Agenda of Council (Development)

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) 13 August 2012

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM SUBJECT PAGE NO

1 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES - Council - 23 July 2012

2 APOLOGIES

3 DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

4 Minutes of Lord Mayor

5 Petitions

6 Public Forum

7 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS TO BE BROUGHT FORWARD

8 Reports - Domestic Applications

8.1 9-15 Elder Road, DUNDAS
(Lot 10 DP 1130429)(Elizabeth Macarthur)

8.2 102 John Street, Merrylands
(LOT 19 SEC 6 DP 947)(Woodville Ward)

8.3 Common Property, 37 Midson Road Eastwood (Lachlan Macquarie Ward)

8.4 20 Rawson Street, EPPING
(LOT 4 DP 9193) (Lachlan Macquarie Ward)

8.5 71 and 73 Marion Street Harris Park (Lot 8 and Lot 9 DP 2114)

8.6 140-142 Kissing Point Road Dundas (Lot 7 and Lot 8 DP 705877)

9 Reports - Major Applications

9.1 8 Orchard Street, Epping (Lot 3 DP29543 SPL COR) (Lachlan Macquarie Ward)

9.2 211 Church Street, Parramatta
(Lot 101 DP 1052788) (Arthur Phillip Ward)

9.3 25 Talbot Road, Guildford
(Lot A DP 349926)

9.4 19 Onslow Street, Granville
(Lot 9 SEC 10 DP 1250)

9.5 4-6 Hammers Road, Northmead (Lot 8 DP 7339 and Lot 9 DP 7339) ( Ward)

9.6 25 Wentworth Street, Parramatta

10 Notices of Motion

10.1 Provision of Secure Bike Parking Facilities in Westmead

10.2 Development of Parramatta South Precinct to facilitate Pedestrian Access to Westfield and Harris Park Station

10.3 Support for Making Parramatta a Safer City

11 Economy and Development

11.1 Update on regular inspections of sex related premises.

11.2 Variations to Standards under SEPP 1

11.3 Planning Proposal for land at 57, 63 & 83 Church Street and 44 Early Street Parramatta

11.4 Planning proposal for land at 42 Bridge Street, Rydalmere (Council's storage depot at Mary Parade)

11.5 Preliminary rezoning concept for land at 12-20 Dixon Street Parramatta

12 Environment and Infrastructure

12.1 Land Acquisition for Widening of Penelope Lucas Lane Rosehill

13 Governance and Corporate

13.1 Tender # 15 / 2012 - Consultant Services for Knowledge Management Project

13.2 Remuneration Tribunal Determination in relation to Fees for Councillor Remuneration

14 Closed Session

14.1 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.

14.2 Legal Matters - 55 Cross Street, Guildford

14.3 Proposed Sale of Road fronting 76-84 Railway Terrace, Merrylands

This report is confidential in accordance with section 10A (2) (c) of the Local Government Act 1993 as the report contains information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.

15 DECISIONS FROM CLOSED SESSION

16 QUESTION TIME

Council (Development) 13 August 2012 Item 8.1

DOMESTIC APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 8.1

SUBJECT 9-15 Elder Road, DUNDAS
(Lot 10 DP 1130429)(Elizabeth Macarthur)

DESCRIPTION Alterations and additions to the heritage listed Dundas Sports and Recreation Club.

REFERENCE DA/288/2012 - Submitted 14 May 2012

APPLICANT/S Dundas Sports & Recreation Club Ltd

OWNERS Dundas Sports & Recreation Club Ltd

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

DATE OF REPORT 19 July 2012

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

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

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The development application seeks consent for alterations and additions to the heritage listed Dundas Sports and Recreation Club including the extension of three existing windows to the existing floor level (existing sill height of 1.2m) and the provision of a 2.8m wide opening to the left of these windows. The openings will be fitted with fabricated white metal grills with matt black operable louvers positioned behind the metal grills, to accommodate smokers.

The alterations and additions to the club are permissible in the RE2 Private Recreation zone under PLEP2011.

The subject site identified as containing a local Heritage Item as listed in Schedule 5 of Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011. It is noted the building is heritage listed as the Cumberland Builders Bowling Club despite being known as the Dundas Sports and Recreation Club. The application was referred to Council’s Heritage Advisor who raised no objection to the proposal.

The proposed works are consistent with the objectives of Parramatta LEP 2011 and Parramatta DCP 2011. The proposal is therefore considered satisfactory as the works result in minimal impact on the streetscape, adjoining properties and the heritage significance of the site and surrounds.

The application was notified in accordance with Parramatta DCP 2011, and no submissions were received.

Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval subject to conditions

RECOMMENDATION

That Council as the consent authority grant development consent to Development Application No. DA/288/2012 for alterations and additions to the heritage listed Dundas Sports and Recreation Club at 9-15 Elder Road, Dundas for a period of five (5) years from the date on the Notice of Determination subject to conditions.

Attachments:

1 View	S79c Assessment Report	12 Pages
2 View	Locality Map	1 Page
3 View	Plans	4 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council (Development) 13 August 2012 Item 8.2

DOMESTIC APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 8.2

SUBJECT 102 John Street, Merrylands
(LOT 19 SEC 6 DP 947)(Woodville Ward)

DESCRIPTION Section 82A review of a refusal for the construction of an outbuilding attached to an existing granny flat to be used for the purposes of a home business.

REFERENCE DA/837/2011 - Submitted 13 June 2012

APPLICANT/S Executive Design and Construction Pty Ltd

OWNERS Mr A Chahrouk, Mrs H Chahrouk

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

DATE OF REPORT 18 July 2012

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/837/2011.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The application seeks a review of a previous decision to refuse Development Application No. 837/2011 for the construction of an outbuilding attached to an existing granny flat to be used for the purposes of a home business.

The development application was notified to adjoining residents in accordance with the Notification DCP and no submissions were received.

The proposed development has been modified due to Service Request No. 13573 being lodged, for unauthorised structures within the rear setback and use of the garage as a secondary dwelling, following refusal of the original application. Investigation by Council’s Development Control has resulted in unauthorised structures being removed and cooking facilities being removed from the garage. The proposal now provides satisfactory private open space and deep soil zones as required by Parramatta DCP2011. Furthermore the applicant has adequately demonstrated the proposed use of the office complies with the definition of a home business.

It is considered 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

That Council as the consent authority grant development consent to Development Application No. DA/837/2011 for the construction of an outbuilding attached to an existing granny flat to be used for the purposes of an office on land at 102 John Street, MERRYLANDS for a period of five (5) years from the date on the Notice of Determination subject to the conditions set out in Attachment 1.

Attachments:

1 View	Notice of Determination	3 Pages
2 View	Previous s79c Report	34 Pages
3 View	Previous Plans	5 Pages
4 View	Service Request Action Sheet	3 Pages
5 View	Locality Map	1 Page
6 View	S79c Assessment Report	31 Pages
7 View	Plans	4 Pages
8	Confidential Plans	1 Page

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council (Development) 13 August 2012 Item 8.3

DOMESTIC APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 8.3

SUBJECT Common Property, 37 Midson Road Eastwood (Lachlan Macquarie Ward)

DESCRIPTION Construction of 10 dwellings on proposed Lots 13 to 22.

REFERENCE DA/339/2012 - Lodged 14 June 2012

APPLICANT/S AVJBOS Eastwood Developments Pty Ltd

OWNERS Community Association DP 270605

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

DATE OF REPORT

19 July 2012

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application has been referred to Council as the application seeks variations of greater than 10% to Clause 4.4 of Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The application seeks approval for the construction of 10 two storey dwellings on lots 13 to 22 in Lot 14 DP 270605 (the subdivision was previously approved under DA/52/2011 and DA/53/2011). The site forms part of the former Eastwood Brickworks housing estate.

The subject site is zoned R2 Low Density Residential under Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011 and the proposed dwellings are permissible under the R2 zone.

The site is subject to the provisions of the Eastwood Brickworks Master Plan which was approved by Council in June 2003. A Master Plan was required under Clause 30 of Parramatta LEP 2001 for sites over 5000m2 to guide future development.

The dwellings have been designed taking into consideration the design principles of the Master Plan and achieves consistency in streetscape and are compatible with dwellings previously approved for the site.

In accordance with Appendix 5 of PDCP2011 the application was notified to adjoining properties for 14 days and no submissions were received.

The proposed development is consistent with Master Plan 2003 and has been assessed against the relevant sections of Section 79C of the EPA Act 1979.

The proposal complies with the requirements of PLEP 2011, other than FSR. The application seeks approval to vary Clause 4.4 - Floor Space Ratio under Clause 4.6 - Exceptions to development standards as the individual housese have floor space ratios between 0.65:1 and 0.68:1; exceeding the maximum FSR permitted on the site which is 0.6:1.

The Master Plan provides for a maximum floor space ratio of 0.6:1 across the site and the overall FSR of the site is 0.327:1; which is currently under the maximum permitted FSR for the site.

Despite the non compliances with the FSR requirements of PLEP 2011 the proposal is consistent with the objectives of R2 Low Density Residential zone and the Eastwood Brickworks Master Plan.

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/339/2012 for construction of 10 dwellings on proposed lots 13 to 22 at 37 Midson Road Eastwood for a period of five (5) years for physical commencement to occur from the date on the Notice of Determination subject to the following conditions

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

Attachments:

1 View	S79c Report	31 Pages
2 View	Locality Map	1 Page
3 View	Plans	2 Pages
4	Plans (confidential)	2 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council (Development) 13 August 2012 Item 8.4

DOMESTIC APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 8.4

SUBJECT 20 Rawson Street, EPPING
(LOT 4 DP 9193) (Lachlan Macquarie Ward)

DESCRIPTION Section 96(1a) modification to an approved tree removal, alterations and additions to the existing dwelling, new carport, swimming pool and front fence. The modifications include replacement of roof tiling, changes to openings, new retaining walls, pool fencing and minor external changes.

REFERENCE DA/186/2010/A - 08 March 2012

APPLICANT/S S Kwok and H Lee

OWNERS Mr H H Lee and Ms S W L Kwok

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

DATE OF REPORT 20 July 2012

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application is being referred to Council due to the nature of the application and the issues raised.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The applicant seeks approval for as built works modifying the approved alterations and additions to the existing dwelling, new carport, swimming pool and front fence at No. 20 Rawson Street, Epping, Lot 4 in DP 9193.

The works include:

· Replace the approved Wunderlich Modern French / Marseille Aurora roof tiles with Wunderlich Modern French / Marseille Florence Red roof tiles;

· Replace front bay window to match existing;

· Repairs to building façade including replacing brick work where required;

· Retain and repair infill brick panels to the front porch;

· Increase number of posts to the carport from six (6) to eight (8) and replace timber posts with metal;

· Reconfigure a stair to the rear of the approved carport;

· Removal of two (2) velux skylights and replace with two (2) solar tube skylights within the rear roof plane.

· Additional solar tube skylight to Bathroom No. 3 within the rear roof plane;

· Removal of north facing rear living room door;

· Construct a concrete platform under the rear steps;

· Relocate the approved water tank from the wall adjacent to Bathroom No. 3 approximately 2m west to the wall adjacent to Bedroom No. 4;

· Install air conditioning condenser unit to the southern elevation;

· New 2.4m tapered to 1.6m high fence on the southern boundary forward of the adjoining garage at No. 18 Rawson Street;

· New side fence 1.8m to 2.1m high to the southern boundary extending from the rear of the adjoining garage at No. 18 Rawson Street to the rear boundary;

· Replacing the finishes of the rear pool building from rendered concrete block walls to face brick to match the dwelling;

· Alterations to the pool building layout including replacing northern and southern facing doors with face brick walls;

· Relocation of the pool plant equipment from the pool building to the rear garden shed;

· Alterations to the retaining wall and pool fence along the northern side of the pool;

· Remove grated drain to pool coping and alter pool deck coping so that stormwater drains to pool; and,

· Provide dark clay brick pavers to the approved driveway.

The works with the exception of the side boundary fencing and the brick pavers to the driveway have been completed.

The site is located within the Epping / Eastwood Heritage Conservation area however, the dwelling is not an individual listed Heritage Item. The works are permissible under the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011.

In response to the notification period of the application a total of seven (7) submissions were received.

The issues raised within the submissions relate to:

· The colour and finish of roof the tiles installed to the dwelling and carport;

· Works undertaken without consent;

· Heritage impacts;

· The approved carport;

· The approved colour scheme;

· Replacement of a bay window to the front of the dwelling;

· The relocation of a skylight within the front roof plane;

· Approved window changes along the southern elevation;

· Amenity impacts from the air conditioning unit, rainwater tank and kitchen exhaust installed along the southern elevation of the dwelling;

· Privacy impacts, side boundary fencing, and the location of a retaining wall;

· The garden lighting installed;

· The letter box constructed;

· The TV antenna installed; and,

· Devaluation of property values.

The as built modifying works have been assessed against the relevant Development Standards and Controls of the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2011 and Parramatta Development Control Plan (DCP) 2011.

The main issue raised by all objectors, relates to the installation of glazed Wunderlich Modern French / Marseille Florence Red tiles to the roof of the dwelling.

It is recommended that the Section 96 Modification be approved subject to a condition requiring the tiles be painted with ‘Neutek PaveCoat’ to dull the gloss finish of the tile. Sample tiles are available for viewing at the Council Meeting.

In addition, conditions requiring the metal carport support posts to be enclosed in timber cladding, correcting details relating to the side boundary fencing and requiring the air conditioning unit to comply with the relevant noise output requirements are also recommended.

The application is considered satisfactory with respect to the aims and objectives of the Parramatta LEP 2011 and Parramatta DCP 2011 subject to the above conditions. Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval subject to conditions contained in Attachment 1.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That the consent authority, modify development consent DA/186/2010 for tree removal, alterations and additions to the existing dwelling, new carport, swimming pool and front fence to include modifications comprising the replacement of roof tiling, changes to openings, new retaining walls, pool fencing and minor external changes on land at No. 20 Rawson Street Epping 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.

(b) That the additional conditions contained in the recommendation of the Section 79C Assessment Report be included in the list of conditions.

Shaun Hehir

Development and Certification Officer

Attachments:

1 View	Section 79C Report	28 Pages
2 View	Location Map	1 Page
3 View	Section 96 Plans	6 Pages
4 View	DA Approved Plans	11 Pages
5	DA Approved Confidential Plans (Floor Plans and Section)	6 Pages
6	Section 96 Confidential Plans (Floor Plans and Section)	3 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council (Development) 13 August 2012 Item 8.5

DOMESTIC APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 8.5

SUBJECT 71 and 73 Marion Street Harris Park (Lot 8 and Lot 9 DP 2114)

DESCRIPTION Alterations and additions including a rear extension and new first floor to two heritage listed buildings, use of the buildings as a Medical Centre, and installation of a new sign to the front of 71 Marion Street,

REFERENCE DA/253/2012 - 30 April 2012

APPLICANT/S Ozedocs Pty. Limited

OWNERS Ozedocs Pty. Limited.

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

DATE OF REPORT

20 July 2012

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application is referred to Council because it involves structural alteration and partial demolition to two heritage listed buildings.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The application seeks consent for alterations and additions to two existing buildings including construction of a link between them, a rear addition, and a first floor addition, use of the modified building as a Medical Centre, and the installation of a sign on the outside of the existing building on 71 Marion Street.

The property at 73 Marion Street is currently occupied by an approved medical centre while the property at 71 Marion Street is currently used as a residential dwelling.

The development application was advertised and notified in accordance with DCP 2011. No submissions were received.

The proposed development is permissible under the B1 Neighbourhood Business zoning that applies to the land under Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011.

The proposal has been assessed against the Development Standards of Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011 (LEP) and found to comply in all regards. The proposal was also assessed against the provisions Parramatta Development Control Plan 2011 (DCP) and while variations are sought to the floor to ceiling levels contained in the general controls of the DCP, the 30% deep soil zone requirement contained in the Harris Park strategic precinct section of the DCP, the wall height control in the Harris Park West Conservation Area section of the DCP, it is considered that the variations sought are the result of specific site circumstances, serve to protect the heritage value of the listed buildings on the site, and will not result in a development inconsistent with existing development on adjoining sites. Accordingly, the development application is recommended for approval.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council as the consent authority grant development consent to Development Application 253/2012 for rear and first floor additions to two Heritage Listed buildings, occupation of the buildings as a medical centre, and installation of a new sign at the front of the property on land at 71 and 73 Marion Street Harris Park (Lots 8 and 9 DP 2114) for a period of five (5) years from the dated on the Notice of Determination subject to the conditions set out in Attachment 1.

Attachments:

1 View	Section 79C Report	34 Pages
2 View	Heritage Inventory Sheet	1 Page
3 View	Site Plan	1 Page
4 View	Non-Confidential Plans	3 Pages
5	Confidential Plans	2 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council (Development) 13 August 2012 Item 9.1

MAJOR APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 9.1

SUBJECT 8 Orchard Street, Epping (Lot 3 DP29543 SPL COR) (Lachlan Macquarie Ward)

DESCRIPTION Section 96(1a) modification to an approved dual occupancy development.

REFERENCE DA/411/2010/A - Lodged 20 February 2012

APPLICANT/S JF Building Consultants and Mrs H F Zhang

OWNERS Mr Q P Zhang and Mrs H F Zhang

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

DATE OF REPORT

19 June 2012

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application is referred to Council due to the number of submissions received.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The application seeks development consent for the Section 96(1a) modification to an approval for demolition, tree removal and construction of a two storey detached dual occupancy development with Torrens title subdivision. Modifications include:

1. Reduction in the height of the dwellings;

2. Reduction in the size of the balcony and porch;

3. Changes to internal configuration and floor area;

4. Modify roofing material from concrete tiles to colourbond; and

5. 600mm fill within the southern corner of each dwelling.

The modification also seeks to delete conditions 9, 10 and 11 that required design changes to the buildings by requiring it to be lowered, reduce the depth of porches and provide a second parking space within the driveway to dwelling 2. The applicant has submitted revised plans that address the intent of these modifications.

The subject site is zoned R2 Low Density Residential under Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011. The proposed dual occupancy is permissible under Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011.

The application was notified in accordance with Council’s Notification Policy, with 12 objections received. Due to the number of submissions received, an on-site meeting was held on 23 June 2012 and commenced at 10:30am.

The objections relate primarily to issues relating to subdivision, character of the area, overdevelopment, parking, traffic, property devaluation and stormwater. The issues are addressed in the Section 79C Assessment Report (Attachment 1) and do not warrant refusal of the application.

Amended plans were submitted to Council on 12 February 2012. Modifications include fill on the southern corner of both houses, further reduction in height and finished floor levels. The amended plans were notified in accordance with Council’s Notification Policy; two of the original objectors submitted a supplementary submission raising the same issues as raised in previous submissions. The issues are addressed in the Section 79C Assessment Report (Attachment 1) and do not warrant refusal of the application.

The proposed development generally complies with the requirements of both Parramatta Local Environmental Plans 2011 and Parramatta Development Control Plans 2011.

After consideration of the development against the relevant statutory and policy provisions, the proposal is considered to be suitable for the site and is in the public interest. Therefore, it is recommended that the modifications be approved subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council as the consent authority, modify development consent DA/411/2010 for the demolition, tree removal and construction of a two storey detached dual occupancy development with Torrens title subdivision to include modifications comprising 1. Reduction in the height of the dwellings; 2. Reduction in the size of the balcony and porch; 3. Changes to internal configuration and floor area; and 4. modify roofing material from concrete tiles to colourbond at 8 Orchard Street, Epping 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 following modifications:

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

Attachments:

1 View	Section 79C Report	18 Pages
2 View	Locality Map	1 Page
3 View	Plans	4 Pages
4	Plans (Confidential)	5 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council (Development) 13 August 2012 Item 9.2

MAJOR APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 9.2

SUBJECT 211 Church Street, Parramatta
(Lot 101 DP 1052788) (Arthur Phillip Ward)

DESCRIPTION Alterations to and occupation of a Heritage listed building as an educational establishment with a coffee bar.

REFERENCE DA/281/2012 - Submitted 11 May 2012

APPLICANT/S MCA Architects

OWNERS Wynnypeg Pty Ltd

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

DATE OF REPORT

20 July 2012

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application has been referred to Council as the proposal involves building works to a heritage item.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The application seeks approval for alterations to and occupation of a heritage listed building as an educational establishment and a coffee bar at 211 Church Street Parramatta. The site is located on the western side of Church Street, between Macquarie Street and George Street.

The site contains a free standing two storey heritage building constructed as a Post Office between 1878 – 1880. The building was used as a Post Office until the 1960s when it then became a Telecom facility and more recently a bar and nightclub. The building is currently vacant.

The application proposes alterations to the two storey building and occupation by the University of New England for a Western Sydney FutureCampus. UNE have identified that there are a number of students undertaking courses by distance education and many of these students reside in western Sydney. The UNE has identified a need to provide these students with a learning facility with access to information technology. The FutureCampus will provide a venue to deliver course content, local small group collaboration, access to telecommuting technology enabling participation in lectures, tutoring, course advice, course administration such as assignment submission and other administrative services. The FutureCampus will also be used to support community engagement activities such as public access to selected UNE academic programs, public relations activities and business engagement.

The proposed use is defined as an “educational establishment” under Parramatta City Centre LEP 2007 and is permissible under the B4 Mixed Use zoning applying to the land.

The proposed alterations include works to ensure the building is compliant with the Disability Discrimination Act. This includes the installation of a platform lift in the ground floor verandah and the addition of an external lift to the rear of the building to provide disabled access to the first floor of the building along with a fire egress stair. External and internal works are proposed to repair the building, remove structures and fittings leftover from the previous tenant and provide fittings for the student learning areas. The first floor balcony is to be enclosed with a low reflective glass and a raised timber floor.

The proposed hours of operation are 7:00am to midnight seven days a week. Access outside standard business hours of 9am to 5pm weekdays will be on a security controlled basis (swipe card or similar). The FutureCampus will have 2 staff members. The coffee bar will operate between the hours of 7am to 6pm seven days a week and will employ up to 5 staff. The coffee bar will be open to members of the public.

It is anticipated the total number of students occupying the building at any one time will be approximately 100. The main utilisation of the site is expected to occur between standard business hours (9am – 5pm). The site has no car parking facilities. It is expected that most students will travel by public transport. Students and staff travelling by car have access to car parking stations in the nearby streets. No additional or new signage is proposed as part of the application.

The site is listed as a heritage item of State significance under Schedule 5 of Parramatta City Centre LEP 2007. The building is a fine example of Victorian ‘Free Classical Colonial architecture’. The application was referred to Council’s Heritage Advisor and the Heritage Office for comment. The Heritage Office supports the proposed development and considers it to be an appropriate adaption for the existing building which is compatible with its significant character and history. Council’s Heritage Advisor is satisfied with the details provided in the works program and architectural plans and raised no objections to the proposal subject to conditions of consent.

Council’s Aboriginal Pleistocene study identifies the site as having a high sensitivity. The construction of the lift at the rear of the site requires excavation. As such the applicant was required to seek an excavation permit under s140 of the Heritage Act from the Heritage Office. On the 5 July 2012 the Heritage Office advised Council that an approval has been given for the S140 application for an archaeological permit, subject to conditions.

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

The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the Parramatta City Centre LEP 2007 and City Centre DCP 2007. The likely impacts of the alterations and use have been assessed and are considered to be compatible with the heritage significance of the building, sympathetically designed and consistent with the character of existing developments in the surrounding area, subject to conditions.

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

RECOMMENDATION

That Council as the consent authority grant development consent to Development Application No. DA/281/2012 for alterations to and occupation of a Heritage Listed building as an Educational Establishment with a coffee bar on land at 211 Church Street Parramatta for a period of five (5) years from the date on the Notice of Determination subject to the conditions contained within Attachment 1.

Emily Dickson

Development Assessment Officer

Attachments:

1 View	Section 79C Report	27 Pages
2 View	Locality Map	1 Page
3 View	Plans	12 Pages

Council (Development) 13 August 2012 Item 9.3

MAJOR APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 9.3

SUBJECT 25 Talbot Road, Guildford
(Lot A DP 349926)

DESCRIPTION Section 96 (AA) has been lodged to amend an approval for a 28 place child care centre with first floor offices over basement carparking and strata subdivision. The amendments include:-
1. Amendments to the southern facade
2. Construction of a 1.8 metre high wall to the southern boundary.
3. Extension of rear balcony and modifications to access.
4. Fenestration changes throughout.
5. Front terrace extended.
6. Modifications to rear sunshade.
7. Reduction in roof parapet.
8. Removal of 1 Jacaranda to the front of the property and 3 Camphor Laurel to rear.
9. Reworking of the internal layout of the childcare centre.

REFERENCE DA/1270/2004/E - 3 May 2012

APPLICANT/S Mr S Nour

OWNERS Mr S Nour and Mrs T Nour

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

DATE OF REPORT 20 July 2012

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The Section 96 application has been referred to Council as the original development application was approved by the Land and Environment Court.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Approval is sought for modifications to a Court approved development consent for a 28 place child care centre on the ground floor and office units on the first floor over basement car parking. The proposed modifications are as follows:

Ground Floor

· Children’s bathroom to be increased in size to accommodate an additional toilet.

· Removal of the bottle preparation area.

· Additional door to the Cot Room area and nappy change room.

· Provision of a Bottle Preparation (BP) area within the After Care area.

· Reconfiguration of the kitchen bench top fittings.

· Removal of three trees to the rear (all Camphor Laurel) and one Jacaranda tree located to the front of the site.

· Provision of a 1.8 metre fence masonry wall along a portion of the southern boundary (towards the rear).

· The rear access to the ground floor verandah along the northern elevation has been extended.

First Floor

· Extension of rear balcony towards the northern boundary.

· Rear vertical metal sheet sunshade blade to be removed.

· Conversion of the non-trafficable roof along the northern elevation to a terrace which comprises of provision of a service door from the commercial area and the increase of the terrace wall height from 300mm to 1 metre.

Eastern Elevation

· Reposition of hallway window slightly higher however the location of this window is retained.

· Reduction in size of the terrace window facing the street.

· The window configuration for the office and hallway on the ground floor addressing the street is to be modified.

Western Elevation

· The first floor windows are to be reconfigured and split in to two separate windows instead of one.

Northern Elevation

· Provision of one additional window and reconfiguration of the windows for the After Care area, staff room and office towards the front of the development that address the access ramp along the northern boundary.

· Provision of a hallway window addressing the terrace and the northern boundary.

Southern Elevation

· Removal of 8 windows on the first floor along the southern elevation.

· Provision of one glass opening/window for the kitchen area on the northern elevation which is to have the dimensions of 1.3 metres x 1.3 metres.

· Modify the decorative facade feature from a horizontal design to a vertical design.

Roof

· The top parapet wall towards the front of the development and extending to the middle of the development has been reduced by 300mm.

All of the above works apart from the tree removal have been completed. Accordingly, the Section 96 (AA) requests for retrospective approval of these works.

The modification to convert the non-trafficable roof along the northern elevation to a terrace on the first floor will not be supported as this elevation adjoins a residential development. The conversion of this portion of the development into a trafficable area will increase the opportunities for overlooking to 23 Talbot Road, Guildford. Also, it is unclear from the submitted plans of any details of ‘services’ or utilities this access and terrace will be servicing. Accordingly, this part of the modification will not be supported.

The extension of the rear balcony towards the northern boundary so that it is flush with the northern wall of the development by approximately 7m2 is considered to be minor. The modification allows for some continuity along the northern and western elevations. The balcony maintains a consistent setback to the northern boundary as that of the northern elevation. However, to mitigate any increased opportunities for overlooking to the adjoining northern property, a condition will be incorporated in the amended consent that requires the provision of a planter box along the extended portion of the balcony and that vegetation is to be planted to mitigate any opportunities for overlooking to the northern property.

All of the above works apart from the tree removal have been completed. Accordingly, the Section 96 (AA) seeks retrospective approval of these works.

The use of the ground floor as a “centre based child care service” was approved under the original development application. No actual use of the first floor has been approved under any previous development consent. The use of the first floor would be the subject of a future development applicant assessment.

The application was reviewed by Council’s Landscape Officer and Development Engineer. No objections were raised by Council’s Landscape Officer or Development Engineer subject to conditions of consent.

The application was notified in accordance with Appendix 5 of PDCP 2011. In response, no submissions were received.

The modifications, with the exception of the conversion of the non-trafficable roof to a terrace, are consistent with the objectives contained in the Parramatta Local Environmental Plan 2011 and Parramatta Development Control Plan 2011. Accordingly the Section 96 application is recommended for approval, subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council as the consent authority, modify development consent No. DA/1270/2004/E under Section 96 (AA) in the following manner:

· Amendments to the southern façade

· Construction of a 1.8 metre high wall to a portion of the southern boundary

· Extension of rear balcony and modifications to access

· Fenestration changes throughout

· Modifications to rear sunshade

· Reduction in roof parapet,

· Removal of 1 Jacaranda to the front of the property and 3 Camphor Laurel to rear

· Reworking of the internal layout of the childcare centre

(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.

Denise Fernandez

Senior Development Assessment Officer

Attachments:

1 View	Section 79C Report	24 Pages
2 View	Locality Plan	1 Page
3 View	Architectural Plans	12 Pages
4 View	Approved Section 96 Report (DA/1270/2004/D)	14 Pages
5 View	Approved Section 96 Devlelopment Consent	4 Pages
6 View	Approved Plans (DA/1270/2004/D)	13 Pages
7 View	Original Development Consent	20 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council (Development) 13 August 2012 Item 9.4

MAJOR APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 9.4

SUBJECT 19 Onslow Street, Granville
(Lot 9 SEC 10 DP 1250)

DESCRIPTION Section 82A Review - Construction of a detached secondary dwelling (granny flat) including demolition of outbuildings.

REFERENCE DA/854/2011 - 19 March 2012

APPLICANT/S Mr A Reziq

OWNERS Mrs L J A R Al-Hashimy

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

DATE OF REPORT 20 July 2012

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 construction of a detached secondary dwelling (granny flat) including demolition of outbuildings.

The original development application was refused under delegation on 28 February 2012 for the following reasons:

1. Council has not received details/plans to enable a full assessment of the application to be conducted under the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. The plans submitted fail to address the following issues raised in Council correspondence dated 9 December 2011, 21 December 2011 and 7 February 2012:

- internal ceiling height increase

- deep soil zone/landscape area details

- BASIX commitments annotated on plans

- drainage plan;

2. The proposal fails to comply with BASIX Certificate 397472S in that the following commitments are not clearly annotated on the DA plans:

- the planting of 40sqm of indigenous or low water use species; and

- 3 star rated instant gas hot water;

3. The proposed granny flat fails to comply with the numeric controls of Section 3.1.3 Preliminary Building Envelope of Parramatta DCP2011 (minimum deep soil zone) as only 3% deep soil (minimum 4m x 4m area) is proposed and results in an inadequate area for recreation and planting;

4. The proposed granny flat fails to comply with Design Principle P.11 of Parramatta DCP2011, Section 3.3.1 Landscaping as a secondary dwelling must not reduce deep soil zone for the property to less than the minimum required for a dwelling house (30% deep soil zone is required for residential development in accordance with Section 3.1.3 Preliminary Building Envelope);

5. The proposed granny flat fails to comply with Design Control C.2 of Parramatta DCP2011 Section 3.3.5 Solar Access and Cross Ventilation as the minimum internal ceiling height of 2.7m is not achieved; and

6. Granting consent to the proposal would not be in the public interest.

Amended information was received with the Section 82A Review including:

· Revised architectural plans deleting the awning to the granny flat, increasing the rear setback to the granny flat, increasing the floor to ceiling height to 2.7 metres, increasing the deep soil zones and illustrating BASIX requirements.

· Revised BASIX Certificate

· Revised Stormwater Details

The amended plans and supporting information satisfactorily address all of the grounds for Council’s previous refusal.

The subject site has a total area of 659.61m2 and is in an R2 Low Density Residential Zone. The principal dwelling is 186.47m2 in area and the secondary dwelling is proposed with 60m2 of floor area. The combined floor area of both the principal and secondary dwellings equates to 246.47m2 and results in a total FSR of 0.37:1. The permitted FSR for the site is 0.5:1. Accordingly, the proposal complies with the provisions under PLEP 2011 and the SEPP (ARH).

No submissions were received following notification of the Section 82A Review.

For the reasons outlined in this report and Attachment 1, it is recommended that Council overturn its previous decision and approve the Section 82A Review application for the construction of a detached secondary dwelling (granny flat) including demolition of outbuildings subject to conditions of consent.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council as the consent authority grant development consent to Development Application No. DA/854/2011 for construction of a detached secondary dwelling (granny flat) including demolition of outbuildings on land at 19 Onslow Street, Granville for a period of five (5) years from the date on the Notice of Determination subject to the conditions contained within Attachment 1

Denise Fernandez

Senior Development Assessment Officer

Development Assessment Team

Attachments:

1 View	Section 82A review and S79C Report	33 Pages
2 View	Locality Plan	1 Page
3 View	Section 82A Review Architectural Plans	5 Pages
4 View	Original Section 79C Report and Plans	26 Pages
5	Original Confidential Plans	1 Page
6	Section 82A Review Confidential Plan	1 Page

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council (Development) 13 August 2012 Item 9.5

MAJOR APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 9.5

SUBJECT 4-6 Hammers Road, Northmead (Lot 8 DP 7339 and Lot 9 DP 7339) ( Ward)

DESCRIPTION 96(1a) Modification to Development Consent DA/714/2009 (Seniors Housing Development). The modifications include increasing the size of the battle axe allotment that contains a seniors living development.

REFERENCE DA/714/2009/B - Lodged 16 May 2012

APPLICANT/S JS Architects Pty Ltd

OWNERS Ms G M Chong and Ms K L Emerson and Mrs J Y T Lee and Mr C Baissari

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

DATE OF REPORT

24 July 2012

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The application is referred to Council due to the number of submissions received.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Section 96(1A) application seeks modifications to an approved consolidation of 2 allotments, re-subdivision into 3 lots, tree removal and construction of seniors housing development to accommodate 11 villas on proposed Lot B. The modifications include increasing the size Lot B.

Lot A contains a heritage item of local significane under Parramatta LEP 2011. As a result of the proposed modification:

· The lot area is decreased in size from 964.37m² to 928.45m²

· The frontage of 21.64m remains unmodified.

Lot B is currently vacant and has approval for Seniors housing development for 11 villas. As a result of the proposed modification:

· The lot area is increased in size from 2926.97m² to 3044.41m²

· The battleaxe accessway width is increased from 6.935m to 7m

Lot C contains a heritage item of local significane under Parramatta LEP 2011. As a result of the proposed modification:

· The lot area is decreased in size from 726.27m² to 644.14m²

· The frontage is decreased in width from 14.705m to 14.645m

The Section 96 application proposes changes to the subdivision to provide larger private open space areas for Villa 1 and Villa 2. No changes are proposed to the seniors living development.

Lot 8 DP 7339 and Lot 9 DP 7339 are listed as Heritage Items of Local Significance under Parramatta LEP 2011. The application was reviewed by Council’s Heritage Advisor who has raised no objection to the proposed development. The proposed modification to the subdivision is not considered to have a negative impact on the historical value of the heritage items.

The application was notified in accordance with Council’s Notification Policy and nine submissions were received. The objections relate primarily to lot sizes, lot widths, heritage and the approved senior’s housing development. The issues are addressed in the Section 79C Assessment Report (Attachment 1) and are not considered to warrant refusal of the application.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council as the consent authority, modify development consent DA/714/2009 in the following way:

1. Modify condition no. 1 in the following way:

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 N⁰	Dated
Masterplan – Site Plan, Site Analysis (JS Architects: No. 01/09), Revision H	5 March 2012
Ground Floor Plan (JS Architects: No. 02/09), Revision H	5 March 2012
Roof Plan and Attic Floor Plans (JS Architects: No. 03/09), Revision H	5 March 2012
Elevation, Section and fence details, Garage plans & elevations (JS Architects: No. 04/09), Revision J	15 April 2012
Subdivision Plan (JS Architects: No. 01/01)	8 June 2012
Landscape Plan (JS Architects: No. 09/09) Refer to conditions no. 19A and 15. Revision G	11 January 2011
Stormwater Drainage Plan (Concept only), designed by Water Plan Pty Ltd, dated March 2009, Amendment D, Drawing No. NHAM4	19/03/2010

Document(s)	Dated
Arborist Report ( MacKay Tree Management)	4 December 2009
Colour and Finishes Schedule (JS Architects)	3 June 2009

Note: In the event of any inconsistency between the architectural plan(s) and the landscape plan(s) and/or stormwater disposal plan(s) (if applicable), the architectural plan(s) shall prevail to the extent of the inconsistency.

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

2. Delete condition 71

3. Delete condition 85

4. Delete condition 86

5. Delete condition 87

6. Include the following additional conditions

87A. The Linen Plan of Subdivision shall conform with Council’s Development Consent Nos. DA/714/2009, DA/714/2009/A & DA/714/2009/B and all relevant conditions there under. The subdivision certificate will not be issued until documentary evidence of compliance with the entire Development Consents has been submitted to Council.

Reason: To ensure compliance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Conditions of Consent.

87B. Prior to issue of the Subdivision Certificate, the applicant must create a Positive Covenant and a Restriction on the Use of Land under Section 88B of the Coveyancing Act 1919, burdening the owner of the proposed Lot 9A with the requirement to maintain the On-Site Stormwater Detention facilities on the lot. The 88B Instrument can be incorporated with the land subdivision Linen Plan. Any proposed inter allotment drainage easements, Right of Ways etc can also be incorporated in one 88B Instrument prepared for the subdivision and submitted with the Subdivision Certificate application. The relative location of the On-Site Detention facility (Tank) in relation to the building footprints or boundary lines must be indicated in the Subdivision Linen Plan. Use the approved drainage plan to confirm the OSD Tank location.

The terms of the Positive Covenant and the Restriction are to be generally in accordance with the Council’s draft terms of Section 88B Instrument and the satisfaction of Council. A copy of this typical 88B can be obtained from Council’s Development Unit.

Reason: To ensure maintenance of On-Site Detention System.

7. All other conditions of DA/714/2009 and DA/714/2009/A remain unmodified.

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

Attachments:

1 View	Section 79C Report	18 Pages
2 View	Locality Map	1 Page
3 View	Plan	1 Page
4 View	Approved subdivision plan under DA/714/2009	1 Page

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council (Development) 13 August 2012 Item 9.6

MAJOR APPLICATION

ITEM NUMBER 9.6

SUBJECT 25 Wentworth Street, Parramatta

DESCRIPTION Section 96(2) modification to an approved Brothel to increase the number of staff on site at any one time from 10 to 14. This comprises 10 sex workers and 4 ancillary staff

REFERENCE DA/1203/1998/A - 22 December 2012

APPLICANT/S Shanavalle Pty Ltd

OWNERS Blunew Pty Ltd

REPORT OF Manager Development Services

DATE OF REPORT

20 July 2012

REASON FOR REFERRAL TO COUNCIL

The proposal is referred to Council for consideration as the application relates to a Brothel.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Section 96(2) application seeks approval to increase the number of staff onsite at any one time from 10 to 14. This comprises 10 sex workers and 4 ancillary staff. No other changes are proposed.

The application was advertised and notified in accordance with Parramatta Council Notification Development Control Plan 2004. One (1) submission was received in response to the notification from a neighbouring property primarily raising concerns with the use of the site as a Brothel and the intensification of the use. These issues have been assessed in detail within the Section 79C report attached (Attachment 1).

The subject site and immediately adjoining sites are zoned B3 Commercial Core. The site currently contains a two storey mixed use development with a hard stand car parking area to the rear comprising 12 spaces. The ground floor level of the subject site contains a restaurant/café/bar currently known as the Velvet Room. The first floor level of the site contains the subject sex services premises.

Surrounding development consists of a varied mix of buildings associated with the mixed use and commercial zones. Immediately to the north of the site is the NSW Government Fair Trading Centre and immediately to the south is a two storey commercial development containing a real estate agency. A large scale commercial development known as Gough Whitlam Plaza is also located on the opposite side of Wentworth Street to the east and to the west of the site is the Wentworth Street Council car park. The locality includes residential units associated with the large scale mixed use buildings recently or currently being constructed on Church Street.

The originally lodged Section 96(2) application sought to increase staff from 10 to 21 employees comprising 17 sex workers and 4 ancillary staff. Pursuant to Council requests the applicant has amended the sought increase to a maximum of 14 employees comprising 10 sex workers and 4 ancillary staff.

Perusal of the development history of the site has found that DA/1203/1998 imposed a 10 employee limit on the premises. In addition Council have previously accepted an enlargement of the premises under Development Application DA/1557/2001 to include 13 nominated bedrooms. This application was resolved by Council on 24 February 2003, the accompanying business paper to this Development Application considered at the meeting made the following statement in Section 2 of the Executive Summary.

‘2. Ten (10) rooms will be used at any one time whilst the remaining will be used as waiting rooms for patrons requiring extra privacy and/or spare rooms available for the next client avoiding any wait whilst cleaning rooms’.

This Section 96 application is primarily the result of inspections of the site by Council’s Development Control Unit and the disclosure of more than 10 employees on site during the inspection. Within this inspection it was found that the owner’s interpretation of the approved number of staff constituted 10 sex workers. The owner contended that ancillary staff did not form part of the total number of employees.

In lieu of the above, the Section 79C Assessment Report attached (attachment 1) finds that the provision of 14 employees namely 10 sex workers and 4 ancillary staff would be consistent in rationalising the total amount of employees with regard to previous approvals associated with the site. These 4 ancillary employees relate to a Manager, receptionist, cleaner and security guard. In addition the approval of the moderate increase in staff numbers allows Council to impose suitable conditions to significantly improve the management of the premises, protect the health and safety of employees and patrons and bring the operation of the Brothel in line with best practice within the sex industry.

While it is acknowledged that the premises are directly above licensed premises known as the ‘Velvet Room’ and that there is one owner for both premises, additional conditions are recommended which clearly separate the two uses in terms of access.

The matter was referred to Council’s Community Crime Prevention Officer who has recommended conditions of consent to improve management of the premises.

The proposed development is consistent with the objectives and provisions of Parramatta City Centre Local Environmental Plan 2007 and the Parramatta Development Control Plan 2007 for Sex Services and Restricted Premises and is considered satisfactory with regard to amenity impact to neighbouring properties.

After consideration of the development against the relevant statutory and policy provisions, the proposal is considered to be suitable for the site. Therefore, it is recommended that the application be approved.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council as the consent authority grant development consent to Development Application No. DA/1203/1998/A for the modification to an approved Brothel to increase the number of staff onsite at any one time from 10 to 14. This comprises 10 sex workers and 4 ancillary staff at 25 Wentworth Street, PARRAMATTA 2150 for a period of five (5) years for physical commencement to occur from the date on the Notice of Determination subject to the following conditions

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

Duncan Livingstone

Senior Development Assessment Officer

Attachments:

1 View	Section 79C Assessment Report	40 Pages
2 View	Locality Plan	1 Page
3	confidential Council stamped floor plan of premises	1 Page

Council (Development) 13 August 2012 Item 11.1

ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER 11.1

SUBJECT Update on regular inspections of sex related premises.

REFERENCE F2007/01985 - D02450009

REPORT OF Manager Regulatory Services

PURPOSE:

The report has been prepared to provide Council with an update of inspections undertaken by the Regulatory Services Unit of sex related premises for the financial year 2011/12.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council receives and notes this report.

(b) Further, that Council continues to monitor sex service premises with six (6) monthly inspections (i.e. brothels, sex on premises facilities, therapeutic massage facilities, and massage parlours).

BACKGROUND

1. Council resolved on the 26 May 2008;

(a) That Council adopt and implement the recommendations contained in Manager Service Audit and Review Report.

(b) Further, that Council move to 6 monthly sex service premises inspections (i.e. brothels, sex on premises facilities, therapeutic massage facilities, massage parlours).

2. In response to Council resolution of the 26 May 2008, the Regulatory Services Unit have placed the highest priority on ensuring this Council resolution has been achieved at all times, with all premises being inspected a minimum of every 6 months. Some premises have been inspected more regularly to ensure compliance with consents.

3. The Regulatory Services Unit has continued to inspect restricted premises since the May 2008 resolution in conjunction with the Community Crime Prevention Officer, through a program of audit, random and routine type inspections. This program ensures a level of probity, whilst ensuring the operators do not become familiar with the likely time frames in which their premises could be subject to an inspection.

4. As a result of the 6 monthly inspection program and associated enforcement action, it is evident that there is a clear message being communicated to all owners and operators that Council will enforce the consent to the full extent of the law. Any non compliant premises and or operators will be made to comply and operate in accordance with their consents and that no tolerance is allowed for any unauthorised activities.

REPORT

5. The Regulatory Services Unit undertakes as a minimum six (6) monthly inspections of sex related premises to meet the Council resolution of the 26 May 2008. These inspections of approved premises ensure they are operating in accordance with the terms of the consent (conditions, approved plans and supporting documentation). Other premises that may have the potential to offer sex related services such as some therapeutic massage and adult services businesses are also included within the inspection program.

6. Within the Parramatta LGA there are 22 approved Brothels that are regularly inspected together with a number of sex related premises and therapeutic massage business that may have the potential to offer sex related services. An emphasis is placed on the control of approved and illegal brothel activity since the introduction of the Brothels Amendment Legislation in October 2007 and the Council resolution in 2008.

7. Staff also conduct investigations relating to unauthorised activities from information received from the general public, other legal operators and information gathered by Council from media scans and other Government agencies. All complaints are logged as service requests and investigated in accordance with the Restricted Premises Enforcement Policy.

8. During the 2011/12 financial year the following inspections and enforcement actions have been undertaken by the Regulatory Service Unit in monitoring sex related premises in accordance with the Council resolution. Council has maintained an active program of monitoring and enforcing compliance for approved and unauthorised activities.

	2010 /11	2011/12
No. of Inspection undertaken	147	73
Joint Interagency Inspections	18	0
Notices and Order	6	13
Penalty Infringement Notices	24	2
Service Requests	6	14

9. During 2011/12 Council conducted 73 inspections, whilst this number of inspections is less than the last financial year, the introduction of the education/ audit program warrants more time allocated per inspection as compared to the previous financial year, whereby more random inspections were carried out within the same time frame. In this regard 1 audit inspection can take up to three hours in comparison to 3 random inspections, as a random inspection only focuses on key components such as number of workers, hours of operation and health and safety issues. An audit inspection requires the officers to review the full approval including the stamped plans, the consent and plan of management whilst on site. This involves a check of every condition with the operator including other supporting documentation such as the plan of management. During these audits, Officers request the operator of the premises to demonstrate their understanding of the conditions of the consent and the plan of management, fire safety measures, equipment and health requirements.

10. This audit inspection program not only achieves a better outcome from a health and safety perspective, it is more legally robust process in the event Council Officers need to progress to Court action, as there is a clear line of documented education to achieve compliance.

11. Council received 14 service requests / complaints regarding illegal activities mostly related to single operators, all complaints were investigated resulting in all unauthorised activities, being closed.

12. As a result of the audit, random and service request inspections, 13 Orders were issued and all orders have been complied with. This number is more than double to the last financial year as the audit process has shown that these inspections achieve better and timely compliance through issuing Orders. In addition to the high number of Orders issued, we have issued 2 penalty infringement notices relating to the inspections for non compliance with approvals.

13. The Community Crime Prevention (CCP) Officer provides an oversight role of inspections and monitoring of restricted premises. The CCP Officer is responsible for providing advice on development applications relating to sex related premises, liaising with other government agencies providing and gathering information to assist Council in regulating and monitoring restricted premises. The CCP Officer attends restricted premises inspections as the independent representative overseeing the inspections process.

14. All inspection results and actions are reported to the Restricted Premises Governance Meeting consisting of senior management, general counsel and staff. The group meets on a bi-monthly basis to oversight all actions and inspections relating to restricted premises providing a good governance framework.

15. Council has also adopted the Restricted Premises Enforcement Policy on the 27 June 2011. This policy provides the framework for the consistent enforcement and to ensure transparency, procedural fairness and natural justice. This policy aligns regulatory actions across all arms of Council, namely the Regulatory Services Unit and the Development Services Unit, for monitoring and regulating business activities and premises within the Parramatta Local Government Area.

16. The adoption of the Restricted Premises Enforcement Policy on the 27 June 2011 by Council provides the framework for the inspection and enforcement action for all restricted premises.

17. The Regulatory Service Unit in conjunction with the CCP Officer will continue to provide an inspection program in line with the Council resolution of the 26^th of May 2008.

Laurie Whitehead

Unit Manger Regulatory Services

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council (Development) 13 August 2012 Item 11.3

ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER 11.3

SUBJECT Planning Proposal for land at 57, 63 & 83 Church Street and 44 Early Street Parramatta

REFERENCE RZ/9/2011 - D02452450

REPORT OF Project Officer - Land Use Planning

PURPOSE:

The purpose of this report is to seek Council's position on a planning proposal to amend the Parramatta City Centre LEP 2007 to rezone the land described above and increase the maximum floor space ratio and building height.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council prepare a planning proposal that reflects the items contained in Attachment 2 and forward to the Department of Planning & Infrastructure for Gateway determination.

(b) That upon successful Gateway determination of the planning proposal, a site specific DCP be developed to address relevant matters such as built form, location of building height, public domain, parking and the like.

(d) That Council proceed with negotiations for a Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) with the applicant in relation to the planning proposal.

(e) Further, that delegated authority be given to the CEO to negotiate the VPA on behalf of Council and that the outcome of negotiations be reported back to Council.

BACKGROUND

THE SITE

1. The land the subject of the planning proposal is 57, 63 & 83 Church Street and 44 Early Street Parramatta (referred to in this report as 'the subject land') and total 14,287m². The subject land is illustrated in Figure 1 of Attachment 1.

2. The subject land is located in the northern portion of the Auto Alley precinct south of the Parramatta City Centre at the junction of Church Street and the Great Western Highway. The subject land currently contains (from north to south) the following:

Site 1- Largely vacant land with some residual shade structures from a previous use as a car yard (83 Church Street & 44 Early Street) - 7592m²

Site 2 - A vacant car sales yard & servicing facility (63 Church Street)- 4742m²

Site 3 - Car sales and display facility (57 Church Street) – 1953m²

3. The subject land has frontage to Church Street and is separated (east-west) by Early Street and Lansdowne Road.

THE PROPOSAL

4. In November 2011, Council received a planning proposal prepared by Aecom Australia Pty Ltd on behalf of the owners of the site, Heartland Group. The planning proposal, as originally submitted, sought to re-zone the subject land from its current B5 (Business Development) zone to B4 (Mixed Use) zone under Parramatta City Centre LEP 2007. The planning proposal, as originally submitted sought to increase the maximum height from 12m (3storeys) to 120m (35 storeys) and floor space ratio from 2:1 to 8:1. Following an initial assessment and several meetings with relevant Council officers, the planning proposal has been amended to now propose to rezone the subject land as follows;

Site 1 - (83 Church & 44 Early Street) to part B4 (Mixed Use) and part B5 (Business Development) with a maximum FSR of 7.2:1 and maximum building height of 36m (8 storeys) for the portion of the site zoned B5 fronting Church Street and 118m (35 storeys) for the remainder of the site zoned B4.

Site 2 - (63 Church Street) to part B4 (Mixed Use) and part B5 (Business Development) with a maximum FSR of 6.4:1 and a maximum building height of 36m (8 storeys) for the portion of the site zoned B5 fronting Church Street and 90m (26-27 storeys) for the remainder of the site zoned B4.

Site 3 – 57 Church Street to RE1 (Public Recreation) to be provided as a public park.

5. Documentation provided by the applicant also identifies how the height and floor space may potentially be distributed over the site as well as areas of open space (park) and publicly accessible plazas. These are represented in diagrammatic and table form in Attachment 1. The mechanisms for potential delivery of elements of open space and publically accessible areas are discussed in more detail in Attachment 1 but would potentially be via a Voluntary Planning Agreement.

6. The original planning proposal was accompanied by relevant issue specific studies/analysis including; urban design analysis, flood study, acid sulfate and contaminated soils report, traffic study, economic and heritage reports. These reports are available upon request.

AUTO ALLEY PRECINCT

7. Council considered a report concerning the options for the urban renewal of the Auto Alley precinct at its meeting on 23 July 2012, following a public consultation period where options from both Council and the SMDA were available for comment.

8. Council at that meeting, endorsed Option 2B, which provides for a balanced approach including preserving commercial land to ensure job targets are achieved for the City Centre, whilst providing for some high density residential uses to create a more vibrant and amenable precinct and to act as a stimulus for precinct improvements and redevelopment. A copy of the endorsed Option 2B is included within Attachment 1.

9. The current controls applied have been referred to as a 'suppression' zoning to prevent the loss of land for future job creation. It was identified in the adopted Parramatta City Centre Vision 2007 that this area would be the subject of further investigation and study so as to achieve the best overall strategic planning outcome for the City and region.

10. The submission of this planning proposal has, partly, brought forward the need to undertake an analysis of the whole precinct and consider the site in the broader context of Auto Alley and the City of Parramatta. In early discussions with Council, the proponent was made aware of the need for this broader piece of strategic work to be undertaken which is continuing to progress in conjunction with the SMDA, however is seeking to progress with the redevelopment of their site.

PLANNING CONTROLS

11. The land is currently zoned B5 (Business Development) under the provisions of Parramatta City Centre LEP 2007. This zoning allows for a variety of office and retail land uses including bulky goods premises and vehicle showrooms. The current zoning does not permit residential development. The site currently has a maximum floor space ratio of 2:1 and a maximum height of 12m.

12. The planning controls sought under this planning proposal are detailed in paragraph 4 of this report. A more detailed comparison table is included in Attachment 1.

ISSUES

13. Council’s Economic Development, Catchment Management, Urban Design, Environmental, Heritage, Social Outcomes and Traffic and Transport Teams have all been involved in the consideration and assessment of this planning proposal. These matters are discussed in more detail in Attachment 1 under relevant headings.

14. The key matters of contention that have arisen during the assessment of the planning proposal include;

(i) the quantum and distribution of floor space and land use mix;

(ii) future employment opportunities and its contribution to the context of the long term viability of the development of Parramatta as a regional city;

(iii) the resultant built form and urban design outcomes associated with the planning proposal; and

(iv) the location of the new park to address flooding issues.

17. In order to best address these issues a number of clauses have been put forward. These draft clauses would;

(i) mandate a minimum percentage of 40% non-residential floor space within the the subject land to better align with the desired employment outcomes for the precinct,

(ii) limit the floor plate size on the taller building elements to reduce bulk and overshadowing and

(iii) require approximately 6,000sqm of the overall commercial floor area to be provided at basement level (proposed supermarket). This would further reduce the resultant bulk of buildings and prevent this floor space being relocated to the tower (residential) elements of the proposal. If the supermarket were not to proceed the 40% non-residential component would still apply to the remainder of the floor space of the site.

18. In response to a number of concerns originally raised by Council officers, the proponent has included an urban design analysis including indicative building footprints, land uses, building heights and setbacks.

Based on the indicative building envelopes diagram (Attachment 1 – Figure 8) an FSR calculations table was provided to assist in indicating the potential distribution of future floor space over the sites as well as to better inform the potential mix of land uses in floor space terms. Some of the more pertinent figures extracted from these analysis are provided below. NB – The figures below are indicative only and also include a further potential 10% bonus being achieved for design excellence;

Table 1 – Indicative floor space distribution of planning proposal (see Figures 7 & 8 Attachment 1)

Site & Area	FSR	GFA (incl 10% bonus)	Non-Residential	Residential	Dedication Total
1 – 7592 m²	7.9:1	59,976 m²	23,116m² or 38%	36,860m² or 62%	2344m²
2 – 4752 m²	7.0:1	33,194 m²	11,648m² or 35%	21,546m² or 65%	1585m²
3 - 1953 m²	0:1	0	0%	0%	1953m²
Total/average	6.6:1	93,364 m²	34,764m² or 37%	58,406 or 63%	5882m²

Table 2 – Comparison of the planning proposal against indicative development possible under Auto Alley - Option 2B

Site

Planning Proposal (PP)

Option 2B – Auto Alley 4:1 all sites (indicative)

Difference

PP / 2B

Site 1

Height

- Church St

- Rear portion

Floor space

- Commercial

- Residential

B5 - 36m (8st)

B4–118m (35 st)

7.9:1*

23,116m²or 38%

36,860m² or 62%

‘commercial’ – 34m (8st)

‘mixed use’ – 100m (30st)

4:1

34% over all sites

66% over all sites

+2m

+18m

+3.9:1

+4%

Site 2

Height

- Church St

- Rear portion

Floor space

- Commercial

- - Residential

B5 – 36m (8st)

B4 – 90m (27st)

7.0:1*

11,648m² or 35%

21,546m² or 65%

N/A – park

‘mixed use’ – 100m (30 st)

4:1

10% - within this site

90% - within this site

+36m

-10m

+3:1

+25%

-25%

Site 3

- Church Street

N/A - New park 0:1

Commercial – 34m (8st) – 4:1

-34m & -4:1

Total - commercial

- residential

34,764m^2* or 37%

58,406m^2* or 63%

19,212m²/34%

37,920m²/66%

+ 15,552m^2*

+ 20,486m^2*

* Floor space figures above include a 10% bonus being achieved through design excellence provisions.

19. The above tables are indicative only as more detailed planning controls have not yet been prepared for the Auto Alley precinct. These tables however allow a reasonable comparison between the land the subject of the planning proposal and these sites within the option (2B) recently endorsed by Council.

20. From the above, it can be observed that the split between commercial/retail uses and residential is almost identical (in percentage terms). The height, which is discussed in more detail in this report, is also comparable. The primary difference is that of the total quantum of floor space. Of particular note is that approximately 15,500m² more commercial floor space would result under this planning proposal than Auto Alley option 2B. Accompanying this however comes an additional 20,500m² of residential floor space.

21. Also of importance is that the planning proposal may also result in the provision of approximately 6,000m² of land being made available for the purposes of public open space, through site links/plazas and road widening. A diagram indicating the potential location of these spaces is included in Attachment 1-Section 4 under heading ‘Voluntary Planning Agreements’.

VOLUNTARY PLANNING AGREEMENT

22. Whilst no formal ‘offer’ has been provided by the proponent, an intention has been indicated to examine the inclusion of items such as; public domain improvements, dedication/provision of public access to plaza, provision and embellishment of land for use as a park, flooding attenuation, community facilities and the like into a potential Voluntary Planning Agreement.

23. There are potential planning and public benefits in this indicative offer that should be further explored. This report recommends that, as required by Council’s VPA policy, a formal resolution be made to proceed with negotiations and that an appropriate officer be given delegated authority to explore and negotiate the VPA on Council’s behalf as well as explore other forms of public benefit such as dedication of units for affordable housing, flood risk mitigation and provision of a multi-purpose community space. The outcome of any negotiations would be required to be reported back to Council for further consideration.

PROCESS - NEXT STEPS

24. Council as the relevant planning authority must resolve to support a planning proposal before it can proceed to ‘Gateway’ by the Department of Planning & Infrastructure (DP&I).

25. Should Council resolve to support the preparation planning proposal, the relevant documentation would be submitted to the DP&I for Gateway determination prior to any formal exhibition being undertaken. This would include a formal planning proposal that reflects the outcomes and intended effects and explanation of provisions which are summarized in Attachment 2.

26. Upon receipt of the Gateway determination of the planning proposal, a site specific DCP will be developed to address relevant matters such as built form, location of building height, public domain, parking and the like. The site specific DCP will be reported to Council together with the Gateway documentation prior to their exhibition.

CONCLUSION

27. The site the subject of the planning proposal is considered pivotal to the long term successful renewal and redevelopment of the Auto Alley precinct given its large size, single ownership and prominent location.

28. As detailed in this report a comparison of the planning proposal against the recently endorsed option 2B for the precinct reveals that the subject land would result in comparable proportions of employment and residential floor space being provided as well as significantly more floor space (approximately 15,000m²) of employment generating floor space than that envisaged under option 2B for the subject land.

29. The planning proposal also makes provision for approximately 6,000m²of land to be made available for public open space, through site pedestrian links/plaza and road widening.

30. The planning proposal is considered to adequately meet the broader longer term strategic employment and growth objectives required to progress and strengthen Parramatta's role as a Regional City. The proposal does include a significant proportion of residential development however includes provisions to ensure a significant quantum of non-residential land uses are also provided. It is therefore recommended that Council support the planning proposal and forward to the DP&I for Gateway determination.

Neal McCarry - Project Officer – Land Use Planning and

Jennifer Concato – A/Manager - Land Use Planning

Attachments:

1 View	Detailed Assessment Report	14 Pages
2 View	Contents and explanation of intended outcomes of planning proposal	2 Pages
3 View	Shadow Diagrams	2 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council (Development) 13 August 2012 Item 11.4

ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER 11.4

SUBJECT Planning proposal for land at 42 Bridge Street, Rydalmere (Council's storage depot at Mary Parade)

REFERENCE F2004/09954 - D02452953

REPORT OF Project Officer- Land Use Planning

PURPOSE:

To inform Council of the results of investigations into the heritage listing of sandstone blocks located in Council’s storage depot at 42 Bridge Street, Rydalmere. Council's endorsement is sought for a planning proposal to remove the heritage listing from Parramatta Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 2011. Subject to Council's endorsement, the planning proposal will then be referred to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure for consideration under the Gateway process.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That the planning proposal at Attachment 1 to remove the listing of the sandstone blocks at 42 Bridge Street, Rydalmere from Schedule 5 Environmental Heritage of Parramatta LEP 2011 be endorsed and forwarded for Gateway determination by the Department of Planning and Infrastructure in accordance with Section 56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

(b) That the loose sandstone blocks, particularly that remnant of historic kerbs and gutters, continue to be stored at Council's depot and reused for repairs of listed kerbs and gutters and other historic structures as required.

(c) That the Heritage Branch of the Office of Environment and Heritage and Council’s Heritage Advisory Committee be consulted during the public exhibition of the planning proposal to remove the heritage listing.

(d) Further, that a report be put to Council following the public exhibition.

BACKGROUND

1. Council’s Property Development Group has requested a heritage assessment of the sandstone blocks stored at 42 Bridge Street, Rydalmere (Council’s storage depot at Mary Parade) which are heritage listed in Parramatta LEP 2011.

2. Parramatta LEP 2011 contains the following listing for the sandstone blocks:

Suburb	Item name	Address	Property description	Significance	Item number
Rydalmere	Sandstone Blocks	42 Bridge Street (part of)	Lot 2 DP 128739; Part Lots 211 and 304, DP 14244	Local	I578

3. The heritage inventory for the item on the NSW Heritage Office website gives the item address as the Morton Street, Parramatta Council depot. The following description of the item provides an indication of the reasons for the original listing:

A large pile of sandstone blocks removed from kerbs and gutters (and other works) as a result of new road works. Sandstone kerb and guttering is a major feature of the older areas of Parramatta. Removed to inside the Morton Street Council Depot.

The historical details are given as:

Sandstone was used for kerb and gutters and road pavement from the early 19th century, and cut from local quarries. In recent decades much kerb and gutters has been removed as a result of road works, and the Council stored it at the Morton Street depot. 1) Foundation stone removed from Convict Barracks when demolished c.1937. 2) Memorial stone originally on gasworks east side of Gasworks Bridge. Also recently added has been the front facade of the Mortimer Lewis courthouse erected in Church Street Parramatta in 1838.

4. The sandstone blocks have been listed in Parramatta LEP 1996 (Heritage and Conservation), with the address being the Morton Street depot, from February 1997 until October 2011, when this heritage LEP was superseded by Parramatta LEP 2011. The listing was retained in Parramatta LEP 2011, but the address was changed to Bridge Street, Rydalmere, because the blocks had been relocated to this storage depot.

ISSUES

5. Council's heritage advisor has undertaken a detailed heritage assessment of the blocks included at Attachment 2. A summary of the assessment is as follows:

(i) Description of blocks: The majority of stones and sandstone blocks stored at the Bridge Street/Mary Parade depot appear as partly formed, or broken or damaged and present little more than large sized rubble. Some stones however are relatively finely cut to size for a particular purpose, with indications that they were previously part of a building, or a utility structure. Individual stones are also identifiable as formerly part of kerbs and gutters.

(ii) Significance of blocks: The sandstone blocks currently stored at this depot have been removed from their original context and, albeit identifiable as cut stone, they are currently in relatively simple and non-specific forms. The blocks do not have distinctive markings or inscriptions which would potentially allow for their association with a particular site, building or location. Furthermore, none of these stones have any association with the depot other than by mere fact that they were deposited there about two years ago.

(iii) Stones of heritage interest: The only stones of heritage interest, related to the listing, are the Convict Barracks pediment stone and the Gasworks Bridge memorial stones. These are of heritage interest as movable items but are not stored at or have any association with the Bridge Street/Mary Parade depot. The Convict Barracks stone is stored at the Parramatta Heritage Centre and arrangements are being made for the Gasworks Bridge stones to also be stored at the centre.

(iv) NSW Government listing criteria: The heritage listing of the sandstone blocks does not satisfy the NSW Government listing criteria. The pediment stone of Convict Barracks and the Gasworks Bridge memorial stones are of heritage value, but as movable items with no association to 42 Bridge Street. These stones will be protected and stored with other movable items at the Parramatta Heritage Centre. All other stones have only a practical value and little heritage interest. It is considered inappropriate to further retain listing of historical stones, which are essentially movable and not related to any particular property in the LEP heritage schedules as though they were buildings or structures.

(v) Recommendation to delete listing: The item sandstone blocks, should be deleted from the heritage schedule of Parramatta LEP 2011 and none of the discussed items should be heritage listed in this LEP.

(vi) Storage of significant stones at Heritage Centre: The Convict Barracks pediment stone and Gasworks Bridge Memorial Stone should remain permanently stored at Council's Heritage Centre (Church Street, protected and exhibited as part of Council's movable items collection (a.k.a. Tech One Cultural Collection).

(vii) Storage and continued use of sandstone blocks: Loose sandstone blocks, particularly that remnant of historic kerbs and gutters, should be stored at Council’s depot and reused for repairs of listed kerbs and gutters and other historic structures as required. This action is in accordance with Council's current policy and is the adequate and appropriate use for this type of material, in a manner accepted by many local councils across NSW.

6. Comments were sought from members of the Council's Heritage Advisory Committee on the value of retaining the heritage listing for the sandstone blocks. Responses received from a number of members acknowledged the value of the sandstone blocks but questioned whether listing was necessary when the blocks are not associated with a particular site or event. It was also suggested that the blocks could be used in future restoration work or the building of new Council structures. It is recommended that further consultation take place with the Heritage Advisory Committee during the public exhibition of the planning proposal to remove the heritage listing.

NEXT STEPS

7. Should Council adopt the planning proposal at Attachment 1 it will be forwarded to the Department for Planning and Infrastructure for Gateway determination. On receipt of the Gateway determination it will be placed on public exhibition. During this period relevant government agencies will be consulted (including the Heritage Branch of the Office of Environment and Heritage, Department of Premier and Cabinet) together with the Heritage Advisory Committee. Following the public exhibition a report on the outcomes of the exhibition with a recommendation for the planning proposal will be put to Council for further consideration.

CONCLUSION

8. An assessment has been undertaken by Council's heritage advisor of the sandstone blocks located at 42 Bridge Street, Rydalmere (Council’s storage depot at Mary Parade) which are listed in the heritage schedule of Parramatta LEP 2011. The conclusions of the assessment are as follows:

(i) The listing does not satisfy the NSW Government listing criteria and should be removed.

(ii) The sandstone blocks currently stored at the depot have been removed from their original context. The blocks do not have distinctive markings or inscriptions which would potentially allow for their association with a particular site, building or location. Furthermore, none of these stones have any association with the depot other than by mere fact that they were deposited there about two years ago.

(iii) The majority of blocks stored at the depot present little more than large sized rubble and none of the blocks are associated with a particular building, site or location or with the depot.

(iv) The only stones associated with the heritage listing that are of value are the pediment stone of Convict Barracks and the Gasworks Bridge memorial stones, but these stones are not stored at and have no association with 42 Bridge Street, Rydalmere and will continue to be protected as part of Council's movable heritage collection at the Parramatta Heritage Centre.

(v) Some of the loose sandstone blocks, remnant of historic kerbs and gutters should continue to be stored at the depot and reused for repairs of listed kerbs and gutters and other historic structures as required.

9. It is recommended that the planning proposal to remove the heritage listed item at 42 Bridge Street, Rydalmere from the heritage schedule of Parramatta LEP 2011 be endorsed and submitted to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure for Gateway determination.

Paul Kennedy Jennifer Concato

Project Officer Acting Manager

Land Use Planning Land Use Planning

Attachments:

1 View	Planning Proposal	7 Pages
2 View	Assessment of heritage significance of sandstone blocks	27 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council (Development) 13 August 2012 Item 11.5

ECONOMY AND DEVELOPMENT

ITEM NUMBER 11.5

SUBJECT Preliminary rezoning concept for land at 12-20 Dixon Street Parramatta

REFERENCE RZ/1/2012 - D02453287

REPORT OF Senior Project Officer

PURPOSE:

To seek Council’s view on the concept of rezoning the site at 12-20 Dixon Street, Parramatta to B4 Mixed Use, to permit high density residential development on the site to a maximum height of 60 metres (20 storeys) and for this rezoning to be sought by including the site in the Auto Alley precinct and amending the boundary of the City Centre Local Environmental Plan to include the subject site.

RECOMMENDATION

a) That Council not endorse the applicant’s preliminary rezoning concept for 12-20 Dixon Street, Parramatta, as it is inconsistent with Council’s adopted option for the renewal of the Auto Alley precinct and further is considered to be of excessive height and density.

(b) Further that, Council advise the Sydney Metropolitan Development Authority that it does not support an increase in height and density in the wider area west of Auto Alley, as proposed in the rezoning concept for 12-20 Dixon Street, Parramatta.

PRELIMINARY REZONING CONCEPT

1. A preliminary rezoning concept submission is a request to seek Council’s initial feedback and to determine if the proposed concept has merit for further investigation. Based on Council’s initial feedback, the applicant may decide to submit a planning proposal, which is a more detailed application with accompanying studies that addresses relevant issues and formally seeks amendments to the planning controls for further assessment by Council (and submission to the State Government under the Gateway process if supported).

2. The preliminary rezoning concept has been lodged by Wesco Projects Pty Ltd, consisting of a written submission prepared by Byrnes PDM, planning consultants, on behalf of the owners of the subject site and a set of architectural concept plans (refer to Attachment 2), showing a possible outcome of built form associated with the suggested rezoning. The proposal seeks;

(a) To rezone the site to B4 Mixed Use, with a height limit of 60 metres (20 storeys) and,

(b) Inclusion of the site in the Auto Alley Precinct and amendment of the boundary of the Parramatta City Centre LEP to include the subject site and,

3. Further information provided by the applicant in support of the proposal is included in Attachment 1 and a copy of the applicant’s submission is available on request.

4. The applicant has also lodged the proposal as a submission to the public consultation of preliminary development options for Auto Alley that was recently held by Parramatta City and Holroyd Councils, together with the Sydney Metropolitan Development Authority (SMDA).

Auto Alley

5. Council considered a report concerning the options for the urban renewal of the Auto Alley precinct at its meeting on 23 July 2012, following a public consultation period where options from both Council and the SMDA were available for comment.

6. Council at that meeting endorsed Option 2B, which provides for a balanced approach including preserving commercial land to ensure job targets are achieved for the City Centre, whilst providing for some high density residential uses to create a vibrant and amenable precinct and to act as a stimulus for precinct improvements and redevelopment. Adjoining the eastern boundary of the subject land, Council’s endorsed option proposes mixed use development with a height of up to 6 storeys.

7. Council’s endorsed option does not include the subject site, as Council opposes increasing development potential in this area west of Auto Alley. This highly restricted area is constrained by existing strata subdivision developments, small lots, narrow roads, a large number of landowners, heritage items and a heritage conservation area (South Parramatta Conservation Area).

8. The SMDA’s exhibited option extends to a wider area surrounding Auto Alley, including the subject site, and proposes higher density residential development of up to 6 storeys as a possibility in this wider area.

9. Council, at its meeting on 23 July 2012, resolved to advise the SMDA and the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure of its objection to amending the planning controls for this area west of Auto Alley.

CURRENT PLANNING CONTROLS

10. The subject land is currently zoned R4 High Density Residential under the Parramatta LEP 2011, with a maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of 0.8:1 and building height of 11 metres (3 storeys). The adjoining heritage conservation area is zoned R3 Medium Density Residential, with a FSR of 0.8:1 and a height control of 11m that permits 2 storeys and an attic for townhouse development.

11. Height limits of 2-3 storeys have been retained for land within and in close proximity of the South Parramatta Heritage Conservation Area.

12. The eastern boundary of the site adjoins the area included within the Parramatta City Centre LEP 2007 and the Auto Alley precinct, which is currently zoned B5 Business Development, with a maximum height of 12 metres and FSR of 2:1.

ISSUES

13. Attachment 1 provides a detailed assessment of the preliminary rezoning concept submission. The key issues are summarised below:

Land Use Planning

· The applicant has requested a B4 Mixed Use zoning, yet the anticipated development of the site is for high density residential development.

· The height and density sought by the applicant is significantly greater than the current controls allow and is also substantially in excess of future options under consideration in this location as part of the review of the Auto Alley precinct.

· Whilst a proposed floor space ratio (FSR) has not been nominated by the applicant, the architectural concept plans provide for a gross floor area (GFA) of 32,400 square metres, suggesting a FSR approximating 5.7:1.

· The subject site is situated between the Church Street Auto Alley precinct and the South Parramatta Heritage Conservation Area. No transition in scale has been provided between these two areas.

· The applicant suggests that under Council’s vision for Auto Alley, development on the adjoining land on the eastern side of the subject site could be developed with a substantial increase in height and density, which would produce unreasonable impacts on the subject site. However, Council’s adopted option 2B proposes 6 storeys for the adjoining land on the eastern side of the subject site and development of the subject land to the currently permitted height of 3 storeys would provide an appropriate transition in scale from the Auto Alley precinct towards the lower rise heritage area to the west. A 20 storey development, with a potential FSR of 5.7:1 would be entirely inconsistent with such a transition.

Urban Design

· Inadequate urban design rationale has been provided for the height, scale and massing of the preliminary concept.

· Preliminary building envelope testing indicates significant extent and impact of overshadowing.

· SEPP 65 – Residential Flat Design Code compliance needs to be demonstrated. (This impacts on building envelopes, setbacks, building separation etc and achievable FSR).

Traffic

· A traffic impact assessment has not been provided with the submission and is required to address the impact of traffic generation and parking associated with the proposed scale and density of development on the subject land on the road network and intersections.

Flooding

· The submission does not address the flood constraints of the site.

· The subject land is flood prone and would be significantly impacted by a 1:100 year flood event. Additionally, part of the site is categorised as high hydraulic hazard and falls within a high risk flood precinct. Development would be required to address Council’s Flood Risk Management Policy.

Heritage

· The subject land directly adjoins the South Parramatta Conservation Area and two heritage listed items (I509 and I510) and is in the vicinity of several other heritage items (I511, I 512 and I467).

· The submission has not provided an analysis of the heritage impact of the proposal on the adjoining heritage conservation area and nearby heritage items.

· Concern is raised that the proposed height and density is significantly out of character and will adversely impact on the heritage values of the conservation area and heritage items.

CONCLUSION

14. Whilst more detailed technical studies and investigations would be required to support different aspects of a planning proposal for the subject site, including traffic, flooding, heritage, urban design and amenity, building height and floor space ratio, the preliminary assessment of the rezoning concept has raised concerns about the appropriateness of the proposal.

15. Any proposal on the subject land must address the concerns raised in this report and be an appropriate use, with a height and density to transition from the proposed high density commercial nature of Auto Alley to the low density heritage significant residential area to the west.

16. It is not recommended that Council endorse the applicant’s preliminary rezoning concept as it is inconsistent with Council’s adopted option for the renewal of the Auto Alley precinct and further is considered to be of excessive height and density.

Sue Stewart

Senior Project Officer

Land Use Planning

Attachments:

1 View	Detailed Report 12-20 Dixon Street	9 Pages
2 View	Architectural Concept 12-20 Dixon Street	5 Pages

REFERENCE MATERIAL

Council (Development) 13 August 2012 Item 12.1

ENVIRONMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE

ITEM NUMBER 12.1

SUBJECT Land Acquisition for Widening of Penelope Lucas Lane Rosehill

REFERENCE DA/635/2004 - D02439921

REPORT OF Acting Manager Strategic Asset & Property Management

PURPOSE:

The report recommends Council accept dedication / transfer of 100.6 sq m of land for the purpose of widening of Penelope Lucas Lane Rosehill, as shown as Lot 101 DP 1099529 in Attachment 1.

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council resolve to accept dedication / transfer of Lot 101 DP 1099529 for the purpose of road widening of Penelope Lucas Lane on terms as stated in this report.

(b) Further, that the Lord Mayor and Chief Executive Officer be authorised to execute under seal the Transfer and linen plan if required for dedication of Lot 101 DP 1099529 for road widening.

BACKGROUND

1. In 1999, Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 28, Harris Park Precinct identified that a 2 metres wide portion (100.6 sq m) at 102-108 James Ruse Drive Rosehill be acquired by the Council for road widening of Penelope Lucas Lane.

2. In 2005, a Development Consent (DA/635/2004) for a high rise commercial / residential development at 102-108 James Ruse Drive Rosehill was approved. No provision was included in the Development Consent obliging the developer to negotiate a transfer of the subject land to the Council.

3. The developer was aware of such planning requirement following discussion with Council officers and created Lot 101 DP 1099529 (Attachment 1) in 2006 for future negotiation with the Council.

4. For information, the commercial / residential development was completed in early 2012 and is in occupation.

CONSEQUENCES

5. An agreement is now reached with the developer to dedicate / transfer the land to widen Penelope Lucas Lane at nominal consideration, on condition that, Council will carry out and complete footpath construction in the current financial year and be responsible for the costs of land dedication / transfer.

CONSULTATION & TIMING

6. The Council’s Civil Infrastructure Unit is fully supportive of the subject land dedication for road widening and has programmed construction work to be done in the current financial year.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATION FOR COUNCIL

7. Council will be responsible for costs relating to land dedication / transfer and construction of the footpath. Total estimated cost is $11,340 and is allowed for in the 2012/13 operational budget.

8. No compensation for the subject land dedication will be payable.

Darren Wood

Acting Manager Strategic Asset & Property Management

Attachments:

1 View

DP 1099529

1 Page

Council (Development) 13 August 2012 Item 13.1

GOVERNANCE AND CORPORATE

ITEM NUMBER 13.1

SUBJECT Tender # 15 / 2012 - Consultant Services for Knowledge Management Project

REFERENCE F2012/01193 - D02442620

REPORT OF Manager Information Communication Technology

PURPOSE:

To advise Council of the evaluation results for Tender 15/2012 for

the Consultant Services for Knowledge Management Project

RECOMMENDATION

(a) That Council decline all the tender proposals received for the Consultant Services for Knowledge Management Project ( Tender # 15/2012 )

(b) That Council will undertake the Knowledge Management project utilizing internal resources and will seek external assistance as and when required.

BACKGROUND

1. Knowledge Management (KM) project is one of 17 projects identified as part of the Information Communication Technology (ICT) Plan to help Parramatta City Council (PCC) achieve its Parramatta Twenty25 Vision and Future Pathways Strategy.

Knowledge Management project objective is to deliver solutions that will improve Parramatta City Council business operations both internally and externally. Specifically the KM project will deliver:

· A culture of knowledge capture, sharing and collaboration.

· Improved accessibility to accurate information and services.

· Access to all Knowledge via a simple and quick single point of access.

· Search-ability across all knowledge base

· Consistent business processes.

· Improved usability of knowledge systems

2. The scope of work that was published included Policy Review and Recommendations, System Review & Recommendations, Development and implementation of Awareness and Training Program and Change Management.

3. Council went to market with knowledge management Expression of Interest ( EOI ) # 08/2012 on 06 March 2012.The objective of this Expression of Interest was to enable Parramatta City Council to generate a shortlist of skilled and competent Consultant firms to work with Council to deliver the published scope of work.

4. The Evaluation panel for this Express of Interest was comprised of Darren Wood (Manager Customer Relations ＆ Comms); Elios Alexoulis (ICT Manager); Jennifer O’Donnell (Service Manager Governance, Quality ＆ Performance); Ismael Teylan (ICT Project Office Team Leader); Nick Murphie (Service Mgr-Comms ＆ Marketing) and Joseph George (Record Mgmt System Officer). The Evaluation panel was supported by the Noel Clarke (Procurement Advisor) and Savinder Sondhi (ICT Business Analyst).

5. The evaluation panel met on 16th April 12 to discuss all the EOI responses received and based on initial analysis panel unanimously rejected 8 proponents out of 11. The Evaluation Panel short listed 3 proponents which were Votar Partners, Space Logic Pty Ltd and Record keeping Innovation Pty Ltd

6. The short listed proponents were invited for selected tender process, tender # 15/2012. Tender document was circulated on 17th May 12 and closed on 06 June 12. The evaluation panel met again on 22nd June to assess all the tender responses. Amanda Diepeveen the newly appointed Service Manager Business Information Services was included as an additional member of the panel.

7. Initial assessment of responses for compliance with the tender requirements showed that Record Keeping Innovation Pty Ltd submission was deemed non-compliant as the proponent did not submit all the required tender schedules. Therefore panel agreed to reject Record Keeping Innovation Pty Ltd submission.

8. The Evaluation panel proceeded to evaluate the two complying proponents by assessing the submitted tender schedules.

9. The following criteria were used to evaluate the remaining two tender submissions:

0	fail to satisfy required standards
1	marginally adequate (lower quartile)
2	acceptable (third quartile)
3	good, better than average (second quartile)
4	very good (top quartile)
5	excellent (top five percentile)

10. Tenders were assessed in accordance with Council’s Tendering Policy and Guidelines using the Value Select Method, which provides a mechanism for objectively scoring price and non-price criteria. A breakdown of the score is shown below:-

Criteria	Votar Partners	Space Logic Pty Ltd
Lump Sum Tender Price Submitted	$153,240	$186,450
Policy Review and Recommendations	3	1
System Review & Recommendations	1	3
Awareness and Training Program	2	1
Change Management	1	1
Price	2	1
Relevant Experience	2	2
Total	11	9

11. Based on the result above Votar scored 36% and Space logic scored 30% against possible total of 100 percent.

12. The tender from Votar Partner was considered to be strong in Policy requirements but demonstrated lack of expert skill required to deliver Council System requirements hence Votar proposed to work with a third party vendor. However Space Logic Pty Ltd demonstrated expertise in System area but was deem inexperienced in Policy area and Space Logic Pty Ltd also outsourced major requirements to third party vendor. Panel also concluded that both the proponents did not demonstrate value for money.

13. Therefore panel was of the view that both the proposals received for Knowledge Management tender shows different level of expertise in each area of the requirements. The panel was of the view that none of the proposal can provide the best outcome for the project that Council is expecting.

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

REFERENCE MATERIAL

	Councillor / Member Annual Fee		Mayor / Chairperson Annual Fee
	Minimum	Maximum	Minimum	Maximum
Major City	$15,490	$25,580	$32,940	$74,530

1 View	Non-Confidential Plans	23 Pages
2	Confidential Plans	26 Pages