Lane Cove Council

 

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council

 

 

 

AGENDA

 

 

 

DATE OF MEETING:          3 December 2007

 

LOCATION:                          Council Chambers

 

TIME:                                     6.30pm.  Note. If members of the public are not interested in any business recommended by the General Manager to be considered in Closed Session or there is no such business, Council will ordinarily commence consideration of all other business at 7pm.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Meetings held in the Council Chambers are recorded on tape for the purposes of verifying the accuracy of minutes and the tapes are not disclosed to any third party under section 12(6) of the Local Government Act, except as allowed under section 18(1) or section 19(1) of the PPIP Act, or where Council is compelled to do so by court order, warrant or subpoena or by any other legislation.

 

 

Lane Cove Council business papers and minutes are available on Council’s website www.lanecove.nsw.gov.au.

 


ORDINARY COUNCIL

 

3 DECEMBER 2007

 

 

 

ITEM                                                  REPORT CONTENT                                                PAGE

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

APOLOGIES

 

OPENING OF MEETING WITH PRAYER

 

MATTERS RECOMMENDED BY THE GENERAL MANAGER TO BE CONSIDERED IN CLOSED COMMITTEE

 

Confidential Items

 

1.       Human Services Division Report No. 28

SUBJECT: Tender for the Rebuilding of the Girl Guides Hall

It is recommended that the Council close so much of the meeting to the public as provided for under Section 10A(2) (c) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that 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; it further being considered that discussion of the matter in open meeting would be, on balance, contrary to public interest by reason of the foregoing and Tender details, should they be revealed, may result in commercial disadvantage to parties involved in the tender process.
Some information provided to Council by tenderers is provided on the basis that Council will treat it as commercial in confidence.  It is not in the public interest to reveal all details of these tenders or the assessment process.  Tenderers have provided sensitive information about their operations in the confidence that their details wil not be made public by Council.  The practice of publication of sensitive information provided by tenderers could result in the withholding of such information by tenderers and reduction in the provision of information relevant to Council's decision.

  

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS

 

At the first meeting (first Monday) of each month, people who wish to address Council on any matter in a report on the agenda for that meeting (for a maximum of three minutes) be allowed to do so at the conclusion of Closed Committee or if there is no Closed Committee at the commencement of the meeting.

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

2.      ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING - 19 NOVEMBER 2007

 

Referred Reports

 

4.       Environmental Services Division Report No. 49

SUBJECT: 1 NUNDAH STREET, LANE COVE

T
he Inspection Committee will meet to inspect the site on 1 December 2007. The matter will then be further considered by Council.

Corporate Services Division Reports

 

3.       Corporate Services Division Report No. 59

SUBJECT: Policy on Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors

 

4.       Corporate Services Division Report No. 60

SUBJECT: Metro Pool Achievements 2006 - 2007

 

5.       Corporate Services Division Report No. 61

SUBJECT: On-line Certificates Project

 

Environmental Services Division Reports

 

6.       Environmental Services Division Report No. 510

SUBJECT: 24-28 Lane Cove Plaza, Lane Cove

 

7.       Environmental Services Division Report No. 48

SUBJECT: 16 Private Road, Northwood

 

Human Services Division Reports

 

8.       Human Services Division Report No. 27

SUBJECT: Community Partnership with  NSW Cancer Council

  

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

 

***** END OF AGENDA *****

 

              


ORDINARY COUNCIL

 

CORPORATE SERVICES DIVISION REPORT NO. 59

 

3 DECEMBER 2007

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council at the Meeting 3 December 2007

28/11/2007 to Ordinary Council

Corporate Services Division Report No. 59

Subject:           Policy on Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors    

Record No:     SU834 - 36434/07

Author(s):       Ian Naylor 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The purpose of this report is to advise that Council is required under Section 252 of the Local Government Act 1993, to annually adopt a policy on the Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors.

 

Discussion

 

During 2006, new legislation was enacted by the NSW State Government requiring councils to review their policy on the Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors in line with policy guidelines distributed by the Department of Local Government.  Council at its Meeting on 3 October 2006, amended its policy based on the guidelines issued and gave public notice for 28 days as required by the legislation.  Council subsequently adopted the policy on 4 December 2006, unamended as no submissions were received and submitted the adopted policy to the Department of Local Government, as shown attached as AT1.

 

Council is required under Section 252 of the Local Government Act 1993 to annually adopt a policy on the Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors.  Council can resolve to either; (1) adopt the current policy and forward to the Department of Local Government or (2) amend the current policy and give public notice of the amended policy and provide the Department of Local Government with documentation relating to the policy and public notice process in accordance with Section 253 of the Local Government Act 1993, as shown below:-

 

“(1) A council must give public notice of its intention to adopt or amend a policy for the payment of expenses or provision of facilities allowing at least 28 days for the making of public submissions.

 

(2) Before adopting or amending the policy, the council must consider any submissions made within the time allowed for submissions and make any appropriate changes to the draft policy or amendment.

 

(3) Despite subsections (1) and (2), a council need not give public notice of a proposed amendment to its policy for the payment of expenses or provision of facilities if the council is of the opinion that the proposed amendment is not substantial.

 

(4) Within 28 days after adopting a policy or making an amendment to a policy for which public notice is required to be given under this section, a council is to forward to the Director-General:

 

(a) a copy of the policy or amendment together with details of all submissions received in accordance with subsection (1), and

(b) a statement setting out, for each submission, the council’s response to the submission and the reasons for the council’s response, and

(c) a copy of the notice given under subsection (1).

 

(5) A council must comply with this section when proposing to adopt a policy each year in accordance with section 252 (1) even if the council proposes to adopt a policy that is the same as its existing policy.”

 

It is not recommended that any changes be made to the existing policy and therefore Council may readopt the existing policy without advertising.

 

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:-

 

1.   Adopt the current policy on the Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors, dated 28 November 2006, as shown attached as AT1.

 

2.   Send a copy of the Policy on Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors to the Department of Local Government.

     

 

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Wrightson

Executive Manager

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Adopted Policy on Payment of Expenses and Facilities to Councillors

5 Pages

 

 

 


ORDINARY COUNCIL

 

CORPORATE SERVICES DIVISION REPORT NO. 60

 

3 DECEMBER 2007

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council at the Meeting 3 December 2007

28/11/2007 to Ordinary Council

Corporate Services Division Report No. 60

Subject:           Metro Pool Achievements 2006 - 2007    

Record No:     SU1568 - 36483/07

Author(s):       Craig Wrightson 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The purpose of this report is to provide detail on the progress and recent achievements of Metro Pool, a full copy of the 2006/07 Annual Report is has been circulated separately to Councillors.

 

2006/07 was a very successful year for Metro Pool from both a claims management and financial perspective.  Metro Pool recorded strong investment returns while claims continue to be well managed.  Well controlled costs resulted in a healthy year end surplus and the Pool now holds a combined surplus exceeding $4 million.

 

Background

 

Councillors would be aware that Council obtains its Public Liability Professional Indemnity and Insurances through Metro Pool, a joint insurance arrangement involving seven councils. Metro Pool was formed in 1990 when one the most unpredictable expenses for councils in New South Wales was public liability and professional indemnity insurance. By pooling insurance resources and exercising real control over risk, members can achieve significant cost savings and longer term budget stability for their ratepayers.

 

The Metro Pool Board is the principle body responsible for the operation and implementation of Metro Pool's purpose and to ensure the financial viability of the Group.

 

Each Member Council has two delegates, one being the elected Mayor, an elected representative and the other the General Manager or his/her nominee being a permanent employee of each Council. The Mayor, Councillor Ian Longbottom is currently Council’s representative, and is also the Vice Chairman of Metro Pool.

 

Discussion

 

The following outlines some of the key achievement throughout 2006/7 by Metro Pool.

 

‘Spirit of APRA’ Program

 

This project will enable Metro Pool to achieve its long term strategy of meeting the minimal capital requirements of an APRA approved insurance mutual.  Although Metro Pool is not subject to APRA, the Board decided in 2007 that it should strive to meet the ‘Spirit of APRA’ and adopt all requirements relating to financial stability and good governance.  Metro Pool engaged a consultant to help the organisation develop a three-year action plan and Metro Pool is pleased to report that the large majority of actions have been achieved within the first year.

 

As part of the APRA program, Metro Pool has developed its own risk management plan and enterprise risk management model.  In addition it has adopted an outsourcing policy, fit and proper policy and investment strategy.  Finally, to ensure the long term viability of the organisation, it has developed a business continuity plan.

 

Improved Financial Position

 

Metro Pool is in a strong financial position with reserves to cover all outstanding liabilities and a prudential margin in excess of 20%.  Under the ‘Spirit of APRA’ program, Metro Pool would be expected to hold $5 million in surplus of its claims reserves and Metro Pool expects to reach this target in 2008.

 

In 2005, Metro Pool adopted an investment policy to invest almost all its available funds in an investment portfolio based on 70% cash and 30% growth.  Funds remain invested and are only drawn down as they are required to pay monthly accounts.

 

During 2006/07 Metro Pool’s total investment portfolio exceeded $10 million which injected a further $1 million investment income into the Pool operations.

 

United Independent Pools

 

In August 2007 the members of both Metro Pool and West Pool participated in the first United Independent Pools Forum.  This was a great success and a small working team are presently developing a long term strategy document for the joint organisation.

 

United Independent Pools now provides property cover for our $2.5 billion worth of assets including a Pool-funded valuation program and an annual safety audit program for our major buildings using the engineering expertise of our partner, Affiliated FM.

 

In 2006 the members commenced a self insured Fidelity Guarantee fund to cover fraud and corporate theft.  This action saved members $100,000 in insurance premiums.  This has been channelled into a separate fund to pay future claims and it is expected the fund will be self funded by 2009.

 

In December 2006 representatives of the joint Pools met with the Minister for Local Government to outline our achievements and discuss our plans for future growth.  The Minister was impressed with our ongoing achievements and it was pleasing to see that Metro Pool and West Pool have featured largely as an example of excellence in the Department’s recent document on successful strategic alliance.

 

The members of both Pools continue to work together to develop a full range of quality risk management products to meet members’ needs.

 

Insurance Renewals

 

Metro Pool and United Independent Pools (UIP) have now developed a wide range of insurance products and deliver these through the insurance pool structure.  Where appropriate, reinsurance is obtained and the collective buying power is used to negotiate cost effective premiums.

Metro Pool and United Independent Pools (UIP) currently provide the following classes of insurance:-

 

§ Public Liability/Professional Indemnity

§ Councillors, Directors & Officers Cover

§ Property Cover

§ Fidelity Guarantee

§ Personal Accident

§ Corporate Travel

§ Motor Vehicle

 

As part of the most recent renewal, the self insured retention for public liability/professional indemnity was increased to $1,000,000, which achieved a $250,000 saving in premium. The saving has been transferred to reserve to fund the additional self insured risk.

 

Statistics show that the Civil Liability Act has reduced the costs for Local Government which means that large public liability claims are less likely than five years ago.  In addition Metro Pool has invested considerable effort and funds into risk management strategies and training to build awareness of professional indemnity risks which remain our greatest risk.

 

Conclusion

 

Metro Pool is approaching 20 years of operation and it continues to provide services and insurance products which are of great benefit to Council. The knowledge gained by members through taking ownership of their risks has resulted in members being regarded as best practice when it comes to Local Government risk solutions. Metro Pool, West Pool and United Independent Pools are now well placed to market products to other councils who have the same high level of commitment to risk management excellence.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the report be received and noted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Wrightson

Executive Manager

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Metropool Annual Report 2006 - 2007

18 Pages

 

 

 


ORDINARY COUNCIL

 

CORPORATE SERVICES DIVISION REPORT NO. 61

 

3 DECEMBER 2007

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council at the Meeting 3 December 2007

28/11/2007 to Ordinary Council

Corporate Services Division Report No. 61

Subject:           On-line Certificates Project    

Record No:     SU2690 - 36553/07

Author(s):       Craig Wrightson 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council has implemented a new on-line conveyancing certificates module, which is the first in Australia to provide instant access to certificates.  It is proposed during the Council meeting to provide a short demonstration to Councillors of the system.  It is recommended the report be received and noted.

 

Background

 

Last year as part of the Federal Government Regulation Reduction Incentive Fund (RRIF), Council obtained funding to work with its main software vendor, Civica, to implement an on-line conveyancing certificates module.  This module provides the public with the opportunity to apply and receive section 603 rating certificates and section 149 zoning certificates.  The project took some 13 months to complete and it is believed that Council is the first in Australia to provide instant access to certificates. 

 

Discussion

 

The system went live on Council’s website http://www.lanecove.nsw.gov.au/certificates on 2 October 2007.  It is currently configured to provide: -

 

§ Instant access to s603 Rating Certificates

§ Next business day delivery of s149 Planning (Zoning) Certificates. (Instant access coming with new L.E.P.)

§ Online ordering of Outstanding Notices & Orders Certificates

 

The key design features of the system are: -

 

§ Easy to use customer interface

§ Ability for staff to generate and despatch certificates electronically by email in addition to conventional means.

§ High levels of electronic security and an online checking facility.  In this regard it is compliant with the NSW Government Chief Information Office, Digital Signature Guidelines.

 

It is proposed during the Council meeting to provide a short demonstration to Councillors of the system. 

 

Feedback about the project has been positive with feedback from staff indicating that it is “easier to generate a Certificate now compared to the old way where you had to swap between Authority and Microsoft Word” and from general users that it is the “easiest Certificate Request method seen offered by a Council” and “unbelievably quick/fast response from Council”

 

Council has marketed the On-line Certificates by sending letters to companies who have lodged applications for certificates in the past twelve months and the inclusion of a flyer with each paper certificate issued.  At this stage, some 38% of certificates are being lodged on-line and this is expected to grow.

 

Conclusion

 

The project has been a success and is a significant achievement by Council, particularly given our size.  It is particularly pleasing that it was able to be achieved with no direct costs to develop the project incurred by Council.

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the report be received and noted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Wrightson

Executive Manager

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

   


ORDINARY COUNCIL

 

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION REPORT NO. 510

 

3 DECEMBER 2007

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council at the Meeting 3 December 2007

23/11/2007 to Ordinary Council

Environmental Services Division Report No. 510

Subject:           24-28 Lane Cove Plaza, Lane Cove    

Record No:     DA04/246 - 35968/07

Author(s):       Michael Mason 

 

 

Property:                      24-28 Lane Cove Plaza, Lane Cove

 

DA No:                        DA246/04D

 

Date Lodged:               10 August 2007

 

Cost of Work:              N/A

 

Owner :                       Fabcot Pty Ltd

 

Author:                         Hansen Partnership Pty Ltd (Mr Brad Roeleven)

 

 

 

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL TO APPEAR ON DETERMINATION

Modification to Development Consent 246/04 for the demolition of existing structures (except the original Lane Cove Library building) and construction of a mixed use development comprising a multi level car park, supermarket, library extension, retail plaza and CBD housing.

ZONE

Part 3(a), Part 5(a) and part unzoned road under LEP 1987

IS THE PROPOSAL PERMISSIBLE WITHIN THE ZONE?

Yes

IS THE PROPERTY A HERITAGE ITEM?

Yes

IS THE PROPERTY WITHIN A CONSERVATION AREA?

No

DOES DCP 1- BUSHLAND APPLY TO THE PROPERTY?

Yes

BCA CLASSIFICATION

Class 9B Library, Class 6 Retail, Class 7A Carpark, Class 2 Residential, Class 5 Office.

STOP THE CLOCK USED

No

NOTIFICATION

In relation to the DA, to the extent that the following would not be covered by Council’s policy for notification, that notification of the DA was given to the following residents, groups or organisations and they were invited to make a submission on the DA:

(a)     the residents of Morrice, Austin and Sera Sts;

(b)     Lane Cove Public School, St Michael’s School and Currumbeena School;

(c)     surrounding pre-schools and kindergartens including: Birrahlee Kindergarten, Lane Cove House, 100 Acre Woods;

(d)     the Sustainable Action Committee and the Access committee ;

(e)     resident and community associations;

(f)      RASAD, the Chamber of Commerce and the Main Street Committee, and

(g)     the Bushland and Conservation Society and shopkeepers in the Plaza and on Longueville Road.

 

Copies of the DA and plans were made available for inspection at Council, at the library and were available on  Council’s website.

 

 

REASON FOR REFERRAL:

 

This application is referred to Council as the original application was determined by the full Council.

 

EXECUTIVE MANAGER’S INTRODUCTORY COMMENT:

 

Notwithstanding that the Fabcot development consent (issued 2005) can now commence the applicant has sought to fine tune and add value to the current approval.

 

Amendments are proposed to the design and presentation of the building and a number of the approved consent conditions.  The proposed amendments, although minor, given the scale of the overall development must be formally considered by Council as the consent authority.

 

Given that Council is a stakeholder in the final structure it is appropriate that an independent assessment be undertaken of the amendments proposed and recommendations made for Council’s consideration.

 

Council will recall that Mr. Roeleven of Hansen Partnership Pty. Ltd. provided independent assessment of the original and subsequent Sec 96 applications.  Mr. Roeleven given his understanding of the proposed development and the site has again been engaged to independently assess the current application.

 

REPORT BY BRAD ROELEVEN, HANSEN PARTNERSHIP

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The layout of this report generally follows the standard format used by Lane Cove Council. In general terms the report:

·       Provides a description of the site and surrounds

·       Outlines of the modification sought by the applicant

·       Summarises prior applications over the development site

·       Notes the results of internal and external referrals

·       Identifies the relevant planning controls and polices to be considered in the assessment

·       Assesses the application for compliance with those planning controls and policies

·       Considers the likely impacts of the development

·       Outlines the results of the public consultation process

·       Draws a conclusion on the proposal

·       Provides a recommendation for the consideration of Council    

 

Part of the development site is owned by Lane Cove Council. Consequently Hansen Partnership Pty Ltd has been retained to provide Council with an independent town planning assessment of this application, including the preparation of this report. Hansen Partnership has been assisted in this process by a consultant team.  This team, and their roles, are:

 

CONSULTANT

              EXPERTISE

Parsons Brinckerhoff

Traffic and pedestrian management (AT1)

Archnex Designs

Heritage impact assessment (AT2)

Accessibility Solutions Pty Ltd

Access consultants (AT3)

 

Additional assessment was also provided by staff of Lane Cove Council.

 

In broad terms the proposed modifications can be divided into two components:

 

1.         Changes to the wording of certain conditions, and

 

2.         Changes to the design and presentation of the building.

 

Largely the proposed changes to the conditions are considered acceptable, excepting those relating to the

 

·    Construction Management Plan;

·    noise level restrictions for demolition works; and

·    hours of construction. 

 

The extent of the proposed architectural modifications is considered minor and, if approved, would not fundamentally alter the form, scale, presentation and operation of the building as originally approved.

 

BACKGROUND DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION D246/04

 

At its meeting on 20 December 2004 Council resolved to grant approval to Development Application 246/04 for the demolition of all structures over the site, excepting the original Lane Cove Library building, to permit the construction of a mixed use development comprising: 

 

·       A 3 level car park providing 335 spaces.

·       A supermarket and associated administration area.

·       1,564m2 of specialty retail space and associated mall linking the Lane Cove Plaza with Longueville Road. 

·       2,549m2 extension to the existing Lane Cove Public Library.

·       10 dwellings over 2 levels set above the retail ground level.

·       A new Link Road along the western boundary of the site, between Austin and Sera Streets.   providing access to the new multi level car park.

·       Signage and landscaping.

 

Various modifications to this consent were subsequently granted by Council at meetings on 18 April 2005 and 17 October 2005.

 

An appeal to the Land and Environment Court challenging the validity of Council’s approval of Development Application 246/04 was dismissed in August 2005. A subsequent appeal of that judgment, to the Supreme Court, lead to the original consent being suspended while Council considered a separate development application for the construction of a new drop-off lane in Austin Street for Lane Cove Public School. That separate application was approved by Council at its meeting on 17 July 2006, following which the Land and Environment Court re-granted consent to Development Application 246/04.     

 

THE SITE

 

The development site comprises 27 allotments in private and public ownership, as well as unzoned road. When consolidated, this land forms an irregular shaped development site with frontages to Lane Cove Plaza, Longueville Road and Austin Street.  Currently this site supports the former Clancy’s supermarket and an adjacent shop (both vacant) fronting Lane Cove Plaza, the heritage listed Lane Cove Library building addressing Longueville Road, the Austin Street car park and an adjacent dwelling house (No.7 Austin Street).

 

Total site area is in the order of about 6,300m2. Site topography varies but generally the land falls away from both Lane Cove Plaza and Longueville Road. Numerous trees exist within the open Austin Street car park. Existing vehicular access to the development site is from Austin Street or a vehicular link extending east from Sera Street behind the Lane Cove Plaza commercial premises. The Austin Street car park is connected to the Lane Cove Plaza by a wide pathway adjacent the former Clancy’s supermarket, while Library Place provides access to Longueville Road.  

 

THIS PROPOSAL

 

Modifications for which consent is sought under this application

 

This application seeks consent to:

 

(a)     Modify the terms or content of various conditions within the consent notice; and

(b)     Modify the approved plans by:

 

·        To Austin Street, screening to the previously open levels of the car park, changes in fenestration and enlargement of the Library plant room.

·        To Link Road, changes to fenestration, screening to the open car park levels, changes to the mix of materials and detailing. Visual relief and interest to this elevation is now achieved through an emphasis on vertical rather than horizontal design elements.

·        To the Plaza elevation, the composition of the façade has been altered to include more vertical elements consistent with the detailing in many of the existing adjoining buildings.

·        To the public walkway elevation near to the Library entry, an increase in the rooftop library plant room and the northern façade of the retail shopfronts.

·        To Council Lane, changes in the external detailing and lower level blockwork.

·        Articulation of the eastern façade of the residential level. 

 

EXTERNAL REFERRALS

 

No referrals to external agencies or authorities were required in relation to this application.

 

INTERNAL REFERRALS

 

No objection raised to the proposal.

 

Library Manager

 

Council’s Manager Library Services has not raised any objection to the application.

 

Environmental Health Officer

 

Comments from the Environmental Health Officer are noted in the discussions regarding proposed amendments to Conditions 42 and 154 later in this report.

 

Health and Building Surveyor

 

The purpose of this referral is to consider the proposal relative to the requirements of the Building Code of Australia. No objections were raised subject to compliance with existing conditions within the consent notice.

STATUTORY CONSIDERATIONS

 

Sections 96(2), 96(3) and 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 are required to be considered in the assessment of this proposal.

 

The assessment of original Development Application 246/04 also had regard to:

 

·       State Environmental Planning Policy 1 – Development Standards

·       State Environmental Planning Policy 11 – Traffic Generating Development

·       State Environmental Planning Policy 55 –  Remediation of Land

·       State Environmental Planning Policy 64 – Advertising and Signage

·       State Environmental Planning Policy 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development.

·       Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Application of Development Standards) 2004

·       Draft State Environmental Planning Policy 66 – Integration of Land Use and Transport

·       Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 1987

·       Lane Cove Business Zones Development Control Plan

·       Lane Cove Development Control Plan 4 – Site Waste Management and Minimisation

·       Lane Cove Development Control Plan 5 – Access and Mobility

·       Lane Cove Landscape Guidelines

·       Lane Cove Tree Policy

·       Section 94 Contributions Plans

 

These instruments, codes and policies are referenced as required throughout this report.

 

COMPLIANCE WITH STATUTORY CONTROLS

 

Is Council able to modify a development consent ? 

 

Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 addresses modifications to a development consent. It provides that Council may modify a consent if:

 

“(a)     it is satisfied that the development to which the consent as modified relates is substantially the same development as the development for which consent was originally granted and before that consent as originally granted was modified (if at all), and

(b)      it has consulted with the relevant Minister, public authority or approval body (within the meaning of Division 5) in respect of a condition imposed as a requirement of a concurrence to the consent or in accordance with the general terms of an approval proposed to be granted by the approval body and that Minister, authority or body has not, within 21 days after being consulted, objected to the modification of that consent, and

(c)      it has notified the application in accordance with:

(i)         the regulations, if the regulations so require, or

(ii)        a development control plan, if the consent authority is a council that has made a development control plan under section 72 that requires the notification or advertising of applications for modification of a development consent, and

(d)      it has considered any submissions made concerning the proposed modification within the period prescribed by the regulations or provided by the development control plan, as the case may be.”

 

In response to the above criteria it is noted that:

 

·       The modifications would not result in any substantial change to the development as it is currently approved.

·       No consultation with any Minister, public authority or approval body is required.

·       Notification of this proposal has been undertaken as required.

·       Consideration of public submissions is provided and comments are provided under the Public Submissions section of this report.

 

What matters are relevant when considering an application to modify a consent ? 

 

Section 96(3) of the Act requires that in determining an application for the modification of a consent, Council must take into consideration such of the matters referred to in section 79C (1) of the Act  as are of relevance to the development the subject of the application. 

 

Section 79C(1) addresses the evaluation of a development application, and identifies the matters to be considered by Council when assessing a development application, being:

 

 

“(a)   the provisions of:

(i)      any environmental planning instrument, and

(ii)     any draft environmental planning instrument that is or has been placed on public exhibition and details of which have been notified to the consent authority (unless the Director-General has notified the consent authority that the making of the draft instrument has been deferred indefinitely or has not been approved), and

(iii)   any development control plan, and

(iiia) any planning agreement that has been entered into under section 93F, or any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under section 93F, and

(iv)    the regulations (to the extent that they prescribe matters for the purposes of this paragraph), that apply to the land to which the development application relates,

(b)     the likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impacts in the locality,

(c)     the suitability of the site for the development,

(d)     any submissions made in accordance with this Act or the regulations,

(e)     the public interest.”

 

These matters are addressed below.

 

CONSIDERATION OF THE APPLICATION

 

This section of the report identifies and assesses the modifications to Development Consent 246/04 sought by the applicant.

 

Amendments to conditions of consent

 

Condition 5

 

This condition addresses the need for the Construction Management Plan to be approved by Council and the Local Traffic Committee prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. This condition currently reads as follows:

 

5.    A revised Construction Management Plan shall be approved by Lane Cove Council and the Local Traffic Committee prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. This plan shall incorporate all relevant measures arising from the Pedestrian Management Plan and any other matters raised within this Notice.

 

Note that the Construction Management Plan shall provide for 2 x 60 minute curfew periods for heavy vehicles including delivery vehicles and demolition and excavation trucks. These curfews shall coincide with the start (8.15am-9.15am) and finish times (2.45pm - 3.45pm) of Lane Cove Public School on school days.

 

The Construction Management Plan shall also address circumstances when the curfew might need to be relaxed to accommodate extenuating circumstances relating to the pouring of concrete. In this regard the following information shall be provided:

 

a)   The expected number of all instances when the curfew would need to be relaxed to allow for concrete pours, and the associated extenuating circumstances;

b)   The extent to which the curfew would need to be relaxed in each instance;

c)   The specific additional measures that would be undertaken to ensure that pedestrian safety around the site, but particularly in relation to Longueville Road and Austin Street, is maintained;

d)   Procedures for notifying Lane Cove Public School, all schools and child care centres in the area, and Lane Cove Council, of all instances when the curfew will be relaxed.

 

The development shall proceed in accordance with the Construction Management Plan approved by this condition.”

 

Comment

 

This application seeks to amend this condition, to enable the curfew to be relaxed should additional extenuating circumstances arise. The proposed alteration, which relates only to the third paragraph of the condition, is shown below in ‘bold’ for clarity:

 

The Construction Management Plan shall also address circumstances when the curfew might need to be relaxed to accommodate extenuating circumstances such as relating to the pouring of concrete. In this regard the following information shall be provided:

 

In considering this matter it is noted:

 

·       The use of the words ‘such as’ suggest other types of circumstances when the curfew might need to be broken, however no examples have been given.

·       The inclusion of the curfew in the approval was a response to the numerous, valid, public concerns raised regarding the need to protect the safety of pedestrians in and around the site during the construction works, particularly given the position of the site adjacent to Lane Cove Public School.

·       Although Condition 5 requires the applicant to address the possibility of altering the curfew hours for concrete pours, by outlining instances and procedures within the Final Construction Management Plan, it does not of itself approve any alteration to the curfew.  The mechanism for any proposal to alter the curfew period in relation to the pouring of concrete is a separate application under Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

·       Altering Condition 5 as proposed to introduce a perceived flexibility in the application of the curfew would compromise the integrity of that control. That is not to say that the applicant could never demonstrate that a relaxation of the curfew may be valid and warranted. That decision however should only be made in conjunction with an application to address a specific circumstance, which can be assessed on its merits at the time. 

 

It is therefore recommended that this condition remain unaltered.

 

Condition 11

 

This condition currently reads as follows:

 

“11.  A separate development application must be submitted to Council to fit out and use the retail area and library.”

 

This application seeks to amend the wording of condition 11 so that occupation of the retail areas and the library can be achieved via separate development applications, rather than a single application as the condition possibly implies.

 

Comment

 

It was always anticipated that that occupation of the retail areas would be progressive, and independent of the occupation of the new library building.

 

This report therefore recommends that condition 11 be amended to instead read: 

 

“11.  Separate development applications must be submitted to Council to fit out and use the retail area and library.”

 

Condition 42

 

This condition addresses noise control for demolition works, and currently reads as follows:

 

“42.  Noise from demolition works must comply with the following criteria:

 

(a)           For demolition periods of 4 weeks or less the noise level from demolition work must not exceed the background noise level by more than 20dB(A) when measured at the boundary of the worst affected premises in the vicinity. 

(b)           For demolition periods greater than 4 weeks the noise level from demolition          work must not exceed the background noise level by more than 10dB(A) when measured at the boundary of the worst affected premises in the vicinity.”

 

This application seeks to delete condition 42 and replace it entirely with the following alternative condition:

 

“42.  The airborne noise objective for demolition works is to manage noise to an LAeq level, measured over a period of not less than 15 minutes, not exceeding the background LA90 noise level by:

 

(a)          more than 20dB(A) when measured at the boundary of the worst affected premise in the vicinity, for demolition periods of 4 weeks or less;

(a)          more than 10dB(a)  when measured at the boundary of the worst affected premises in the vicinity, for demolition periods greater than 4 weeks.

 

Where this cannot be achieved all reasonable and feasible noise mitigation and management measures are to be implemented, to achieve to the greatest extent possible, the demolition noise objective.”

 

Comment

 

The applicant has previously sought to vary Condition 42 via a Section 96 application lodged in January 2005 (DA 246/04B). At that time the proponent sought to vary the condition to reflect draft guidelines that the Department of Environment and Conservation were developing. The report assessing DA 246/04B recommended, and Council agreed, that there be no modification of Condition 42.

In terms of this current application, the proponent contends that an amendment is necessary in order for this condition to reflect the NSW Department of Environment and Climate Change’s current requirements for construction noise. The proposal is accompanied by a submission from Bassett Acoustics, which provides the following further justification in support of this amendment:

 

·       The NSW Department of Environment and Climate Change’s (DECC) Environmental Noise Control Manual has been largely superseded by the NSW Industrial Noise Policy and the Noise Guidelines for Local Councils. Construction noise criteria previously specified in the Noise Control Manual have not been included in the later publications.

·       The DECC advises that they are developing new draft guidelines for managing construction noise which will adopt a ‘best practice’ approach that attempts to reduce construction noise to a level that is limited by what is feasible and reasonable.

·       It is anticipated that the guidelines will require the preparation of a construction noise management plan which will include noise level objectives set for both daytime and evening periods, which must be complied with where reasonably practicable.

·       Condition 42 as currently worded is more stringent than current DECC policy as it sets limits rather than objectives.

·       Most Council’s base their requirements on current DECC policy.   

 

In considering this matter advice was sought from Council’s Environmental Health Officer who has indicated:

 

·       While the DECC Noise Control Manual has been largely superseded by the Noise Guide for Local Government, it is still used in cases where there is an absence of other clear policy or information.

·       DECC advises that there is no draft set of guidelines proposed to replace the Noise Control Manual.

·       As there are no draft guidelines in place, it could be said that Condition 42 is more stringent than the Noise Guide for Local Government. However that Guide does not clearly set out limits for construction and demolition noise, and therefore the Noise Control Manual has been used.

 

The Environmental Health Officer agrees that Condition 42 can be amended, in part, so that it is consistent with the DECC Noise Guide for Local Government, but that the condition should not be altered to the extent nominated by the proponent, as that would remove certainty and leave the condition open to interpretation should noise problems occur.

 

Accordingly this report recommends that Condition 42 be amended to now read:

 

“42.  Noise from demolition works must be managed to an LAeq level, measured over a period of not less than 15 minutes, not exceeding the background LA90 noise level by:

 

a)            more than 20dB(A) when measured at the boundary of the worst affected premises in the vicinity, for demolition periods of 4 weeks or less;

b)            more than 10dB(a) when measured at the boundary of the worst affected premises in the vicinity, for demolition periods greater than 4 weeks.

 

Condition 56

 

This condition addresses the issue of heritage and currently reads as follows:

“56.  Prior to the commencement of works on site:

 

An appropriately qualified conservation architect shall be employed to oversee the construction of the approved development (including any demolition works) in proximity to, or affecting, any heritage item on the subject site.

 

Details of the conservation architect employed to oversee the construction of the development shall be submitted to Lane Cove Council with the ‘Notification of Commencement’ 2 days before works are to commence on site.

 

The conservation architect should have prior experience in the conservation of similar heritage items.      

 

Archival Recording

Two (2) complete copies of the archival recording are to be submitted to Lane Cove Council, including a set of photographic negatives on completion of the partial demolition of the Library. The archival recording shall be prepared by an experienced heritage consultant and is to be in accordance with the Archival Recording Standards described below:

 

*       Title page (with subject, author, client, date and copyright).

*       Statement of why the record was made.

*       Outline history of the item and associated sites, structures and people.

*       Statement of heritage significance of the items using the State Heritage Inventory criteria.

*       Inventory of archival documents related to the item (eg. company records, original drawings) when available.

*       Location plan (show relationship to surrounding geographical features, structures, roads, vegetation etc. Include a north point).

*       Base plans, drafted or hand-drawn base plans including:

         (i)         cross references to photographs;

         (ii)        name the relevant features, structures and spaces;

         (iii)        a north point.

*       Black and white photographic record, including one set of 35mm black and white negatives labelled and cross referenced to base plans and accompanied by informative catalogues, and two copies of proof sheets and select medium format prints showing important details. The images shall include:

(i)      views to and from the site (possibly from four compass points);

(ii)     views showing relationships to other relevant structures and landscape features;

(iii)    all external elevations;

(iv)    views of all external and internal spaces (eg. courtyards, rooms, roof spaces etc.); and

(v)     external and internal details (eg. joinery, construction joints, decorative features, paving types etc.).

 

All photographic images shall be mounted and labelled.

 

* Colour slides (two copies mounted in archivally stable slide pockets, clearly labelled and cross referenced to base plans). Images shall include:

   (i)   view to and from the site and/or the heritage item, and

   (ii)  views and details of external and internal colour schemes as appropriate.

 

Selected colour prints may be required. They should mounted and labelled.

 

*  Measured drawings, with appropriately scaled drawings printed on archivally stable paper. For a built item, this may include:

 

(i)   site plan (1:500 or 1:200),

(ii)  floor plan(s) (1:100 or 1:50),

   (iii) elevations and sections (1:100 or 1:50),

(iv) roof plan(s) (1:100 or 1:50),

(v)  ceiling and joinery details (1:20 or 1:10), and

(vi) machinery and services details eg. drainage lineshafts.

 

* Presentation

 

The archival recording shall be presented to Council as a single bound document preferably in A4 format. Large maps shall be folded and inserted as map pockets attached to the document. Similarly, all photographic images shall be fixed to the document and labelled.

 

Unbound documents or loose supporting materials such as maps, plans, slides, negatives or prints are not acceptable”.

 

The applicant seeks to alter the wording of this condition to instead read:

 

“56.   Prior to the commencement of works on site:

 

A.      An appropriately qualified conservation architect shall be employed to:

 

1.   Undertake an inspection of the Library prior to demolition of the Library extension.

2.   Review and comment on the building contractor’s Library extension demolition method statement.

3.   Undertake an inspection of the Library during the demolition of the Library extension.

4.   Undertake an inspection of the Library during the adjacent piling works.

5.   Undertake 3 inspections of the Library during the above ground adjacent construction works.

6.   Undertake an inspection of the Library on completion of the adjacent structure.

7.   After each inspection, a 1 to 2 page written report is to be provided by the  conservation architect. 

 

B.      Archival Recording

 

         Provide two (2) copies of a bound archival report which includes:

 

1.   The original GBA Heritage Impact Statement, provided as part of the DA.

2.   A location plan, which shows the relationship to surrounding geographical features, structures, roads, vegetation etc. A North point is to be provided.

3.   Base plans which cross-references to photographs, names relevant features, structures and spaces. A North point is to be provided.

4.   Digital photographs, stored on a CD-Rom, which picture the following (each picture is to be printed in colour and included in the archival report.)

5.   Views of the general area, which show the relationship of the building to the surrounding area. (i.e. 4 pictures)

6.   Views to and from each of the 4 sides of the building (i.e. 8 pictures).

7.   Views of the internal spaces of the building (i.e. 8 pictures)

8.   Views of external and internal details (i.e. 8 pictures)

9.   A schedule, and A3 paper copy, of the original Library extension design drawings, stored by Lane Cove Council.(copy of schedule attached for your reference).

 

Comment

 

Archnex Designs has reviewed this matter and advises that the proposed amendment to Condition 56 is satisfactory, subject to point B4 being altered to include a reference to guidelines issued by the NSW Heritage Office regarding digital photography. 

 

Accordingly this report recommends that Condition 42 be amended as nominated by the applicant, subject to point B4 stating:

 

4.   Digital photographs, prepared in accordance with relevant guidelines from the NSW Heritage Office, and which comprise at a minimum the images and views noted elsewhere in this condition. These photos are to be stored on CD Rom, and each picture is also to be printed in colour and included in the archival report, using archivally stable images.

 

Condition 90

 

This condition imposes various requirements under the Building Code of Australia and Australian Standard 1428 to ensure the development provides appropriate facilities and design elements necessary for safe and equitable access throughout the building for people with a disability.

 

The final paragraph of the condition currently reads as follows:

 

“Prior to the issue of a Final Occupation Certificate the Principal Certifying Authority shall be provided with a compliance certificate, from a suitable qualified person, demonstrating that the requirements of this condition have been satisfied.”

 

This application seeks to amend the wording of that paragraph by replacing the words ‘compliance certificate’ with the word ‘confirmation’.

 

Comment

 

The applicant advises that this amendment is sought because the project consultant traffic engineer does not issue ‘compliance certificates’. This circumstance does not seem particularly relevant as condition 90 does not deal with matters likely to be relevant to traffic engineers.

 

In March 2006 the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 was amended to clarify that that an applicant, certifying authority or principal certifying authority can choose whether to obtain a compliance certificate to demonstrate that detailed designs comply with conditions of approval, or that works have been properly executed in accordance with an approval, but that a  Council can no longer impose a condition in a development consent notice that requires the provision of a compliance certificate.

 

The intent of the final paragraph of this condition was to ensure that the principal certifying authority was provided with formal advice by an appropriately qualified person that the terms of this condition are fulfilled. This outcome can be achieved regardless of the term used to describe that advice. The need for a ‘compliance certificate’ is not critical – what is important is that the certifying authority be provided with documentation to demonstrate this condition has been fulfilled.

 

Given this, and noting the legislative circumstances outlined above, this report recommends that condition 90 be amended by altering the final paragraph to instead read:

 

“Prior to the issue of a Final Occupation Certificate the Principal Certifying Authority shall be provided with written confirmation from a suitably qualified person, demonstrating that the requirements of this condition have been satisfied.”

 

Condition 120

 

This condition addresses the issue of excavation and imposed obligations on the applicant regarding the possible impacts from such works upon adjoining properties, and measures required to protect those properties from undermining during construction. The condition includes the following component:

 

“The applicant shall:-

 

i.          seek independent advice from a Geotechnical Engineer on the impact of the proposed excavations on the adjoining properties

ii.         detail what measures are to be taken to protect those properties from undermining during construction

iii.        provide Council with a certificate from the engineer on the necessity and adequacy of support for the adjoining properties.”

 

Comment

 

This application seeks to amend the wording of point (iii) such that the required certification is provided by a structural, rather than geotechnical engineer as a structural engineer is more suitability qualified to provide such advice.

 

There is no objection to this modification and accordingly this report recommends that the relevant section of condition 120 be amended to instead read: 

 

“The applicant shall:-

 

i.          seek independent advice from a Geotechnical Engineer on the impact of the proposed excavations on the adjoining properties

ii.         detail what measures are to be taken to protect those properties from undermining during construction

iii.        provide Council with a certificate from a Structural Engineer on the necessity and adequacy of support for the adjoining properties.”

 

Condition 123

 

This condition currently reads as follows:

 

“123.   Compliance Certificate: A Compliance Certificate must be obtained confirming that the constructed erosion and sediment control measures comply with the construction plan and Lane Cove Council’s standards and specifications for stormwater drainage.”      

This application seeks to amend the wording of the condition by requiring that the Compliance Certificate be issued by a suitably accredited person, so that the terms of the condition remain consistent with other conditions within the consent notice.

 

Comment

 

The proposed amendment does not alter the intent or obligation imposed on the applicant by this condition. This report therefore recommends that condition 123 be amended to instead read: 

 

“123.   Compliance Certificate: A Compliance Certificate, issued by a suitably accredited person, must be obtained confirming that the constructed erosion and sediment control measures comply with the construction plan and Lane Cove Council’s standards and specifications for stormwater drainage.”

 

Condition 154

 

This condition addresses limits on construction hours and currently reads as follows:

 

“154. (35) All demolition, building construction work, including earthworks, deliveries of building     materials to and from the site to be restricted to the following hours:-   

 

            Monday to Friday (inclusive)  7.00am to 7.00pm

            Saturday                                   7.00am to 4.00pm

        

            No work to be carried out on Sundays or public holidays.”

 

This application seeks to amend the wording of the condition by identifying circumstances where works would be permitted on Sundays and public holidays, as outlined below:

 

“154.    All demolition, building construction work, including earthworks, deliveries of building materials to and from the site to be restricted to the following hours:-   

 

            Monday to Friday (inclusive)   7.00am to 7.00pm

            Saturday                                   7.00am to 4.00pm

        

            No work to be carried out on Sundays or public holidays except for:

 

a)   any works which do not cause noise emissions to be audible at any nearby residential property and other sensitive noise receivers;

b)   the delivery of plant, equipment and materials which is required outside of these hours as requested by the Police, or other authorities for safety reasons;

c)   emergency work to avoid the loss of lives, property and/or to prevent environmental harm.”  

 

The application is accompanied by a submission from Bassett Acoustics which includes the following contention in support of this amendment to Condition 154:

 

Typically the Department of Environment and Climate Change allow works which do not cause noise emissions to be audible at any nearby residential property or any other noise sensitive receivers during the night time, on Sundays and on Public Holidays. Therefore, to ensure that demolition works are not unduly restricted, it is recommended that this condition be modified to reflect the current assessment procedures for construction noise. 

 

Comment

 

The Bassett submission indicates that this condition be modified to permit demolition works, however the suggested revised wording to Condition 154 provided by the applicant is much broader, and would encompass any works, not just demolition works.

 

The applicant has previously attempted to vary Condition 154 via a Section 96 application lodged in August 2005 (DA 246/04C). At that time the proponent sought to permit excavation trucks to exit the site for an additional 3 hours past the stipulated finish times.

 

The issue of construction times generally was therefore the subject of significant review with DA 246/04C. In considering the matter at that time, the following conclusions were reached:

 

·       The applicant has provided evidence that there could be some community benefit.  However there is no guarantee that the outcomes suggested by the applicant can definitely be achieved, particularly in terms of an overall reduction to the construction period.

·       Impacts from construction were common concerns in the representations received from the community consultation process for the original Development Application.

·       None of the submissions received from the public notification of this Section 96 application supported any extension to the current approved construction hours.

·       While the views of the Lane Cove Public School and Lane Cove Chamber of Commerce would be of interest in the consideration of this matter, they are not determinative, and would be of no more ‘weight’ than any submission from any other interested party.

·       The Manager of Council’s Traffic section raises concerns to any changes in construction hours.

·       The cumulative impact of allowing any extension in construction hours would have significant implications, with applicants for other future developments making claims for being granted a similar concession.

 

Comment

 

The control of noise from building sites is fundamental to maintaining amenity for surrounding properties. Central to this is the ability for a condition such as this to be actively and easily policed. Creating the potential for works beyond the prescribed times creates the opportunity for the amenity of the surrounding locality to be more readily compromised.  

Should specific circumstances arise as works proceed that warrant the consideration of a variation to the approved hours, to resolve an individual instance or situation, then the applicant can apply at that time to have this condition reviewed within that context.

 

Otherwise, the conclusions reached in relation to DA 246/04C remain valid for this current proposed amendment to Condition 154.

 

Accordingly this report recommends against any alteration to Condition 154 of Development Consent 246/04.

 

Condition 156

 

This condition imposes requirements to improve the safety and operation of the School Drop Off Lane in Austin Street, and currently reads as follows:

 

“156.   To improve the safety and operation of the New School Drop-Off Lane (NSDL) the following measures shall be implemented:

 

a)   A pedestrian deterrent shall be provided between the roundabout and the NSDL. A pedestrian fence, to satisfy the Roads and Traffic Authority standards shall be provided along the median island.

b)   “P5 minute” time restriction signs shall be installed within the NSDL.

c)         The left and right arrows at the exit to the NSDL shall be removed.

d)   “One Way” signs shall be used at the NSDL exit in addition to signs already shown.

e)   Pedestrian advance warning signs shall be placed between the wombat crossing and Longueville Road.

f)    “No Parking” signs shall be provided at the driveways within the NSDL to allow stopping but not parking.

g)   The first parking space marked to the east of the wombat crossing shall be deleted.

h)   The guard rail detail shall include an appropriate end terminal treatment that satisfies the Roads and Traffic Authority requirements.

i)    A minimum of 20m “No Stopping” zones shall be provided either side of the Austin Street wombat crossing.

 

These changes shall be detailed on the plans approved with the Construction Certificate.” 

 

This application seeks to delete point (c) from the condition in light of the results of agreement between Council and the Department of Education to enable vehicles to turn left and right from the New School Drop-off Lane (NDSL).

 

Condition 156 was prepared by Parsons Brinckerhoff following their assessment of the NSDL. In reviewing this current application, Parsons Brinckerhoff advise that the purpose of point (c) of the condition was to ensure that signage and line markings in the NSDL were consistent with typical public road design, but that they have no objection to retaining the markings.

 

It is considered that retaining the markings would ensure that motorists are clear on their options for existing the NDSL.

 

 

Comment

 

Accordingly this report recommends that point (c) of Condition 156 be deleted.     

 

Condition 178

 

This condition addresses the construction of the school drop-off lane in Austin Street, and in part, currently reads as follows:

 

“The applicant is to provide a report from a practising geotechnical engineer indicating that the ‘as built’ NSDL structure has structural integrity, to be stable for the expected life of the project.”

 

Comment

 

This application seeks to amend the wording of this paragraph of the condition to instead require that the report be prepared by a civil, rather than a geotechnical engineer as a civil engineer is more suitability qualified to provide such advice.

 

There is no objection to this modification and accordingly this report recommends that the relevant section of condition 178 be amended to instead read: 

 

“The applicant is to provide a report from a practising civil engineer indicating that the ‘as built’ NSDL structure has structural integrity, to be stable for the expected life of the project.”

 

Condition 184

 

This condition prohibits the use of mechanical rock pick machines generally but prescribes that Council may grant approval for the use of such equipment in certain circumstances. In part this condition currently reads as follows:

 

“(b)     Notwithstanding the prohibition under condition (a), consideration will be given to the use of rock pick machines and may be approved by Council subject to:-

 

(1)    A Geotechnical Engineers Report that indicates that the rock pick machine can be used without causing damage to the adjoining properties.”

 

This application seeks to amend the wording of this part of the condition to instead require that the report be prepared by a structural, rather than a geotechnical, engineer as a structural engineer is more suitability qualified to provide such advice.

 

Comment

 

There is no objection to this modification and this report recommends that the relevant section of condition 184 be amended to instead read: 

 

“(b)     Notwithstanding the prohibition under condition (a), consideration will be given to the use of rock pick machines and may be approved by Council subject to:-

 

(1)    A Structural Engineers Report that indicates that the rock pick machine can be used without causing damage to the adjoining properties.”

 

New condition 185

 

The applicant seeks to have an additional condition included in the consent notice, addressing the matter of separate construction and occupation certificates. The proposed condition is shown below:

 

“185.    Notwithstanding any other condition of this consent, this consent permits separate construction certificates and occupation certificates to be issued for the development approved by this consent in stages, provided that all conditions of consent relevant to the development incorporated within each stage have been complied with prior to the release of the construction certificate or occupation certificate for that stage.” 

 

In support of their request for the condition the applicant submits:

 

·       Although not specifically stated, the development consent notice allows for the issue of staged construction certificates.

·       The intention to construct the development in stages was clearly articulated in the Construction Management Plan

·       The conditions of consent do not preclude staged construction.

·       The consent notice is ambiguous and/or inconsistent on this issue.

·       The new condition will clarify this issue, and allow for construction and occupation certificates to be issued in stages, and also for the development to be occupied and the approved uses commence in stages. 

 

Comment

 

It is reasonable to expect that a development of this size would be completed in stages and for the avoidance of doubt on this matter there is no objection to the inclusion of a condition which confirms the entitlement of the proponent to obtain such certificates for sections of the building. 

 

Accordingly this report recommends that additional condition 185 be included into the consent notice as follows:

 

“185.    Notwithstanding any other condition of this approval, construction certificates and occupation certificates may be issued for separate stages or components of the approved development, provided that the Principal Certifying Authority is satisfied that all conditions of consent relevant to each stage have been complied with prior to the release of the construction certificate or occupation certificate for that stage.” 

 

Amendments to approved plans

 

This application also seeks approval to amend the approved architectural plans. The extent of the proposed changes are detailed on the schedule attached to this report (AT4) and described on plans prepared by BN Group. (AT5).

 

 

 

Comment

 

Discussion on the proposed amendments is provided later in the report under the heading “Site Design and Internal Design” however in summary these changes are considered to be  insignificant, both individually and collectively.

 

Approval of these changes would require a modification to condition 3 of the consent to have the revised plans included on the list of approved drawings.

 

COMPLIANCE WITH PLANNING CONTROLS AND POLICIES

 

Original Development Application 246/04 was found to be satisfactory after having been assessed against the statutory planning controls and policies identified earlier in this report

 

The amendments now proposed by this application have also been considered against those same controls, and it concluded that these modifications would not result in any non-compliance with the numerical standards, objectives or controls within those instruments or policies.

 

Notwithstanding, certain issues require discussion and these matters are addressed below.

 

THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

 

The following subheadings reflect guideline issues by the (now) Department of Planning to assist in the consideration of the likely impacts of a proposed development.

 

Context and Setting

 

The modifications proposed by this application would have no adverse implications in terms of the developments relationship with the local and regional context of the site, nor would any adverse impacts arise for adjacent properties.

 

Access, transport and traffic

 

Access

 

Parsons Brinckerhoff has reviewed the amended plans and raised the following concerns:

 

·       Details are required to demonstrate that the loading docks have been tested for swept paths. Turning movements showing the accessibility of the loading dock when one space is already occupied, are to be submitted.

·       At the Level 3 car park, the length of the blind aisle adjacent to the travelator is longer than permitted by the relevant Australian Standard. 

 

In response to these matters it is noted:

 

·       In terms of the loading dock the proposal would be conditioned to comply with the relevant standard and Council requirement at construction certificate stage.

 

·       Compliance with the Australian Standard can be achieved by designating the 4 spaces nearest to the supermarket administration area on Level 3 as ‘staff parking’. It is noted that the 4 staff parking already approved are currently located on Level 1. It is therefore a matter of switching the position of these 4 spaces. The applicant raises no objection to this change.

 

Parking

 

The building as originally approved with DA 246/04 provided 335 parking spaces even though it only generated the need for a total of 149.3 spaces.

 

The total parking provided however included replacing the public parking lost from the site and Austin Street, providing 4 dedicated staff parking spaces and providing an extra 10 parking spaces for the CBD housing component. Even allowing for all of that, the development still achieved a clear surplus of 74 spaces. Subsequent approvals to amend DA 246/04 did not substantially alter floor space, but nevertheless parking was reduced by 4 spaces to a total of 331 through various design alterations – but still leaving a surplus of 70 spaces.

 

This current application now proposes:

 

·       To reduce the quantity of retail floor space by 195m2.

·       Increase the floor area of the Library by 18m2.

·       Provide a total of 330 on site parking spaces, being a reduction of 1 space from the current approved plans.

·       Alter the allocation of parking so that the CBD housing now has 18 spaces instead of 20.

·       Provide a new substation on Council Lane.

 

Comment

 

In considering these changes it is noted that the lost retail area reduces demand for parking by 5 spaces, while the increase in Library floor space is negligible and does not of itself generate the need for any additional parking.  The reduction in the allocation of parking for the CBD housing does not create any non-compliance with Council requirements. The new substation removes 2 spaces from Council Lane.

 

In terms of the total parking supply, the current surplus of 70 rises by 5 to 75 (because demand reduces given the lesser quantity of retail floor space). However it then reduces by 1 due to changes in design to the basement levels. A further 2 spaces are lost through the introduction of a new electrical substation in Council Lane in proximity to the roundabout at the entry to the car park.

 

Consequently this application would result in a parking surplus of 72 spaces.

 

Pedestrian Access (mobility)

 

This issue considers the need to ensure that new developments are accessible by all sections of the community, and incorporate appropriate facilities.

 

Accompanying the application is a report by Morris-Goding Accessibility Consulting (AT3), which considers the proposal with regard to provisions of relevant Australian Standards, the Building Code of Australia and the Disability Discrimination Act. Specifically the report has regard to matters of:

·       Ingress and egress (Plaza level, Longueville Road, CBD Housing, Supermarket, Staff Library, Emergency)

·       Retail and library areas (General paths of travel, lifts, sanitary facilities)

·       CBD Housing ( Paths of travel, Adaptable unit design, SEPP 65 requirements)

·       Basement areas (Car parking, ramps)

·       Lighting

·       Signage

 

This report concludes:

 

The Development Application drawings indicate that compliance with statutory requirements pertaining to site access, common area access, accessible parking and accessible sanitary facilities can be readily achieved.

 

A detailed assessment of the adequacy of the proposed design amendments, including the analysis and conclusions in the Morris-Goding report, was undertaken by Accessibility Solutions Pty Ltd. The Accessibility Solutions report concludes that:

 

The section 96 plans for the development will comply with the accessibility and adoptability requirements of the Building Code of Australia, Council’s Development Control Plan No. 5, State Environmental Planning Policy 65 and referenced standards AS1428 and AS4299 and be generally consistent with the Disability Discrimination Act objectives.

 

Conditions Nos. 87-90 of the current Determination Notice for Development Application 246/04 address various requirements to ensure the approved complex is completed to meet all relevant requirements for access and facilities. The modifications proposed by this application do not require any amendments to those conditions.    

 

Pedestrian Safety

 

None of the modifications proposed under this application would alter the arrangements for achieving pedestrian safety in and around the site, both during construction and once occupied and in operation.

 

Public Domain

 

The proposed modifications would not result in any adverse impacts on the public domain in terms of public recreational opportunities, the quantity/design/location /management of public spaces or pedestrian linkages between the development and public areas.

 

Utilities

 

The proposed modifications would not alter demands for the supply of utility services.

 

Heritage

 

This issue is a relevant consideration as the subject site includes the heritage listed Library building. Other such items, both built and landscape elements, are also located in proximity to the site.

 

Archnex Designs has considered this application relative to the values, setting and context of these heritage items, and advises that there is minimal potential adverse heritage impacts arsing from the proposed amendments.   

 

Water

 

The proposed modifications have no greater implications in terms of the conservation of water resources and management of the water cycle.

 

Soils

 

The nature and scope of the proposed modifications would not raise any issues of concern relative to the management of soils in terms of contamination, subsidence, erosion, sediment control or the like.

 

Air and Microclimate

 

The nature and scope of the proposed modifications would not result in any adverse effects for air quality or microclimate conditions external to the site.

 

Flora and Fauna

 

The modifications proposed would have no adverse impacts in terms of the maintenance of biodiversity over the site or the locality.

 

Waste 

 

Arrangements for the provision of waste collection, storage and disposal remain satisfactory.

 

Energy and Sustainability.

 

The modifications proposed would have no greater or additional adverse impacts. Existing conditions of consent addressing these matters remain unaltered.

 

Noise and Vibration

 

Refer to comments provided earlier in this report in relation to proposed alterations to Conditions 42 and 154.

 

Natural Hazards

 

The proposed modifications would have no adverse implications for these matters.

 

Technological Hazards

 

The proposed modifications would have no adverse implications for these matters.

 

 

 

 

Safety, Security and Crime Prevention

 

The modifications supported by this assessment have no adverse implications. Existing conditions of consent addressing these matters remain unaltered.

 

Social Impacts

 

Having regard to the scope and nature of the proposed amendments, no greater or additional adverse social implications have been identified.

 

Economic Impacts

 

Having regard to the scope and nature of the proposed amendments the modifications proposed by this application would not result in any greater or additional adverse economic impacts.

 

Site Design and Internal Design

 

As previously noted, a detailed schedule of the proposed design modifications is provided at (AT4) to this report. However in summary, the more notable internal changes comprise:

 

·       Reconfiguration of the pedestrian pathway between the lower and upper levels of the building.

·       Alterations to the layout of certain components of the parking areas, however, retaining a surplus of 72 spaces.

·       Relocation of the lift cores.

·       Relocation of the escalators.

·       Reconfiguration of the loading zone for the specialty shops.

·       Overall reduction in supermarket and retail floor space.

·       Reconfiguration of the Plaza level walkway.

 

Assessment of these changes has not identified any new issues of concern and therefore no objections are raised. Specific comments regarding car parking and changes to the position of the escalators are discussed elsewhere in this report.

 

In terms of the exterior of the complex, the proposed changes to the elevations of the buildings, in summary, comprise:

 

·       To Austin Street, screening to the previously open levels of the car park, changes in fenestration and enlargement of the Library plant room.

·       To Link Road, changes to fenestration, screening to the open car park levels, changes to the mix of materials and detailing. Visual relief and interest to this elevation is now achieved through an emphasis on vertical rather than horizontal design elements.

·       To the Plaza elevation, the composition of the façade has been altered to include more vertical elements consistent with the detailing in many of the existing adjoining buildings.

·       To the public walkway elevation near to the Library entry, an increase in the rooftop library plant room and the northern façade of the retail shopfronts.

·       To Council Lane, changes in the external detailing and lower level blockwork.

·       Articulation of the eastern façade of the residential level. 

 

Comment

 

The majority of these changes can reasonably be considered as cosmetic. The revised presentation of the building is satisfactory in terms of built form considerations and accordingly no objections are raised. 

 

It is noted that some of the images provided by the applicant, for information purposes, include details of signage which is not a part of this application. It is confirmed that all signage approved with this application remains as per condition 9 of the Development Consent 246/04.

 

Construction

 

Refer to comments provided earlier in this report in relation to proposed alterations to Conditions 42 and 154.

 

Cumulative Impacts

 

The modifications supported by this assessment have no implications for this matter.

 

THE SUITABILITY OF THE SITE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT

 

Development Application 246/04 was found to be suitable for the site having regard:

 

·      Its consistency with the Public Inquiry of 1999 which supported the rezoning of this site to enable consideration of a mixed use development.

·      Its ‘fit’ with the locality as established by the urban design assessment.

·      Its response to the attributes of the site as set out in this report.

·       The outcomes of the proceedings before the Land and Environment Court.

 

The modifications now proposed by this application would not alter those conclusions. 

 

PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS

 

The application was publicly advertised from 26 September 2007 until 26 October 2007, and was available for inspection at the Council Civic Centre, Lane Cove and Greenwich Libraries.

 

A total of 5 submissions were received. The matters raised in those submissions are summarised, grouped into particular issues, and addressed below. It is noted that some submissions included comments which relate to Development Application 272/07, also for this site, and accordingly are not considered in this report.

 

·       Concern about the effect of trolleys being taken from the Market Square to the Rosenthal Avenue car park across the Plaza. It would be appropriate to consider a deposit/token system for the return of shopping trolleys. Trolley drop-off points should be conveniently positioned for customer use and not be just at one site within the Market Square car park.

 

 

 

 

Comment:

 

Condition 13 of the Determination Notice approving Development Application 246/04 requires that Council approve a Trolley Management Plan for the supermarket.

 

·       As it has been some time since the original approval we suggest that the most current sustainable practices be applied to this development.

 

Comment:

 

The submission does not suggest what the most current sustainable practices that this development should achieve.

 

Condition 144 of the Determination Notice approving Development Application 246/04 requires the applicant to lodge with Council for approval a schedule demonstrating the implementation of the strategies and recommendations of the Energy Performance report provided with original application.

 

         Condition 145 requires that Council approve a Final Energy Management Plan addressing the ongoing management and maintenance procedures required for the energy efficiency measures within the development. It is anticipated that this Plan would be reviewed by the proponent against Council’s Sustainability Action Plan.

        

·       This development has lost most of its ability to provide any significant landscaping, in particular along Austin Street where the elevation will be most visible. The only small area, at the corner of the slip road and Austin Street that could have possibly accommodated reasonable vegetation has now been denied that privilege due to the position of the hydrant and sprinkler booster valves. Those facilities should be relocated, possibly around the corner facing Link Road, so that plantings can be established in that area. We would like to see the remainder of the area that is available along Austin Street heavily landscaped to soften the visual impact of the building.

 

Comment:

 

The Sprinkler Hydrant Booster Valve connection facilities are located behind a line of shoring piles, essentially within the perimeter of the building, and consequently do not reduce the area available for landscaping in this area of the site.

 

·       I have no objection to the project as it will be beneficial to Lane Cove. I am concerned with what impact it will have on a number of businesses, including mine. Lane Cove has already had a decline in patronage which has had a negative impact on a number if businesses. Construction will add to an already burdening financial situation. Will construction affect access to suppliers, customers, staff and waste management as a result of scaffolding etc. Will construction affect businesses in the mall due to construction noise. Will Woolworths insert a compensation clause in their contract should construction have direct impact upon my business takings ?

 

Comment:

 

The Determination Notice approving Development Application 246/04 requires the preparation of pedestrian, traffic and construction management plans for approval by both Council and the Local Traffic Committee. Similarly, conditions are also included to address the control of construction related noise.

 

Potential economic impacts upon local businesses was investigated in detail in the assessment of Development Application 246/04. On balance, that assessment concluded the proposal demonstrated a likely net economic benefit to the community, and that there was no evidence the proposal would have an adverse economic impact upon the viability of the centre, notwithstanding that some individual retailers would be adversely affected during the construction phase and the development.

 

It is unclear what is meant by the reference to Woolworths ‘contract’ and the question of compensation is not a matter for consideration in the assessment of this application.

 

·       We deplore the changed location of the escalators. Escalators discharging into the shopping arcade divorce the relationship between the supermarket and the Village Centre, making it easier to use the Market Square as a ‘one stop’ shopping trip ignoring the rest of the Centre. We acknowledge that this may be good commercial practice but it flies in the face of statements that Woolworths want to be ‘good Citizens of Lane Cove’.

 

The majority of shoppers will use the ramps and escalators in preference to the lifts and therefore the move of the escalators is condemned as it now discharges shoppers almost at the library door, totally remote from the rest of the shopping in the Village.

 

Comment:

 

The escalators are now proposed to be located in a more central position along the retail/library level walkway. This walkway creates a link between the existing Plaza and Longueville Road, and is a key pedestrian thoroughfare of the development. While these escalators remain positioned along the eastern side of that walkway, they are now shown to be about 38m further away from the Plaza. This is not a significant distance to expect pedestrians to walk to exit the building and access the services of the surrounding commercial precinct. Pedestrians using the escalators would have a clear view of the Plaza from the landing areas where the escalators discharge onto the walkway, noting that the walkway between the Plaza entry and the escalators is proposed to be widened and straightened. These design modifications will further strengthen the visual connection from inside the development to the wider CBD. Therefore it is not agreed that the proposed new location of the escalators can be described as being totally remote from the wider Lane Cove CBD.

 

·       The new substation on Council Lane takes up at least 2 more car spaces which do not seem to be included in the parking calculations. We understood that this substation was to be adjacent to the existing one near the Library and War Memorial.

 

Comment:

 

The applicant has confirmed that they are seeking approval for the new substation shown to be located immediately adjacent to roundabout at the entry to the car park. This substation is in addition to those approved in proximity to the Library adjacent to Austin Street.  The loss of two parking spaces as a consequence of this substation raises no concerns noting the surplus of parking that remains.

·       Bicycles are catered for only at the lowest levels, so far away from the riders destinations that they will not be used. Is there a better location for them ? More bicycle and motorcycle parking spaces should be provided to accommodate this increase in the use of this form of transport.

 

Comment:

 

         Condition 24 of the Determination Notice approving Development Application 246/04 prescribes the quantity of bicycle parking to be provided and that these facilities shall be spread across the development, including at the Plaza level.

 

·       Trolley storage is concentrated on the western side of the parking area but should be spread more evenly around the parking areas so that they are not left in car parking spaces.

 

Comment:

 

Condition 13 of the Determination Notice approving Development Application 246/04 requires that Council approve a Trolley Management Plan for the supermarket. This management plan will address the storage and collection of trolleys.

 

·       Access to the stormwater and sewer manhole pits are located in the middle of the only access to the rear of the remaining properties fronting the Plaza and Longueville Road. Any time access to these pits is required these properties will have their access disrupted. These pits should be located to a position within the building site.

 

Comment:

 

The applicant has advised that these access pits can not be relocated. The location of these pits is part of a complicated process for the supply of utility services linked to the staging of the construction of the development. It is further noted that it is not unusual for these kinds of access holes to be located within a road reserve. 

 

·       The description of the external materials is difficult to understand. We would like to see coloured elevations with sample materials presented.

 

Comment:

 

         The applicant has confirmed that they are not seeking to alter the schedule of external       finishes as previously approved.

 

·       In terms of Condition 90, we question whether the ‘confirmation’ has sufficient legal standing as a ‘Compliance Certificate’.

 

Comment:

 

The circumstance behind the proposed modification to this condition was outlined earlier in this report.

 

·       The Preliminary Construction Management Plan is scant on information and we hope to see a fuller description of construction management when a contractor is appointed. The earlier Traffic Management Plan has a far a more detailed description of construction and timing.

 

Comment:

 

The preliminary construction management plan annexed to this application is the same as that lodged with Development Application 246/04. Condition 5 of the Determination Notice issued on Development Application 246/04, requiring the submission of a revised construction management plan, is not amended in any way by this application. 

 

·       There does not appear to be an Energy Plan or submission on noise abatement and these would be crucial to the amenity of the adjoining neighbours, including the School. The original energy assessment made no concrete promises, but left it to be investigated as developed.

 

Comment:

 

   The issue of noise abatement has been addressed in the discussions above regarding Conditions 42 and 154 of the consent notice. Conditions 144 and 145 of that approval impose requirements upon the applicant regards energy and sustainability obligations. Those conditions are considered sufficient relative to the nature of the amendments being considered with this current application. However, if Council chooses, it could amend those conditions should it be of the view that they are no longer adequate.

 

·       There is no indication of water reuse or solar use. Woolworths should abide by Council’s Sustainability Plan and ensure that the building includes the most up to date technology available to instigate these sustainable and energy efficient inclusions.

 

Comment:

 

Condition 144 of the Determination Notice approving Development Application 246/04 requires the applicant to lodge with Council for approval a schedule demonstrating the implementation of the strategies and recommendations of the Energy Performance report provided with original application. This condition specifically requires investigation of opportunities for the reuse of water and solar electricity.

 

         Condition 145 requires that Council approve a Final Energy Management Plan addressing the ongoing management and maintenance procedures required for the energy efficiency measures within the development. It is anticipated that this Plan will be reviewed against Council’s Sustainability Action Plan.

 

THE PUBLIC INTEREST

 

No circumstances have been identified to indicate that the proposed modifications would not be in the public interest.

 

 

 

CONCLUSION

 

This report considers a proposal to amend Development Consent 246/04 for the construction of a mixed use development comprising a multi level car park, supermarket, library extension, retail plaza and CBD housing on land generally described as the Austin Street car park, the former Clancy’s supermarket and adjacent commercial site, Lane Cove Library and a residential property at No 7 Austin Street. 

 

This report recommends the amendments to the architectural plans be approved. The alterations to the conditions of consent are also supported, excepting the proposed changes to Condition 5 (Construction Management Plan), some of the changes to Condition 42 (Noise restrictions for demolition works) and Condition 154 (Construction Hours).

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That:

 

A.      That Development Application 246/04D which seeks, pursuant to Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, to modify various conditions within Development Consent 246/04 dated 22 December 2004 (and subsequently regranted 4 August 2006) be approved as follows:

 

1.      That Condition 3 be modified by inserting the following text and table immediately             before the third last paragraph:

 

         The approved plans are further modified by the amendments described on the following plans, prepared by BN Architectural Group, approved with Development Application 246/04D: 

        

Drawing No

Title

Date

Issue

A 130

Car Park Level 1

17 August 2007

Rev F

A 131

Car Park Level 2

17 August 2007

Rev F

A 132

Car Park Level 3

17 August 2007

Rev G

A 107

Supermarket Level 4

17 August 2007

Rev H

A 108

Library Level 5

17 August 2007

Rev R

A 109

Residential Level 1

17 August 2007

Rev N

A 110

Residential Level 2

17 August 2007

Rev K

A 111

Roof plan

17 August 2007

Rev K

A 301

Section No. 1

17 August 2007

Rev G

A 302

Section No. 2

17 August 2007

Rev J

A 303

Section No. 3

17 August 2007

Rev J

A 304

Section No. 4

17 August 2007

Rev K

A 308

Section No. 8

17 August 2007

Rev J

A 450

External Elevations

Austin St/Link Road

17 August 2007

Rev F

A 451

External Elevations

Plaza/Council Lane/Library Walk/Residential East

27 July 2007

Rev F

 

         To satisfy the requirements of AS 2890.1-2004 the 4 dedicated staff parking spaces shall be located in parking spaces 99-102 on Car Park Level 3. Parking spaces 16-19 on Car Park Level 1 shall become public spaces.

 

         The substation shown on drawing A131, Revision F, is also approved with Development Application 246/04D.

 

2.      That Condition 11 be modified to read:

 

         11.    Separate development applications must be submitted to Council to fit out and use the retail area and library.

 

3.      That Condition 42 be modified to read:

 

         42.    Noise from demolition works must be managed to an LAeq level, measured over                 a period of not less than 15 minutes, not exceeding the background LA90 noise                           level by:

 

a)   more than 20dB(A) when measured at the boundary of the worst affected premises in the vicinity, for demolition periods of 4 weeks or less;

 

b)   more than 10dB(a) when measured at the boundary of the worst affected premises  in the vicinity, for demolition periods greater than 4 weeks.

 

4.      That Condition 56 be amended to read:

 

56.    Prior to the commencement of works on site:

 

A.     An appropriately qualified conservation architect shall be employed to:

 

                         1.        Undertake an inspection of the Library prior to demolition of the Library                                    extension.

         2.         Review and comment on the building contractor’s Library extension       demolition method statement.

         3.         Undertake an inspection of the Library during the demolition of the        Library extension.

         4.         Undertake an inspection of the Library during the adjacent piling works.

         5.         Undertake 3 inspections of the Library during the above ground adjacent             construction works.

 

         6.         Undertake an inspection of the Library on completion of the adjacent     structure.

         7.         After each inspection, a written report is to be provided by the              conservation architect. 

 

B.      Archival Recording

 

                  Provide two (2) copies of a bound archival report which includes:

 

         1.         The original GBA Heritage Impact Statement, provided as part of the DA.

         2.         A location plan, which shows the relationship to surrounding     geographical features, structures, roads, vegetation etc. A North point is to    be provided.

               3.         Base plans which cross-references to photographs, names relevant        features, structures and spaces. A North point is to be provided.

4.         Digital photographs, prepared in accordance with relevant guidelines from the NSW Heritage Office, and which comprise at a minimum the images and views noted elsewhere in this condition. These photos are to be stored on CD Rom, and each picture is also to be printed in colour and included in the archival report, using archivally stable images.

         5.         Views of the general area, which show the relationship of the building to             the surrounding area. (i.e. 4 pictures)

         6.         Views to and from each of the 4 sides of the building (i.e. 8 pictures).

         7.         Views of the internal spaces of the building (i.e. 8 pictures)

         8.         Views of external and internal details (i.e. 8 pictures)

         9.         A schedule, and A3 paper copy, of the original Library extension design             drawings, stored by Lane Cove Council.

 

5.      That the final paragraph of condition 90 be amended to read:

 

         Prior to the issue of a Final Occupation Certificate the Principal Certifying                                           Authority shall be provided with written confirmation from a suitably qualified                          person, demonstrating that the requirements of this condition have been satisfied

        

6.      That condition 120 be amended to read:

 

120.  Excavation. The proposed development will result in substantial excavation that has the potential to affect the foundations of adjoining properties.

 

The applicant shall:-

 

i.    seek independent advice from a Geotechnical Engineer on the impact of the proposed excavations on the adjoining properties

ii.    detail what measures are to be taken to protect those properties from undermining during construction

iii.   provide Council with a certificate from a Structural Engineer on the necessity and adequacy of support for the adjoining properties.

 

         The above matters are to be completed prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

 

         All recommendations of the Geotechnical Engineer are to be carried out during the course of the excavation. The applicant must give at least seven (7) days notice to the owner and occupiers of the adjoining allotments before the excavation works commence.

 

7.      That condition 123 be amended to read:

 

123.  Compliance Certificate: A Compliance Certificate, issued by a suitably accredited person, must be obtained confirming that the constructed erosion and sediment control measures comply with the construction plan and Lane Cove Council’s standards and specifications for stormwater drainage.

 

8.      That condition 156 be amended to read:

 

         156.  To improve the safety and operation of the New School Drop-Off Lane (NSDL) the following measures shall be implemented:

 

a)    A pedestrian deterrent shall be provided between the roundabout and the        NSDL. A pedestrian fence, to satisfy the Roads and Traffic Authority standards shall be provided along the median island.

b)    “P5 minute” time restriction signs shall be installed within the NSDL.

c)    “One Way” signs shall be used at the NSDL exit in addition to signs already shown.

d)    Pedestrian advance warning signs shall be placed between the wombat crossing and Longueville Road.

e)    “No Parking” signs shall be provided at the driveways within the NSDL to allow stopping but not parking.

f)     The first parking space marked to the east of the wombat crossing shall be deleted.

g)    The guard rail detail shall include an appropriate end terminal treatment that satisfies the Roads and Traffic Authority requirements.

h)    A minimum of 20m “No Stopping” zones shall be provided either side of the Austin Street wombat crossing.

 

These changes shall be detailed on the plans approved with the Construction Certificate.

 

9.      That condition 178 be amended to read:

 

         178.  The applicant is to provide a report form a  practicing civil engineer indicating that the “as built” NSDL structure has structural integrity, to be stable for the expected life of the project.

 

                  This document must be submitted to the Council prior to the issue of any      Occupation Certificate, or prior to the completion of the project.

 

                  In this case the structure/works to be certified are the entire road and NSDL.

 

                  The above document must be submitted to Council prior to any of the          following:

                  (a) issue of any Occupation Certificate or (b) use of the development.

 

10.    That condition 184 be amended to read:

 

         184.  (a)     The use of mechanical rock pick machines on building sites is prohibited                              due to the potential for damage to adjoining properties.

                  (b)     Notwithstanding the prohibition under condition (a), consideration will                                           be given to the use of rock pick machines and may be approved by                                     Council subject to:  

 

(1)     A Structural/geotechnical Engineer’s Report that indicates that the rock pick machine can be used without causing damage to the adjoining properties.

(2)     The report details the procedure to be followed in the use of the rock pick machine and all precautions to be taken to ensure damage does not occur to adjoining properties.

(3)     With the permission of the adjoining owners and occupiers comprehensive internal and external photographs are to be taken of the adjoining premises for evidence of any cracking and the general state of the premises PRIOR TO ANY WORK COMMENCING. Where approval of the owners/occupiers is refused they be advised of their possible diminished ability to seek damages (if any) from the developers and where such permission is still refused Council may exercise its discretion to grant approval.

(4)     The Geotechnical Engineer supervises the work and the work has been carried out in terms of the procedures laid down.

 

                  COMPLIANCE WITH THE REQUIREMENTS OF THIS CONDITION MUST BE SATISFIED PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

11.    That new condition 185 be added to the determination notice:

 

         185.  Notwithstanding any other condition of this approval, construction certificates and occupation certificates may be issued for separate stages or components of the approved development, provided that the Principal Certifying Authority is satisfied that all conditions of consent relevant to each stage have been complied with prior to the release of the construction certificate or occupation certificate for that stage. 

 

12.     That a new condition 186 be added to the determination notice:

 

          186.   Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the applicant is to submit details demonstrating that the loading docks have been tested for sweep paths and such comply with all relevant standards.  This is also to include turning movements showing the accessibility of the loading dock when one space is already occupied.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Traffic and Pedestrian Review from Parsons Brinckerhoff

4 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

Heritage assessment from Archnex Designs

4 Pages

 

AT‑3 View

Access Report from Accessibility Solutions

2 Pages

 

AT‑4 View

Schedule of architectural changes

16 Pages

 

AT‑5 View

Plans of proposal

15 Pages

 

 

 


ORDINARY COUNCIL

 

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION REPORT NO. 48

 

3 DECEMBER 2007

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council at the Meeting 3 December 2007

26/11/2007 to Ordinary Council

Environmental Services Division Report No. 48

Subject:           16 Private Road, Northwood    

Record No:     DA05/357 - 36194/07

Author(s):       Michael Mason 

 

 

Background

 

Council at its meeting dated 4 August 2007 resolved:

 

            “That development application number DA357/05 for the erection of a two storey dwelling house, separate garage for the parking of two vehicles and the erection of a swimming pool at 16 Private Road, Northwood, that:

 

           1.          Mediation by an independent mediator be conducted between the applicant, affected neighbours and Council by an independent mediator; and

          2.           After that mediation that the results of that mediation with a report be returned to Council for determination.”

 

A copy of the ESD Report No. 242 is provided as (AT1) to place a context to this report.

 

The Mediator

 

Having regard to the complex physical impact issues associated with the site, Mr John Tyrril was engaged to facilitate the mediation (Mr Tyrril’s CV is provided as AT2).  Mr Tyrril has a particular understanding of architectural matters as well as considerable experience as a professional mediator.  Mr Tyrril undertook to facilitate the mediation in early September 2007.  Unfortunately, given the number of stakeholders and full diaries the mediation was finally scheduled for Saturday 27 October for a 9am start at the Council Chambers.

 

The author provided Mr Tyrril with all necessary reports/plans and submissions by objectors as a context prior to the mediation of outstanding issues and assisted as and when necessary.

 

The Mediation

 

The nature of a mediation provides a without prejudice forum for stakeholders to discuss relevant outstanding issues and, hopefully, arrive at an agreed position or resolution.

 

The following people participated in the mediation:

 

·    The Mediator, Mr John Tyrril

·    The owner of 16 Private Road – Mr R Webber

·    His Architect – Mr David Cant

·    His Town Planner – Mr Kerry Nash

Adjoining owners:

·    Mr R Loneragan – 12 Private Road

·    Mr & Mrs Larking – 74A Northwood Road

·    Mr J Berry – 80A Northwood Road

·    Mr Davies – 78 Northwood Road

·    Mr Bradbury – 14 Private Road

·    Mrs Shore – 80 Northwood Road

 

The mediation commenced at 9am and concluded on or about 7pm the same day.

 

The formal Mediator’s Report is provided at (AT3).

 

Outcome of Mediation

 

Paragraph 18 of the Mediator’s Report states:

 

            “Since agreement was not reached between the applicants and complainants and the available options had been explored, the mediation concluded without agreement on resolution of  the objections.”

 

Notwithstanding the failure of stakeholders to reach agreement on the day, Mr Webber advised that he would stand by and refine concessions made at mediation with the view to the matter being determined by Council.  A formal mediation response letter has been provided by Mr Kerry Nash (AT4).

 

Mr Nash, on behalf of the owners, has provided Council further concessional amendments to the original development proposal in the following terms:

 

1.         Retain the palm tree to provide privacy screening between 74A Northwood Road (Larking Residence) and subject site.  It is proposed to relocate the palm tree by approximately 2.5 metres north-west of its current location thereby avoiding any change to the lower ground floor level and ground floor terrace.  The relocation of the palm tree will be undertaken with the supervision of a qualified arborist.

 

2.         The retained palm tree also provides a privacy screening role between existing dwellings at 12 Private Road, 76 and 78 Northwood Road.

 

3.         Provision of a 1700mm high privacy screen of toughened obscure glazing on the western end of the first floor balcony off proposed Dining Room to provide better privacy between both 78 Northwood Road (Davies residence) and the proposed dwelling on the subject site.

 

4.         Provide advanced planting within the subject site and the common boundary of 76 and 78 Northwood Road to provide screening of the proposed dwelling.  The details of appropriate plant species will be subject to the satisfaction of Council’s Landscape Architect and will not contribute to the overshadowing of 80A Northwood Road.

 

5.         Provide a 500mm fixed louvre privacy screen above the northern balustrade of the roof terrace to provide screening for 12 Private Road (Loneragan residence).  In the event that the tree canopy provides adequate screening the privacy screen can be deleted upon agreement between the parties (12 and 16 Private Road).

6.         Lower height of garage roof by 300mm to align with top of fence between 12 Private Road and subject site.

 

7.         Setback of eastern portion of first floor a further 800mm northwards to align with dining room façade to provide for increased solar access to 80A Northwood Road (Berry residence) in the a.m. period.  The change to the first floor can be achieved without a change to the building footprint.

 

8.         Remove mature eucalyptus tree north of the south-eastern corner of site in accordance with the recommendation of the arborist.  The removal of the substantial canopy will significantly improve solar access and natural light to the Berry dwelling and outdoor area in the a.m. period year round.

 

9.         An undertaking was also given to review the existing view corridors from the Larking residence at 74A Northwood Road.  Photographs provided by you (copy attached) clearly indicate that existing vegetation between the dwelling at 74A and the proposed dwelling obscures any view to be occupied by the building envelope of the proposed dwelling.  It is noted that this was also the conclusion reached by the Councillors during the on-site inspection held on 4 August 2007.

 

The above concessions add to existing concessions previously agreed to with staff (also refer to AT4 and original report AT1).

 

Executive Manager’s Comments

 

16 Private Road is a vacant parcel of land with development rights to construct a dwelling.  The development assessment reported to Council on 4 August 2007 recommended refusal on fifteen grounds.

 

The site exhibits a number of constraints that by and large have dictated the footprint and design of any dwelling that would occupy the land.  The applicant and his advisors have given consideration to all issues raised by adjoining owners during the mediation process.  The applicant has proposed further concessions in an effort to accommodate the concerns of his adjoining neighbours.

 

Notwithstanding the goodwill displayed by all participants, full agreement could not be reached during mediation and the matter has now been referred back to Council for determination.

 

Having regard to the applicant’s additional concessions to address identified concerns during mediation, draft consent conditions that include all concessions is provided at (AT5) for Council’s consideration.

 

I fully concur with the concluding comments, interalia, of the Mediator (Mr Tyrril) see paragraph 20.

 

            “Although the Complainants seemed unable to so accept or acknowledge at the mediation, the Applicants have to date made considerable, significant design changes to address complaints, particularly overshadowing to Mr Berry’s property (80A).  Those amendments are set out in Nash’s letter to Council of 5 November 2007.”

 

Given that the additional concessions and compromises put forward by the owners address the concerns of all neighbours to a greater or lesser degree I am of the view the application can now be approved should Council wish to determine the matter having regard to the draft conditions contained in AT5.

 

The matter is submitted for Council’s consideration and determination.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council determine the development proposal for 16 Private Road, Northwood.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

ESD Report No. 242 - 16 Private Road

19 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

Curriculum Vitae for Mr John Tyrril

7 Pages

 

AT‑3 View

Mediator's Report

6 Pages

 

AT‑4 View

Mediation response letter from Mr Kerry Nash

10 Pages

 

AT‑5 View

Draft consent conditions

13 Pages

 

 

  


ORDINARY COUNCIL

 

3 DECEMBER 2007

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council at the Meeting 3 December 2007

27/11/2007 to Ordinary Council

Human Services Division Report No. 27

Subject:           Community Partnership with  NSW Cancer Council    

Record No:     SU3126 - 36208/07

Author(s):       Jane Gornall 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The NSW Cancer Council has been conducting a campaign to have Councils adopt a formal community partnerships protocol, to assist both parties in working towards lowering the impact of cancer in the community. The Cancer Council was represented at the recent Local Government Conference at Coffs Harbour. Seventy-five (75)  Councils have now become community partners.

 

Discussion

 

The information received from the Cancer Council for committing to a formal partnership  lists the following positives for the community, the Council and the NSW Cancer Council: -

Programmes for the community:

·    Library stands and information resources

·    Smoke-free environments

·    Community speakers

·    Cancer support groups

·    Advocacy campaigns

 

Programmes for Councils:

·    Working with cancer – resource for HR departments

·    Media copy – resources for mayoral columns and newsletters

·    Sunsmart – guide and resources for childcare centre providers

·    Sun protection survey and tailored recommendation report

·    Sun products – wholesale pricing for Cancer Council merchandise

·    Shade solutions

·    Guidelines – smoke-free events and sun smart events

·    Sun protection for the workplace – seminars

·    Workplace sun protection – policy guide

·    Going smoke-free in the workplace

·    Healthy catering guidelines for Council functions and events

 

And the Cancer Council lists the following:

Programmes to assist the Cancer Council of NSW

·    Use of Council venues

·    Relay for Life

·    Biggest Morning Tea

·    Daffodil Day

·    Pink Ribbon Day

·    Girls Night In

·    International Treks

 

Lane Cove Council already participates in an informal way in many of the above activities.

 

The Cancer Council of NSW has provided the following detailed information (in italics) outlining the benefits of a formal agreement.

 

Cancer directly affects one in three people in the community – and everyone else will see and feel the impact in physical and emotional suffering, premature death and financial burden.  Australians have identified it as their number one health concern (Roy Morgan poll). 

 

While Local Government doesn’t have control over spending in hospitals or on Medicare, there are many ways to help reduce the impact of cancer on our community, and Councils are well placed to provide a real boost to the wellbeing of residents.

 

The Cancer Council NSW has been working with Local Government across NSW on an informal basis for a long time through a range of activities, including Relay For Life, Smoke-free playgrounds, advice on sun-safety for workers, and the provision of free cancer information through local libraries.

 

The Cancer Council NSW has approached Council to enter into a community partnership: a formal relationship between The Cancer Council NSW and Lane Cove Council.  This involves Council affirming its commitment to reduce the impact of cancer in the local community by –

 

·    Learning about and adopting new policies that will lead to a reduction in the incidence of cancer;

·    Supporting Cancer Council advocacy campaigns that benefit the residents of Lane Cove;

·    Using Council communication channels, venues, staff and networks to disseminate Cancer Council health promotion and patient support materials;

·    Helping the Cancer Council to support patients and their families in your community by allowing use of Council venues for support group meetings and education programs; and

·    Supporting Cancer Council efforts to raise money in the local area.

 

When Council becomes a Community Partner, the Cancer Council NSW will provide materials, draft policies, and a suggested range of activities free of charge.  Each year, new programs will be developed to help educate and support councils, their residents and their staff.  In the coming year these will include the provision of cancer information and support centres in local libraries; advice on shade provision in childcare centres and skin cancer prevention materials for older residents. 

 

The Cancer Council NSW will also provide free health-related copy for use in Council columns in newspapers and in Council newsletters.

 

Council will be required to nominate two senior staff as Relationship Managers with the Cancer Council.  These people will receive all correspondence from The Cancer Council NSW regarding the Partnership, and will facilitate future contact with appropriate Council staff as needed.

 

The Cancer Council NSW will provide information updates on a quarterly basis to Council’s Relationship Managers. Council will then be able to decide which programs to participate in.

 

Conclusion

 

The Cancer Council of NSW has provided the following recommended motion (in italics). While the paper proposes a simpler motion – it is understood that in general the Council would commit, where possible, to assisting in the work of the Cancer Council through this program.

 

Lane Cove Council acknowledges the high level of physical and emotional suffering, premature death and financial burden caused by cancer in this community.  By becoming a Cancer Council Community Partner, we undertake to help lower the impact of this insidious disease in our community by –

 

·    Learning about and adopting new policies that will help reduce the incidence of cancer in our area.

·    Supporting Cancer Council advocacy campaigns that will benefit the people of our community.

·    Using our communication channels, venues and networks to help deliver Cancer Council information and education.

·    Allowing free use of Council venues and other resources for support group meetings, education programs and other activities that benefit cancer patients and their families in our area.

·    Supporting Cancer Council efforts in our area to raise money for cancer research, prevention and support.

 

The Community Partnership Program requires the nomination of two Senior Staff members as the dedicated Relationship Managers. Discussions with the General Manager have indicated that he will nominate the Executive Manager, Environmental Services and the Executive Manager, Human Services as the Relationships Managers.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That:-

 

1.         Council affirms its commitment to reducing the impact of cancer in the local community by             entering into a formal Community Partnership with the Cancer Council of NSW.

 

2.         That the General Manager nominate appropriate staff to be the Relationship Managers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jane Gornall

Executive Manager - Human Services

Human Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

      

***** END OF AGENDA *****