PURPOSE:

This report provides a copy of the minutes of the Delegated Authority Meeting held on 13 January 2011 between the Lord Mayor, Deputy Lord Mayor and Chief Executive Officer for the information only of Councillors.

RECOMMENDATION

That the minutes of the Delegated Authority Meeting held on 13 January 2011 be noted.

1View

Minutes of Delegated Authority meeting

4 Pages

PURPOSE:

The report recommends Council, subject to finalisation of negotiations, to grant an easement for electricity cables over the Council Wentworth Street Car Park land and provide consent for the owner of 116-124 Church Street Parramatta to create similar easement over the land identified for dedication under a voluntary planning agreement.

RECOMMENDATION

(a)     That Council, resolve to create an easement for electricity cables in favour of Integral Energy over the Council Wentworth Street Car Park land (Lot 1 DP 731072).

(b)     That Council, provide consent in accordance with Clause 16 of a voluntary planning agreement of 31 August 2010 between the Council and the owner of 116-124 Church Street Parramatta for the owner to create an easement for electricity cables in favour of Integral Energy over the land identified for dedication.

(c)      Further, that the Lord Mayor and Chief Executive Officer be authorised to execute under seal the linen plan, Section 88B instrument, transfer granting easement and deed of agreement if required for creation of easement and providing consent.

1View

Location plan

1 Page

2View

Plan showing land for dedication

1 Page

PURPOSE:

An update on the status of the negotiations with the Transport Construction Authority (TCA)  on the development of a commuter car park on Council land at 40-48 Cowper Street, Granville

RECOMMENDATION

(a)       That the Council note that the Transport Construction Authority has withdrawn its interest in the site at 40-48 Cowper Street, Granville for the purposes of a commuter car park.

PURPOSE:

To provide Council with information each month on development applications determined where there has been a variation in standards under State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 or similar provisions under the standard instrument.

RECOMMENDATION

That the report be received and noted.

1View

Development Application Variations under SEPP 1 - Approved in December 2010 & January 2011

2 Pages

DATE OF REPORT   29 DECEMBER 2010

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application has been referred to Council due to the nature of the application (variation from policy). This report was referred from the Delegated Authority Meeting on 13 January 2011.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The application seeks approval for the subdivision of an existing battleaxe allotment (known as 55A Constitution Road) to create 2 Torrens Title lots, being Lot 551 and Lot 552.

Proposed Lot 551 is to be rectangular in shape and is to comprise an area of 1021m² inclusive of the battle- axe handle and 759m² when the battle axe handle is excluded.

Proposed Lot 552 is generally triangular and is to comprise an area of 670m². This lot does not technically comprise a battle-axe handle but is accessed via a right-of-carriageway over Lot 551 accessed from Constitution Road.

A concrete access driveway is proposed to service both new lots. This driveway will have a width of 3.62m. No trees are to be removed as part of the development,

The proposal does not include the construction of buildings on the two proposed allotments although indicative building platforms have been submitted with the application. No excavation or retaining works for building platforms are proposed under this application, apart from those associated with the driveway construction.

Whilst the subdivision of land is permitted with consent in PLEP2001, DCP2005 strongly discourages multiple subdivision of battleaxe allotments and accordingly this application seeks to vary this policy standard. The approval of the proposed subdivision is supported in this case as the subdivision represents an orderly and economic redevelopment of a large parcel of land in metropolitan Sydney.

The proposed lots meet the subdivision standards of Parramatta LEP2001. The additional allotment is not likely to result in any adverse traffic impacts and safety issues associated with the driveway can be resolved through the provision of a passing bay and mirrors in the driveway. It is also considered that the resultant pattern of development will be consistent with that of adjoining properties.

It is noted that the previous owner of the parent allotment and current owner of No.55 Constitution Rd sought prelodgement advice on 6 February 2004 regarding a 3 lot subdivision. The advice provided was that the planning controls that applied at the time (DCP2001) did not allow multiple subdivision of battleaxe allotments but that any application lodged for this type of subdivision would need to be supported by justification for the departure from the standard. The owner did not pursue a 3 lot subdivision but rather lodged a DA in March 2004 for a 2 lot subdivision which was subsequently approved on 7 June 2004.

Five (5) submissions have been received in respect of this application. The issues raised in the submissions have been addressed through conditions and a site meeting was held with staff and the owner of 55 Constitution Rd who is also an objector to the Development Application.

The proposed development is consistent with the objectives contained in the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001 and Parramatta Development Control Plan 2005.

Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION

(a)       That Development Application No 812/2010 for the subdivision of an existing battleaxe allotment to create 2 Torrens Title lots at 55A Constitution Road, Constitution Hill be approved subject to the conditions of consent in Attachment 1 of this report

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

1View

S79C Assessment Report

27 Pages

2View

Plans

1 Page

3View

Locality Map

1 Page

DATE OF REPORT  19 January 2011

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application has been referred to Council, as the application seeks a variation of greater than 10% to the minimum allotment size control outlined in Clause 38 and the maximum floor space ratio control of Clause 40 of Local Environmental Plan 2001. The application is accompanied by a SEPP 1 Objection.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The application seeks approval for construction of a 2 storey split level dwelling house.

The dwelling house proposed in this application will be located on an allotment of land that has an area of 300m² and has been proposed with a floor space ratio of 0.57:1. In accordance with a Planning Circular released by the Department of Planning in November 2008 on ’Reporting Variations to Development Standards' variations to development standards greater than 10% should be determined by Council.

The subject site is located within a housing estate known as Lachlan View Estate that was approved by the Land and Environment Court in August 1998.  The consent issued in 1998 granted approval for land subdivision and the construction of 59 dwellings at 20-22 Buckleys Road.  A review of the relevant files has revealed that the approved minimum lot size of most of the parcels of land created in the subdivision were substantially less than 550m². Most of the dwellings approved in this estate have floor space ratios between 0.5:1 to 0.8:1. 

The variation to the minimum allotment size is considered appropriate in this particular case, as the allotment of land is in existence and was consented to by the Court in 1998.  In addition, the floor space ratio of the dwelling proposed is consistent with that of other dwellings that have been constructed in the estate.

The proposed works are consistent with the objectives of Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001 and Parramatta Development Control Plan 2005, and are considered satisfactory with respect to design, bulk and scale. The dwelling is considered to be appropriately sited without unduly impacting on the streetscape or adjoining properties

No submissions have been received in respect of the application.

Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION

(a)       That Council support the variation to Clause 38 and Clause 40 of the PLEP 2001 under the provisions of SEPP 1.

(b)       Further that Development Application No 892/2010 for construction of a 2 storey split level dwelling house at 10 Lachlan Drive, Winston Hills be approved subject to the conditions of consent in Attachment 1 of this report.

1View

Section 79C Report

34 Pages

2View

Locality Map

1 Page

3View

Plans

10 Pages

4

Confidential floor plans

3 Pages

DATE OF                  21 January 2010

REPORT                 

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application is being referred to Council for determination as the proposal involves work to a listed heritage item.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The development application seeks consent for the fitout and change of use of Shop 1 to a tea room. Outdoor dining is also proposed to include 4 tables, 16 chairs and an umbrella.

The proposed use is for a “restaurant” under Parramatta City Centre LEP 2007. The proposed use is permissible under the B4 Mixed Use zoning applying to the land.

The subject site is listed as a Heritage item of State significance under Schedule 5 of Parramatta City Centre Local Environmental Plan 2007 and is commonly known as Murrays’ Building. The application was referred to Council’s Heritage Advisor who raises no objection to the proposal.

The proposed fitout, change of use and outdoor dining are consistent with the objectives of Parramatta City Centre Plan LEP 2007 and Parramatta City Centre Plan DCP 2007 and is considered satisfactory as there is minimal impact on the streetscape, adjoining properties and the heritage significance of the site and surrounds.

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

Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval subject to conditions

RECOMMENDATION

(a)     That Council as the consent authority grant development consent to Development Application No. DA/918/2010 for the internal fitout and change of use of Shop 1 to a tea room, with outdoor dining at 188 Church Street, Parramatta for a period of five (5) years from the date on the Notice of Determination subject to conditions.

1View

S79C Assessment Report

18 Pages

2View

Locality Map

1 Page

3View

Plans

3 Pages

Date of report   8 November 2010

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application is referred to Council as the original application was approved by the Land and Environment Court.

The matter was also deferred from the Council Meeting held on 13 December 2010.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The application seeks to modify Development Consent No. 2552/2002 under the provisions of Section 96(AA) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

Approval is sought to modify the application which includes the following:

1.         The internal steps within unit 2 has been removed

2.         The rear fire escape has been relocated between 200mm to 500mm closer to the southern boundary.

3.         Five additional steps were provided to the rear fire stairs and the pedestrian pathway was realigned.

4.         The construction of a concrete fire stair lid (cover) to the rear fire escape.

5.         The north-western timber fenced has been replaced with a 1.5 metre high green colorbond fence.

6.         A portion of the front fence was relocated 500mm within the property.

7.         The driveway grade has been adjusted and a pedestrian path has also been provided located beside the driveway.

8.         The front and rear fire stair walls from basement have been extended in height.

9.         Amended roof details which include a change from a hip end roof form for Unit 4 to a gable end roof.

10.       Dormer window/roof has been added above the bathrooms of Unit 5 and 6 on the first floor level and the headroom heights have been raised to comply with BCA standards.

11.       The party wall parapets that extended beyond roof ridges have been deleted.

12.       The material finishes have been modified from cement render to face brick.

13.       The landscaping has been amended to remove the raised planters from the front of Unit 3, 4 and 5.

14.       The basement floor level has been lowered from FFL 28.71 to FFL 28.425.

15.       A window and door schedule has been provided.

16.       Amended roof detail plan has been submitted to clarify inconsistencies.

A site visit has confirmed that modifications 6 and 7 have not been undertaken. However, modifications 1 to 5 and 8 to 16 have been completed and therefore retrospective approval is sought. Modification 2 (relocation of the rear fire escape stairs) that has already been undertaken was included in the Construction Certificate issued by Council’s Certification Team. While a degree of variation can be addressed through a construction certificate to allow for the reasonable tolerances of actual construction, the change sought to the rear fire escape stairs is best considered through a Section 96 assessment.

Development Consent No. 2552/2002 granted consent for the construction of a multi-unit development containing 8 townhouses. A subsequent modification DA/2552/2002/A approved internal modifications to Unit 1 to 4.

It is noted that Section 96 Modification DA/2552/2002/B was withdrawn by the applicant following deferral at Council’s Regulatory meeting of 9 August 2010.  The determination of DA/2552/2002/B was deferred for the following reason:

“That the application be deferred pending a report on the legal implications of Council retrospectively approving a non complying application and on Council’s options should it wish to refuse the application together with advice from the Chief Executive Officer on other matters associated with the development application”.

Legal advice was sought in regards to the above. Accordingly, the following advice was provided.

The council resolution of 9 August 2010 asks for some legal comments about implications if council approves the ’non complying application’.  Having regard to the above comments, I consider those implications are as follows:

·    There is nothing that prevents Council from making a decision.

·    Approval of the section 96 application will permit use of the items constructed which are beyond the scope of the current construction certificate (namely, the item relating to the relocation of the fire stairs).

·    Approval of the section 96 application does not prevent a prosecution for unauthorised works.

·    Refusal of the section 96 application will entitle the applicant to commence class 1 proceedings in the L & E Court if it thinks fit. On the information presently available, I do not think that the Council would be in a strong position to successfully defend those proceedings.

·    Council could amend the recommendations but that would still constitute an approval.

·    The applicant is also entitled to commence class 1 proceedings if it wishes to challenge any particular consent condition (regardless of whether it has been changed by the council). It is not possible to comment on legal implications and risk in respect of any changes council makes to the recommended consent conditions unless those changes are available for review.  Suffice to say that any changes which result in consent conditions that are not for proper planning purposes will be very unlikely to withstand legal challenge.

One submission was received raising concerns over the landscaping plan which proposed a planting scheme that involved a White Cedar tree which produces toxic fruits. 

The proposed modifications will not result in any unacceptable impacts to the amenity of the area as an appropriate level of privacy for adjoining sites is maintained and the design, bulk and scale of the development remains predominantly commensurate with the development as previously approved. The development as modified by the subject application is substantially the same development as that approved. The proposed modification of the original development consent does not raise any additional issues in respect of compliance with Council’s policies.

Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION

(a)       That Council as the consent authority modify Development Consent No. 2552/2002 under the provisions of Section 96(AA) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act in the following manner:

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:

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

2.              Add the following conditions to the development consent:

                 1a.)   The two Melis Azedarch (White Cedar) trees proposed along                           the rear boundary are to be replaced with one Lagerstroemia                      indica and one Magnolia soulngiana.

1b.)   The planting schedule which includes the species and quantities for the proposed development as stipulated on the Landscaping Plan approved under DA/2552/2002 (Landscape Plan 10-02/03 Issue E. Prepared by SAOKI) is to be complied with.

          Reason:   To ensure compliance with DA/2552/2002. 

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

1View

Section 79C Report

17 Pages

2View

Location Plan

1 Page

3View

Amended Plans

7 Pages

4View

Original Consent

14 Pages

5View

Section 96 DA/2552/2002/A report

9 Pages

6View

Section 96 DA/2552/2002/B report

15 Pages

7

Confidential plans

2 Pages

DATE OF REPORT 18 November 2010

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application is referred to Council as the original application was approved at a Regulatory Council meeting on 19 May 2003.

The matter was also deferred from the Council Meeting held on 13 December 2010.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The application seeks approval to modify Development Consent No.2862/2002 which granted consent to demolition, removal of 11 trees and the erection of seven x 3 bedroom and two x 2 bedroom town houses over basement car parking.

Approval is sought for the retrospective modifications which include an increase in the basement floor levels which has resulted in an increase of up to 970mm higher than the approved ground floor levels to the front row of units and to a maximum of 700mm higher than the approved floor levels to the rear row of units. As a result, the ridge height of the front row of units has increased by 970mm and the rear row of units by 750mm.

Approval is also sought for modifications to mitigate the impact of excessive bulk and scale as a result of the unauthorised works detailed above. The proposed works include additional landscaping in the form of planter boxes between each set of stairs, which provide access to the front row of units, and reconfiguration of the staircase providing access to the ground floor of each unit within the front row to provide for a landing which faces the street. Additionally, a condition is recommended requiring 600mm of lattice screening to be surmounted on top of the eastern side boundary fence to reduce the potential for overlooking into the courtyard of adjoining properties located immediately to the east of the site.

Approval is also sought for the deletion of Condition No. 59 requiring the basement level carpark to have a minimum floor to ceiling height of 2.5 metres. The as built works have resulted in a minimum floor to ceiling height of 2.0 metres for a portion of the basement carpark. As this does not comply with the deemed to satisfy requirements of the Building Code of Australia and Australian Standard AS 2890.1, a condition is recommended requiring the floor to ceiling height of the basement carpark to comply with the performance requirements of the Building Code of Australia and the relevant  Australian Standard.

Council issued a Stop Work Order on 30 September 2009, as a site inspection revealed that construction of the development commenced prior to obtaining a Construction Certificate. Concerns were raised by Council’s Construction Team with regard to the structural integrity of the development.  The Stop Work order was lifted once the structural integrity of the development was rectified.

Construction of the townhouses is nearly complete.

Three submissions have been received in response to the notification of this application, raising issues with respect to unacceptable overlooking and excessive bulk and scale.

It is considered that the proposed changes to the front façade of the development to mitigate the impact of the unauthorised works and recommended conditions will appropriately address the issues raised by objectors with respect to bulk and scale and overlooking. Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval, subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION

(a)       That Council as the consent authority, modify development consent to Development Application No. DA/2862/2002 in the following manner:

           The following additional conditions are imposed.

1.         The provision of 600mm lattice screening shall be surmounted on top of   

       the entire length of the eastern boundary fence prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

Reason: To minimise the impact of overlooking.

2.         All landscape works shall be maintained for a minimum period of two (2) years after the final completion, in accordance with the approved plans and conditions.

Reason:        To ensure restoration of environmental amenity.

Condition No. 59 is to be modified in the following  manner:

            The floor to ceiling height of the basement car parking area is required to               satisfy the performance requirements of the Building Code of Australia and             Australian Standard AS 2890.1.

          Reason: To comply with the height requirements of the BCA and AS            2890.1.    

(b)       Further, that as the development works have occurred without prior  

development consent being obtained, that the matter be referred to Council’s Development Control Section for investigation and possible issue of a penalty

 infringement notice.

(c)       Further, that the objector’s be notified of Council’s decision.

1View

Section 79c Report

16 Pages

2View

Locality Map

1 Page

3View

Original Section 79c Report

6 Pages

4View

Plans & Elevations

4 Pages

5

Confidential plans

4 Pages

DATE OF REPORT - 14 January 2011

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application has been referred to Council as the application seeks variations of greater than 10% to the allotment size/frontage control of clause 38(1)(b), the height control of clause 39(1)(a) and the floor space ratio control of clause 40(1) contained within Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001 and the application is accompanied by an objection under SEPP 1.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The application seeks approval for the construction of 7 dwellings in an approved 7 lot subdivision of Lot 6 DP 270605. The site forms part of the housing estate located inside the former Eastwood Brickworks. The subdivision pattern and allotment sizes remain consistent with DA/799/2008 which was approved on 18 December 2008. Despite the site being located inside a new housing estate the development standards of Parramatta LEP 2001 continue to apply.

The 3 storey height of five of the proposed dwellings results in a variation to the 2 storey height limit. The 0.85:1 floor space ratio for the 3 storey dwellings is a variation to the 0.5:1 floor space ratio control by 70%. The 0.69:1 floor space ratio for the 2 storey dwellings is a variation to the 0.5:1 floor space ratio control by 38%. The dwellings are located on allotments that have an area of between 444.4m2 and 447.5m2. The maximum variation to the 550m2 allotment size control is 19.2%.

In November 2008 a Planning Circular titled ‘Reporting Variations to Development Standards’ was issued by the Department of Planning. The circular recommended that variations to development standards of greater than 10% should be determined by Council.

The site is subject to the provisions of the Eastwood Brickworks Master Plan which was approved by Council in June 2003.

The proposed dwellings are considered acceptable when assessed against the Brickworks Master Plan. In particular the Master Plan envisaged a development with a density of 0.6:1 across the site and an aesthetic based on the use of verandahs, projecting awnings, and gable roof forms. The dwellings have been designed taking into consideration the design principles of the Master Plan and achieve consistency with the streetscape and are compatible with dwellings previously approved for the site despite the variations to the developments standards in Parramatta LEP for height, floor space ratio, and allotment size, and the variation to the rear setback control for the two storey dwellings on proposed lots 7 and 8. 

The application was notified to adjoining properties and one submission was received from the owner of a property that backs onto the housing estate. The issues raised in the submission have been considered in the assessment of the application.

Despite the non compliances with the floor space ratio, height, and allotment size requirements of the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan the proposal is consistent with the zone objectives as the design of the dwellings is compatible with recent development in the housing estate. Accordingly the proposal is recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION

(a)       That Council supports the variations to Clauses 38(1), 39(1)(a) and 40(1) of Parramatta LEP 2001 under the provisions of SEPP 1.

(b)       That Council as the consent authority grant development consent to Development Application No. DA/701/2010 for the construction of seven dwellings on Birchgrove Crescent (proposed lots 2 to 8 in an approved subdivision of Lot 6 DP 270605) subject to the conditions in Attachment 1.

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

1View

Section 79C Assessment Report

31 Pages

2View

Locality Map

1 Page

3

Confidential plans

7 Pages

DATE OF REPORT

10^th december, 2010

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The proposal is referred to Council for determination due to the number of submissions received. This report was referred from the Delegated Authority Meeting on 13 January 2011.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The proposal involves the demolition of existing fast food outlets (KFC and Pizza Hut buildings) and structures on the site and the construction of  a two storey building with indicative uses of commercial (offices), retail (including grocery), recreation facility (gymnasium) and medical centre with 93 carparking spaces. It is noted that these uses are indicative only and would require further development consent should the application be approved.

Eight submissions were received. The objections relate primarily to issues relating to general traffic and parking, as well as the economic impacts of this development on existing commercial and retail premises in Guildford. The issues are addressed in the Section 79C Assessment Report (Attachment 1) and are not considered sufficiently adverse to warrant refusal of the application.

The conclusions contained within Attachment 1 are that:

·    Economic competition between individual trade competitors is not an environmental or planning consideration. Such competition is resolved by market forces, subject to the Trade Practices Act and it is not part of the assessment process under the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 to determine economic viability of competing retail premises; and

·    Traffic generated by the development can be accommodated by the surrounding road network and would not have unreasonable impacts on existing traffic volumes or congestion.

·    Neither the Roads & Traffic Authority of NSW nor Council’s Traffic Engineer raise any concerns in relation to the proposal and its impacts on traffic either on its own or the cumulative impacts having regard to   other development in the locality.

·    The acoustic and air quality impacts of Woodville Road on the development are not sufficient to warrant refusal of the proposal, particularly as this development does not contain a residential component.

The other issues raised in the submissions are addressed in Attachment 1.

The proposal is a long standing application as a number of issues relating to the driveways and access onto and from Woodvile Road required resolution. These issues have been satisfactorily addressed to the satisfaction of the Roads and Traffic Authority of NSW and Council’s Traffic and Transport Engineer who have both provided their conditions of consent.

The proposal has been considered by Council’s Urban Designer and the proposal is considered to be of appropriate design quality, with Council’s Urban Designer concluding:

          ‘The proposal is considered acceptable given that (previous issues raised) are      relatively minor urban design issues.’

The proposal complies with the prescribed requirements of Parramatta Local  Environmental Plan 2001 and its DCP. In particular, the proposal satisfies the key development controls of FSR, height and carparking.

The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the LEP 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 development consent to        Development Application No. 72/2010 for the demolition of existing buildings     and structures on the site and the construction of a two storey commercial      premises, shops, recreation facility (gymnasium) and medical centre           development with at-grade and basement carparking for 93 cars and two        loading docks at 272-272 Woodville Road, Guildford, subject to the conditions        contained within Attachment 1. 

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

1View

Section 79 Assessment Report

55 Pages

2View

Locality Map

1 Page

3View

Plans & Elevations

7 Pages

DATE OF REPORT

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL:

The application has been referred to Council for determination due the high public interest in the site and the nature of the deferred commencement. This report was referred from the Delegated Authority Meeting on 13 January 2011.

Executive Referral:

Approval is sought for the construction of a detached 2 storey dual occupancy development with Torrens title subdivision. In addition to the dual occupancy, an existing Council stormwater pipe is to be relocated to the middle of the property and construction of a sandstone wall on the Gilbert Street frontage from the foundation material of the original dwelling house.

It is noted that the original proposal included demolition of the home once occupied by Australian Cricketer Richie Benaud and tree removal. These elements are no longer included in the proposal as they have been approved under a Complying Development Certificate issued by a Private Certifier and a Tree Application.

A recommended condition of consent requires a plaque to commemorate the ‘Benaud’ family to be placed on the sandstone wall at the Gilbert Street frontage.

The proposed development is defined as a “dual occupancy” under the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001. The proposal satisfies the definition of “dual occupancy” and is permissible under the 2A Residential zoning applying to the land.

The land is subject to flooding. A Flood Study Report and plan detail were submitted to Council addressing flooding issues. The original Flood Study Report and plan detail has since been amended as a result of comments from Council’s Catchment Management Team and Development Engineers. Architectural plans for the development however, are yet to be amended to reflect the latest Flood Study. This issue has been dealt with by way of a deferred commencement condition in the 79C Report attached.

The application was notified in accordance with Council’s Notification DCP and three submissions were received. The concerns raised have been addressed in the attached 79C Report.

Accordingly the application is recommended for approval (deferred commencement), subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION

(a)     That the Development Application No. 533/2010, for the construction of a detached, 2 storey dual occupancy development with Torrens title subdivision on land at 5 Sutherland Road, North Parramatta be determined by granting a consent for a period of 5 years subject to ‘deferred commencement’ under Section 80(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. Upon strict compliance with all conditions appearing in Schedule A and with the issue of confirmation to that effect in writing from Council, the “deferred commencement” consent shall revert to a development consent inclusive of all conditions appearing in Schedule B, pursuant to Section 80(1) of the Act.

(b)     Objector to be notified of Council’s decision.

1View

Section 79C Report

59 Pages

2View

Locality map

1 Page

3View

Plans

9 Pages

4

Confidential floor plans

3 Pages

DATE OF REPORT   29 December 2010

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application has been referred to Council as it seeks a variation of greater than 10% to the height control within Clause 39 of Local Environmental Plan 2001 and the application is accompanied by an objection under SEPP 1. This report was referred from the Delegated Authority Meeting on 13 January 2011.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The application seeks approval for demolition and construction of a three storey dwelling house.

Although the proposed dwelling has a ground and first floor for habitable purposes the proposed dwelling will comprise of three storeys as defined by Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001 which exceeds the two storey height limit permitted under the development standard of Clause 39. The non compliance is a technical non compliance due to the definition of a storey under PLEP 2001. The definition includes any area greater than 1.2 metres above ground level as a storey. The garage area of the dwelling protrudes above the natural ground level by a maximum of 1.9m on the north-eastern elevation of the dwelling. The non-compliance is a direct result of the slope of the allotment. The application also seeks a small variation to the Floor space ratio control of Clause 40 of PLEP 2001 (less than a 10% variation) and is deemed to be appropriate.

In accordance with a Planning Circular released by the Department of Planning in November 2008 on ’Reporting Variations to Development Standards' variations to development standards greater than 10% should be determined by Council.

One submission has been received in respect of this application.

The proposed development is consistent with the objectives contained in the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001 and Parramatta Development Control Plan 2005. The dwelling has a satisfactory design, bulk and scale. There is sufficient landscaping and open space provided by the proposal. The new dwelling is appropriately sited without unduly impacting on the streetscape or amenity of adjoining properties in terms of privacy or shading.

Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council support the variations to Clause 39 and Clause 40 of the PLEP 2001 under the provisions of SEPP 1.

(b) Further that Council as the consent authority grant development consent to Development Application No. DA/884/2010 for the for demolition of the existing dwelling and the construction of a 3 storey dwelling at 5 Romani Street, NORTH PARRAMATTA  NSW  2151 for a period of five (5) years from the date on the Notice of Determination has been approved subject to the conditions contained in the annexed draft determination letter.

1View

S79C Assessment Report

46 Pages

2View

Locality Map

1 Page

3View

Plans

5 Pages

4

Confidential Plans

3 Pages

DATE OF REPORT   4 January 2011

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application has been referred to Council due to the number of submissions received. This report was referred from the Delegated Authority Meeting on 13 January 2011.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Development Application No. 674/2010 seeks approval for the demolition, tree removal and construction of a multi-unit housing development containing 5 dwellings under the provisions of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

The development is being constructed under the provisions of the SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 and 50% of the dwellings (being 3 of the proposed dwellings) will be designated for affordable housing to be managed by a "Registered Community Provider" for 10 years as required under the SEPP.

The subject site is zoned Residential 2(b) under the provisions of LEP2001. Multi unit housing is a permissible land use under the zoning provisions of LEP2001. Notwithstanding this, the proposed use is considered as “infill affordable housing” under the SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 and is a permissible development under this SEPP, which is the prevailing legislative document.

The proposed FSR of 0.6:1 and 2 storey height of the proposed development complies with the maximum FSR and height provisions within the current 2(b) zoning and proposed R3 zoning of the subject site. The development also complies with the maximum FSR and height provisions of the SEPP.

The proposal does not comply with the solar access provisions of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009. The departure is minor only and does not warrant the refusal of the application. The applicant has submitted a SEPP 1 Objection to vary this control. This SEPP 1 Objection is considered to warrant Council’s support.

Six objections were received in respect of this application. The issues raised within those submissions relate to potential overlooking, overshadowing, impacts on the character of the area, asbestos removal, loss of green space, impact upon traffic, stormwater and drainage. The issues raised in the submissions do not warrant refusal of the application. The issues have been discussed in detail within the Section 79C assessment report contained at Attachment 1.

Subject to conditions of consent, the proposal is considered to be acceptable as it generally complies with the provisions of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 and is consistent with the aims and objectives of Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001 and Parramatta Draft Local Environmental Plan 2010. Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION

(a)       That Council support the variation to the solar access provisions of Clause 14(1)(e) of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 under the provisions of SEPP 1.

(b)       Further that Council as the consent authority grant development consent to Development Application No. 674/2010 for the demolition, tree removal and construction of a multi-unit housing development containing 5 dwellings under the provisions of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 on land at 37 Rosebery Road, Guildford subject to the conditions contained within Attachment 1. 

(c)        Further that the persons who lodged a submission be advised of Council’s determination of the application.

1View

Section 79C Assessment report

57 Pages

2View

Locality Map

1 Page

3View

Plans

13 Pages

4

Confidential Plans

5 Pages

DATE OF REPORT 20 January 2011

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application is referred to Council as it is an application under Section 82A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This Section 82A Review application seeks Council’s reconsideration of its refusal to grant consent for alterations and additions to Unit 36 comprising the enclosure of a portion of the existing terrace.

The original development application was refused under delegated authority by the Group Manager, Outcomes and Development on 9 August 2010 for the following reasons:

1.         Council has no power to approve the application as owners consent has not been provided in accordance with the requirements of Clause 50 and Schedule 1 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

The applicant has submitted owner’s consent with the Section 82A review application.

Clause 40(1A) of Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001 restricts the floor space ratio for buildings within an Employment 4 zone to a maximum of 1:1. The proposed development seeks to increase the existing floor space by 58m². The development was approved with 8979m² of floor space which equates to a floor space ratio of 0.78:1. The proposed development would result in a floor space ratio of 0.79:1 which is less than the maximum 1:1 permissible on the land.

No specific use has been nominated for the proposed development as part of this development application. Notwithstanding this, it should be noted that a separate application for the occupation of Unit 36 as a community facility was lodged with Council on 2 November 2010 (DA/883/2010). This application is currently under assessment and pending determination. The application for the use of the unit as a community facility includes the enclosed terrace area, the subject of the Section 82A review application. The application for the use is a separate application and does not need to be considered in conjunction with the subject Section 82A review application.

One submission was received in respect of this application. The issues raised within that submission relate to waste, heritage, impacts on the natural and built environment and impacts on the amenity of the area. The issues raised within the submission do not warrant refusal of the application. The issues have been discussed in detail within the Section 79C assessment report contained at Attachment 1.

For the reasons outlined in this report and Attachment 1, it is recommended that Council change its determination and grant consent to the application.

RECOMMENDATION

(a)     That Council change its previous determination of DA/511/2010 and approve Development Application DA/511/2010 for alterations and additions to Unit 36 comprising the enclosure of a portion of the existing terrace on land at 46 Wellington Road, South Granville subject to the conditions of consent contained in Attachment 1 of this report.

(b)     Further, that the person who lodged a submission be advised of Council’s determination of the application.

1View

Section 82A Assessment Report

17 Pages

2View

Locality Map

1 Page

3View

Plans & Elevations

3 Pages

4View

Previous Section 79C Assessment Report

9 Pages

DATE OF REPORT

21 January 2011

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The original development application was approved at the Regulatory Council meeting on 11 October 2010

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The original development application granted approval for:

Construction of a 3 storey office building within the Baxter health care complex.

·    Construction of a three storey commercial building with 2,914sqm of floor area

·    Consolidation of the existing 2 allotments into 1 allotment

·    Removal of 30 trees

·    Provision of an additional 139 car parking spaces (total 524 spaces on the site)

·    Reconfiguration of existing car parking to provide a uniform designed car park

·    Provision of landscaping

Details of the modification are as follows:

·    Retrospective approval for removal of an additional 67 trees from the site

The additional trees have been removed.

The proposed development to be modified is considered to be substantially the same development as that to which the original development consent relates. The removal of additional trees does not result in a development that is not substantially the same as the original development. The essence of the development which is the construction of a three storey office building with associated carparking and landscaping works will remain. The inclusion of additional tree removal does not change the definition of the development under Parramatta LEP 2001

The application was notified to surrounding properties and previous objectors. In response one submission was received that raises concerns about truck movements to and from the site via Oakes Road. The RTA requires access to the site to be from Oakes Road and this section 96 modification does not increase traffic movements.

The proposed modifications have been assessed in accordance with the matters for consideration under both Section 96(1A) and section 79C of the EP&A Act 1979. The removal of additional trees do not breach the numerical controls contained within either Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001 or Parramatta Development Control Plan 2005.

The additional tree removal is supported by Council’s landscape officer as many of the trees are young semi mature specimens. Further Tree planting is recommended to mitigate the tree removal

As the tree removal has occurred without the prior consent of Council being obtained, the file will be referred to Council’s Technical Specialists Team Leader to investigate the breach of Council’s Tree Preservation Order.

Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION

(a)       That Council as the consent authority modify development consent No. DA/255/2010 in the following manner:

1.         Modifying condition 10 to state:

10. Trees to be retained are identified in the submitted Tree Report by Treescan Urban Forest Management dated July 2010. Tree No’s 1-5, 7-15, 32-33, 36-38 and 53-57 are required to be retained and protected during the demolition and construction period.

Reason: To protect significant trees which contribute to the landscape character of the area.

2. Modify condition 11 to state:

11. Trees to be removed as indentified in the submitted Tree Report by Treescan Urban Forest Management dated July 2010. Tree No’s 6, 16-30, 31, 34 and 39-52 are approved to be removed as well as the additional 65 trees identified on the survey plan prepared by Stutchbury Jacques Pty Ltd –Land Surveying consultants, reference No.6511/07 dated 10/11/10.

                   Reason:   To allow appropriate development of the site

          3.      Condition 78A be added:

78A.        Prior to the Issue of an occupation certificate replacement tree (screen) planting shall be undertaken along the southern boundary of the site in front of the carpark to replace the trees approved for removal. The trees shall be planted at two (2) metre intervals along the length of the boundary.  Suitable species include (or a mixture of) the following: 

·    Elaeocarpus reticulatus (Blueberry Ash)

·    Hymenosporum flavum (Native Frangipani)

·    Melaleuca bracteata (River Tea Tree)

·    Callistemon citrinus (Scarlet Bottlebrush)

     NOTE: Minimum container size of 25 litres

Reason:        To ensure the restoration of the environmental amenity of the area.

          4.      All other conditions of consent are to remain.

(b)       Further, that as the development works have occurred without prior  

development consent being obtained, that the matter be referred to Technical Specialists Team Leader for investigation and possible issue of a penalty

 infringement notice.

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

1View

Sec 96 Assessment Report

8 Pages

2View

Locality Map

1 Page

3View

Plans

2 Pages

4View

Approved Tree Report

27 Pages

5View

Original Council report for 104 Oakes Rd

71 Pages

DATE OF REPORT 31 January 2011

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The Section 96 application has been referred to Council for determination as the original development application was referred to Council for determination.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Approval is sought for the modification to an approved multi-unit development containing 3 townhouses. The modification includes deletion of condition 32 of the original Development Consent (DA/1207/2004). Retrospective approval is sought for the installation of frosted glazing to all first floor eastern windows.

Condition 32 of the original Development Consent reads as follows:

“32.     All first floor windows to the eastern elevation shall be provided with louvres.

Reason: To ensure privacy of the adjoining properties.”

Louvres were conditioned for the first floor rear facing windows so as to maintain the amenity of the neighbouring properties and reduce potential for looking into adjoining properties.

Through the construction process windows with obscure glazing were installed and the louvers were not. The Occupation Certificate is yet to be issued for the development as condition 32 has not been met.

The rear facing first floor rooms are considered to be of low use being windows associated with bedrooms. It is considered that the rear facing, obscure glazing, windows would satisfy the original privacy concerns and are acceptable.

The application was notified in accordance with Council’s Notification DCP and no submissions were received. Due to an administration error a person who objected to the original DA was not sent a letter advising to the section 96 application. A letter has since been mailed to the person.

Accordingly the application is recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION

(a)       That Council as the consent authority, modify development consent to Development Application No. DA/1207/2004/B for Section 96(1a) modification to an approved multi-unit development containing 3 townhouses including deletion of Condition 32 and retrospective approval for installation of frosted glazing to all first floor eastern windows on land at 13 Dobson Crescent, Dundas Valley  NSW  2152 as shown on the plans submitted with the modification of determination, for a period of five (5) years from the date on the original Notice of Determination subject to the modifications included in the attached Assessment Report.

(b)       That the original objectors to be notified of Council’s decision.

(c)       Further, that the matter relating to breaches to the development consent be referred to the Regulatory Services Unit for investigation.

1View

Section 79c Report

7 Pages

2View

Locality Plan

1 Page

3View

Approved Plans

5 Pages

4View

Original 79c Report

19 Pages

5View

Original Development Consent

22 Pages

6View

Original Emailed Council Report

5 Pages

7View

Section 96c Report for DA/1207/2004/A

6 Pages

8

Approved Confidential Floor Plan

2 Pages

DATE OF REPORT   21 January 2011

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application is referred to Council as the original application was approved at the Regulatory Council Meeting of 8 August 2005.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The application seeks to modify Development Consent No. 2202/2003 under the provisions of Section 96(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

Development Consent No. 2202/2003 granted consent for the construction of a multi-unit development containing 5 townhouses.

Approval is sought to modify the application which includes the following:

1.         Reconfiguration of the internal floor layout of the first floor of each dwelling which includes:

-     Changes to the floor area (both area and dimensions) of bedroom 1, bedroom 2 and the bathroom for all 5 units as follows:

-     relocation of the ensuite to the northern side adjacent to the bathroom for all 5 units

-     as a result of reduced bedroom sizes, a study room was created and is located between bedroom 1 and the staircase for all 5 units.

2.         External changes which include

-     addition of five 600mm x 700mm ensuite windows on the northern elevation

-     external finishes of Unit 1, 3 and 5 were changed from rendered and painted to face brick.

It is noted that the above modifications have been undertaken and therefore retrospective approval is sought.

No submissions were received during the notification period. 

The proposed modifications will not result in any unacceptable impacts to the amenity of the area as an appropriate level of privacy for adjoining sites is maintained and the design, bulk and scale of the development remains commensurate with the development as previously approved. The development as modified is substantially the same development as that originally approved. The proposed modification of the original development consent does not raise any additional issues in respect of compliance with Council’s policies including overall height and floor space ratio which remain unaltered by the proposal.

Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION

(a)       That Council as the consent authority modify Development Consent No. 2202/2003 under the provisions of Section 96(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act in the following manner:

            1. Modify Condition No. 1 as follows:

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:

(b)     That the application be referred to Regulatory Compliance for investigation and possible issue of a Penalty Infringement Notice given that the works were carried out without prior development approval being obtained.

1View

Section 79C Report

8 Pages

2View

Location Plan

1 Page

3View

Amended Plans

1 Page

4View

Original Section 79C

23 Pages

5View

Original Consent

24 Pages

6View

Original Plans

2 Pages

7

Original Confidential Plans

3 Pages

8

Confidential Plans

2 Pages

DATE OF REPORT  21 January 2011

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application is referred to Council as the original application for demolition and construction of a 3 storey mixed use development comprising ground floor retail shops, 2 levels of residential units, basement car parking and strata subdivision was approved by Council on 14 August 2006.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Section 96(1A) Application seeks approval for the deletion of condition No. 62 of the development consent which requires trees to be planted on the nature strip.

Condition 62 states:

The application was referred to Council’s Landscape Officer who supports the removal of the condition. The following comments were provided:

“The following condition (62) cannot be complied with due to the location of the approved awning, the location of the development to street corners ( development site approximately 30 metres in length), the location of the surrounding infrastructure (pedestrian crossing, power poles, etc) and services (Telstra, Sydney Water, etc). The street tree planting would have blocked sight lines for vehicles using the laneway at the rear of the site.”

The application was notified in accordance with Council’s Notification Policy and one submission was received. The issues raised have been considered and do not warrant refusal of this application.

The likely impacts of the proposed development have been assessed and the proposed modification is considered acceptable with respect to the standards and controls contained within Council’s LEP 2001 and DCP 2005.

Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION

(a)       That Council as the consent authority, modify Development Consent No. 961/2004/B by deleting condition no. 62.

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

1View

Section 79C Report

7 Pages

2View

Locality Map

1 Page

3View

Section 79C Report for DA/961/2004

10 Pages

4View

Council report for DA/961/2004/A

4 Pages

DATE OF REPORT 21 January 2010

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application has been referred to Council as it is a place of public worship.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Development Application No. 868/2010 seeks approval for the occupation of Unit 3 as a place of public worship for a seating capacity of 120 persons and the display of associated signage.

The subject site is zoned Employment 4 under the provisions of LEP2001. A place of public worship is a permissible land use under the zoning provisions of LEP2001.

The proposed development has a useable floor space of approximately 240m². This requires the provision of 66 car parking spaces under the guidelines of the Place of Public Worship DCP. The traffic report submitted with the application estimates 30 car parking spaces are required for the use, based upon the 120 seat capacity of the building, and the current car occupancy rates and operations of the church (formerly located in Northmead). No car parking is provided on site for the use of the proposed church. The applicant has submitted letters from the owner and tenant of the adjoining property at 9-11 Barney Street granting permission for the church to utilise the car parking on that property on Wednesday evenings and Sundays (during the peak usage times). The furniture warehouse currently located at 9-11 Barney Street does not use the car parking at these times. The provision of the 30 car parking spaces is less than that required by the Places of Public Worship DCP, however consistent with that estimated by the traffic report. Council’s Traffic engineer can support the proposal, subject to conditions.

It is considered that to ensure certainty of the use of car parking on the adjoining property, a lease agreement should be entered into between the applicant and the owner at 9-11 Barney Street, formalising the use of this area for parking.  The execution of the lease and a plan indicating the car parking on the adjoining property should be submitted before the consent becomes operative.

It should be noted that building works have commenced within the building, with 2 large walls and the kitchenette already been constructed. These works do not form part of this approval and a building certificate would need to be lodged and approved before any use could commence. Internal partitioning to separate the congregation area from the “break-out” area and proposed external signage is still to be constructed and is subject to a Construction Certificate.

The application was notified in accordance with Council’s Notification DCP and one submission was received in respect of this application. The issue raised within the submission relates to the lack of car parking available on site. The issue raised in the submission does not warrant refusal of the application. The issue has been discussed in detail within the Section 79C assessment report contained in Attachment 1.

The proposed development is consistent with the objectives contained in the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001 and Parramatta Development Control Plan 2005. The proposed place of public worship is appropriately sited without unduly impacting on the amenity of nearby residential properties.

Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval vide a deferred commencement consent and subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions once the consent becomes operational.

RECOMMENDATION

(a)       That Council as the consent authority grant a deferred commencement development consent to Development Application No. 868/2010 for the occupation of Unit 3 as a place of public worship on land at 13 Barney Street, North Parramatta subject to the conditions contained within Attachment 1. 

(b)       Further that the person who lodged a submission be advised of Council’s determination of the application.

(c)        Further that the unauthorised works within the premises be referred to Council’s Compliance Team for further investigation and action.

1View

Section 79C Assessment Report

34 Pages

2View

Locality Map

1 Page

3View

Plans & Elevations

7 Pages

DATE OF REPORT

28 January 2011

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

This development application has been referred to Council due to the number of objections received.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Development Application No. 824/2010 seeks approval for demolition, tree removal and construction of a multi-unit housing development containing 7 townhouses over basement carparking with strata subdivision.

The subject site is zoned Residential 2(b) under the provisions of LEP2001. Multi unit housing is a permissible land use under the zoning provisions of LEP2001.

The proposed FSR of 0.55:1 and 2 storey height of the proposed development complies with the maximum FSR and height provisions within the current 2(b) zoning and proposed R3 zoning of the subject site.

The proposal does not comply with the height controls contained within DCP 2005 as the development does not comply with the building height envelope controls for the upper level on the front and rear rows and the landscaped area controls. However, having regards to the adjoining townhouse developments that also exceed Council’s current planning controls the variations are supported.

One individual letter of objection and a petition signed by owners/occupiers were received in respect of this application.  Three of the petitioners subsequently withdrew their objection to the proposal. The issues raised within those submissions relate to potential overlooking, tree removal, stormwater and drainage. The issues raised in the submissions do not warrant refusal of the application. The issues have been discussed in detail within the Section 79C assessment report contained at Attachment 1.

Subject to conditions of consent, the proposal is considered to be acceptable as it generally complies with the provisions of Parramatta Development Control Plan 2005 and is consistent with the aims and objectives of Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2001 and Parramatta Draft Local Environmental Plan 2010. Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION

a)        That Council as the consent authority grant development consent to Development Application No. 824/2010 for demolition, tree removal and construction of a multi-unit housing development containing 7 townhouses over basement carparking with strata subdivision on land at 162 Kissing Point Road, Dundas subject to the conditions contained within Attachment 1. 

b)         Further that the persons who lodged an individual submission and the head petitioner be advised of Council’s determination of the application.

1View

Section 79C Report

57 Pages

2View

Locality Plan

1 Page

3View

Plans

7 Pages

4

Confidential Floor Plan

1 Page

DATE OF REPORT 31 january 2011

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

To seek Council endorsement of a submission to the Director General of the Department of Planning on the project application for the construction of Buildings 7 and 8 containing a total of 130 dwellings.

The application is made under Schedule 3 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Major Development) 2005. Under Part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the proposal is declared as a Major Project and the Minister for Planning is the Consent Authority for the above project.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council endorse the submission to the Director General of the Department of Planning (contained at Attachment 1) regarding their assessment of the project application at 61 Mobbs Lane, Epping.

1View

Draft Submission to DOP

4 Pages

2View

Referral Comments - Traffic

3 Pages

3View

Referral Comments - Urban Design

3 Pages

4View

Plans & Elevations

16 Pages

5

Confidential Plans & Elevations

16 Pages

DATE OF REPORT  12 November 2010

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application is referred to Council as it is an application under Section 82A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.

The issue was considered at the Council Meeting held on 6 December 2010 where it was deferred pending the holding of an on site meeting. The on site meeting has been scheduled for 8 February 2011 at 5.30pm.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This Section 82A Review application seeks Council’s reconsideration of its refusal to grant consent for the demolition, tree removal and the construction of a 2 storey attached dual occupancy development.

The original development application was refused under delegated authority by the Group Manager, Outcomes and Development on 16 March 2010 for the following reasons:

1.         The proposed development is inconsistent with the aims and objectives of the Residential 2(b) zoning applying to the land as the proposed works do not enhance the amenity and characteristics of the established residential area and the building form incorporating two double garages as the street façade is not in character with the surrounding built environment.

2.         The proposed dual occupancy is not consistent with the requirements of Sections 4.2.1 – Streetscape and Section 4.5.1 – Parking and Vehicular access of Parramatta Development Control Plan 2005 as the garages are greater than 50% of the street elevation and are not setback 300mm behind the front building line and dominate the street elevation. In this regard, the proposed double garages will adversely impact upon the visual appearance of the dwelling house and upon the streetscape amenity.

3.         The proposed dual occupancy is not consistent with the requirements of Section 3.1 of Parramatta Development Control Plan 2005 as the rear setback of Dwelling A does not achieve compliance with the 30% requirement.

4.         The principles of CPTED (Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design) have not seen satisfied within the design in accordance with Section 4.4.2 of Parramatta Development Control Plan 2005. In this regard, the garages are dominant in the streetscape and the entries to both dwellings are obstructed from the view of the street. The elements of natural surveillance and guardianship are compromised due to the proposed design which is contrary to CPTED principles.

5.      The proposed development is contrary to the public interest.

Amended plans were received with the Section 82A Review indicating the following amendments:

·    Increased front setback of the proposed dual occupancy

·    1^st floor of the southern dwelling brought forward toward the street and over the garage

·    Reduction in length of both dwellings

·    Internal changes to the southern dwelling due changes to upper storey

·    Modified building façade

The amended plans have not satisfactorily addressed the previous reasons for refusal.

Six submissions were received in respect of this application. The issues raised within those submissions relate to potential overlooking, overshadowing, impacts on the character of the area, garage dominance, impacts on the existing easement and on the sewerage capacity of the existing infrastructure, impacts upon pedestrian and traffic safety and reduction of market value of property. The majority of the issues raised in the submissions do not warrant refusal of the application. The issues have been discussed in detail within the Section 79C assessment report contained at Attachment 1.

For the reasons outlined in this report and Attachment 1, it is recommended that Council uphold its previous decision and refuse consent to the Section 82A Review application.

RECOMMENDATION

(a)       That Council uphold its determination and refuse Development Application DA/8/2010 for the demolition, tree removal and the construction of a 2 storey attached dual occupancy development on land at 74 Tintern Avenue, Telopea for the reasons contained in Attachment 1 of this report.

(b)       Further, that the persons who lodged submissions be advised of Council’s determination of the application.

1View

Section 82A Assessment Report

36 Pages

2View

Locality Map

1 Page

3View

Plans & Elevations

5 Pages

4View

Previous Section 79C Assessment Report

16 Pages

5View

Applicant's Statement of Environmental Effects

29 Pages

6

Confidential Plans

2 Pages