MINUTES OF THE Meeting of Parramatta City Council HELD IN THE Council Chamber, CIVIC PLACE, PARRAMATTA ON Monday, 11 July 2011 AT 6.45 pm

PRESENT

The Acting Lord Mayor, Councillor M McDermott in the Chair and Councillors P B Barber, A Bide (retired 8.21 pm), G J Elmore, P Esber (retired 8.20 pm), P J Garrard, M A Lack, C X Lim (arrived 6.46 pm), S D Lloyd, P K Maitra (arrived 6.46 pm), L E Wearne (arrived 6.46 pm) and A A Wilson.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT TO TRADITIONAL LAND OWNERS

The Acting Lord Mayor, Councillor M McDermott acknowledged the Burramattagal Clan of The Darug, the traditional land owners of Parramatta and paid respect to the elders both past and present.

MINUTES

1	SUBJECT          Minutes of the Council  Meeting held on 27 June 2010
	RESOLVED      (Esber/Elmore)
12463	That the minutes be taken as read and be accepted as a true record of the Meeting.

APOLOGIES

	RESOLVED      (Barber/Elmore)
12464	That an  apology be received and accepted for the absence of The Lord Mayor, Councillor J Chedid, Councillor J D Finn and Councillor A Issa OAM MP.
	NOTE:       Councillors C X Lim, P K Maitra and L E Wearne arrived at the meeting at 6.46pm during consideration of this matter.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

There were no declarations of interest at this Council (Development) Meeting.

PASSING OF FORMER ALDERMAN JOE DOUGALL AND MR HAROLD MOSS

The Chamber received advice of the recent passing of former Alderman Joe Dougall and Mr Harold Moss.

The Chamber observed one minute’s silence in respect of the passing of Mr Dougall and Mr Moss.

NOTE:        It was requested that the Office of the Lord Mayor advise Councillors of the funeral arrangements for Mr Dougall and an appropriate floral tribute be forwarded to the families of both persons.

PUBLIC FORUM

1	SUBJECT          Contact with Council REFERENCE   F2010/02612 FROM                 Mr Bruce Berry
	“Lord Mayor, I want to comment on and to ask a question about Management’s recent refusal to respond to my letters. Reasons given for the refusal are: a.        A suggestion that I am not genuinely assisting Council to improve its services. b         I have not co-operated with Council since it removed the restrictions it had imposed on me. c         All of my concerns have been addressed. My response to this is: a.        Assistance to Council has always been my one and only aim and it still is. I have shown this as follows: (i)      Submissions on policies (DCP/LEP, Compliments and Complaints, Notifications, Delegation of Authority, Unclear and Insufficient Applications, Code of Meeting Practice). (ii)     Submissions on Government inquiries (Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters, Developer Contributions, Improving NSW Planning System, IPART inquiry on Electoral Reform, State-wide     Exempt and Complying Development Code, ICAC inquiry into Corruption Risks and Lobbying in NSW). (iii)    Inquiry carried out by Building Professionals Board leading to reprimand of private certifier and improvements in certification process. (iv)    Provided evidence in Council’s successful convictions and issue of Orders in Local Court and L and E Court. (v)     Improvements in several DA’s and Council’s approval and regulatory processes. (vi)    Revealing Council’s administrative errors and repetition of them. (vii)   Evidence provided in Conflict of Interest charge against Senior Manager. (viii)  Evidence in apparent dismissal of other Council officers. (ix)    Initiated improvement in keeping of records of inspections. (x)     Submission on traffic and parking in Elder Rd, leading to improvements. (xi)    Submission to Police leading to traffic and parking improvements in St Andrews Pl and Kenworthy St. (xii)   Initiated improvements in Ranger patrols. (xiii)  Campaigned against Staff recommendations to prevent the public from speaking on DA’s at public forum, resulting in retention of the right and other improvements. (xiv)  Submission on Residential Development Strategy, influencing changes that now prevent inappropriate development in our area. b.        Since the lifting of the restrictions on 9 February 2011, I have written only 4 letters ( I would have been allowed 8 under the restrictions). I have not spoken at public forum since then, until now. Management has said that the formats of my letters meet requirements and has not objected to their length, following my explanation that the procedure was more convenient and less wasteful to Council and to me. c.        I have provided extensive evidence that my concerns have not been addressed, such as: · Approval of major changes to developments without Section 96 application. · Approval of major breaches of Landscape Plan without explanation. · Inconsistency in decision making and  many failures to substantiate decisions and failures to respond. · Proven failure to release information to me, following “detailed investigations”. · Issue of admittedly confidential floor plans to the public on at least 9 different occasions, with the extraordinary explanation that Council trusted me, but at the same time it gave the plans to everyone else. · Failure to prove that I had “abused public forum” and repeatedly asked the same questions “week in, week out”. My question is:- Can Council dispute my above comments? If so, in what ways and, if not, how does Council justify its frustrating of my efforts to assist Council by placing even more repressive obstructions on me, apart from making such puny comments that I “expect too much of Council” or that I am being an increasing burden on its resources, when its own statistics and general commentary show that I am not? I will be following up with more of these matters at public forums in the near future, if necessary.” RESPONSE by Mr Maurice Doria, General Counsel:-
12465	“Thank you for your question in this Public Forum regarding what you have termed “Management’s recent refusal to respond to my letters”. I note that this topic is also the subject of a lengthy letter you have also written to Council on this topic which was received on 7 July 2011.  This letter is under review. Council management has not refused to respond to your letters.  You have received response to your recent communications.  It is fair to say that you may remain dissatisfied with some of the responses.  However, it is incorrect to say that there was a refusal to respond. The most recent substantial communication you received from Council was the letter dated 30 May 2011.  This Council response letter provided responses to the many questions and issues you had raised in your earlier correspondence to Council.  Some of the topics covered in that response are repeated in this Public Forum.  The issues you raised were not new and had been previously responded to in a number of earlier letters to you from Council. Council’s letter of 30 May 2011 indicated that it was the final response that Council would provide on the matters you had raised and that further correspondence on the same matters would be read and filed, but not further responded to.  This letter further indicated that Council would provide responses to any new issues you might wish to raise.  This approach is consistent with accepted best practice in the handling of complaints. I accept that you may continue to hold a different view on this matter.  You are at liberty to raise any concerns with any relevant review agency (such as the NSW Ombudsman).  Council will work cooperatively with any such review agency in the manner as it has done previously in all instances (including matters you have referred to them).”

2	SUBJECT          Development Application - 317 - 319 Kissing Point Road, Dundas REFERENCE   DA/847/2010 FROM                 Mr Richard Smyth
	“ Good evening Councillors, My name is Richard Smyth and I am a planning consultant appearing for the applicant for DA/847/2010 that seeks Council approval for multi unit dwellings at 317 – 319 Kissing Point Road. Your assessment officer has made a very serious error in the work done in this assessment. This error is illustrated in the 3^rd paragraph of your executive summary where there is a correct reference to the townhouses to the north of the subject site but no reference at all to the ones now being built on the lots immediately to the south of the subject site. Not 300 metres away as suggested in your report. To save you a site visit, I attach hereto 3 photos. No. 1 shows our site with the multi unit developments just visible on each edge of the photo. Photo 2 shows the multi unit development to the immediate north of our site. Photo 3 shows the multi unit development happening now to the immediate south of our site, the one that is not known to the writer of the report or not acknowledged. Perhaps it is being built without an approval. This same omission or error continues through the report and sets the theme for a recommendation to refuse the application. (see page 7 and page 10 second paragraph). I note from the compliance table on pages 13 and 14 that the application generally complies with all the requirements of the PLEP 2001 except for two attics being 5 sq m above the permitted size. Even then the FSR is only 0.5:1 when 0.6:1 is the permitted maximum. The failure to know about the development on the adjoining lot to the south colours the assessors views about the compliance with the objectives as noted in the last paragraph on page 14. In my opinion the proposed development is generally consistent with the aims and objectives of the existing 2B residential zone. On page 16, first paragraph, the assessor says and I quote “if the context of the site were such that the proposal were surrounded by existing development of a similar from, scale and use then it may be appropriate for the development to be allowed, not withstanding the imminent prohibition.” As I have illustrated with the photos of the proposal is surrounded by development of a similar form, scale and use and therefore Council should look favourably on the application if it was tidied up in minor ways. To further support this I note that there was previously an 8 town house development approved on the subject site, such approval having lapsed. In addition, if you look at the compliance table for Council’s imminent new LEP and new DCP on pages 16 – 32 of the report you will see that the proposal complies with many of the standards and could easily be adjusted to comply with all. On the basis of the above points, I ask Council to defer the application to give:- 1.        The applicant the opportunity to tidy up and improve the design to better meet Council’s controls; and 2         Council’s officers an opportunity to re-inspect the site and reassess the application in the light of the immediately adjoining development. I would be pleased to answer any questions you may have. The photos of development on our neighbour’s sites follow.” RESPONSE By:  Mark Leotta Service Manager Development Assessment
12466	“I refer to the above application which seeks approval for demolition, tree removal and construction of a multi-unit dwelling development containing 7 townhouses over basement parking. The applicant’s planning consultant has prepared a Public Forum statement raising concern with the assessing officer’s s79C report. In particular, concern is raised with the assessment of context for the development and the reports omission of the fact that construction of a multi-unit development has commenced on the adjoining site to the south of the subject site (321 Kissing Point Road). Although the Public Forum does not ask any specific questions, bur rather suggests that Council defer the application to enable the applicant to amend the design of the proposed development, it is nonetheless considered of benefit in this instance for Councillors to be updated by way of a memorandum on the matters raised in the Public Forum. It is acknowledged that the adjoining property at 321 Kissing Point Road is currently under construction for 8 townhouse developments approved under DA/93/2005. This fact was not stated in the assessment officer’s report. The reason for the omission of this fact is that at the time the officer inspected the site which was shortly after lodgement of the application a construction certificate for the development on the adjoining site had not been issued and construction work had not commenced. Even though the development site is located between 2 properties that contain multi-unit developments, it is the opinion of the assessment officer that the proposed development not be approved due to significant issues with the current design of the development, as discussed in detail in the assessment report.  It is maintained that the proposed development at 317-319 Kissing Point Road does not contribute to the existing or future streetscape of Kissing Point Road as the built form is inconsistent with that of surrounding development which is demonstrated by the lack of façade articulation and an overly complex and unpleasing roof form. In addition, the proposed development at 317-319 Kissing Point Road does not comply with the design standards of the current PDCP 2005 including: · Height · Side setback · Development on sloping land · Landscaping · Streetscape · Fences · Built form and Massing · Roof Form · Attics · Building facade and Articulation · Communal open space · Solar Access · Internal amenity · Waste Management It is also noted that Council’s Urban Designer also does not support the proposed development. Accordingly, the recommendation to refuse DA/847/2010 for the reasons outlined in the report attached to Item 10.5 remains. “

PETITIONS

1	SUBJECT          Denham Place, Dundas - Unauthorised Works REFERENCE   BC/47/2011 FROM                 K Moon and others
	RESOLVED      (McDermott/Bide)
12467	That the petition be received and referred to the appropriate officer for action.
	NOTE:       Councillor P Barber assumed the Chair during consideration of this matter to enable the Acting Lord Mayor to present the petition and move a motion in respect of this matter.

Rescission Motions

7.1	SUBJECT          Urban Renewal Study for Granville REFERENCE   F2010/02537 - D02013034 REPORT OF     N/A
	MOTION             (Barber/Elmore)
12468	That the resolution of the Council Meeting held on 27 June 2011, regarding Urban Renewal Study for Granville namely:- “In keeping with the objectives of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Urban Renewal) 2010:- (a)      That Council acknowledges the significance of this Renewal SEPP which identifies the Granville Centre within the Metropolitan Strategy and its importance within the context of future State and Local Government planning.  (b)     That this Council recognises the significance of the Granville Town Centre as a residential origin rather than an employment destination. (c)       That in order for Council’s Planning scheme to reflect the objectives of the Urban Renewal SEPP, Council wishes to have the area bounded by the Railway line to the South and the M4 Freeway to the north and the Carlingford railway line to the East deferred from the provisions of the Draft Parramatta LEP and seeks the Minister’s support to take this action, so as to allow Council to carry out a further comprehensive investigation of the identified area.” be and is hereby rescinded.
	The motion was put and carried on the Acting Lord Mayor’s Casting Vote.
	MOTION              (Barber/Elmore)
12469	That Council acknowledges the significance of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Urban Renewal) 2010 and a workshop be held with the Department of Planning to discuss areas of Parramatta identified in the SEPP.
	The motion was put and carried on the Acting Lord Mayor’s Casting Vote.
	NOTE: A Notice of Motion to rescind this decision was submitted following the conclusion of the meeting.

Reports - Domestic Applications

9.1	SUBJECT          16 McKillop Place, Carlingford (Lot 1639 DP 214707) (Lachlan Macquarie) DESCRIPTION Demolition of existing garage, tree removal and construction of detached double garage and carport to the rear of the property. REFERENCE   DA/277/2011 - Submitted 3 May 2011 APPLICANT/S  Mr B C Farrell OWNERS          Mr B C Farrell REPORT OF     Manager Development Services REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL                             The application has been referred to Council as the proposal seeks a SEPP 1 variation of greater than 10% to Clause 47 – “Development on land abutting an environmental protection zone” (Zone 7 in Parramatta Local Environmental Plan.
	RESOLVED      (Esber/Maitra)
12470	(a)       That Council support the variation to Clause 47 of the PLEP 2001 under the provisions of SEPP 1. (b)       Further, that Development Application No. DA/277/2011 for the demolition, tree removal and construction of detached double garage with attached carport to the rear of the property at 16 McKillop Place, Carlingford be approved subject to the conditions of consent in Attachment 1 of this report
	DIVISION      The result being: AYES             The Acting Lord Mayor, Councillor M D McDermott and Councillors A Bide, G J Elmore, P Esber, P J Garrard, M A Lack, C X Lim, S D Lloyd, P K Maitra and A A Wilson. NOES            Councillors P B Barber and L E Wearne.

9.2	SUBJECT          1 Willis Avenue Guildford NSW 2161 Lot 1 DP 208820 DESCRIPTION Demolition of heritage listed dwelling and outbuildings. REFERENCE   DA/264/2011 - Lodged 29th April 2011 APPLICANT/S  N White OWNERS          Mrs S McGarrigle, Mr P D McGarrigle REPORT OF     Manager Development Services REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL                             The application is being referred to Council for determination as the proposal involves the demolition of a heritage item.
	RESOLVED      (Garrard/Bide)
12471	(a)      That Council grant development consent to Development Application No. 264/2011 for the demolition of the dwelling house and associated structures on land at 1 Willis Avenue, Guildford subject to conditions contained within Attachment 1. (b)      Further, that the decision of Council be communicated to Council’s Land Use Planning Team so as to the remove the heritage item from the heritage LEP in the next review.
	DIVISION      The result being: AYES             The Acting Lord Mayor, Councillor M D McDermott and Councillors A Bide, P Esber, P J Garrard, M A Lack, C X Lim, S D Lloyd, P K Maitra, L E Wearne and A A Wilson. NOES            Councillors P B Barber and G J Elmore.

9.3	SUBJECT          186 Windsor Rd Winston Hills (Caroline Chisholm Ward) (Lot 2 DP 1144817) DESCRIPTION Demolition of unsympathetic additions to a heritage listed cottage and construction of a carpark at the front of the site. Approval is also sought to use the premises as an office. REFERENCE   DA/71/2011 - Lodged 17 February 2011 APPLICANT/S  United Holdings Pty Ltd OWNERS          United Holdings Pty Ltd REPORT OF     Manager Development Services REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL                             The proposal involves building works associated with a heritage team.
	RESOLVED      (Esber/Elmore)
12472	(a)       That Council as the consent authority grant development consent to Development Application No. DA/71/2011 for the demolition of unsympathetic additions to a heritage listed cottage, restoration of the building and the construction of a carpark at the front of the site. Consent is also granted to use the premises as a professional services office at 186 Windsor Road, Winston Hills NSW 2153 for a period of 5 years from the date of the Notice of Determination, subject to conditions of consent contained in Attachment 1. (b)       Further, that Council advise the objector of Councils decision.
	DIVISION      The result being: AYES             The Acting Lord Mayor, Councillor M D McDermott and Councillors P B Barber, A Bide, G J Elmore, P Esber, P J Garrard, M A Lack, C X Lim, S D Lloyd, P K Maitra, L E Wearne and A A Wilson. NOES            None.

Reports - Major Applications

10.1

SUBJECT          54 Binalong Road, Toongabbie
Lot 2 DP703749 (Caroline Chisholm Ward)

DESCRIPTION Section 96(2) application to modify Development Consent No. DA/80/2008 (use of a heritage listed dwelling as a 39 place child care centre and construction of 6 townhouses). The modification includes amendments to the child care centre.

REFERENCE   DA/80/2008/A -  11 May 2011

APPLICANT/S  De Jong Unit Trust

OWNERS          De Jong Unit Trust

REPORT OF     Manager Development Services

REASON FOR REPORT TO COUNCIL

                            The Section 96 application has been referred to Council for determination as the original development application was determined by Council and includes work to a heritage item.

RESOLVED      (Lim/Bide)

12473

That Council as the consent authority, modify development consent No. DA/1123/2005 in the following manner:

1.      Modify condition No. 1 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:

Drawing No	Date
DA02E – Ground Floor Plan	18/08/08
DA03D – First Floor Plan	5/02/08
DA04D – Elevations	5/02/08
DA07C – Elevations and Roof Plan (Heritage Building)	5/02/08
DA08C – Elevations, Floor Plan and Roof Plan (Townhouses)	5/02/08
SK01 – Shade cloth structure	Undated
SK02 – Shade cloth structure	Undated
SW1 – Stormwater management plan Issue A	19/08/08
DA09A – Soil and erosion control plan	5/02/08
Draft subdivision plan	April 2008
L01B – Landscape Plan	20 August 2008
Colour scheme Page 1	Undated
Colour scheme Page 2	Undated
A01(A)- Child care centre – ground floor plan	April 2011
A02(A)- child care centre – roof plan	April 2011
A03(A)- Elevation/section	April 2011
A04(A)- Elevations	April 2011
A05(A)- Elevations	April 2011

Document(s)	Dated
Updated Conservation Plan and Statement of Heritage Impact prepared by Perumal Murphy Alessi Heritage Consultants	August 2008
Noise Assessment prepared by RSA Acoustics – Acoustic Consultants – Report No. 3402	April 2008
Waste Management Plan for the ongoing use of the child care centre	Undated
Waste Management Plan	10/01/08
BASIX Certificate No. 179294M	8/08/2008

2.     
Modify condition No. 3 in the following manner:

“The south and west facing windows of the 2-3 year old childcare room and the south facing windows of the 0-2 year old childcare room are to be fixed windows that are unable to be opened. These rooms shall be mechanically ventilated.
Reason: To preserve the amenity of the adjoining dwelling”.

3. All other conditions of consent for DA/80/2008 are to remain.

DIVISION      The result being:

AYES             The Acting Lord Mayor, Councillor M D McDermott and Councillors P B Barber, A Bide, G J Elmore, P Esber, P J Garrard, M A Lack, C X Lim, S D Lloyd, P K Maitra, L E Wearne and A A Wilson.

NOES            None.

10.2	SUBJECT          46 Hassall Street, Parramatta (Lot 11 Sec 3 DP 192710) (Elizabeth Macarthur Ward) DESCRIPTION Construction of a Boarding House REFERENCE   DA/870/2010 - submitted 29 October 2010 APPLICANT/S  Nigel White OWNERS          B & K Patel REPORT OF     Manager Development Services REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL                             The application is referred to Council as it proposes a Boarding House and due to the number of submissions received.
	RESOLVED      (Bide/Lack)
12474	That the application be deferred to allow the applicant to hold further discussions with staff in relation to incorporating 3 off street parking spaces within the design and to further address the outstanding issues as outlined in the proposed deferred commencement e.g. social impact assessment and on site management.
	DIVISION      The result being: AYES             The Acting Lord Mayor, Councillor M D McDermott and Councillors P B Barber, A Bide, G J Elmore, M A Lack, S D Lloyd, L E Wearne and A A Wilson. NOES            C X Lim and P K Maitra
	NOTE:      Councillors P J Garrard (7.49 pm) and P Esber (7.55 pm)                    left the meeting during consideration of this matter.

10.3	SUBJECT          37 Midson Road (former Eastwood Brickworks) Eastwood DESCRIPTION Construction of 14 dwellings fronting Avondale Way on lots 2-15. REFERENCE   DA/190/2011 - Lodged 8 June 2011 APPLICANT/S  AVJBOS Eastwood Developments Pty Ltd OWNERS          AVJBOS Eastwood Developments Pty Ltd REPORT OF     Manager Development Services 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.
	RESOLVED      (Wearne/Barber)
12475	(a)       That Council support the variation to Clause 38, Clause 39 and Clause 40 of the PLEP 2001 under the provisions of SEPP 1. (b)       That Council as the consent authority grant development consent to Development Application No. DA/190/2011 for the construction of 14 dwellings fronting Avondale Way on lots 2-15 at 37 Midson Road (former Eastwood Brickworks) Eastwood for a period of five (5) years from the date on the Notice of Determination is approved subject the conditions in attachment 1. (c)       Further, that the objectors be advised of Council’s decision.
	DIVISION      The result being: AYES             The Acting Lord Mayor, Councillor M D McDermott and Councillors P B Barber, A Bide, G J Elmore, M A Lack, C X Lim, P K Maitra and L E Wearne. NOES            Councillors S D Lloyd and A A Wilson.

10.4	SUBJECT          6 Belmore Street, NORTH PARRAMATTA  NSW  2151 Lot 4 Sec 62 DP 758788 (Arthur Phillip Ward) DESCRIPTION Section 96(1a) modification to an approved multi unit housing development. It is proposed to increase the floor area of the development, change internal layout and change the external facade. REFERENCE   DA/1037/2007/A - 17 March 2011 APPLICANT/S  Mr W Gebrael OWNERS          Walland Pty Ltd REPORT OF     Manager Development Services REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL                             The Section 96(1a) application has been referred to council for determination as the original development application was determined by Council.
	RESOLVED      (Barber/Elmore)
12476	That Council as the consent authority, modify development consent No. DA/1037/2007 in the following manner: ·          Alterations to “Unit 1” to make it adaptable in accordance with Condition No. 3 of the original Development Consent which requires one unit to comply with Australian Standard AS4299. Changes include: Þ        Increase in floor area, enclosing the rear patio and side courtyard; Þ        Internal reconfiguration of unit to accommodate ground floor disabled facilities. Configuration on the ground floor is to consist of a Kitchen/meals room, disabled bathroom, laundry, bedroom and a garage accommodating one disabled car space . The first floor consists of three bedrooms including a Master bedroom with ensuite, and a bathroom and sitting room; Þ        Inclusion of obscure windows to the ground floor laundry and toilet. ·          Alterations to “Unit 2” including: Þ        Alteration to front corner of unit, squaring it off; Þ        Change to side windows; Þ        Slight internal reconfiguration of unit; ·          Alterations to “Unit 3” including: Þ        Changes to first floor “open study” room windows; Þ        Slight internal reconfiguration of unit; ·          Alterations to “Unit 4” including: Þ        Alteration to front corner of unit, squaring it off; Þ        Change to side windows; Þ        Slight internal reconfiguration of unit. ·          Change of materials schedule.
	DIVISION      The result being: AYES             The Acting Lord Mayor, Councillor M D McDermott and Councillors P B Barber, A Bide, G J Elmore, M A Lack, S D Lloyd, P K Maitra, L E Wearne and A A Wilson. NOES            Councillor C X Lim.

10.5	SUBJECT          317-319 Kissing Point Road, Dundas Lot B DP 391925 and Lot A DP 391925 DESCRIPTION Demolition, tree removal and construction of a multi unit dwelling development containing 7 townhouses over basement parking. REFERENCE   DA/847/2010 - 25 October 2010 APPLICANT/S  A Naddi OWNERS          Mr E Hassib and Mrs W Hassib and Mr M Y Hassib and Mrs M Hassib REPORT OF     Manager Development Services REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL                             This application is brought to Council for determination due to the future down zoning of the site to R2 Residential Zone under Draft LEP 2010.
	MOTION             (Bide/Wilson) That consideration of this matter be deferred and the issues raised during public forum by Mr Smyth be addressed and communicated to Councillors in writing.
	AMENDMENT   (Wearne/Elmore)
	(a)       That Council as the consent authority REFUSE Development Application No. 847/2010 for  demolition, tree removal and construction of a multi-unit housing development comprising of 7 dwellings over a basement carpark on land at 317-319 Kissing Point Road, Dundas for the reasons given in the attached Section 79C Report. (b)       Further, that the objectors be advised of council’s decision.
12477	The amendment was put and carried on and being put as the motion was again carried.
	DIVISION      The result being: AYES             The Acting Lord Mayor, Councillor M D McDermott and Councillors P B Barber, G J Elmore, P J Garrard, M A Lack, S D Lloyd, P K Maitra, L E Wearne and A A Wilson. NOES            Councillor A Bide and C X Lim.
	NOTE:       Councillor P J Garrard returned to the meeting at 7.57 pm during consideration of this matter.

10.6	SUBJECT          Granville Park (Pk 24), 188 Woodville Road and 2 Montrose Avenue, Merrylands. DESCRIPTION Lots 17C, 231-234, 242-245, 249-253 in DP 752058, Use of Granville Park between 31 October and 20 November 2011 by Webers Circus REFERENCE   DA/249/2011 - 27 April 2011 APPLICANT/S  Webers Circus Pty Ltd OWNERS          Department of Lands in Parramatta Council's care, control and management REPORT OF     Manager Development Services REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL                             The subject site is land under Council’s care, control and management and the application has been assessed by an independent planning consultant.
	RESOLVED      (Barber/Lack)
12478	That Council as the consent authority grant development consent to Development Application No. DA/249/2011 for the use of Granville Park by Webers Circus between 31 October 2011 and 20 November 2011, at 188 Woodville Road and 2 Montrose Avenue, Merrylands, as shown on the approved plans, subject to the recommended conditions.
	DIVISION      The result being: AYES             The Acting Lord Mayor, Councillor M D McDermott and Councillors P B Barber, A Bide, G J Elmore, P Esber, P J Garrard, M A Lack, S D Lloyd, P K Maitra, L E Wearne and A A Wilson. NOES            Councillor C X Lim.
	NOTE:       Councillor P Esber returned to the meeting at 8.01 pm during consideration of this matter.

10.7	SUBJECT          All Saints Church, 21 Victoria Road, Parramatta  NSW  2150 Cor Lot 101 DP 786056 (Arthur Phillip Ward) DESCRIPTION Tree removal and construction of a church hall and ministry centre. REFERENCE   DA/152/2011 - 22 June 2011 APPLICANT/S  Intelligent Architecture and Trustees All Saints Church Of England OWNERS          Trustees All Saints Church Of England REPORT OF     Manager Development Services. Also Development Advisory Officer’s Memorandum dated 11 July 2011. REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL                             The application is being referred to Council for determination as the proposal involves work within the grounds of a listed heritage item.
	MOTION             (Maitra/Lim)
	That Council as the consent authority grant development consent to Development Application No. 152/2011 for the tree removal and construction of a church hall and ministry centre on land at All Saints Church, 21 Victoria Road, PARRAMATTA  NSW  2150 subject to the conditions attached to Development Advisory Officer Memorandum dated 11 July 2011 rather than those contained within the Section 79C Assessment Report.
	AMENDMENT   (Bide/Wearne) (a)      That the application be deferred pending comprehensive advice being provided to Councillors addressing the errors previously provided in the report. (b)      Further, that an explanation be provided to the Chamber as to how the errors in the report occurred. The amendment was put and lost.
12479	The motion was put and carried.
	DIVISION      AYES             The Acting Lord Mayor, Councillor M D McDermott and Councillors G J Elmore, P Esber, M A Lack, C X Lim, S D Lloyd and P K Maitra. NOES            Councillors P B Barber, A Bide, P J Garrard, L E Wearne and A A Wilson. NOTE:       Councillor A Bide requested his name be recorded as having voted against this decision.

10.8	SUBJECT          226 Windsor Road, Winston Hills (Lot 2 DP 772001) (Caroline Chisholm) DESCRIPTION Section 96(1A) modification to a seniors housing development known as the Willows Seniors Village. REFERENCE   DA/703/2008/E - 12 April 2011 APPLICANT/S  Equity Development Management OWNERS          Aevum Ltd and the owners of various Strata Plans REPORT OF     Manager Development Services REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL                             The parent DA (703/2008) was determined at a Council meeting held on 14 April 2009 and proposes work on a heritage listed property.
	RESOLVED      (Bide/Wilson)
12480	That Council as the consent authority, modify development consent to  DA/703/2008, as modified, for internal design and site works revisions at the Willows Retirement Village at  226 Windsor Road Winston Hills in the following manner: 1. Modify condition 1 as follows: (i)         delete reference to Plan DA1.01 (C) drawn by Young and Metcalf and dated 24 July 2009 and replace it with Plan DA1.01 (E) drawn by Young and Metcalf and dated 18 February 2011 (ii)        delete reference to Plan DA1.02 (D) drawn by Young and Metcalf and dated 6 October 2010 and replace it with Plan DA1.02 (E) drawn by Young and Metcalf and dated 18 February 2011 (iii)       delete reference to Plan DA.1.03 (C) drawn by Young and Metcalf and dated 24 July 2009 and replace it with Plan DA1.03 (D) drawn by Young and Metcalf and dated 18 February 2011 (iv)       delete reference to Plan DA1.05 (C) drawn by Young and Metcalf and dated 24 July 2009 and replace it with Plan DA1.05 (D) drawn by Young and Metcalf and dated 18 February 2011 (v)        delete reference to Plan DA1.05/1 (A) drawn by Young and Metcalf and dated 24 July 2009 and replace it with Plan DA1.05/1 (B) drawn by Young and Metcalf and dated 18 February 2011 (vi)       delete reference to Plan DA 1.06 (C) drawn by Young and Metcalf and dated 24 July 2009 and replace it with Plan DA1.06 (D) drawn by Young and Metcalf and dated 18 February 2011
	DIVISION      The result being: AYES             The Acting Lord Mayor, Councillor M D McDermott and Councillors P B Barber, A Bide, G J Elmore, P Esber, P J Garrard, M A Lack, C X Lim, S D Lloyd, P K Maitra, L E Wearne and A A Wilson. NOES            None.

Economy and Development

11.1	SUBJECT          Variations to Standards under SEPP 1 REFERENCE   F2009/00431 - D02005786 REPORT OF     Manager Development Services
	RESOLVED      (Esber/Maitra)
12481	That the report be received and noted.

Community and Neighbourhood

12.1	SUBJECT          31 Prospect Street Rosehill REFERENCE   F2011/01127 - D02012977 REPORT OF     Property Program Manager. Also Group Manager Corporate and Group Manager Outcomes and Development Memorandum dated 11 July 2011.
	RESOLVED      (Bide/Lloyd)
12482	(a)     That Council resolve to purchase 31 Prospect Street Rosehill (Lot 1 DP 128372) at a price as recommended in the valuation report at Attachment 2. (b)     Further, that the Lord Mayor and Chief Executive Officer be authorised to execute under seal the sale contract and transfer relating to purchase of the property.

CLOSED SESSION
12483	RESOLVED      (Esber/Maitra) Members of the press and public be excluded from the meeting of the Closed Session and access to the correspondence and reports relating to the items considered during the course of the Closed Session be withheld. This action is taken in accordance with Section 10A(2) of the Local Government Act, 1993 as the items listed come within the following provisions:-

1       Legal Matters Monthly Report to Council. (D02005788) - This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (g) of the Local Government Act 1993 as the report contains advice concerning litigation, or advice that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege.

2       EOI for Independent Members of the Audit Committee . (D02013021) - This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (d) of the Local Government Act 1993 as the report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.

RESUMPTION OF MEETING
	That the decisions of Closed Session be noted as follows:-

13.1	SUBJECT          Legal Matters Monthly Report to Council REFERENCE   F2004/07898 - D02005788 REPORT OF     Manager Development Services
	RESOLVED      (Esber/Barber)
12484	That the report be received and noted.

13.2	SUBJECT          EOI for Independent Members of the Audit Committee REFERENCE   F2011/00996 - D02013021 REPORT OF     N/A
	RESOLVED      (Maitra/Wilson)
12485	That the resolution of the Council Meeting held on 27 June, regarding EOI for  Independent Members of the Audit Committee namely:- “(a)     That Council appoint Respondent 3 and 6 as the independent community representatives of the Audit Committee for a term of 3 years. (b)     Further, that Council delegates to the Chief Executive Officer authority to negotiate a reasonable engagement terms (including fees) for the services to be provided by the independent community members of the Audit Committee.” be and is hereby rescinded.
	RESOLVED      (Wilson/Bide)
12486	(a)      That Council appoint Respondents 3, 5, 6 and 10 as the independent community representatives of the Audit Committee for a term of 3 years. (b)      Further, that Council delegates to the Chief Executive Officer authority to negotiate a reasonable engagement terms (including fees) for the services to be provided by the independent community members of the Audit Committee.

13.3	SUBJECT          Land Acquisition REFERENCE   F2004/06427 FROM                 Property Development Director
	RESOLVED      (Bide/Lim)
12487	(a)      That Council notes the freehold interest in 12 Darcy Street, Parramatta has been compulsorily acquired for the purpose of implementing the Civic Place Masterplan. (b)       That Council notes the freehold and leasehold interests in 28 Darcy Street, Parramatta have been compulsorily acquired for the purpose of implementing the Civic Place Masterplan. (c)        That Council approves of the amount of compensation to be paid to the owners of the respective freehold and leasehold interested in the properties known as 12 and 28 Darcy Street Parramatta for the amount stated in the report. (d)      Further, that Council authorises the Chief Executive Officer to negotiate, complete and execute the terms of all documentation necessary to finalise and bring into force a binding agreement with the owners of the respective freehold and leasehold interested in the properties known as 12 and 28 Darcy Street Parramatta in respect of the amount of compensation to be paid to them by reason of the compulsory acquisition of their respective interests including the affixation of the seal to an agreement under the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991.
	NOTE:        A Suspension of Standing Orders was moved, carried and ruled as a matter of urgency in Closed Session to enable this matter to be considered.

QUESTION TIME

1	SUBJECT          Poor Road Condition - Midson Road, Carlingford REFERENCE   F2005/02796 FROM                 Councillor Lorraine Wearne
12488	Councillor Wearne requested that a report be prepared in relation to the poor condition of the road pavement in Midson Road, Epping between Boronia Avenue and Carlingford Road.
	NOTE:           Councillor P Esber retired from the meeting at 8.20 pm during consideration of this matter.

2	SUBJECT          Asia Pacific Smart City Conference REFERENCE   F2005/00046 FROM                 Councillor Paul Garrard
12489	Councillor Garrard asked whether the report to be prepared by the Manager Executive Support on the Asia Pacific Smart City Conference was now available. The Group Manager Outcomes and Development advised that an initial report would be circulated to Councillors with a full report being provided at the next appropriate Council Meeting.
	NOTE:           Councillor A Bide retired from the meeting at 8.21 pm during consideration of this matter.

3

SUBJECT          Winterlight Event REFERENCE   F2011/01386 FROM                 Councillor Andrew Wilson

12490

Councillor Wilson noted that the Winterlight Event was innovative but commented that Councillors were not given the opportunity to make a decision in relation to this matter as the cost of the event apparently fell below $150,000. Councillor Wilson stated that Councillors should be involved in such decisions as this particular event seemed quite rushed and had cost a great deal of money. He added that contracts should not be broken up to ensure that they did not reach the $150,000 threshold. The Group Manager Outcomes and Development responded that Council could not make break up contracts in the procurement of services.

4	SUBJECT          Parramasala Corporation REFERENCE   F2009/02982 FROM                 Councillor Glenn Elmore
12491	Councillor Elmore noted that Parramasala is to be held from 30 October to 6 November 2011. Councillor Elmore noted that Council has 2 Directors on the Corporation for Parramasala and asked that the Directors provide Council with an update on the present position of the Corporation.

5	SUBJECT          Erection of Flag Pole in Prince Alfred Park REFERENCE   F2004/10359 FROM                 Councillor Glenn Elmore
12492	Councillor Elmore noted that Council has been conducting civic events in Prince Alfred Park with NAIDOC Day being celebrated last Saturday. Councillor Elmore further noted that Council had posted portable flags for the ceremony and asked that Council investigate the erection of permanent flag poles in Prince Alfred Park on the corner of Victoria Road and Church Streets, Parramatta.

RESCISSION MOTIONS

Notices of Motion to rescind the following items were received after the termination of their respective meetings:-

1       Item 7.1 of Rescission Motions regarding Report on the Public Exhibition and Public Hearing of the Planning Proposal into the rezoning and reclassification of various Council owned sites (Minute No 12367 refers of the Council Meeting held on 23 May 2011) by Councillors A Bide, S D Lloyd and L E Wearne.

          This rescission was subsequently withdrawn by Councillor Bide.

2       Item 7.1 of Rescission Motions regarding Urban Renewal Study for Granville (Minute No 12469 refers) by Councillors P J Garrard, S D Lloyd and L E Wearne.

The meeting terminated at 8.25 pm.

THIS PAGE AND THE PRECEDING 23 PAGES ARE THE MINUTES OF THE ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING HELD ON MONDAY, 11 JULY 2011 AND CONFIRMED ON MONDAY, 25 JULY 2011.

Lord Mayor