Agenda of Council (Development)

NOTICE OF Council (Development) MEETING

The Meeting of Parramatta City Council will be held in the Council Chamber, Fourth Floor, 2 Civic Place, Parramatta on Monday, 14 May 2012 at 6:45pm.

Dr. Robert Lang

Chief Executive Officer

Parramatta – the leading city at the heart of Sydney

30 Darcy Street Parramatta NSW 2150

PO Box 32 Parramatta

Phone 02 9806 5050 Fax 02 9806 5917 DX 8279 Parramatta

ABN 49 907 174 773 www.parracity.nsw.gov.au

“Think Before You Print”

COUNCIL CHAMBERS

The Lord Mayor Clr Lorraine Wearne -

Lachlan Macquarie Ward

Dr. Robert Lang, Chief Executive Officer - Parramatta City Council

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

Clr Paul Barber – Caroline Chisholm Ward			Clr John Chedid – Elizabeth Macarthur Ward
Clr Mark Lack – Elizabeth Macarthur Ward			Clr Paul Garrard - Woodville Ward
Clr Glenn Elmore – Woodville Ward			Clr Scott Lloyd – Caroline Chisholm Ward
Clr Pierre Esber– Lachlan Macquarie Ward			Clr Andrew Wilson, Deputy Lord Mayor – Lachlan Macquarie Ward
Clr Prabir Maitra – Arthur Phillip Ward			Clr Andrew Bide – Caroline Chisholm Ward
Clr Julia Finn – Arthur Phillip Ward	Clr Michael McDermott - Elizabeth Macarthur Ward	Clr Antoine (Tony) Issa, OAM MP – Woodville Ward	Clr Chiang Lim– Arthur Phillip Ward

Staff

GALLERY

Council (Development) 14 May 2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM SUBJECT PAGE NO

1 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Council - 23 April 2012

2 APOLOGIES

3 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

4 Petitions

5 Minutes of Lord Mayor

6 Public Forum

6.1 Development Application - 65 and 68 McArthur Street, Guildford

7 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS TO BE BROUGHT FORWARD

8 Reports - Domestic Applications

8.1 18 Pine Street, Rydalmere (Lot 9 DP 38941)

9 Reports - Major Applications

9.1 289 Clyde Street, South Granville (Lot A DP 389750)

9.2 58 O'Connell Street - Parramatta NSW 2150
Lot 1 DP 900803 ( Arthur Phillip Ward)

10 Notices of Motion

10.1 Naming of Melita Stadium

10.2 Prosecution for Littering and Enforcement

11 Economy and Development

11.1 Variations to Standards under SEPP 1

12 Closed Session

12.1 Legal Matters Monthly Report to Council

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.

12.2 Civic Place

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.

13 DECISIONS FROM CLOSED SESSION

14 QUESTION TIME

Council (Development) 14 May 2012 Item 6.1

PUBLIC FORUM

ITEM NUMBER 6.1

SUBJECT Development Application - 65 and 68 McArthur Street, Guildford

REFERENCE DA/394/2011 - D02350519

REPORT OF Councillor P J Garrard

FROM Councillor Paul Garrard

In relation to Development Application DA/394/2011 (for consent to operate a Place of Worship) at 65 and 68 McArthur Street, Guildford:-

Question 1

SEPP 55 states that a consent authority MUST NOT CONSENT to the carrying out of any development on land unless:-

(a) It has been considered whether the land is contaminated, and;

(b) If the land is contaminated, it is satisfied that the land is suitable in its contaminated state (or will be suitable after remediation) for the purpose for which the development is proposed to be carried out.

THE REQUIREMENTS FOR PROPER SITE ASSESSMENT ARE VERY CLEAR AND ARE WELL KNOWN TO COUNCIL’S PLANNING STAFF.

Given that Council records identify both sites at 65 and 68 McArthur Street as being potentially contaminated, and in acknowledging that there will be significant disturbance of the surface of the site as required under the terms of the DA to undertake drainage works, site preparation including the grading to construct the car park, concrete kerbs, tree removal, landscaping and light trenching etc; and given that council asked for a contamination report but did not receive one, what assessment procedures were put into place to satisfy the statutory requirements of SEPP 55 – when SEPP 55 requires as an absolute minimum as Stage 1, to obtain a contamination report and that consent can not be given until the contamination assessment has been undertaken.

Question 2

Council’s records show that the Acoustic report was inadequate on 5 different counts. The applicant was informed that it was not in accordance with the Council’s “Place of Worthip DCP”. Why was there not an amended report?

Question 3

This site is partly flood prone.

Why have Council not require a “Flood Evacuation Plan” but instead, only conditioned it when other applicants need provide it prior to consent.

Question 4

Why was this DA not rejected as required under the Act and Regulations and despite the unauthorised use, when the following situation was evident;

The development application form is incomplete! There is no lot and DP identification. The description on the DA form refers to No. 70 Oxford Street only. It makes no reference to the car park site and what is presumed to be the owner’s consent is simply a signed letter with no reference to the DA whatsoever. Part 4 of the DA, “Development Details” has not been completed.

There was no survey plan of the car park site provided with the DA and it only came in much later.

There was no arborist report even though the DA required the removal of 12 trees.

The cost is only $20,000 and there is no way this development could be completed for that amount given that it requires the construction of a car park, drainage, landscaping and actually building the prayer room.

Question 5

Given that the Council report indicates that the 2006 consent included a condition requiring site drainage details to be submitted within 2 months of the granting of consent, when assessing this DA, did council check to see if this work was ever done before disregarding the applicant to do any drainage works, and why was not proper drainage requirements applied to this DA?

Question 6

It has been my experience as a Councillor that where retained trees have a setback and a tree protection zone established, a recommended tree protection specification and diagram should be provided.

Why hasn’t this principle been applied, as all site plans are to be amended to indicate the tree protection zone requirements as set forth in the arborist’s report along with other requirements that the arborist deems necessary to ensure long term health and retention of trees?

RESPONSE

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

Council (Development) 14 May 2012 Item 8.1

DOMESTIC APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 8.1

SUBJECT 18 Pine Street, Rydalmere (Lot 9 DP 38941)

DESCRIPTION Development Application for demolition, tree removal, construction of an attached dual occupancy development and Torrens title subdivision into two lots.

REFERENCE DA/88/2012 - DA/88/2012 lodged 5 February 2012

APPLICANT/S Develop 888 Pty Ltd

OWNERS Mr Warwick Graham Artis and Marianne Friis Artis as Executors of the Will of Betty Alwyn Artis

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

DATE OF REPORT 17 April 2011

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application is referred to Council because a petition signed by 11 households and two individual submissions were received during the notification period.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The application seeks development consent for the demolition of all existing structures on the site, the removal of 1 tree, construction of a 2 storey attached dual occupancy development and associated Torrens title subdivision.

The development application was notified to adjoining residents in accordance with DCP 2011. In response, two individual submissions and a petition signed by members of 11 households have been received. The main issues raised in the submissions and petition relate to concern about dual occupancy development in Pine Street generally, character, traffic, parking, and the visual impact of above ground stormwater infrastructure including on-site detention basins. These issues have been fully considered in the 79C report attached and do not warrant refusal or amendment of the proposed development.

The proposed development is permissible under the R2 Low Density Residential zoning that applies to the land under Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011, and satisfactorily complies with all requirements of the Parramatta Development Control Plan. Accordingly, the development application is recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council as the consent authority grant development consent to Development Application No. DA/88/2012 for the demolition of all existing structures on the site, the removal of 1 tree, construction of a 2 storey attached dual occupancy development and associated Torrens title subdivision at 18 Pine Street, RYDALMERE NSW 2116 for a period of five (5) years from the date on the Notice of Determination subject to the conditions set out in Attachment 1.

(b) Further that, persons who made a submission or head petitioners be advised of Council’s decision.

Liam Frayne

Development Assessment Officer

Attachments:

1 View	Section 79C Assessment Report	44 Pages
2 View	Locality Plan	1 Page
3 View	Architectual Plans - Non-confidential	1 Page
4	Architectural Plans Confidential	1 Page

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council (Development) 14 May 2012 Item 9.1

MAJOR APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 9.1

SUBJECT 289 Clyde Street, South Granville (Lot A DP 389750)

DESCRIPTION Section 82A Review of a Development Application No 423/2011 for demolition, tree removal, and construction of 3 x two storey townhouses under the Affordable Rental Housing SEPP 2009

REFERENCE DA/423/2011 - S82A review lodged 1 March 2012

APPLICANT/S Mr A Al Obaid

OWNERS Mr J Saad

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

PREVIOUS ITEMS 9.2 - 289 Clyde Street, South Granville (Lot A DP 389750) - Council - 28 November 2011

DATE OF REPORT 30 March 2011

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

This application is referred to Council for determination as the application seeks a review of Council’s previous refusal of DA 423/2011.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The application seeks a review of a previous decision to refuse Development Application No. 423/2011 for the demolition, tree removal and construction of a multi unit housing development comprising 3 units under the provisions of SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

The development application was advertised and notified to adjoining residents in accordance with the Notification DCP and a petition opposing the development but that does not contain addresses of the persons who signed the petition was received. Accordingly, the petition was considered as a single individual submission. The main issues that have been raised in the submission are traffic and parking. These issues have been fully considered in the S79C report attached.

The proposed development has been modified following refusal of the original application and the amended plans have resulted in an improved design, including greater private open space, setbacks, reduced bulk, and an improved internal layout. It is considered that these modifications have sufficiently addressed the reasons for refusal of the original application and the proposal satisfactorily meets the relevant development codes. Accordingly, the development application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council as the consent authority grant development consent to Development Application No. DA/423/2011 for demolition, tree removal and construction of 3 x 2 storey townhouses under the Affordable Rental Housing SEPP on land at 289 Clyde Street, SOUTH GRANVILLE NSW 2142 for a period of five (5) years from the date on the Notice of Determination subject to the conditions set out in Attachment 1.

(b) Further that, persons who made a submission or head petitioners be advised of Council’s decision.

Attachments:

1 View	Notice of Determination	3 Pages
2 View	Previous S79C Report	45 Pages
3 View	Previous Plans	4 Pages
4 View	Locality Map	1 Page
5 View	82A Review Report - S79C Report	68 Pages
6	Confidential Plans	3 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council (Development) 14 May 2012 Item 9.2

MAJOR APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 9.2

SUBJECT 58 O'Connell Street - Parramatta NSW 2150
Lot 1 DP 900803 ( Arthur Phillip Ward)

DESCRIPTION Section 96(1a) application to modify condition 13 ( payment of a monetary contribution for mitigation of the loss of low rental bedrooms) arising from strata subdivision of the building.

REFERENCE DA/174/2011/A - lodged 14 December 2011

APPLICANT/S Byrnes PDM Pty Ltd

OWNERS Classy Business Pty Ltd

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

DATE OF REPORT 6 february 2012

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

NOTE: This report was deferred from the Council Meeting on 23 April 2012 to allow Council Staff to appropriately consider the recently submitted legal advice.

Application seeks to modify a Development Consent determined by the elected Council and the condition being modified was subject to debate when Council previously considered the application.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Council on 10 October 2011 granted consent to the Strata subdivision of a residential flat building at 58 O’ Connell Street containing 10 units. The provisions of SEPP Affordable Rental Housing (ARHSEPP 2009) were considered in the assessment of the application as the strata subdivision is going to result in the loss of affordable housing.

The Section 96 application seeks to modify condition 13. Condition 13 currently reads:

“A monetary contribution of $95,760 for mitigation of the loss of low-rental bedrooms is to be paid. The contribution is to be paid to the Chief Executive, Housing NSW, Department of Human Services. The evidence of such a payment is to be submitted to the Council prior to the issue of a subdivision certificate.”

The applicant seeks to modify this condition by seeking to quarantine not less than three (3) of the two (2) bedroom units for affordable housing (low rental) for a period of not less than 5 years from the date of registration by way of a positive covenant. This would be in lieu of the payment of $ 95,760 to Housing NSW and is suggested by the applicant as they believe the strata subdivision does not result in any loss of low cost rental housing.

The application was been notified in accordance with Council’s Notification Development Control Plan and no submissions have been received.

The proposed modification would not comply with the requirements of ARHSEPP (2009) and contravenes the Ministerial directions issued under section 94G (3) (b) of the EP& A Act 1979. The request to modify the condition is also not supported by Council’s Social Outcomes group .The proposed modification is therefore recommended for refusal.

RECOMMENDATION

Pursuant to Section 80(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979

That Council not support the request to modify condition 13 for the following reasons:

1. The proposed modification does not comply with the requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

2. The proposed modification would not comply with the Ministerial directions issued under Section 94G (3) (b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

3. The proposed modification is not in the public interest.

Sasi Kumar

Senior Development Assessment Officer

Attachments:

1 View	Section 79C Report	15 Pages
2 View	Location Plan	1 Page
3 View	Section 79C report for DA/174/2011	30 Pages
4 View	Determination Notice for DA/174/2011	5 Pages
5 View	Ministerial Direction	1 Page

Council (Development) 14 May 2012 Item 10.1

NOTICES OF MOTION

ITEM NUMBER 10.1

SUBJECT Naming of Melita Stadium

REFERENCE F2004/06845 - D02336988

REPORT OF Councillor G J Elmore

To be Moved by Councillor G J Elmore

RECOMMENDATION

That Council name the Grandstand in Melita Stadium at Everley Road South Granville after former Granville Ward Councillor Joe Dougall.

BACKGROUND

It’s become a tradition for Parramatta City Council to name part of Councils property after a former Councillor who made a substantial contribution to the community has passed away.

Joseph Tancred Dougall was born on the 1^st February 1924 at Cospicua Malta and died on 7^th July 2011 Sydney Australia.

Joe formerly of 7 Miller Street South Granville was elected to Granville Ward at extraordinary election held 30 June 1973. Joe served 4 terms on Council being re-elected on 21st September 1974, 17^th September 1977 and 20th September 1980 retiring at end of term 23 September 1983 not standing for re-election.

Joe Dougall served on the docks of Valletta, during the famed Maltese heroism that earned Malta the George Cross.

Migrating to Australia he was to work as a metal trade’s assistant in a nearly South Granville factory and at Westmead Hospital.

Joe was a long term member of the Labor Party in Australia, always proudly noting that his sister was the Women’s Leader in the Maltese Labour Party.

He served many years on Parramatta Council, being equally devoted to the Catholic Church and Melita Eagles Soccer club during those decades. Joe played the central role in Council cooperation in establishing the Melita Eagles Stadium, assisted at various stages by State and Federal funding.

As a mark of respect for Joe’s years of work transforming a once market garden area into a splendid sporting facility it’s fitting to name the Melita Stadium Grandstand after Joe Dougall.

Comment by Service Manager – Open Space and Natural Resources

1. Research has been made into the proposal to name the Melita Stadium grandstand after former Alderman Joseph Dougall.

2. This grandstand is signposted as the Donald Agius Stand and was apparently named shortly after its construction in the early 1970’s. Mr Agius was the Treasurer of the Melita Eagles Soccer Club at that time and was involved in the planning and co-ordination of the grandstand project. Mr Joseph Dougall was the Vice President of the club during this period.

3. Council may formally name areas or features within a public park or reserve without reference to the Geographical Names Board of NSW. This may include areas or items such as sporting fields, playgrounds, amenities buildings, gardens, or meeting rooms.

4. One of the two playing fields at Council’s Norford Park in Boundary Road Chester Hill is named after former Alderman Dougall as the Joe Dougall Field.

5. Council has also previously named sporting fields within the following parks after prominent local identities:

(a) Ray Price Field, Sir Thomas Mitchell Reserve Alexander Street, Dundas;

(b) Richie Benaud Oval, Belmore Park, Castle Street, North Parramatta.

6. The playing field at Melita Stadium within Everley Park Chester Hill has not been officially named.

7. As the Melita Stadium grandstand and Norford Park field have already been named, Council may wish to undertake further stakeholder consultation before determining this matter.

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

Council (Development) 14 May 2012 Item 10.2

NOTICE OF MOTION

ITEM NUMBER 10.2

SUBJECT Prosecution for Littering and Enforcement

REFERENCE F2008/03032 - D02341128

REPORT OF Councillor A A Wilson

To be Moved by Councillor A A Wilson

It is hereby moved that

a) Parramatta City Council's cleansing teams prepare a statistical valid report on places where persistent littering occurs.

b) Parramatta City Council rangers, liaising with the Police, then prepare a program of enforcement.

c) Council then publicise the results both in the media and in the pamphlet accompanying the rates notice.

d) Council conduct an ongoing education program targeted in specific areas.

Comment From Group Manager City Services

Littering is a persistent problem that both reduces the amenity of public spaces such as shopping centres, street, parks and bus stops as well as generating significant waste collection and disposal costs. Council adopted the Illegal Dumping Strategy in June 2010 which aims to reduce the amount of illegal dumping occurring in the Parramatta Local Government Area and in turn, provide financial savings to the Council from collecting and dispose of such materials as well as improving the appearance, health and natural environment of the city. A similar, multi-faceted approach to the related problem of littering is suggested by this motion and could include both education and enforcement initiatives to support more effective cleansing services.

Council has the authority to issue Penalty Infringement Notices (PINs) under the Local Government Act and Protection of the Environment Operations Act. As part of Community Safety Officers Patrols of high profile locations such as the Church Street Mall, people observed littering are approached and where possible issued with a PIN. Unfortunately, this relies on the person providing their correct name and address. If they fail to do this, Council officers, unlike the Police, do not have the authority to demand names and addresses. The greatest success in anti-littering and anti-dumping enforcement campaigns has been achieved when the offence can be attached to owners of property, such a littering from motor vehicles and illegal dumping from adjoining properties. A successful campaign on littering enforcement will rely on support from the Police for joint patrols.

Educational programs developed to support an anti-littering strategy would similarly benefit from a partnership approach with other stakeholders including other councils, schools and non-government organisations such as Keep Australia Beautiful and the Clean Up Australia.

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

Council (Development) 14 May 2012 Item 11.1

ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER 11.1

SUBJECT Variations to Standards under SEPP 1

REFERENCE F2009/00431 - D02337368

REPORT OF Acting Manager Development Services

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.

REPORT

In accordance with the reporting requirements prescribed in Planning Circular

PS08-014 issued by the NSW Department of Planning, there were no development applications determined where there has been a variation in standards under SEPP 1 or similar provisions (clause 4.6 of LEP 2011) under the Standard Instrument, during the period April 2012 (up to 23 April 2012).

Mark Leotta

Acting Manager Development Services

Attachments:

REFERENCE MATERIAL