Agenda of Council (Development)

Council (Development) 13 September 2010 Item 11.1

MAJOR APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 11.1

SUBJECT 36, 36A & 38 Charles Street, Parramatta (the Port Bar) (Lots 1 and 2 in DP 869820 and Lot 1 in DP 869816) (Arthur Phillip Ward)

DESCRIPTION Alterations and additions to the existing restaurant and bar (the Port Bar) - installation of a small boutique brewery of 60sqm.

REFERENCE DA/362/2010 - lodged 22nd May, 2008

APPLICANT/S TNT Issa Investments

OWNERS TNT Issa Investments and Parramatta City Council

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

This DA is presented to Council for determination as part of the land over which the proposal will be built is Council land (Lot 2 in DP 869820 and Lot 2 in DP 869816).

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Development Application No. 362/2008 seeks approval for the installation of a small boutique brewery (60m²) at the Port Bar in Parramatta, adjacent to the Parramatta River and the ferry wharf for use in association with the existing restaurant and bar.

The brewery is located to the eastern side of the Port Bar on land zoned B4 Mixed Use and RE1 Public Recreation.

The proposed additions are permissible with consent in both zones and are consistent with the objectives of Parramatta City Centre LEP 2007, Parramatta City Centre DCP 2007, Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 and its DCP. The proposal will not unreasonably affect the amenity of the surrounding area, subject to conditions being imposed relating to the operation and management of the premises.

The application was advertised and notified in accordance with Council’s Notification DCP and no objections were received.

The matter was discussed with Council’s Community Crime Prevention Officer, who advised that as the proposed new brewery is not resulting in an increased occupancy of the pub/restaurant, he raises no objections with the proposal.

This is a long standing application resulting from anomalies in the City Centre LEP that prescribed a 0:1 FSR over the 3 allotments and no prescribed height limit over the land at Lot 1 in DP 869820 (the privately owned land). These anomalies prohibited further development over the subject site.

The development has only become permissible via corrections to the LEP (Amendment 3) that were commenced on 9^th July, 2010. These corrections allow for an FSR of 4:1 and height of 36 metres over the subject private land and no prescribed FSR or height over the adjoining Council land (over which part of the brewery will be located).

The proposed brewery will result in an FSR of 0.093:1 when measured over the three allotments upon which it will be located. In terms of the privately owned land, subject of a maximum FSR of 4:1, the proposed brewery will maintain an existing FSR of less than 1:1.

The proposal will attain a maximum height of 6.65 metres, thereby complying with the maximum height limit of 36 metres.

The proposal is not designated development for the purposes of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000 as the anticipated volume of production is significantly less than the prescribed volumes prescribed by Schedule 3 of the Regulation.

The proposed brewery would produce approximately 500 litres of brewed beer per week for consumption on-site. The additions would retain the outward appearance consistent with the scale of the existing restaurant/pub and is of a use that is compatible with the existing and desired future character of the locality.

Accordingly, conditional consent of the development application is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council as the consent authority grant development consent to Development Application No. 362/2008 for alterations and additions to the existing restaurant/pub through the installation of a boutique brewery with a maximum output of 500 litres per week, on land at 36, 36A and 38 Charles Street, Parramatta, subject to the conditions contained within Attachment 1.

Kerry Gordon

Consultant Town Planner

Kerry Gordon Planning Services Pty Ltd

Attachments:

1	Section 79C report	19 Pages
2	Locality Map	1 Page
3	Plans & Elevations	4 Pages
4	FSR Plan	1 Page

Council (Development) 13 September 2010 Item 11.4

MAJOR APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 11.4

SUBJECT 16 Grand Avenue Camellia (Lot A DP 109063) (Ward)

DESCRIPTION Section 96(2) application to modify a development consent for a recycling yard for used building materials. The modification is to allow the premises to receive and store green waste.

REFERENCE DA/144/1997/A - Submitted 31 May 2010

APPLICANT/S KLF Holdings Pty Ltd

OWNERS Trebor Enterprises Pty Ltd

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application is referred to Council for determination because the parent DA was determined by Council.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The application seeks approval to modify the development consent for an existing recycling yard for used buildings materials by allowing the premises to also receive and store green waste. No works are proposed on site to accommodate green waste as existing facilities can be used. No additional hours of operation, staff or deliveries are proposed.

The recycling yard is a permissible activity within the Regional Enterprise zone and currently receives waste from a variety of sources including skip bins. Waste bins containing green waste mixed in with building materials are occasionally received by the recycling yard.

The application has resulted from the operator of the recycling yard making an application to the Department of Environment Climate Change and Water to vary their Environment Protection License to permit the receiving, storing and processing of green waste. The Department of Environment Climate Change and Water can only issue the variation to the license if the development consent for the premises is modified to include the receipt and storage of green waste. The role of the Department of Environment Climate Change and Water as a licensing authority also results in the proposal being classified as Integrated Development.

No submissions were received in response to the notification of the proposal.

It is noted that part of the site is affected by heritage listed wetlands associated with the Parramatta River.

The environmental impacts of the modification can be addressed through the imposition of conditions regarding storage requirements, volume of waste, odours, stormwater disposal, and the location of the green waste bin. Accordingly approval of the application is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council as the consent authority, modify development consent to Development Application No. 144/1997, ‘To use the premises as a recycling yard for used building materials’ on land at 16 Grand Avenue Camellia by making the following amendments to the development consent:

Replace the existing description of the approved development with the following revised description:

“To use the premises as a recycling yard for used building materials and incidental green waste’.

The addition of the following conditions:

24. The applicant must comply with section 129 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 that states "a licensee must not cause or permit the emission of any offensive odour from the Premises to which the licence applies”.

25. All green waste received at the premises must be stored in a sealed bin and must not be processed at the premises.

26. The applicant must comply with section 120 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.

27. Section 120 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 prohibits the pollution of waters. Appropriate measures must be taken to prevent stormwater run off from the stored green waste.

28. The quantity of green waste received and stored at the premises must not exceed 5 tonnes per annum.

29. The green waste bin must not be stored within the area of the site zoned Environmental Protection under the provisions of Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 28.

Reason: To minimise risk to the environment.

Jonathan Goodwill

Senior Development Assessment Officer

Attachments:

1	Section 79C Assessment Report	8 Pages
2	Locality Map	1 Page
3	Original Council Report for DA/144/1997	6 Pages

Council (Development) 13 September 2010 Item 11.5

MAJOR APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 11.5

SUBJECT 59 Victoria Road Parramatta (Lot 2 DP 37358) (Arthur Phillip Ward)

DESCRIPTION Demolish existing structures, tree removal and the construction of a two storey boarding house with 14 boarding rooms and a maximum occupancy of 16 boarders.

REFERENCE DA/21/2010 - Submitted 15 January 2010

APPLICANT/S Mr Nigel White

OWNERS Mrs M Hend

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

This DA is referred to Council for determination due to the number of submissions received and that it involves development for the purposes of a boarding house.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

DA/21/2010 is a development application seeking to demolish the existing structures on the site and construct a two storey boarding house to contain 14 boarding rooms and one communal living room to cater for a maximum of 16 boarders. The plan of management/plans lodged with the application indicate that the kitchen of each boarding room will be fitted with a sink, bar fridge, bench space, washing machine and dryer. The boarding rooms will also be supplied with a bed, table and chairs. Each bedroom will be provided with a phone line and it is at the tenant’s discretion whether or not they connect to the service. The plan of management identifies the hours of use of the common recreation area, indicating the room is not to be used after 10pm Sunday to Thursday or midnight on Fridays and Saturdays. There is no provision for an on-site manager to reside within the boarding house.

In accordance with Council’s Notification DCP, owners of surrounding properties were given notice of the application for a period of 21 days between 27 January and 17 February 2010. In response, ten submissions were received objecting to the proposal, including one petition from six properties. As a result of the level of concern expressed in the submissions, an onsite meeting was held with the persons who made submissions, the applicant, the assessment officer and Councillors on 1 May 2010. Eleven residents from the neighbourhood attended the onsite meeting. Amended plans were renotified between 7 and 28 July 2010 and one submission was received. Issues that were raised at the onsite inspection and in submissions addressed the suitability of the site for a boarding house given the residential zone, proximity to a girls school, playground, the distance from the CBD, the cumulative impacts given a similar boarding house is proposed on the adjoining site, the lack of parking, the impact upon property values, the appearance of the development, noise, the type of tenants, the facilities for tenants, loss of privacy, loss of trees and heritage impact.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2007 (ARHSEPP) was introduced to ensure that affordable rental housing projects were treated equitably across the state and subject to ARHSEPP a boarding house is permissible with consent on the subject site. It is noted that at clause 8, ARHSEPP indicates that where there is an inconsistency between it and any other environmental planning instrument, ARHSEPP prevails to the extent of the inconsistency. As such ARHSEPP does not override provisions of the LEP that are not inconsistent with ARHSEPP. Clause 29 sets standards that if met cannot be used to refuse consent to an application for a boarding house and the proposal satisfies these standards other than the standard related to FSR. ARHSEPP requires that consent cannot be refused on the basis of density if the development does not exceed the maximum FSR applying to the site. The LEP specifies a maximum FSR of 0.6:1 and the proposal seeks a FSR of 0.75:1. Notwithstanding the FSR proposed is higher, the density of the proposal is considered appropriate given the context of the site in an area that contains a number of residential flat buildings. Clause 30 contains standards for boarding houses and the proposal is consistent with those standards.

The site is zoned Residential 2(b) under Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001 and within that zone a boarding house is permissible with consent. The proposal is consistent with the provisions of Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001 and Parramatta Development Control Plan 2005.

The subject site is proposed to be zoned R3 Medium Density Residential under Draft LEP 2010. The proposed use is defined as a boarding house and will be permissible land use on the site if the proposed zoning proceeds. The proposal is generally consistent with the relevant objectives of the zone.

Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council, as the consent authority, grant consent to Development Application No. DA/21/2010 for demolition of the existing structures and construction of a boarding house containing 14 boarding rooms at 59 Victoria Road, Parramatta as shown on the approved plans, subject to the conditions in Attachment 1.

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

Kerry Gordon

Consultant Town Planner

Kerry Gordon Planning Services Pty Ltd

Attachments:

1	Section 79C Assessment Report	57 Pages
2	Locality Map	1 Page
3	Plans & Elevations	1 Page
4	Confidential plans	2 Pages

Council (Development) 13 September 2010 Item 11.6

MAJOR APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 11.6

SUBJECT 61 Victoria Road, Parramatta (Lot 3 in DP 37358) (Arthur Phillip Ward)

DESCRIPTION Demolition of structures and construction of a two storey boarding house with 16 boarding rooms.

REFERENCE DA/22/2010 - lodged 15th January, 2010

APPLICANT/S Mr N White

OWNERS 61 Victoria Road Pty Ltd

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

This DA is referred to Council for determination due to the number of submissions received (nine) and that it involves development for the purposes of a boarding house.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

DA/22/2010 is a development application seeking to demolish the existing structures on the site and construct a two storey boarding house to contain 16 boarding rooms and one communal living room to cater for a maximum of 18 boarders. The plan of management/plans lodged with the application indicate that the kitchen of each boarding room will be fitted with a sink, bar fridge, bench space, washing machine and dryer. The boarding rooms will also be supplied with a bed, table and chairs. Each bedroom will be provided with a phone line and it is at the tenant’s discretion whether or not they connect to the service. The plan of management identifies the hours of use of the common recreation area, indicating the room is not to be used after 10pm Sunday to Thursday or midnight on Fridays and Saturdays.

In accordance with Council’s Notification DCP, owners of surrounding properties were given notice of the application for a period of 21 days between 27 January and 17 February 2010. In response, nine submissions were received objecting to the proposal, including one petition from 6 properties. As a result of the level of concern expressed in the submissions, an onsite meeting was held with the persons who made submissions, the applicant, the assessment officer and Councillors on 1 May 2010. Eleven residents from the neighbourhood attended the onsite meeting. Issues that were raised at the onsite inspection and in submissions addressed the suitability of the site for a boarding house given the residential zone, the proximity to a girl’s school and playground and the distance from the CBD, the cumulative impacts given a similar boarding house is proposed on the adjoining site, the lack of parking, the impact upon property values, the appearance of the development, noise, the type of tenants, the facilities for tenants, loss of privacy, loss of trees and heritage impact.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 (ARH SEPP) was introduced to ensure that affordable rental housing projects were treated equitably across the state and subject to ARH SEPP a boarding house is permissible with consent on the subject site. It is noted that at clause 8, ARH SEPP indicates that where there is an inconsistency between it and any other environmental planning instrument, ARH SEPP prevails to the extent of the inconsistency. As such ARH SEPP does not override provisions of the LEP that are not inconsistent with ARH SEPP. Clause 29 sets standards that if met cannot be used to refuse consent to an application for a boarding house and the proposal satisfies these standards other than the standard related to FSR. ARH SEPP requires that consent cannot be refused on the basis of density if the development does not exceed the maximum FSR applying to the site (0.6:1) and the proposal seeks a FSR of 0.75:1. Notwithstanding the FSR proposed is higher, the density of the proposal is considered appropriate given the context of the site in an area that contains a number of residential flat buildings. Clause 30 contains standards for boarding houses and the proposal is consistent with those standards.

Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval.

It should be noted that a similar boarding house development is proposed for 59 Victoria Road, Parramatta (DA/21/2010)

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council as the consent authority, grant consent to Development Application No. DA/22/2010 for demolition of the existing structures and construction of a boarding house containing 16 boarding rooms at 61 Victoria Road, Parramatta as shown on the approved plans, subject to the conditions in Attachment 1.

(b) That the objectors be advised of Council’s decision.

Alan Middlemiss

Development Assessment Officer

Attachments:

1	Section 79C Assessment Report	58 Pages
2	Locality Map	1 Page
3	Plans & Elevations	1 Page
4	Confidential plans	2 Pages

Council (Development) 13 September 2010 Item 11.7

MAJOR APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 11.7

SUBJECT Site A 121-129 Railway Parade, Granville (Lot 11 DP 1018867) (Woodville Ward)

DESCRIPTION Demolition of structures, tree removal and construction of a three storey mixed use development containing 25 dwelling units and three shops over basement level carparking for 29 cars.

REFERENCE DA/723/2009 - Submitted 22 October 2009

APPLICANT/S Australian Consultant Architects

OWNERS Mr O. Cingiloglu

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

This DA is referred to Council for determination as there is a concurrent development application (DA/724/2009) for the re-development of the adjoining site to the east for the purposes of a 307 seat place of public worship (with five dwelling units above) and having regard to the cumulative impact of these two proposed developments in relation to traffic generation and parking provision.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The proposal involves the demolition of existing industrial structures on the site and the construction of a three storey mixed use development comprising 25 dwelling units and three ground floor shops over a 29 space basement carpark.

Four submissions were received, these relating primarily to traffic and parking issues. The issues are addressed in the Section 79C Assessment Report (Attachment 1) and are not considered sufficiently adverse to warrant refusal of the application.

This is a long standing application resulting from stormwater and Railcorp issues needing to be satisfactorily addressed. These matters have recently been resolved by amended stormwater plans and subject to a deferred commencement consent being recommended by Railcorp.

The proposal has been considered by Council’s Design Review Panel and the proposal is considered to satisfy the design quality principles of SEPP No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Buildings.

The proposal results in a shortfall of car parking on the site. According to the DCP, an additional 17 car parking spaces would be required for the proposed residential units, shops and visitor parking.

In providing 29 carparking spaces, the development provides one space for each dwelling and four for the shops. This will result in no visitor parking being provided on the site.

Given the location of the site in reasonable proximity to public transport (approximately 645 metres to the west of Granville Railway Station and bus interchange) and the availability of parking on the street, this should not create an unreasonable impact on the capacity of the road network. Given this proximity and the gentle grade of the street between the property and the railway station, it is considered likely that some visitors to the site would avail themselves of the frequent public transport options available in the area.

In addition to this, advice from Council’s Traffic Engineer is that:

“Council proposes to install a Residential Parking Scheme (RPS) and associated '2 hour parking' 8am - 6pm Monday – Friday’ with exemptions for permit holders in the area closer to the railway station such as Jamieson Street, Railway Parade and The Avenue. In Railway Parade, the signs are proposed to be installed on the southern kerbside of the road opposite the proposed development. “

This will serve to further free-up the availability of on-street parking during the day to allow for visitor parking on the street and to allow for residents who comply with conditions to be able to park upon the street. Furthermore, it is considered that in the event that this parking scheme did not go ahead, ample visitor parking would still remain available either on Railway parade or in adjacent streets near the site.

The most pressing issue in this DA is the cumulative impact of the two developments in particular, in respect of parking, both in terms of the amount that is to be provided on the respective sites in basement parking, as well as the impact on the availability of street parking for existing residents and their visitors and the likely demand for on-street parking. The conclusions of the attached report are that the cumulative impacts of the two developments is acceptable and that the demand on street parking will be at its highest only for limited periods throughout the week.

Despite the non-compliant carparking, the proposal is generally consistent with the objectives and development controls of the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001 and Parramatta Development Control Plan 2005 and there will be no likely unacceptable impacts on adjoining properties.

Accordingly, approval of the application is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council, as the consent authority, grant deferred commencement consent to Development Application 723/2009 for the demolition of structures, tree removal and the construction of a three storey mixed use building containing 25 dwelling units, three shops and basement level carparking for 29 cars at 121- 129 Railway Parade, Granville, subject to the conditions contained in Attachment 1.

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

Alan Middlemiss

Senior Development Assessment Officer

Attachments:

1	Section 79C Assessment Report	72 Pages
2	Locality Map	1 Page
3	Plans & Elevations	9 Pages
4	Confidential Floor Plans	5 Pages

Council (Development) 13 September 2010 Item 11.8

MAJOR APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 11.8

SUBJECT Site B 121-129 Railway Parade, Granville (Lot 11 DP 1018867) (Woodville Ward)

DESCRIPTION Demolition of buildings, tree removal and the construction of a mixed use development comprising a 307 seat place of public worship (including a parent's room containing 34 seats) and community centre with five residential units within a part three/ part four storey building and two levels of carparking accommodating 44 cars.

REFERENCE DA/724/2009 - 22 October 2009

APPLICANT/S Australian Consultant Architects

OWNERS Mr O Cingiloglu

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

This application is brought to Council for determination as it includes a proposed place of public worship.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Development Application No. 724/2009 seeks consent for the demolition of buildings and structures, tree removal and the construction of a mixed use development comprising a 307 seat place of public worship (including a parent’s room containing 34 seats) and community centre with five residential units within a part three/ part four storey building and two levels of carparking accommodating 44 cars.

The place of public worship and ancillary community centre will operate between the hours of:

· 7.00pm to 9.00pm Mondays (bible studies);

· 7.00pm to 9.00pm Thursdays (main weekly service);

· 10.00am to Midday Fridays (prayer meetings); and

· 9.00am to 11.00am and 6.00pm to 8.00pm Sundays (Sunday services).

Four submissions were received, raising issues relating to the lack of parking provided on the site, the lack of on-street parking at times and the inadequate disabled access to the new building.

Council staff wrote to the applicant on 19^th March, 2010 advising that extra carparking should be provided. On 12^th April, 2010, amended plans were received depicting a further basement level of carparking providing an additional 22 carparking spaces in accordance with Council staff’s request.

There is a concurrent development application (DA/723/2009) relating to the adjacent site (Site A) to the west. That DA involves the construction of a three storey mixed uses building containing 25 dwelling units and three shops over basement level parking for 29 cars. The cumulative impact of both developments has been discussed in both Section 79C assessment reports and deemed to be acceptable.

Since lodgement of this DA, Council’s DCP for Place of Public Worship has been adopted (15^th June, 2010) and came into force on 30^th June, 2010. The DCP states that there are no savings provisions and accordingly its provisions apply to the assessment of this DA.

The DCP prescribes a rate of carparking to be based upon the submission of a traffic impact statement having regard to the objectives of the DCP relating to carparking. The proposal exceeds the required number nominated by the traffic impact statement of 39 spaces by five and is therefore considered to comply with the requirements of the DCP for Places of Public Worship.

Railcorp has advised that it is prepared to grant deferred commencement consent conditions to this development application, subject to further geotechnical investigations and rail corridor-related studies being undertaken.

Subject to conditions and a deferred commencement consent relating to the matters raised by Railcorp, the proposal is considered to be acceptable as it is consistent with the aims and objectives of Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001 and its DCP and complies with the current requirements of the newly adopted Places of Public Worship DCP.

Accordingly, consent to the application is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council, as the consent authority, grant a deferred commencement development consent to Development Application No. 724/2009 for the demolition of buildings and structures, tree removal and the construction of a mixed use development comprising a 307 seat place of public worship (including a parent’s room containing 34 seats) and community centre with five residential units within a part three/ part four storey building and two levels of carparking accommodating 44 cars in the manner outlined in Attachment 1.

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

Alan Middlemiss

Senior Development Assessment Officer

Attachments:

1	Section 79C Assessment Report	84 Pages
2	Locality Map	1 Page
3	Plans & Elevations	10 Pages
4	Confidential Floor Plans	2 Pages

Council (Development) 13 September 2010 Item 11.9

MAJOR APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 11.9

SUBJECT 134 - 136 Woodville Road, Merrylands
(Lot 1 DP 194675, Lot 26 DP 979273) (Woodville Ward)

DESCRIPTION Section 96 (2) to an approved part 3 and part 4 storey Mixed Use Development containing 3 commercial tenancies and 21 residential apartments including correctly identifying the site boundaries and area of the development site. This results in the area of the development site being reduced by 83.6m2.

REFERENCE DA/355/2004/A - 15 February 2010

APPLICANT/S Mr L B Nouh

OWNERS Mr L B Nouh

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application is referred to Council as there was a petition with 5 signatures and three individual submissions. It is noted that two signatures from the petition are from the one household and that the members of this household also submitted an objection.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The subject application seeks to modify Development Consent No. 355/2004 under the provisions of Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. (No work has commenced on site.)

Approval is sought to modify the application by the new owners which includes correctly identifying the allotment boundaries and site area. The corrections result in the area of the development site being reduced by 83.6m2 from 1703.9m2 to 1620.4m2. In addition, the application also seeks to modify the development in the following way:

Basement (Lower Level)

· The western (rear) wall is realigned so that it is flush and not angular as previously approved.

· A wall has been added between storeroom 3 and the western set of fire escape stairs.

Basement (Upper Level)

· The western (rear) wall is realigned so that it is flush and not angular as previously approved.

· Bike rack is relocated closer to the southern portion of the basement from its original location to the west of the basement.

· Bin storage room is relocated to the northern portion of the basement from its original location in the eastern portion of the site.

· Store Room 1 and 2 is to increase in size from 4m2 and 6m2 to and 9m2 12m2 respectively.

· The provision of fire escape stairs to adjoin to the south of Store Room 1.

Ground Floor

· The fire escape stairs are to adjoin Unit 1 to the south.

· Unit 1: Bedroom 1 is to be relocated so that it adjoins the living/dining area closer to the rear of the site.

· Unit 2: The western (rear) wall is realigned so that it is flush and not angular as previously approved. The floor plan of Unit 2 is to be reconfigured to group the three bedrooms closer to the south of the development. Also, the length of Bedroom 1 is to be reduced from 4.29 metres to 3.8 metres.

· Unit 3 and Unit 4: The width of the living area of both Unit 3 and 4 is increased from 4.18 metres to 6.60 metres.

· Commercial 3: The width of Commercial Area 3 is reduced from 10.2 metres to 8.935 metres.

First Floor

· Unit 5: Bedroom 1 is relocated so that it adjoins the living/dining area closer to the rear of the site.

· Unit 6: The western (rear) wall is realigned so that it is flush and not angular as previously approved. The floor plan of Unit 6 is reconfigured to group the three bedrooms closer to the south of the development. Also, the width of Bedroom 2 is reduced from 4.6 metres x 3.29 metres to 3.29 metres x 3.8 metres. The width of Bedroom 3 is increased from 2.64 metres to 3.1 metres.

· Unit 7 and Unit 8: Bedroom 1 and 2 of both Unit 7 and 8 have increased in width from 2.64 metres to 3.1 metres.

· Unit 9: The size of the balcony of Unit 9 is to be reduced from 33m2 to 24m2.

· Unit 10: The floor plan of Unit 10 is reconfigured which results in the relocation of the kitchen so that it adjoins the laundry to the south.

· Unit 11: The floor plan of Unit 11 is reconfigured to improve intern amenity.

Second Floor

· Unit 12: Bedroom 1 is relocated so that it adjoins the living/dining area closer to the rear of the site.

· Unit 13: The western (rear) wall is realigned so that it is flush and not angular as previously approved. The floor plan of Unit 13 is reconfigured to group the three bedrooms closer to the south of the development. Also, the dimension of Bedroom 1 is reduced from 2.69 metres x 4.29 metres to 3.8 metres x 3.6 metres. The width of Bedroom 2 is reduced from 4.69 metres to 3.8 metres. The width of Bedroom 3 is increased from 2.64 metres to 3.1 metres.

· Unit 14 and Unit 15: Bedroom 1 and 2 of both Unit 14 and 15 have increased the width from 2.64 metres to 3.1 metres.

· Unit 17: The floor plan of Unit 10 is reconfigured which results in the relocation of the kitchen so that it adjoins the laundry to the south.

· Unit 18: The floor plan of Unit 18 is reconfigured to improve internal amenity.

Western Elevation

· Due to the relocation of Bedroom 1 for Unit 21, the western elevation is amended to reflect these changes

· The number of windows on the ground floor is increased from 4 to 5 windows. The modifications also seek to reduce the size of the living room windows for Units 1, 5 and 12.

Northern Elevation

· The sizes of the bathroom and ensuite windows of Units 1, 5 and 12 have been reduced.

· Due to the increase in the width of the bedrooms for Units 3, 4, 7, 8, 14 and 15, the windows are repositioned closer to Woodville Road.

During the notification period, one petition with 5 signatures and 3 individual submissions were received. Issues raised in the submissions include, queries as to the reasons for the omission of these modifications from the original application, queries into the status of the portion of land the applicant claims to be dedicated for road widening, air quality on Woodville Road, concerns to the reasons why Council did not identify the correct boundaries and site area of the development site during the original assessment of the application, impacts of demolition works, objections to tree removal, objections to increasing the housing density within the area, inconsistent development on Woodville Road, insufficient parking and increased local traffic, the provision of overlooking opportunities from the development to adjoining properties and objections to the BBQ area and cabana along the western boundary.

The application was referred to Council’s Landscape Officer and Development Engineer. Upon review of the modifications, both Council’s Landscape Officer and Development Engineer did not raise any objections.

The proposed modifications will not result in any unacceptable impacts to the amenity of the area. The development as modified by the subject application is substantially the same development as that approved. It is noted that the development was originally assessed and compliant with PDCP 2001 and modifications to site boundaries has resulted in several non-compliances with Council’s PDCP 2005 controls. In particular, the rear setback, deep soil and FSR for Woodville Road. However the development does not propose modifications to the approved floor area or height.

Accordingly, approval of the request to modify condition No. 1 is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council as the consent authority modify Development Consent No. 355/2004 under the provisions of Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act in the following manner:

Replace Condition No. 1 with the following revised condition:

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

Document(s)	Dated
Elevations Sht 1. Drawing No. B – 7/34/2009.	June 2010
Section and Streetscape. Drawing No. 9 / 34 / 2009. Issue A	June 2009
Elevations Sht 2. Drawing No. 8 / 34 / 2009.	June 2009
Third Floor Plan. Drawing No. 6 / 34 / 2009.	June 2009
Ground Floor Plan. Drawing No. B 3 / 34 / 2009	May 2010
Basement Upper Level. Drawing No. A 2 / 34 / 2009.	May 2010
Basement Lower Level. Drawing No. A 1 /34 / 2009.	May 2010.
Second Floor Plan. Drawing No. B / 5 / 34 / 2009.	June 2010
First Floor Plan. Drawing No. B / 4 / 34 / 2009.	June 2010
Roof Plan. Drawing No. 11 / 34 / 2009.	June 2009
Landscape Plan. Drawing No. 10 / 34 / 2009.	October 2009
Engineering Plans 3 Pages – Annotated. Drawing No’s. SW 001-003.	14 October 2009 – as annotated.
Waste Management Plan singe by Lichaa Nouh	Undated
NatHERS Certificate – Assessment No. HMB399/PAT/229 prepared by Frances Turrisi	22/03/2004
Schedule of External Finishes – Job No. 3373 prepared by Zhinar Design Partnership	Undated
Noise Assessment Report prepared by RSA Acoustics, Report No:1106	Undated

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

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

Replace Condition No. 12 with the following revised condition:

12. No construction works shall start on the stormwater system until the detailed final storm water plans have been approved by the Principal Certifying Authority. Prior to the approval of storm water drainage plans, the person issuing the Construction Certificate shall ensure that:

a. The final stormwater plans are consistent with, and address and incorporate all the notes/issues marked on the approved Stormwater Plans i.e. the stormwater plans titled “Ground Floor Level Drainage” and “General Notes and Specifications”, Drawing #’s SW003/03 & SW002/03, Job # DR/Jack, Revision “A”, dated 14/10/2009, prepared by MLE Designs Pty Ltd (Sheet # 3 & 2 of 4) together with the annotations marked thereon, and approved with the Development Consent.

Note: The approved Stormwater Plans are for DA approval only and shall not be used for construction purposes as the construction plan (drawing). Separate Rectified Stormwater Plan addressing all issues and incorporating all notes and comments marked on the plans shall be submitted for Construction Certificate Approval.

b. The proposed On-Site Detention (OSD) System has been designed and certified by a suitably qualified Hydraulic Engineer, in accordance with the Upper Parramatta River Catchment Trust “On-Site Detention Handbook” and Council’s Drainage Code E4 and stormwater Drainage Guidelines.

c. The design achieves, a Site Storage Requirement of 470 m³/ha and a Permissible Site Discharge of 80 L/s/ha (as per 3^rd edition of UPRCT’s handbook) with the basin volume as shown on the approved stormwater plan.

d. Detailed Stormwater plans with cross sectional details of OSD storage areas; pits etc, OSD Detailed Design Submission (Form B9) and OSD Detailed Calculation Summary Sheets are submitted and are acceptable.

e. The OSD underground tank is designed by a qualified practicing professional/structural engineer and certifying its structural soundness and stability.

Reason: To minimise the quantity of storm water run-off from the site, surcharge from the existing drainage system and to manage downstream flooding.

Replace Condition No. 13 with the following revised condition:

13. In order to make satisfactory arrangements for the operation of the stormwater pump-out system, the system shall be designed and constructed to ensure the following are provided:

(a) A holding tank capable of storing the run-off from a 100 year ARI - 2 hour duration storm event allowing for pump failure, i.e. the tank shall have capacity as shown on the approved stormwater plan.

(b) Two pump system (on alternate basis) capable of emptying the holding tank at a rate equal to the lower of:

i. The permissible site discharge (PSD) rate; or

ii. The rate of inflow for the one hour, 5 year ARI storm event.

(c) An alarm system comprising of basement pump-out failure warning sign together with a flashing strobe light and siren installed at a clearly visible location facing the front street at the entrance to the basement in case of pump failure.

(d) A 100 mm freeboard to all parking spaces.

(e) Submission of full hydraulic details and pump manufacturers specifications.

(f) Pump out system to be connected to a stilling pit and gravity line before discharge to the street gutter.

Plans and design calculations along with certification from the designer indicating that the design complies with the above requirements are to be submitted to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issue of the Construction Certificate.

Reason: To ensure satisfactory storm water disposal.

Replace Condition No. 29 with the following revised condition:

29. Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the parking dimensions, internal circulation, aisle widths, kerb splay corners, head‑room clearance heights, ramp widths and grades of the car parking areas are to be in conformity with the current relevant Australian Standard AS2890.1 (2004) & AS2890.2 (2002), except where amended by other conditions of this consent. Certification or details of compliance are to be submitted with the Construction Certificate plans.

Reason: To ensure car parking complies with Australian Standards.

Replace Condition No. 66 with the following revised condition:

66. Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, five (5) convex traffic mirrors shall be installed on the wall, two (2) numbers at the Lower basement car-park, one (1) at the 90degree bend/ turning point of the ramp from lower basement to upper basement, one (1) in front of the car space #12 at the upper basement as shown on the approved basement car park plan, and one (1) at the left-hand side wall at the exit point to improve traffic visibility, vehicle manoeuvring and access to and from the basement car park.

Reason: To improve the traffic visibility and manoeuvring to access the car spaces.

Replace Condition No. 70 with the following revised condition:

70. The landscaping shall be completed in accordance with the consent and approved plans, prior to occupation or use of the premises and shall be maintained at all times. NOTE: All tree planting shall be located a minimum of two (2) metres to any boundary, existing or proposed drainage lines and shall have a minimum container size of 45 litres.

Reason: To ensure landscaping is completed in accordance with the approved plans and maintained.

The addition of the following conditions to the development consent:

1a. All trees supplied above a 25 L container size for the site must be grown and planted in accordance with Clarke, R 1996 Purchasing Landscape Trees: A guide to assessing tree quality. Natspec Guide No.2. Certification that trees have been grown to Natspec guidelines is to be provided upon request of Council’s Tree Management Officer. NOTE: All tree planting shall be located a minimum of two (2) metres to any boundary, existing or proposed drainage lines and shall have a minimum container size of 45 litres.

Reason: To minimise plant failure rate and ensure quality of stock utilised

1b. Stormwater system shall be constructed as per the approved Stormwater plan addressing the issues and incorporating all the notes and comments annotated on the plan and approved with this development consent. The approved stormwater plan consist of the following drawings together with the comments, notes and rectification requirements as annotated on the drawings:

i. “Ground Floor Level Drainage”, Drawing # SW003/03, Job # DR/Jack, Revision “A”, dated 14/10/2009, prepared by MLE Designs Pty Ltd (Sheet # 3 of 4).

ii. “General Notes and Specifications”, Drawing # SW002/03, Job # DR/Jack, Revision “A”, dated 14/10/2009, prepared by MLE Designs Pty Ltd (Sheet # 2 of 4).

iii. “Lower Basement Level Drainage”, Drawing # SW001/03, Job # DR/Jack, Revision “A”, dated 14/10/2009, prepared by MLE Designs Pty Ltd (Sheet # 1 of 4).

Reason: To ensure satisfactory storm water disposal.

1c. The basement carpark shall be constructed in accordance with the Approved Basement Car-park Plans. The approved basement car-park plan consist of the following drawings together with the comments, notes and rectification requirements as annotated there on and approved with the Development Consent:

i. “Basement Lower Level Plan”, Drawing # ‘A’ 1/34/2009, Revisions “A”, dated May 2010, Prepared by Jack Elia Architectural Design Services (1 sheet).

ii. “Basement Upper Level Plan”, Drawing # ‘A’ 2/34/2009, Revisions “A”, dated May 2010, Prepared by Jack Elia Architectural Design Services (1 sheet).

iii. Basement ramp long section: “Elevation Sht 1”, Drawing # ‘B’ 7/34/2009, Revisions “B”, dated June 2010, Prepared by Jack Elia Architectural Design Services (1 sheet).

Note: Rectified Basement Car-park Plan addressing all issues and incorporating all notes and comments marked on the plans shall be submitted for Construction Certificate Approval.

Reason: To ensure safe satisfactory parking provisions are made.

1d. Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the designated disabled car spaces shall have a minimum dimension of 3.8m wide and 5.4m long. Alternatively the width can be 2.4m wide with a dedicated 2.4m wide x 5.4m long shared zone adjacent to the disabled car space and comply with the provision made under AS 2890.6-2009.

Reason: To improve access to the car parking space.

1e. The installation of any security roller shutter for the basement car parking area shall not restrict access to any designated visitor car parking space. In the event that the approved visitor car parking spaces are located behind any proposed security roller shutter, an intercom system is required to be installed to enable visitor access into the basement car parking area. This requirement is to be reflected on the Construction Certificate plans and any supporting documentation for the endorsement of the Principal Certifying Authority, prior to the release of the Construction Certificate.

Reason: To ensure appropriate visitor access to the site.

1f. Works-As-Executed stormwater plans shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate, certifying that the stormwater drainage system has been constructed and completed in accordance with the approved stormwater plans. The person issuing the Occupation Certificate shall ensure that:

· Stormwater system including On-Site Detention systems have been built according to and comply with the requirements including the OSD storage volume as shown on the approved stormwater plan.

· The Work-As-Executed plans are prepared on the copies of the approved drainage plans issued with the Construction Certificate and variations are marked in red ink.

· The Work-As-Executed plans have been prepared by a registered surveyor certifying the accuracy of dimensions, levels, storage volumes, etc.

· As built On-Site Detention (OSD) storage volume calculated in tabular form (in incremental depth verses segmental area and volume table) and certified by the registered surveyor.

· OSD Works-As-Executed survey certification form and dimensions form (refer to UPRCT Handbook - Form B10 and Form Attachment B).

· Certificate of Hydraulic Compliance from a qualified drainage / hydraulic engineer (refer to UPRCT Handbook – Form B11 Certificate). The person issuing Hydraulic certificate shall ensure that all the works have been completed and comply with the approved plans.

· Approved verses installed Drainage Design (OSD) Calculation Sheet certified by a qualified practicing Hydraulic Engineer.

· Structural Engineer’s Certificate for the OSD tank structure, basement pump‑out tank structure, OSD basin (retaining) wall etc.

· The original Work-As-Executed plans and all documents mentioned above have been submitted to Council’s Development Services Unit.

Reason: To ensure works comply with approved plans.

(b) Further, that the head petitioner and objectors be advised of Council’s decision.

Denise Fernandez

Development Assessment Officer

Attachments:

1	Location Map	1 Page
2	Section 79C Report	26 Pages
3	Plans	6 Pages
4	Confidential Plans	5 Pages
5	Previous Consent and Survey Plan	23 Pages
6	Original S79C Assessment Report	21 Pages

Council (Development) 13 September 2010 Item 11.10

MAJOR APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 11.10

SUBJECT 4-6 Hammers Road Northmead (Lots 8-9 DP 7339) (Arthur Phillip Ward)

DESCRIPTION Consolidation of two allotments, re-subdivision into 3 lots, tree removal and construction of seniors housing development to accomodate 11 villas on proposed lot B.

REFERENCE DA/714/2009 - Submitted 19 October 2009

APPLICANT/S JS Architects Pty Ltd

OWNERS Mr G Chong, Ms K Emerson, Ms J Lee, Mr C Baissari

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application has been referred to Council as the proposal has received more than 5 objections.

This report was deferred from the Council Meeting on 9 August 2010 pending a Conciliation Meeting.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The proposal involves the following:

· Consolidation of the two (2) existing allotments;

· Re-subdivision of the consolidated site into three (3) allotments. Lot A will be occupied by the 2 storey dwelling that contains a doctors surgery. Lot B will be redeveloped for a seniors living development under State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004. Lot C will be occupied by the single storey timber clad cottage;

· Lot B (the rear lot) will be accessed by a driveway located at the centre of the frontage between No. 4 and No. 6 Hammers Road. The driveway will also provide access to a new garage located to the rear of the single storey timber clad cottage; and

· The proposed seniors living development will comprise 11 x two bedroom villa style dwellings with first floor attics arranged in four separate buildings around a central driveway.

The notification of the application attracted 22 submissions and 3 petitions. The submissions received in relation to the application related to tree removal, building height, drainage/flooding, overshadowing, privacy, waste disposal, traffic, car parking, heritage impacts and area character. The submissions have been assessed and do not warrant refusal of the application.

As the existing dwellings at No. 4 and 6 Hammers Road are heritage items of local significance the application has been reviewed by Council’s Heritage Advisor and is considered to be acceptable. Traffic and parking issues have been addressed in a response from the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) and Council’s Traffic and Transportation Engineer and are considered to be acceptable subject to conditions of approval being imposed. Local flooding issues have been considered by Council’s Development Engineer and Catchment Management Section and it is considered that subject to conditions of approval being imposed, the proposal will not result in significant impacts in the locality.

The proposal is generally consistent with the objectives and development controls of the SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 as well as the relevant provisions of Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001, Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 1996 (Heritage and Conservation) and Parramatta Development Control Plan 2005 and there will be no likely unacceptable impacts on adjoining properties.

The proposal does result in non-compliance with Clause 40(4)(c) of State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004, which states that a building located in the rear 25% area of the site must not exceed 1 storey in height. The applicant has submitted a State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 Objection in relation to this non-compliance. The non-compliance affects two units within the development and the upper level is limited to an attic which under the Standard Instrument for a Local Environmental Plan would not constitute a “storey”. The non-compliance will not result in any unacceptable privacy impacts, overshadowing or excessive bulk in the building form. Accordingly, it is considered that the SEPP 1 Objection is well founded.

This is a long standing application that has been amended several times in response to concerns raised by Council staff and the Town Planning Consultant engaged by Council to finalise the assessment.

Approval of the application is recommended.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council support the variation to Clause 40(4)(c) of State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004, which states that a building located in the rear 25% area of the site must not exceed 1 storey in height, under the provisions of SEPP 1.

(b) That Council as the consent authority grant development consent to Development Application No. 714/2009 for consolidation of two existing allotments, re-subdivision into 3 lots, tree removal and proposed seniors housing development to accommodate 11 villas on proposed lot B (rear lot) with a lapsing period of five (5) years from the date on the Notice of Determination subject to the conditions contained within Attachment 1.

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

Planning Ingenuity Pty Ltd

Independent Planning Consultants

Attachments:

1	Locality Map	1 Page
2	Section 79C Assessment Report	53 Pages
3	Plans and Elevations	1 Page
4	Heritage Inventory Sheet	1 Page
5	Confidential plans

Council (Development) 13 September 2010 Item 11.13

MAJOR APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 11.13

SUBJECT Winston Hills Lion Park, 22 Churchill Drive, Winston Hills (Lot 613 DP228561, Lot 12 DP 233268, Lot 7 DP 253959) (Caroline Chisholm Ward)

DESCRIPTION Temporary use for a community fair known as 'Octoberfest' for one Sunday in the middle of October each year for 5 years commencing in 2010 and ceasing in 2014.

REFERENCE DA/584/2010 - Submitted 22 July 2010

APPLICANT/S The Lions Club of Winston Hills Inc.

OWNERS Parramatta City Council

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application relates to land owned by Parramatta City Council.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Approval is sought for the temporary use of the park for a community fair, “Octoberfest” on one Sunday in the middle of October each year for 5 years commencing this year and ceasing in 2014. Octoberfest is proposed to occupy the entire park and will commence at 9am and finish at 4pm. Set up for the event will occur between 7am and 8.30am and dismantling and removing the structures from the event is to occur prior to 6pm on the day of the event. Octoberfest is to be a fair, with stalls for the sale of toys, clothes, jewellery, craft, ice-cream and doughnuts and rides to include a jumping castle, merry-go-round, slide and pony rides. The stalls are generally proposed to be lined along the existing pathways throughout the park and the rides are proposed to be located to the northern side of the small creek dividing the park, in proximity to the existing playground equipment within the park. It is also proposed to sell food and beverages, with sales of egg and bacon and sausage sandwiches and coffee. Finally, it is also proposed to sell alcohol (beer and wine) within a beer garden area to be located at the eastern side of the park between 10am and 3.30pm. A liquor licence will be required for the sale of alcohol and the applicant has advised that an application for the licence has been made. All bar staff are to hold current Responsible Service of Alcohol certificates.

It is proposed to provide 3 portable toilets for the event. As with last year’s event, security is to be supervised by a licensed security officer and is to be carried out by Lions Club members. A St John’s Ambulance officer will be in attendance. Based on past experience the event is anticipated to attract between 2000 and 2500 visitors.

In accordance with Council’s Notification DCP, owners of surrounding properties were given notice of the application for a period of 21 days between 4 August and 25 August 2010. In response, no submissions were received.

The site is zoned 6A Public Open Space under LEP 2001 and is permissible as a temporary use pursuant to clause 50. The proposal is consistent with the provisions of Parramatta LEP 2001 and DCP 2005. The proposal is also consistent with the provisions of SEPP 19 and SEPP (Temporary Structures and Places of Public Entertainment)

Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council as the consent authority, grant development consent to Development Application No. DA/584/2010 for the use of Winston Hills Lions Park at No. 22 Churchill Drive, Winston Hills for a community fair “Octoberfest” for the next five years, as shown on the approved plans, subject to the conditions in Attachment 1.

Kerry Gordon

Consultant Town Planner

Kerry Gordon Planning Services Pty Ltd

Attachments:

1	Section 79C Assessment Report	14 Pages
2	Site Plan	1 Page
3	Locality Map	1 Page
4	Photographs of the site	2 Pages

Sue Coleman – Group Manager City Services			Assistant Minutes Clerk – Joy Bramham
Gregory Smith – Group Manager Corporate			Minutes Clerk – Grant Davies
Sue Weatherley–Group Manager Outcomes & Development

Clr Paul Barber – Caroline Chisholm Ward			Clr Lorraine Wearne, Lachlan Macquarie Ward
Clr Mark Lack – Elizabeth Macarthur Ward			Clr John Chedid – Elizabeth Macarthur Ward
Clr Glenn Elmore – Woodville Ward			Clr Scott Lloyd – Caroline Chisholm Ward
Clr Pierre Esber– Lachlan Macquarie Ward			Clr Andrew Wilson – Lachlan Macquarie 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 Antoine (Tony) Issa, OAM – Woodville Ward	Clr Chiang Lim, Deputy Lord Mayor – Arthur Phillip Ward

1	S79C Assessment Report	46 Pages
2	Plans	6 Pages
3	Location Plan	1 Page
4	Confidential plan	1 Page

1	Sec 79C report	30 Pages
2	Plans	3 Pages
3	Locality Map	1 Page
4	Confidential plans	2 Pages

1	Delegated Report	7 Pages
2	Locality Plan	1 Page
3	Site Plan	1 Page
4	Council report and plans for original proposal	17 Pages

1	Section 79C Assessment Report	33 Pages
2	Locality Map	1 Page
3	Plans and Elevations	2 Pages
4	Heritage Inventory Sheet	1 Page