Lane Cove Council

 

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council

 

 

 

AGENDA

 

 

 

DATE OF MEETING:          17 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

 

17 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.       General Managers Report No. 34

SUBJECT: Proposed Partial Road Closure and Sale - Nield Ave

It is recommended that the Council close so much of the meeting to the public as provided for under Section 10A(2) (d) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that the report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret; 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 that the report discusses commercial negotiations concerning the sale of part of Neild Avenue.

 

2.       Human Services Division Report No. 30

SUBJECT: Tender for the Reinstatement of the Rowing Shed Tambourine Bay

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.  Tenders have provided sensitive information about their operations in the confidence that their details will 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.

 

3.       Environmental Services Division Report No. 56

SUBJECT: Discussions with Legal Representatives on 24e Upper Cliff Road, Northwood

It is recommended that the Council close so much of the meeting to the public as provided for under Section 10A(2) (g) of the Local Government Act, 1993, on the grounds that the report contains advice concerning litigation, or advice as comprises a discussion of this matter, that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege; 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 the issues contained in the report are substantial issues relating to a litigious matter in which Council is involved, and are clearly identified and fully discussed in the advice in the report.

  

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS

 

Council at its meeting of the 13th May 1996, resolved in part that:

 

At the second Council meeting (third Monday) of each month, people who wish to address Council on an issue (for a maximum of three minutes) be allowed to do so at the conclusion of Closed Committee.

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

4.      ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING - 3 DECEMBER 2007

 

 

 

Notices of Rescission

 

5.       Notice of Rescission No. 1

SUBJECT: 24e Upper Cliff Road, Northwood

 

Orders Of The Day

 

6.       Order Of The Day No. 24

SUBJECT: Council and Committee Meeting Dates for 2008

 

General Managers Reports

 

7.       General Managers Report No. 32

SUBJECT: Draft Planning Controls - Little Lane carpark Redevelopment

 

8.       General Managers Report No. 33

SUBJECT: NSW Legislative Council Inquiry into Electoral and Political Party Funding

 

9.       General Managers Report No. 35

SUBJECT: Interim Report - Proposed Development Controls for part of 314 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove

 

Corporate Services Division Reports

 

10.     Corporate Services Division Report No. 62

SUBJECT: Members of the Public Addressing Council Meetings


 

11.     Corporate Services Division Report No. 63

SUBJECT: Delegation of Authority During the Christmas Recess

 

Open Space and Urban Services Division Reports

 

12.     Open Space and Urban Services Division Report No. 41

SUBJECT: Street Parties - Draft Policy and Procedures...................... 23

 

13.     Open Space and Urban Services Division Report No. 45

SUBJECT: Greener, Safer Fleet - Update......................................................... 26

 

14.     Open Space and Urban Services Division Report No. 46

SUBJECT: Introduction of Car Sharing Scheme to Lane Cove.......... 28

 

Environmental Services Division Reports

 

15.     Environmental Services Division Report No. 46

SUBJECT: Draft Signage and Advertising DCP........................................... 34

 

16.     Environmental Services Division Report No. 52

SUBJECT: Draft Comprehensive LEP 2007........................................................ 38

 

17.     Environmental Services Division Report No. 53

SUBJECT: 1 Nundah Street, Lane Cove............................................................ 48

 

18.     Environmental Services Division Report No. 6

SUBJECT: Planning Reforms - Discussion Paper....................................... 54

 

19.     Environmental Services Division Report No. 54

SUBJECT: 16 Private Road, Northwood.......................................................... 56

 

20.     Environmental Services Division Report No. 548

SUBJECT: 24-28 Lane Cove Plaza, Lane Cove................................................. 61

 

Human Services Division Reports

 

21.     Human Services Division Report No. 29

SUBJECT: Shoreshocked 2008.............................................................................. 96

  

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

 

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

 

 


ORDINARY COUNCIL

 

NOTICE OF RESCISSION NO. 1

 

17 DECEMBER 2007

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council at the Meeting 17 December 2007

13/12/2007 to Ordinary Council

Notice of Rescission No. 1

Subject:           24e Upper Cliff Road, Northwood    

Record No:     DA05/46-01 - 38344/07

Author(s):       Councillor Ian Longbottom; Councillor Win Gaffney; Councillor Ann Smith 

 

 

Discussion

 

Rescission Motion

 

Councillors Gaffney, Smith and Longbottom have given notice to rescind the resolution of Council on 19 November 2007 in relation to Environmental Services Division Report No. 42 – “24e Upper Cliff Road”. The resolution was as follows:-

 

            “That Council continue legal proceedings in this matter”.

 

Proposed Motion

 

In the event that the rescission motion is carried Councillors Gaffney, Smith and Longbottom have given notice that they intend to move the following motion:

 

            “That Council have regard to discussions between legal representatives from both parties arising from Mayoral Minute No. 6 and determine the most appropriate way forward”.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council’s resolution of Council on 19 November 2007 in relation to Environmental Services Division Report No. 42 – “24e Upper Cliff Road” be rescinded.

 

 

 

 

 

Councillor Ian Longbottom

Councillor - West Ward

Lane Cove Council

 

 

 

Councillor Ann Smith

Councillor - Central Ward

Lane Cove Council

 

 

 

Councillor Win Gaffney

Councillor - West Ward

Lane Cove Council

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

        


ORDINARY COUNCIL

 

ORDER OF THE DAY NO. 24

 

17 DECEMBER 2007

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council at the Meeting 17 December 2007

7 December 2007 to Ordinary Council

Order Of The Day No. 24

Subject:           Council and Committee Meeting Dates for 2008    

Record No:     SU1915 - 37649/07

Author(s):       Ian Naylor 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The purpose of this report is to advise Council of the proposed Council and Committee Meeting Dates for 2008.

 

Discussion

 

The proposed Council and Committee Meeting Dates for 2008 is shown in the schedule attached as AT1.  The first Council Meeting is scheduled for Monday 4 February 2008.  The first Meeting in the Plaza is not due until Saturday 23 February 2008.

 

 

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the schedule of Council and Committee Meeting Dates for 2008, attached as AT1 be adopted.

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Wrightson

Executive Manager

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Lane Cove Council & Committee Meeting Dates 2008

1 Page

 

 

   


ORDINARY COUNCIL

 

GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT NO. 32

 

17 DECEMBER 2007

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council at the Meeting 17 December 2007

11/12/2007 to Ordinary Council

General Managers Report No. 32

Subject:           Draft Planning Controls - Little Lane carpark Redevelopment    

Record No:     SU2992 - 37999/07

Author(s):       John Lee 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report sets out the proposed development controls prepared by Scape and Scott Carver P/L (Scott Carver) for the redevelopment of Little Lane Carpark.  The report considers the way forward to achieve Council’s primary outcome in regard to additional carparking on this site and includes recommendations to progress redevelopment in a timely manner.

 

Background

 

In the General Manager’s Report No. 13 to the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 18 June 2007, Council approved the independent development of planning controls for the Little Lane Carpark site.  On 8 August 2007, Scott Carver were appointed as expert and independent planning consultants.  After initial consultation with the community, they considered a number of options and developed preliminary planning controls.  These controls were discussed at a workshop with Councillors on 12 November 2007.  Further workshops / briefings were held with:-

 

·    resident and community groups more directly affected by any redevelopment on the 20 November 2007,

·    the Lane Cove ALIVE Board on 27 November 2007;

·    consultants developing the Lane Cove Village Structure Plan; and

·    a number of residents unable to attend workshops.

 

Scape and Scott Carver Planning Report

 

The Scott Carver report in Attachment 1 (which has been circulated separately to Councillors) sets out the proposed planning controls for the redevelopment of Little Lane Carpark.  Their Executive Summary is reproduced here for completeness:-

 

“This report on the Development of Planning Controls for Little Lane Car Park has been prepared by Scott Carver on behalf of Lane Cove Council in response to Council’s desire to redevelop the existing Public Car Parking Area known as the Little Lane Car Park located at 1-5 Little Street, Lane Cove. The site has been identified as suitable for redevelopment site because of its strategic location to the Lane Cove Commercial Business District.

 

Council’s primary objectives for the site is to increase public car parking on the site to around 150 spaces and to incorporate a mix of residential development, retail, professional offices and community facilities, the sale of which has a positive return to Council to fund other community facilities.

Also as part of the development of planning controls for Little Lane Car Park, the linkages between the Lane Cove Town Centre and surrounding land uses such as the aquatic centre, Pottery Green and the new bus interchange at the intersection of Epping Road with Longueville Road have been investigated to identify strategies for strengthening the relationship between the village and the future community benefits the site will deliver.

 

The planning controls were developed through analysis, community consultation, development of design principles, preparation of building envelopes, and finally recommendations for specific controls which can be included within Council’s Consolidated Draft Local Environmental Plan 2007. Throughout the process, Council has provided the consultant with feedback and information has been made available on Council’s website associated with the Major Projects weblink. This has enabled the project to progress, stage by stage, in an open and transparent manner.

 

Character Principles 

 

·    Reinforce the existing character created by building setbacks

·    Design buildings to respond to the climate, topography and setting

·    Protect and share views to the east

 

Below are selected planning controls recommended for Little Lane Car Park, which are described in greater detail in Chapter 5:

 

·    A desirable ground floor space of 1,170 square metres to be used for commercial/community use

·    The maximum FSR is not to exceed 2.55:1 • The overall height is not to exceed RL 101.26 at the top of the lift overrun.

·    Controls are proposed in relation to internal and external amenity such as setbacks, solar access, separation distances,

·    Requiring the future built form to break down bulk and scale through upper level and side setbacks, and roof design

·    Promoting an environmentally responsive building with high quality indoor and outdoor spaces

·    Slow traffic and increase pedestrian safety and connectivity with streetscape improvements to Little Lane and Little Street such as the provision and widening footpaths being integrated with building setbacks

·    Creating a strong, feature element at the intersection of Little Street with Little Lane and enable the visual link to the aquatic centre to be maintained

·    Provide adequate parking to serve the future site development for use by workers, residents and visitors, without compromising streetscape character and the pedestrian environment.”

 

The Scott Carver report was prepared so that it can be made available as a supporting document to the DLEP 2007 with respect to Little Lane Carpark during the public exhibition period. The draft Lane Cove Local Environment Plan 2007 (DLEP 2007) contains the FSR and height controls for this site proposed by Scott Carver.  A site specific Development Control Plan (DCP) will need to be prepared to incorporate the remaining development controls as may be necessary to guide development on that site.  It is expected that the DCP will be prepared early next year for exhibition to allow its consideration at the same time as the Lane Cove Local Environment Plan 2008 (LEP2008).

 

Public Parking

 

Little Lane currently has 86 parking spaces.  Council may give some consideration to increasing the public carparking included in this development from 150 spaces (identified in the Major Projects Plan and the Scott Carver report) to 200 public spaces having regard to expanding membership and services offered by the Aquatic Centre.  Structural parking under Little Lane provides greater flexibility in achieving a combination of lift and level pedestrian access between the public carpark and Longueville Road.  Further investigations will consider the feasibility of a direct connection between the Little Lane Carpark and the Aquatic Centre.

 

Community / Commercial Space

 

This site provides an ideal opportunity to achieve commercial space along the Little Lane frontage and community space fronting Little Street and the rear of the commercial.  The combined area is in the order of  1,170 m2.  Whilst this is not a mandatory requirement, as the space could easily be another level of residential or identified for other uses, the area provides Council with an opportunity to maintain the real estate interest as well as receive an ongoing income stream to offset against the operating costs.  Subject to more detailed assessment, this area is included as a minimum outcome for Council from the development.

 

Preferred Building Envelope

 

The site is constrained by trees along Little Street, view lines and setbacks to neighbouring properties.  Option 3b is the preferred building envelope for the site (Figure 7 on page 28 of the Scott Carver Report).  This comprises a single lift core (maybe with multiple lifts) and minimises inefficiencies in circulation and loss of parking spaces within each level of parking (both private and public).

 

In recommending Option 3b, it will be an important architectural exercise to:-

 

·    minimise any perceived bulk; and

·    maintain a minimum of 3 hours of solar access as at 21 June to the adjacent residents.

 

Key Milestones

 

If the controls in the LEP 2008 are gazetted, the type of development envisaged would be permissible.  There are also three key milestones which will influence how this project might progress from a planning perspective.  These are the:-

 

·    S69 report to the Minister for Planning following the exhibition of the DLEP 2007.  This strengthens the degree of certainty knowing Council’s position in regard to LEP 2008.  This is unlikely to occur before May 2008.

·    adoption of a Development Control Plan for Little Lane carpark; and

·    gazettal of LEP 2008, after which development on this site may commence.  In noting the requirements for the Parliamentary Counsel to review LEP 2008 including any amendments from DLEP 2007, gazettal is unlikely to occur prior to August 2008.

Endorsing the proposed development controls for this site will be an important step informing community in relation to the DLEP2007.  These draft controls also provide a reasonable basis to proceed with the design phase of the project, culminating in a development application, recognising that any development undertaken will need to comply with the gazetted LEP 2008.  Although the Little Lane carpark is a discrete site, any development on it may have an influence on or be influenced by other studies for the Lane Cove CBD including the Land Cove ALIVE Village Structure Plan, the Retail Marketing Strategy and/or the Cultural Centre Study.

 

Defined Outcomes

 

A prerequisite in tendering or seeking expressions of interest is to clearly identify the essential deliverables to Council from the development.  These include:-

 

i.          Unencumbered Strata Title in favour of Council for a public carpark having not less than 200 public parking spaces

ii.          Unencumbered Strata Title in favour of Council for not less than  1,170 m2 of gross lettable area suitable for community and/or commercial use directly accessible at the street level for Little Lane

iii.         An acceptable financial benefit having regard to the market value of the Land and combined value of the unencumbered strata tiles outlined above, demonstrating that Council has received best value from the development.

 

Tendering Options

 

There are a number of ways forward for Council.  While there is no one “right” approach to achieving a development that is not inconsistent with the endorsed planning controls, the following merit based discussion considers tendering options calling for :-

 

(i)         expressions of interest for private sector involvement to redevelop the Little Lane Carpark; and

(ii)        calling for open tenders to prepare the necessary documentation for a development application which would be lodged as soon as it is legally possible to do so.

 

Council will recall that a number of guidelines were developed in consultation with the community.  Section 6.3.9 – Project Delivery provides that:

 

“Council will, for each project, assess the method of project delivery to maximise the financial returns recognising, where applicable, the financial value of any community benefit.  Wherever possible, Council will control development of all sites through to completion.

Council owned land for a project included in the Plan will not be sold to a developer by public tender without:-

 

a)   first having obtained development consent satisfactory to both Council and the Developer; and

b)   including contractual requirements:

i)          of the developer to undertake the development approved by the satisfactory development consent as an essential condition of contract for sale; and

ii)         of Council to retain ownership of Council land until the essential terms of the consent have been complied with.”

 


(i)         Expressions of Interest

 

Calling for expressions of interest (EOI) is the first part of the two staged selective tender process outlined in Clause 168 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, and requires Council to agree to enter a proposed contract by that method. 

 

In this case, an EOI could:-

 

a)         be limited to a design or ideas competition or the like ;

b)         identify any person, corporation or other entity with experience in fulfilling the requirements of similar contracts and having the capacity to fulfill Council’s requirements to prepare a development application for a mixed use development that is not inconsistent with the endorsed planning controls; or

c)         identify any person, corporation or other entity with experience in fulfilling the requirements of similar contracts and having the capacity to fulfill Council’s requirements for the redevelopment of the Little Lane carpark from concept to completion.  This not only includes the DA from (b) above but also the building and sales.  It may also include lease / operation of the public carpark, commercial and/or community facilities.

 

In the case of (a) for a design or ideas competition, its benefit is limited as the site is quite limited in size, will be subject to site setbacks and height restrictions and FSR, the latter two both being a function of solar access requirements.  The work undertaken by Scott Carver may be regarded as a master plan for the site by setting the parameters and building envelopes by which development is constrained.  In the case of (b) above the EOI is an extra step to the open tender process and unnecessarily adds at least 35 days before a tender submission is received from which a contract to prepare a development application may ensue.  Ideally the tenderer, if not an architect, would nominate a key person with relevant architectural experience to take a lead role.

 

An EOI envisaged by (c) above has private sector involvement from concept to completion including preparation of a development application, and once consent is obtained, completing the development.  Before seeking expressions of interest, documentation would need to contain sufficient probative (relevantly detailed financial) material to form the basis of lawful and ethical decisions by Council.   It would be preferable to have certainty in planning controls before moving to the second stage of seeking tenders from selected applicants.  In any event, the tender specification will need to be comprehensive and subject to Council approval.

 

As carparking and community / commercial floor space are essential outcomes, it is assumed that there is no intention to sell the land to a developer (where Council would have no further approval role other than as a consent authority).  Decisions relating to the delivery of this project where the cost of works or services exceeds $150,000 will trigger the tendering provisions and regulations.  As a consequence, if Council decides to proceed, it would be required to seek tenders from selected EOI applicants.  Significant time must be allowed in reaching a satisfactory Deed of Agreement / Contract after receipt of tenders.

 

Assuming also that Council maintains a financial interest in the project at least through ownership of the land, Council will also need to carefully consider the extent, if any, to which the provisions of Part 6 of Chapter 12 of the LG Act, with respect to public-private partnerships (PPP) apply, and the timeframe involved in securing the necessary approvals to enter into a PPP.  By way of caution, any private sector arrangement must not, as a result of any kind of default, result in Council losing control or ownership of its carpark.

 

(ii)        Open Tenders for a Development Application

 

Tenders would be sought from any person, corporation or other entity with experience in fulfilling the requirements of similar contracts and having the capacity to fulfill Council’s requirements to prepare a development application for a mixed use development that is not inconsistent with the endorsed planning controls.  Ideally the tenderer, if not an architect, would nominate a key person with relevant architectural experience to take a lead role.  The tender documentation will require a detailed economic analysis on the best mix of uses to be included in the development and key hold points such as Council agreement on concept plans, key stakeholder consultation and pre lodgement of the DA.  This approach is preferred for the following reasons:-

 

a)         It achieves a Development Application in the shortest timeframe possible;

b)         Lodgement of the DA would occur soon as legally possible;

c)         Council can then test the market to secure private sector involvement with a high degree of certainty on what it wants developed;

d)         There is a reasonable lead time between the S69 Report and gazettal in which to resolve PPP issues as well as prepare detailed building plans suitable for contract and obtain the Construction Certificate without delay to commencement; and

e)         Council maintains much better control of outcomes.

 

Local Government Amendment Bill 2007

 

The Local Government Amendment Bill 2007 has passed both houses of parliament and makes a number of changes to Section 55 of the LG Act which have relevance to this project.  The amendments include tendering for a contract to enter into a public-private partnership and extends the operation of Section 55 of the Act to require compliance with the requirements of section 55 (including any regulations made under that section) even though the contract to which that section applies involves something being done to or by an entity that the council has formed or participated in forming.

 

Preferred Steps

 

The preferred steps outlined below do not preclude alternate proposals being considered, provided that the proposals are competitively received as part of normal tendering processes.  The steps are not all strictly in chronological order:-

 

(i)         Council endorses the height and FSR controls prepared by Scott Carver for inclusion in the DLEP2007;

(ii)        Council endorses the principle of extending parking under Little Lane;

(iii)       Council adopts a probity plan governing all commercial dealings;

(iv)       Council’s Strategic Planning Section considers the remaining development controls identified by Scott Carver for inclusion in a draft site specific Development Control Plan (DDCP) and reports back to Council in February 2008 recommending the DDCP be placed on public exhibition and considered at the same time as the LEP2008 is considered by Council;

(v)        Tenders are called to prepare the documentation necessary to lodge a development application.  Approval to appoint a tenderer would be sought at the first ordinary meeting of Council in March 2008.  The tender documentation will:-

·    Indicate that the development must address the endorsed development controls and with the provisions in DLEP 2007;

·    provide the necessary flexibility in the documentation to easily respond to any changes to the development controls to be sanctioned in the Section 69 Report approving the LEP 2008;

·    require an economic assessment of the uses to be included in the building to maximise the financial return to Council;

·    Identify key hold points for reference back to Council;

·    set out the minimum outcomes Council must achieve including the number of publicly available carparking spaces to be provided in the development, the amount of community space to be provided, the amount of commercial space to remain in Council ownership and other relevant matters;

(vi)       The appointed tenderer to consult further with key stakeholders and prepare the documentation necessary to lodge a development application for a mixed use development that is not inconsistent with the endorsed development controls prepared by Scott Carver;

(vii)      Once a development application is lodged, it will be independently assessed and reported to Council for determination; 

(viii)      Assuming a consent is issued, Council will be required to determine whether the development consent is satisfactory and if so whether to proceed with:

a.   construction by open or selective tender;

b.   open or selective tendering to enter into contract for a joint venture with Council under public private partnership guidelines (PPP); or

c.   the sale of the land by open tender subject to completion of the approved development and on what terms. 

(ix)       Finalisation of the building design including tender documentation for the building and construction certificate;

(x)        Commence sales including a commitment for 30% of presales prior to commencement of construction to minimise risk;

(xi)       Building construction; and

(xii)      Complete the development including strata, sales, probity review, etc

 

Probity

 

It is essential that all dealings which involve commercial dealings are subject to a probity plan and all actions reviewable by an independent external probity auditor.  The probity plan is to ensure that in Council’s commercial dealings, the highest standard of probity is to be observed.

Business dealings must be fair, open and demonstrate the highest level of integrity consistent with the public interest.  Council decisions in relation to all aspects of each project from concept to completion are (and are seen to be):-

 

a)         soundly based on logically persuasive facts and/or materials;

b)         supported, where appropriate, by expert opinion;

c)         free of bias, partiality and pre-judgment of issues;

d)         made only after Council has fully informed itself of all relevant considerations and only after due enquiry;

e)         free of extraneous considerations; and

f)          supported by reasons;

 

Attachment 2 is the probity plan for this project for Council’s endorsement.

 

Conclusion

 

The draft development controls as recommended by Scott Carver provide an appropriate envelope in which to develop this site.  Every effort will be made in the design process to preserve the mature trees along the Little Street frontage.  Increasing the carparking area to extend under Little Lane and increasing the supply of public carparking to 200 spaces responds to issues raised during public consultation and in particular with increased demand on the Aquatic Centre facilities. 

 

FSR and height controls are outlined in the DLEP 2007.  The remaining controls are best handled by way of a site specific Development Control Plan to be prepared early in 2008.  While there is still a time lag until there is some level of certainty in regard to the final planning controls adopted under the LEP 2008 and a DCP, Council’s endorsement of the development controls is sufficient to proceed with preparing a Development Application to be lodged as soon as legally possible, recognising that no action can be taken on any consent issued for this development until after LEP 2008 is gazetted.

 

Council initially sought a spot rezoning in 2006 to allow a redevelopment of this site to proceed with the primary focus of achieving more public carparking paid for from the development proceeds.  The Major Projects Strategic Management Plan also identified that redevelopment of this site was a priority.  There is no question that additional carparking is required on this site as soon as possible.  Additional parking was identified during community consultation with increased usage at the Aquatic Centre.  It is recommended that tenders be called for a development application incorporating not less than 200 public parking spaces and that parking may extend under Little Lane.  Including not less than 1,170 m2 of commercial / community floor space as a minimum outcome from the development provides Council more flexibility in providing community facilities and well as securing annual rental income to offset operating costs.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:

 

1.   Endorse the Planning Controls as set out in the attached Planning Report on the Little Lane Carpark prepared by Scape and Scott Carver Pty Ltd;

 

2.   Include the endorsed planning controls by way of background information as a supporting document to the draft Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2007 when placed on public exhibition, noting that Appendix D of the report which contains confidential financial information will not be made available;

 

3.   Endorse the principle of including structural parking under Little Lane and Little Street into the project;

 

4.   Adopt the attached probity plan governing all commercial dealings;

 

5.   Authorise the General Manager to appoint an independent external probity auditor;

 

6.   Authorise the General Manager to seek open tenders to prepare documentation suitable for lodgement of a development application that is not inconsistent with the draft Planning Controls prepared by Scott Carver and adopted by Council and having regard to the following:-

 

(a)        carparking extending under Little Lane to allow for a future lift and pedestrian connection within a future redevelopment of one or more properties along Longueville Road;

(b)        possible carparking extending under Little Street to access the Aquatic Centre;

(c)        retention of as many mature trees as possible along the Little Street frontage;

(d)        Minimum outcomes for the site being:

i. Unencumbered Strata Title in favour of Council for a public carpark having not less than 200 public parking spaces

ii. Unencumbered Strata Title in favour of Council of not less than 1,170 m2 of gross lettable area suitable for community and/or commercial use directly accessible at the street level for Little Lane

iii.            An acceptable financial benefit having regard to the market value of the Land and combined value of the unencumbered strata tiles outlined above, demonstrating that Council has received best value from the development; and

(e)        an opportunity for tenderers to submit, in addition to a conforming tender, alternate not conforming tenders or tender options.

 

7.   Request the General Manager to report back to Council on the tender evaluation process no later than 3 March 2008 with recommendations on how to complete the development in a timely and cost efficient manner; and

 

8.   Request the General Manager to consider the remaining development controls identified by Scott Carver for inclusion in a draft site specific Development Control Plan (DDCP) and reports back to Council in February 2008 recommending the DDCP be placed on public exhibition and considered at the same time as the LEP2008 is considered by Council.

 

 

 

 

 

Peter Brown

General Manager

General Managers Unit

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Att 1 - Draft Planning Controls for the redevelopment of Little Lane Carpark - Scape and Scott Carver Report. NB This has been circulated seperately to Councillors.

232 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

Att 2 - Probity Plan - Redevelopment of Little Lane Carpark

13 Pages

 

 

 


ORDINARY COUNCIL

 

GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT NO. 33

 

17 DECEMBER 2007

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council at the Meeting 17 December 2007

11/12/2007 to Ordinary Council

General Managers Report No. 33

Subject:           NSW Legislative Council Inquiry into Electoral and Political Party Funding    

Record No:     su3137 - 38061/07

Author(s):       Peter Brown 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The NSW Legislative Council has established a Select Committee on Electoral and Political Party Funding to conduct an inquiry into the funding of, and the disclosure of donations to political parties and candidates in NSW State and Local Government Elections.  The purpose of this report is to advise Council of the inquiry and recommend that Council prepare a submission.

 

Background

 

Council has received a letter from the Hon. Fred Nile MLC who has been appointed Chairman of the Select Committee Inquiry into Electoral and Political Funding inviting council to make a submission.  A copy of the select committees term of reference and the Committee membership is shown attached as AT1. 

 

The Select Committee has also published a discussion paper to encourage debate on the issues to be examined by the Committee.  The discussion paper is available on the committees website at www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/partyfunding. 

 

The discussion paper for the Select Committee discusses several areas in which the inquiry could recommend reform.  Those areas include reforming the Election Funding Act 1981 which governs the funding of elections and political parties in NSW, reviewing the current structure of the Election Funding Authority and the transparency of its operation, reviewing both public funding and political donations including the amounts and sources of these donations, reviewing disclosure of political donations and reviewing election expenditure and the amounts that are currently required by legislation to be disclosed.

 

The closing date for submissions is 15 February 2008 and the committee intends to hold public hearings following the closing date for submissions.

 

Discussion

 

In recent years the Local Government Association Conference and several councils have passed motions calling for the banning of donations to political parties.  The Local Government Association Conference in 2005 passed a motion that the Local Government Association supports amendments to the legislation governing all elections to ensure the transparency of donations is made to candidates for election to Federal, State and Local Government.  In 2006, the Local Government Association passed a motion that a letter be sent to the Federal Government seeking a National Summit to develop a national strategy to fundamentally reform in a co-ordinated manner all the financial donations received for all three levels of Australian Government.  The result of these motions have been that the Federal Government has convened a Joint Standing Committee on Electoral Matters and implemented some of their recommendations but there has been no change to the State legislation as a result of these motions.

 

Leichhardt Council on 12 December 2006 resolved to call on the NSW State Government to change the Local Government Act 1993, in order to ban property industry donations to political parties and individuals in the future and requesting all Councillors who have accepted donations from corporations, partnerships and individuals whose businesses involves property development declare the details, amounts and extent of those donations and to absence themselves from any debate and not vote on any motion or recommendation on where such donors may receive a benefit from that outcome or that vote. 

 

Shellharbour City Council in March 2005 resolved that the Local Government Association be requested to make representations on its behalf to the State Government to change the appropriate legislation so that;  all donations from any source be banned including fundraising by way of functions; candidates form elections be required to supply the names and addresses, for inclusion in a public register, of any person who has donated time, equipment or any other effort to their campaign and Councillors be prevented from taking part in debate or voting on issues relating to matters before Council where financial and in kind support for candidates seeking local government office have been provided for their election campaign including property developers. 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council prepare a submission to the Select Committee on Electoral and Political Party Funding supporting a ban on donations from property developers to candidates seeking office for Local and State Government as it can compromise the availability, transparency and openness of the Development Application process. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Peter Brown

General Manager

General Managers Unit

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Terms of Reference

2 Pages

 

 

 


ORDINARY COUNCIL

 

GENERAL MANAGERS REPORT NO. 35

 

17 DECEMBER 2007

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council at the Meeting 17 December 2007

13/12/2007 to Ordinary Council

General Managers Report No. 35

Subject:           Interim Report - Proposed Development Controls for part of 314 Burns Bay Road, Lane Cove    

Record No:     SU2589 - 38349/07

Author(s):       John Lee 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This interim report provides an update on the proposed development controls proposed for the redevelopment of 314 Burns Bay Road.

 

Background

 

In the General Manager’s Report No. 14 to the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 18 June 2007, Council approved the independent development of planning controls for the 314 Burns Bay Road.

On 8 August 2007, Scape and Scott Carver Pty Ltd (Scott Carver) were appointed as expert and independent planning consultants.  After initial consultation with the community, they considered a number of options and developed preliminary planning controls.  These controls were discussed at a workshop with Councillors on 12 November 2007.  Two further workshops were held with residents in the vicinity of 314 Burns Bay Road on 21 November 2007.

Discussion

At the time this report was prepared, the Scott Carver report had not been received as they were investigating a further option to reduce the scale of the building envelope presenting to Burns Bay Road with an increase in height for part of the development located adjacent to 296 Burns Bay Road.  They have also considered the relationship of the development when viewed from Burns Bay.

Councillors will recall at the workshop held on 12 November 2007 that Scott Carver indicated that the draft planning controls would include 6 levels of residential and an FSR of 2.02:1.

This further option will be included in their report with an increase in height by 1 level for part of the building and an FSR of 2:3, controlled by a modified building envelope as shown in Attachment 1. 

This Council Meeting Agenda includes a report on the proposed adoption of the draft Lane Cove Local Environment Plan. The Scott Carver report was prepared to be available as a supporting document during the DLEP2007 exhibition period, to provide the community with further details on the site.  It is recommended that when the Scott Carver report is received, it me made available as part of the exhibition, with a notation that the report has not yet been endorsed by Council and that a further report is to be presented on this matter to the first ordinary meeting of Council in February 2008.  

Discussions with the community have been premised on the draft Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2007 addressing an appropriate zoning R4 to allow high density, and suspension or release of covenants and on a change in land classification from Community Land to Operational under the Local Government Act occurring as separate processes.  It expected that a report on these matters will also be presented to Council in February 2008.

Site constraints include poor internal road geometry approaching the Burns Bay Road signalised intersection, potential access to the adjacent Tuta site, an energy easement along the southern boundary, a main sewerage main across the site and proximity to Burns Bay Road.

While not planning control issues, providing for pedestrian access and additional parking for recreational use will be incorporated into the overall scheme.

 

Conclusion

 

The Scott Carver report has been prepared as a supporting document to the DLEP2007 exhibition period. Its inclusion will provide the community with further detail on the future of the site. It is recommended that when the Scott Carver report is received, it me made available as part of the DLEP2007 exhibition.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:-

 

1.   Note that the report on the proposed development controls for 314 Burns Bay Road prepared by Scott Carver will be made available as a supporting document to the draft Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2007 when it is placed on public exhibition with advice that the report has not yet been endorsed by Council;

2.   Request the General Manager to report back to Council in February 2008 on:

(a)        the proposed development controls for 314 Burns Bay Road prepared by Scott Carver; and

(b)        the process to change in classification under the Local Government Act for that part being rezoned as Residential R4 from Community Land to Operational.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Peter Brown

General Manager

General Managers Unit

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


ORDINARY COUNCIL

 

CORPORATE SERVICES DIVISION REPORT NO. 62

 

17 DECEMBER 2007

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council at the Meeting 17 December 2007

7/12/2007 to Ordinary Council

Corporate Services Division Report No. 62

Subject:           Members of the Public Addressing Council Meetings    

Record No:     su824 - 37677/07

Author(s):       Ian Naylor 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

 

The purpose of this report is to clarify the recent resolution passed by Council on allowing members of the public to address the 1st Council Meeting of the month and review its operation.

 

 

Background

 

 

On 13 May 1995, Council passed a resolution giving members of the public the opportunity to address the 2nd Council Meeting of each month for 3 minutes on any matter.  This practice has been in place for the last 12 years. 

 

 

On 8 June 2007, Council passed a resolution giving members of the public the opportunity to address the 1st Council Meeting of each month for 3 minutes on any matter.

 

 

Discussion

 

The resolution passed on 8 June 2007 makes a distinction between the matters that can be raised by members of the public at the 2 Council Meetings during a month.  The benefit of this distinction is that any matter can be raised on the 3rd Monday only and the discussion on the 1st Monday is focussed on the items listed on the Agenda for that Meeting.

 

 

At recent Meetings a number of speakers at the 1st Meeting of the month have spoken on any issue which strictly does not accord with Council’s Resolution of 8 June 2007. 

 

 

To clarify this issue formally, Council should determine its preference and decide whether to:-

 

(i)         allow people to address the 1st Council Meeting of the month only on items listed in the Agenda for that meeting only; or

 

(ii)        to allow members of the public to address the Council Meeting on any issue for a maximum of 3 minutes at either the 3rd Monday of the month only, or at both meetings each month.

 


 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council give consideration to this matter.

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Wrightson

Executive Manager

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


ORDINARY COUNCIL

 

OPEN SPACE AND URBAN SERVICES DIVISION REPORT NO. 41

 

17 DECEMBER 2007

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council at the Meeting 17 December 2007

10 December 2007 to Ordinary Council

Corporate Services Division Report No. 63

Subject:           Delegation of Authority During the Christmas Recess    

Record No:     su1282 - 37903/07

Author(s):       Ian Naylor 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council will be in recess from 18 December 2007 until 4 February 2008.  In past years it has been Council’s practice to delegate authority to a Committee comprising of the Mayor and the General Manager to deal with urgent matters arising during the recess.  In such cases, Council’s policies are applied and if no such policies exist, due caution is exercised.

 

I would draw Council’s attention in particular to two matters which will need to be determined by the delegates in order to avoid undue delays, and they are the Development Applications in relation to the Tambourine Bay Boatshed reconstruction and playground improvements at Birrahlee Kindergarten.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That:-

 

 1.        Subject to the provisions of Section 377 of the Local Government Act, Council appoint a Committee comprising of the Mayor and the General Manager, or in their absence a delegate of the Mayor and/or the person acting as General Manager, to deal with and determine, urgent matters arising during the Council recess between 18 December 2007 until 4 February 2008, in such cases applying Council’s policies, or where no such policies exist, exercising due caution.

 

 2.        No SEPP No.1 objections be supported without reference to the Ward Councillors in the normal distribution of Councillor’s mail on Thursdays, and that the Mayor and the General Manager are not to determine those matters until the following Tuesday.

 

3.       No Section 96 or Section 82A reviews of development applications in relation to any matter that has been determined by Council or Planning and Building Committee, be referred to, or be determined by the Mayor and the General Manager during the recess.

 

Craig Wrightson

Executive Manager

Corporate Services Division

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

CNL171207CSD_63.doc

*****   End of Corporate Services Division Report No. 63   *****

 

Ordinary Council at the Meeting 17 December 2007

7/12/2007 to Ordinary Council

Open Space and Urban Services Division Report No. 41

Subject:           Street Parties - Draft Policy and Procedures    

Record No:     SU2735 - 37700/07

Author(s):       Wayne Rylands 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Every year Council receives numerous requests from residents to hold street parties, particularly around Christmas time. Most of these requests involve street closures to allow neighbours to meet and mingle. Most of these requests are for the closure of local streets with low traffic volumes.

 

Where this is the case, Council has been granted delegated authority to approve these applications without the need for Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) concurrence. Where a local road carries higher volumes of traffic or adjoins a major road, the street party application will be forwarded to the Traffic Committee for consideration. These street parties will normally require RTA certified traffic controllers to manage the traffic.

 

The Street Parties Traffic & Parking Arrangements Draft Policy and Procedures manual has been developed to provide the guidance and framework to allow residents to organise their street parties. This manual is tabled for Council adoption.

 

 

Discussion

 

Christmas parties were once a common occurrence in local streets. However, with an increase in car numbers on the roads and various other factors, such as the change in demographics of areas, these street parties were a rare event in the 1980’s and 1990’s.

 

Recent evidence would suggest that the occurrence of these street parties has again begun to rise. Council is now receiving between 8-12 applications per year for parties to be held which includes a request for a street closure. In accordance with the RTA’s Traffic and Transport Management of Special Events document, road closures related for street parties require the consideration of the Traffic Committee and a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) to be lodged. Insurance cover is also required.

 

In endorsing these events, Council has been willing to accept the insurance liabilities, subject to the organisers complying with conditions such as notifying emergency service authorities, letter box dropping all affected residents of the event, and provision of barriers that are marshalled at all times by responsible adults.

 


The approval of street closures for parties was complicated this year by the Roads and Traffic Authority requiring the provision of RTA certified traffic controllers for any event where organisers are requesting a street closure. The cost of two RTA certified traffic controllers for an event that lasts five (5) hours is over $500. This is considered excessive, and actually caused the cancellation of two street parties for this year.

 

In response to this, Council undertook investigations into the required approval processes for street parties and to determine whether RTA certified traffic controllers were actually required in all cases. In undertaking these investigations, Council reviewed the RTA’s Traffic and Transport Management of Special Events document, liaised with the RTA’s Policy Manager, and liaised with representatives from the RTA Traffic Management Centre.

 

On reviewing the RTA’s Traffic and Transport Management of Special Events document representatives of the RTA Traffic Management Centre have agreed that street parties on local roads with low traffic volumes are classified as a Class 3 Special Event. In summary, this Class of Special Event does not require a Traffic Management Plan (TMP) to be lodged with the RTA, and it also allows Council to approve these events under delegated authority. This is a very positive outcome.

 

Consultation

 

Statement of Intent

 

The consultation is designed to inform the community of this initiative to minimise regulatory controls and insurance requirements for the holding of street parties that require temporary road closures in local streets.  Any comments received will be utilised to determine whether or not to proceed with the street parties’ policy.

 

Method

 

Street Parties Policy & Procedures Manual

Level of Participation

Inform

Consult

Form of Participation

Open

Open

Target Audience

Whole Community

Whole Community

Proposed Medium

Advertisement,

Public Exhibition at Civic Centre, E-newsletter and

Website Exhibition

Web-Based Survey

Indicative Timing

January/February 2008

January/February 2008

 

Conclusion

 

Based on the review of the RTA’s Traffic and Transport Management of Special Events document, and the advice of the relevant RTA officers, Council believes it is in a position whereby it can approve street parties on local roads with low traffic volumes.

 

As a result of the investigations undertaken, the Draft Policy and Procedures Manual for Street Parties has been developed and is a tabled for Council’s consideration and determination.


 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That:-

 

1.         Council place the Draft Policy and Procedures Manual for Street Parties dated December 2007 on public exhibition in January 2008 for a period of 6 weeks.

 

2.         a further report be submitted following the consultation period.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wayne Rylands

Executive Manager

Open Space and Urban Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Draft Policy and Procedures Manual for Street Parties

7 Pages

 

 

 


ORDINARY COUNCIL

 

OPEN SPACE AND URBAN SERVICES DIVISION REPORT NO. 45

 

17 DECEMBER 2007

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council at the Meeting 17 December 2007

11/12/2007 to Ordinary Council

Open Space and Urban Services Division Report No. 45

Subject:           Greener, Safer Fleet - Update    

Record No:     SU2326 - 38100/07

Author(s):       Wayne Rylands 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council is continually investigating options to make its’ light vehicle fleet the greenest, safest fleet in Australia.

 

In line with the ‘Greener, Safer Fleet’ policy, an above ground fuel storage tank was recently installed at the Council depot for the storage and distribution of E85 ethanol based fuel (E85 is 85% ethanol and 15% unleaded) and B20 or higher bio-diesel (B20 is 20% vegetable based diesel and 80% fossil based diesel fuel).

 

Prior to utilising the fuel storage facility for the supply of E85 to Council’s light vehicle fleet, the E85 supplier (Manildra Group) suggested a two stage trial to minimise any potential problems that may arise from converting the vehicles for ethanol use.

 

Stage 1 of trialling involved converting one (1) Council six-cylinder vehicle for E85 use. This Stage has now been successfully completed, and Council is in the process of commencing Stage 2 of the trial; converting another four (4) six-cylinder vehicles to run on ethanol. Council will also shortly be receiving the first shipments of E85, and a bio-diesel blend (most likely B50) to be distributed from the fuel storage facility installed at the depot.

 

 

Discussion

 

Over the past year Council has been working closely with the Manildra Group with respect to converting its’ unleaded light vehicle fleet to be able to run on ethanol based fuel (E85). The Manildra Group are an Australian company that produces and distributes ethanol based products.

 

The first stage of this process has involved converting one of Council’s six-cylinder vehicles to be able to run on the E85 fuel. The vehicle chosen for the first stage of the trial was a six-cylinder Holden Captiva. Tests were undertaken on the vehicle prior to the ethanol conversion and then again after the conversion to monitor the emissions from the vehicle. These tests conclusively showed that there was a significant reduction in the carbon monoxide, carbon dioxide, hydrocarbon and benzene emissions. The reductions are due to the fact that ethanol contains 35% oxygen, which results in a more complete fuel combustion, thus reducing the harmful tailpipe emissions that result from normal unleaded fuels.

 

The vehicle has been running without any problems throughout the trial period, and as a result, Council is ready to proceed to Stage 2 of the trial.

 

Stage 2 involves converting another four (4) six-cylinder vehicles to run on E85. These four vehicles will include a Ford Territory, a Holden Crewman, and two (2) Holden Rodeos. Stage 2 will also involve receiving the first shipment of E85 to our fuel storage facility for distribution to the five (5) vehicles in the trial, and for ongoing use by all Council vehicles should Stage 2 be successful and Council moves to converting its’ whole light vehicle fleet (unleaded fuel vehicles) to E85.

 

 

Conclusion

 

Council is progressing with the implementation of converting its’ light vehicle fleet to E85. Stage 1 has been successfully completed, and Stage 2 has commenced.

 

It is envisaged that if progress continues with the trial at its’ current rate, that Council will have its’ entire light vehicle fleet (that currently runs on unleaded petrol) converted to E85 by the end of April 2008.

 

A further report will be submitted to Council at the conclusion of the trial.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receive and note the Greener, Safer Fleet – Update report.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wayne Rylands

Executive Manager

Open Space and Urban Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


ORDINARY COUNCIL

 

OPEN SPACE AND URBAN SERVICES DIVISION REPORT NO. 46

 

17 DECEMBER 2007

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council at the Meeting 17 December 2007

12/12/2007 to Ordinary Council

Open Space and Urban Services Division Report No. 46

Subject:           Introduction of Car Sharing Scheme to Lane Cove    

Record No:     SU1361 - 38211/07

Author(s):       Nick Karahlis 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The purpose of this report is to seek Council’s support for a car share scheme business, to be established in the Lane Cove Town Centre. Council’s support would be in the form of the provision of a car space in a central location adjacent to the shops in Council’s Town Centre.

 

The proposed scheme suggests a range of social and environmental benefits to the City. The main social benefits of this scheme are that it provides car access at a relatively low cost and the low need of owning or using a private car. This scheme may have benefits for people who would like to reduce the use of their private car, or have no access to a private car and/or intend to use a sustainable way of transport. Car Sharing offers users the services of a car without the liabilities of conventional car ownership. Car Sharing is considered as a ‘personal mobility service’.

 

 

Background

 

Car sharing is a mobility service system, which is set up in a way that a group collectively owns one or more vehicles, which are available to members on a shared basis, based on demand, on a pay-as-you-go basis.

 

Car Sharing differs from traditional car rentals as it is a self-service reservation, pickup, and return service. The vehicles can be rented by the hour, as well as by the day by users who have previously become members. For these users, there are pre-approved background driving checks, by car share groups or companies. After these checks have taken place, a payment method is established.  The applicable fees include a membership fee, a refundable bond for the duration of membership, an hourly fee or a per kilometre charge for use of the vehicle. The following characteristics apply to Car Sharing Schemes.

 

·    The locations of the vehicles are at dedicated parking spaces, which are called ‘pods’. These are the locations where Car Share vehicles are kept when they are not used by Car Share members. Vehicle locations are distributed throughout the service area. The full costs of the car such as insurance and fuel costs are included in the hired rates.

 

·    Car Share systems may be set up and managed by commercial companies, not-for-profit organisations, neighbourhood and community groups and group residents.

 

·    A Car Share parking space or area is controlled by approved parking control signs indication “Permit Holders Excepted” and are provided exclusively for a particular Car Share group. Car Share parking permits exempt vehicles from time limit shown on the parking in an un-metered Resident Parking area where ‘Permit Parking Holders’ signs apply, but Car Share Permits do not apply to metered spaces. The Car Share Pods are introduced at strategic locations in order to increase the potential catchment area.

 

·    The Car Share scheme members can pick up and drop off the vehicle locally. They can enjoy the service of a private car without the liability of ownership. Councils have recognised that the scheme offers a range of benefits to the community and reduces the local traffic and environmental concerns.

 

·    Council can supply one or more parking locations in the business area with specific signposting for Car Share vehicles approved by the RTA.

 

 

Discussion

 

How a Typical Car Share Scheme Works.

 

There hundred of cities in the world where people can Car Share. Car sharing in Australia is a relatively new system of transport and was launched in Newtown in 2003. It is a growing industry and has a range of local government and transport supporters as the benefits of the scheme are realized. Well known Car Share companies are Go Get and Flexi Car. The car sharing companies provide their members with access to a fleet of cars or other vehicles.

 

The typical car share schemes follow similar renting methods and procedures. Typically the following Steps are followed to hire a car from car share companies.

 

Step 1

An application is sent to the company by drivers interested to participate in the scheme. Instructions of uses and information details are sent to the applicant. Some companies provide that information electronically or by DVD.

 

Step 2

When the driver, group or company decides to join the car share scheme the car is booked either by phone or online. The type of car is chosen and the preferable location. Each vehicle has a home location, referred to as a "Pod” The booking takes place any time within 24 hours and usually months or up to a year in advance. A vehicle access card is then provided to the car share member.

 

Step 3

The driver swipes the card across the windscreen. The doors will unlock automatically.

 

Step 4

The car is driven anywhere within the booked time. The car is then returned to the same designated car share parking space for the next driver to pick up.

 

As the cars are booked on-line or by phone, there is no additional paperwork and no queuing to pick up the car.

 

GoGet Car Scheme.

 

A well known car share scheme in Australia is GoGet. As this scheme is the most publicised scheme the following information of how it works is provided.

 

It is a car sharing company which provides members with access to a fleet of cars or other vehicles. GoGet members choose a rate plan and pay an annual fee. Members pay a monthly membership fee and are charged an hourly or daily basis, and are billed monthly for their car usage. The hourly rate is either $4.40 or $6.60, depending on the membership plan. The costs, vehicle purchase, ownership and maintenance are managed by GoGet.

 

The GoGet Car Share Company was established in Newtown in 2003 with three vehicles and twelve founding members. It currently has 52 cars established in 39 locations (pods) around Sydney. Locations range from the North Shore (Manly, Chatswood through to Kirribilli) to the Eastern Suburbs (Bondi through to Maroubra) and the Inner West and CBD (from Kings Cross to Balmain). Most of the GoGet schemes have local council support. Recently Sydney City Council have publicised that they are providing many parking spaces dedicated to specific use for car share.

Car Share Benefits

 

Councils have recognised that the scheme offers a range of benefits to the community and the local traffic and environmental concerns. There are clear benefits for individuals and businesses in that the scheme allows them the access and flexibility of using a car without the cost and management of car ownership.

 

Car share advocates, operators advice that those who do not drive daily or who drive less than 10,000 kilometres annually may find car sharing to be more cost-effective than private car use.

 

There are social benefits of this scheme.  Mainly that it provides car access at a relatively low cost. This scheme may have benefits for people who can not afford to run a car. Overseas, car sharing has a role to play in the provision of mobility and accessibility to some disadvantaged groups, such as those in social housing where a car share scheme is offered as part of the development.

 

The scheme has many environmental benefits. The car share scheme as it becomes more popular may help ease traffic congestion on the street and also in parking. In 2005 the UK scheme Streetcar met their target to take 300 cars off the roads each year. Research has shown that each shared car replaces 6 privately owned cars. Streetcar’s services in London have stated that they will be reducing pollution in London at a rate of 400,000 kilograms of CO2 per year.

 

Additionally, better environmental outcomes are achieved by car share, as they supply new, fuel-efficient vehicles which means that in same cases, people are getting out of older, inefficient means of transport and into a cars that are new, well maintained, safer and more improvement, benefiting the environment.

 

This scheme may also have a useful role in delivering both local transport and land-use planning objectives in high-density urban areas which have both good public transport and parking restraints. Car share have worked with councils and developers to provide share spots to reduce the need for individual parking spaces attached to unit and office blocks. The UK Commission for Integrated Transport state that developers of high density low-car housing projects which incorporate social housing should be encouraged to establish car clubs within their developments and to offer the residents of the social housing free membership for at least a year.

Council Involvement

 

Providing car parking space contributes to delivering environmental and social benefits to the local community. Reducing the existing car park by two spaces dedicated to ‘Pods’ would have minimal impact on existing parking and also aims to reduce the numbers of cars needing parking within the Lane Cove Town Centre.

 

The following is suggested;

 

·    That at this stage two (2) parking spaces be provided for Car Share named as ‘Pod’s’ within the City Centre. One space can be provided within the Rosenthal Avenue Car Park and one space in Longueville Road close to the Plaza.

 

·    Car Share will be allocated to Car Share groups on a first come, first served basis. Council will monitor the use. If the approved car share scheme is not used within 6 months the approval may lapse.

 

·    To ensure Council treats all car share companies in a fair and equitable manner all car share activities should be reviewed on an annual basis. By renegotiating the provision of the parking space and membership annually, Council would have the opportunity to consider all schemes keen to operate in the City regularly.

 

·    There will be no fee for Car Share Parking or Car Parking Permits

 

·    The Residents who demonstrate that they have joined a Car Share Scheme and have no need of their Parking permit return they will be eligible to receive a pro rata refund on their Resident Parking Permit.

 

·    Preference will be given to Car Share groups with low impact vehicles (Green vehicle guide rating more than 2.5 stars) and low fuel consumption, such as hybrid vehicles and Smart Cars.

 

Council can also investigate the potential to become a member of an introduced Car Share scheme for Council’s use and benefit of the scheme. Council could then benefit from the scheme by gaining access to an additional fleet vehicle at a fraction of the cost of owning one. It also benefits from the wider community gains of this scheme.

 

Responsibility and Accountability

 

·    Council’s Traffic Section will be responsible for the provision and determination of eligibility and management of the Car Share schemes.

 

·    The issuing of Car Sharing Permits will be performed by the Council’s Customer Service Section.

 

·    Council’s Rangers are responsible for the enforcement of parking controls in the Car Share Scheme

Financial Impact

 

To establish a Car Scheme there is minimal cost to Council. If the Car Scheme is a not-for-profit organisation, then Council would absorb the cost of signage and line marking. If the Car Scheme is a commercial business, then they would be required to pay for the signage and line marking.

 

There are currently no parking fees charged at Rosenthal Avenue Car Park and therefore the allocation of a space to car share is not going to impact on Council’s income.

 

The total cost for the set-up of a car space is estimated at $350.00

 

If Council wishes to participate in the Car Share scheme after it has been introduced in the Lane Cove area, the cost of membership of this scheme is around $360 per year plus a fee of $4.40 per hour for any trips. Petrol is charged at around $0.35 per kilometre. (This is based on the Go Get fees and charges).

 

 

Consultation

 

Statement of Intent

 

The consultation is designed to determine if the community is willing to accept a Car Share Scheme for the loss of two (2) car spaces in the Lane Cove Town Centre. Comments received will be utilised to determine whether or not to proceed with the Car Share Scheme.

 

Method

 

Car Share Scheme

 

Level of Participation

Inform

Consult

Consult

Form of Participation

Open

Targeted

Open

Target Audience

Whole Community

CPOWA, Chamber of Commerce, Lane Cove Alive

Whole Community

Proposed Medium

Advert placed in local paper, exhibition incl website and enewsletter

Survey

Web-Based Survey

Indicative Timing

January/February 2008

January/February 2008

January/February 2008

 

 


Conclusion

 

A Car Share Scheme would provide a range of social and environmental benefits to the Town Centre. Council’s support of this type of scheme would reaffirm our philosophy of ‘Fast Tracking Sustainability’ and providing the community with further leadership in ‘green’ vehicle principles.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That:-

 

1.         Council undertake consultation as out outlined in this report to determine if there is support for the introduction of a Car Share Scheme in the Lane Cove area with a provision of two (2) parking spaces in the Town Centre.

 

2.         A further report be submitted at the end of the consultation period.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wayne Rylands

Executive Manager

Open Space and Urban Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

GoGet Car Share Brochure

9 Pages

 

 

 


ORDINARY COUNCIL

 

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION REPORT NO. 46

 

17 DECEMBER 2007

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council at the Meeting 17 December 2007

19/11/2007 to Ordinary Council

Environmental Services Division Report No. 46

Subject:           Draft Signage and Advertising DCP    

Record No:     SU2845 - 35166/07

Author(s):       Brendan Metcalfe 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Following a series of community consultation and Councillor Workshops the draft Lane Cove Signage and Advertising Development Control Plan (DCP) attached at AT1 is presented to Council. The report recommends adoption of the DCP for the purposes of exhibition and that a copy be forwarded to the Outdoor Media Association (OMA), stakeholders who attended the workshops and community groups for comment.

 

Background

 

The draft Signage and Advertising DCP has been prepared by consultancy Scott Carver, in consultation with Council’s Strategic Planning branch and seeks to provide guidance for applicants and staff for signage and advertising development to “ensure the character of buildings, streetscapes and vistas are consistent with Council’s desired future outcomes”.

 

Four workshops have been conducted during the development of the draft DCP, they were:-

 

·    Councillor Workshop 23 April 2007

·    Stakeholder Workshop 30 April 2007

·    Staff Workshop 10 July 2007

·    Councillor Workshop 10 September 2007

 

Councillors were consulted and provided input on and provided input 23 April 2007 regarding the scope of the project and again on 10 September 2007 to discuss the feedback from the Stakeholder Workshops of 30 April 2007 and the proposed development controls of the DCP.   The draft DCP has now been finalised and is attached for adoption for purposes of exhibition.

 

Discussion

 

The Need For a DCP

 

Council currently has a Draft Advertisements and Advertising Structures Manual which was exhibited in 1998 but never formally adopted following exhibition. LEP Amendment 35 of 1998 prohibits advertisements on land in the 2(a), 2(a2), 2(b) or 2(c) Zone.  As the Advertising Manual was not adopted following exhibition there was a need to clarify Council’s controls for signage and advertising. 

 

 

Relationship to Other Plans

 

The DCP has been prepared under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (EPAA) and in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 (EPAR).  Whilst Council was preparing the DCP in April 2007, the State Government proposed an amendment to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 (SEPP 64) Advertising and Signage and consultation draft Transport Corridor Outdoor Advertising and Signage Guidelines.  In August 2007 an amended SEPP 64 was gazetted, the aims of which were to permit advertisements on road and railway corridors, including the St Leonards rail corridor, and control the display of election material.  The draft DCP is designed to be used in conjunction with the SEPP and has been prepared with consideration of its provisions.

 

The draft DCP is designed to be used in conjunction with the Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 1987.  The current LEP prohibits all types of signage in the residential zones.  Draft LEP 2007 also places restrictions on advertising and signage in residential zones but permits building and business identification signs.  In the B3 Commercial Core Zone, which is the equivalent of the current 3B zoning applying at St Leonards of LEP 1987, advertisements and advertising structures are permitted in addition to building and business identification signs.  

 

Consultation

 

At the workshop on 10 September 2007, Councillors were briefed on the issues raised during the Stakeholder workshops.  Issues raised included:- maintaining the village character in the Lane Cove Town Centre, window coverage for shop fronts ranging from 20% to 50%, window displays, street numbering of commercial properties, awning signage size, phone boxes, that content of foreign language signs be reproduced in English and that; A-frames, banners, flashing and neon signage, roadside advertising on vehicles and hanging signage from existing under awning signage be prohibited.  These and other ideas and Councillor comments at each stage have been considered in preparation of the draft DCP.

 

Statement of Intent

 

The purpose of the public exhibition would be to confirm that the advertising design analysis is an accurate depiction of the character of the Municipality, and that the proposed controls of the Signage and Advertising DCP will deliver high quality signage development, whilst permitting businesses to grow across the LGA.  The comments received will be used to validate the content of the DCP, and may result in amendment of the document.

 

The method of consultation for preparation of the draft DCP has and would be:-

 

 

Draft Signage and Advertising DCP Consultation Strategy

 

Involving

Inform

Consult

Inform

 

 

Targeted

Targeted

Open

Open

 

Target Audience

Community Progress Associations and groups.  Chamber of Commerce, RASAD, CPOWA

Community Progress Associations and groups, Stakeholders from workshop.

Lane Cove Community

Lane Cove Community

 

Proposed Medium

Stakeholder Workshop

Strategic Bulletin (Newsletter), Email notification of exhibition

Exhibition at Council offices and Libraries

Community Newsletter, Website Exhibitions page, Public Exhibition

 

Indicative Timing

April 2007

January 2008

December 2007 to February 15th 2008

December 2007 to February 15th 2008

 

 

Outline of the DCP

 

The Signage and Advertising DCP was prepared following an urban design analysis and included character statements based on development form and intensity (Chapter 2), specifically:-

 

·    Lane Cove Town Centre

·    St Leonards

·    Neighbourhood Centres of

o Blaxlands Corner

o Yorks Corner

o Greenwich Village

o Lane Cove West and

o Burns Bay Road

·    Lane Cove West  Business Park

 

Particular elements discussed during consultation with Councillors, stakeholders and staff addresses in the draft DCP are addressed below.  Prohibited signage was of particular interest with A-frames, flashing, video, and mobile signage all being prohibited after strong opposition to these forms of signage. Temporary signage to allow businesses to advertise sales and specials is permissible for 1 week per month and a maximum of 4 times per year.  Flush wall mounted signage can be used for temporary content subject to application approval on merit from Council. Real estate agent signage is permissible in all zones, however no real estate signage is permitted in public roads or reservations.

 

The general signage controls component of the DCP (Chapter 3) contains detailed information on the various types and forms of permissible signage across the Municipality. For the Lane Cove Town Centre 25% window coverage is permitted as is projected above awning signage.  Below-awning signage is permitted in all locations with a minimum of 3 metres between each.  Top hamper signs are also permissible in all locations.  Two options have been provided for exhibition for plinth and pole signage for arcades.

 

Chapter 4 addresses less common signage types such as illuminated signage, which limits above awning signage to 11pm and 10pm where residences may be affected, and telephone booth signage.  Signage in residential zones is to respect the residential nature and to be of a scale which does not detract from the streetscape or property on which the sign is located.

 

Next Steps

 

Following adoption by Council for public exhibition, the draft document would be publicly exhibited for a minimum period of 28 days in accordance with clause 18 of the EP&A Regulation.  Public notice of the locations and times that the plan is available for viewing must be given in a local paper.  As Council has prepared an advertising design analysis for the Municipality, a copy the draft plan should be forwarded to the Outdoor Media Association for comment in accordance with clause 29 of SEPP 64.

 

Following exhibition the draft DCP would then be submitted back to Council for final approval after a review has been undertaken with regard to submissions received.  If Council resolves to proceed with the DCP it must, within 28 days, give public notice of its decision and provide the Director-General with a copy of the plan. The plan comes into effect on the date of the public notice in a local paper or date stated in the notice.

 

Conclusion

 

Following Councillor and Stakeholder Workshops, the draft Signage and Advertising DCP is now recommended for adoption for purposes of exhibition for a minimum of 28 days in accordance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.  A copy of the draft plan should be forwarded to the Outdoor Media Association for comment and the participants of the Stakeholder Workshops and community progress associations be notified of the exhibition.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:-

 

1.   Adopt the draft Lane Cove Signage and Advertising Development Control Plan dated 13 December 2007 and place it on public exhibition for a period of 6 weeks;

 

2.   Forward a copy of the DCP to the Outdoor Media Association for comment; and

 

3.   Notify the stakeholders who attended the Workshop 30 April 2007 and community progress associations of the exhibition of the plan.

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Draft Lane Cove Signage & Advertising DCP - December 2007

30 Pages

 

 

 


ORDINARY COUNCIL

 

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION REPORT NO. 52

 

17 DECEMBER 2007

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council at the Meeting 17 December 2007

6/12/2007 to Ordinary Council

Environmental Services Division Report No. 52

Subject:           Draft Comprehensive LEP 2007    

Record No:     SU1454 - 37461/07

Author(s):       Stephanie Bashford 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This Report recommends that Council endorse Draft Comprehensive Local Environmental Plan (Draft LEP 2007) for public exhibition. A copy of the draft plan with maps is attached at AT1.

 

The Draft Comprehensive LEP was adopted by Council on 20th September, 2004 and forwarded to the Department of Planning requesting exhibition. Following extensive changes to the NSW planning system during the intervening period, the Department has issued Written Authorisation/ Section 65 Certificate in the past week to permit exhibition.

 

This report describes the review process of the Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 1987, which initiated the preparation of the draft LEP, and the NSW Planning Reforms which have determined its content. It recommends procedures for a two month exhibition period and a community consultation plan.

 

The contribution made by Councillors in an ongoing series of workshops during the State planning system’s transition period has been of significant assistance in the development of Draft LEP 2007.

 

Background

 

On19th June 2000, Council resolved to prepare a comprehensive draft local environmental plan, reviewing the Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 1987 “with the purpose of updating the matters covered in the LEP, reducing unnecessary complexity and reflecting contemporary practice and community views as to the future of Lane Cove”.

 

The preparation of Draft LEP 2007 has occurred over an extended period from 2000 to 2007. This was due to the fact that Council’s review occurred almost simultaneously with the review of the NSW planning system, and has consequently been required to adapt to a series of policies issued from PlanFirst in March 2001 to the Planning Reforms of 2005-2007.

 

These policies include the Metropolitan Strategy for Sydney of 2005 and Draft Inner North Subregional Strategy of 2007. These documents form the principal strategic planning basis for the Draft LEP.

 

The history of the Draft LEP’s development within this context is explained in AT2.

 

On 20 September 2004, adopting the Draft LEP for exhibition, Council resolved that: “The draft plan, subsequent to the issue of a Section 65 Certificate, be reported to Council before being placed on public exhibition in accordance with section 66 of the Act.”.

 

Discussion

 

Draft LEP 2007 has been required to be prepared in accordance with the following NSW Government planning documents:-

 

A.        Draft Inner North Subregional Strategy: published 11 July 2007

B.         NSW Standard Instrument (Local Environmental Plans) Order 2006: issued 31 March 2006, amended 1 September 2006

 

The following report provides an outline only of the major features of the Draft LEP, which have in most cases also been presented to Council during a series of reports following workshops throughout the preparation of the Draft LEP.

 

The principal issues are described in the Section 64 Request for Written Authorisation to the Director-General of Planning, which is attached at AT3. The Attachments should be read to obtain further understanding of the Draft LEP’s content. (Note: Some of the data will be updated before exhibition to accord with the latest Departmental advice.) Detailed strategic explanatory material will accompany the Draft LEP when placed on exhibition.

 

A.        Draft Inner North Subregional Strategy 2007:

 

Following the release of the Metropolitan Strategy for Sydney in December 2005, the Draft Inner North Subregional Strategy was exhibited from July to September 2007 and states:-

 

“Some of the key challenges of this strategy are to manage the growth and change implications of accommodating an additional 1.1 million people, requiring 640,000 new homes and capacity for 550,000 new jobs to 2031… The Subregional Strategy will guide the preparation of new principal LEPs which each council has undertaken to complete within two to five years. The new LEPs will reflect the strategic planning objectives of their region.”

 

1.         Major features of Draft LEP 2007

 

The Draft Inner North Subregional Strategy requires the following growth targets to be achievable within Lane Cove over the 25-year period to 2031 (it assumes a base year of 2006):-

 

Residential

3,900 new dwellings

Employment

6,500 new jobs

 

(i)         Residential Growth

 

(a)        General principles for increasing density

 

Council’s response has been to envisage that the Draft LEP would provide for a 15-year timeframe (State 1 Residential) within a 25-years overall timeframe (employment growth and other matters generally). It is advisable to stage the intensification of residential areas, to encourage the orderly development of a series of areas.  This would allow for a Stage 2 Residential LEP to be prepared for the 15-25 year residential component, in accordance with the housing needs as assessed Lane Cove community with the NSW Government in 15 years from now.

 

In the preparation of the Draft LEP’s Stage 1 residential component, the Department has required that it provide for a minimum of 3,300 new dwellings. This is in excess of the 2,900 dwellings which would achieve two-thirds of the 25-year target of 3,900. The Department’s objective is to allow for possible under-development of any areas. A further approach to increasing residential densities has been to retain approximately 80% of the detached housing stock at its existing low density.

 

(b)        Criteria for proposed residential growth areas

 

The selection of areas for residential intensification has based on clustering growth around retail/ commercial and transport nodes, in support of the principle of the integration of land use and transport.

 

In order to identify specific areas, the following methodology was applied:-

 

(i)         A set of ten criteria was developed, such as topography, access etc

(ii)        A range of  locations was ranked according to a score under those criteria

(iii)       The appropriate scale in terms of floor space ratio and height for each area , and the potential number of dwellings, were determined taking into account surrounding land uses, scale and character

 

The tables used for this process are attached at shown in the Strategic Framework at AT4.

 

Detailed material on the areas proposed to be rezoned to satisfy the Department of Planning’s requirements will accompany the Draft LEP’s exhibition.

 

(ii)        Employment Growth

 

The major areas of employment growth are the St Leonards Specialised Centre (3,370 new jobs) and Lane Cove West Business Park (3,570). In St Leonards, employment floor space has been allocated on an individual-block basis according to matters such as financial viability, topography, visual impact  and proximity to residential zones. Consistency with recent and potential development in North Sydney and Willoughby has been taken into account; however Lane Cove’s unique constraints were of primary priority. In particular the amenity of adjacent residential precincts to the south was considered with height scenarios being modelled in the Simmersion 3D system to avoid overshadowing of those areas.

 

The area on the south side of Pacific Highway, east of Christie Street, has been identified for the highest scale, permitting a range of building heights of up to 18 storeys, with the aim of promoting redevelopment of the key Telstra telecommunications facility at 530 Pacific Highway and dated two-storey shops adjacent. The rejuvenation of this block is of high importance to the  Lane Cove sector of the St Leonards Specialised Centre.

 

The Lane Cove West Business Park growth is expected to occur within the existing planning controls.

 

2.         Compliance with Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979

 

(i)         Local environmental study (Section 57)

 

The Metropolitan Strategy for Sydney and the Draft Inner North Subregional Strategy have formed the principal strategic rationale for the Draft LEP. Council will exhibit strategic material in explanation of Lane Cove’s response to the requirements of these plans.

 

 

(ii)        Consultation with government authorities (Section 62)

 

During the preparation of a local environmental plan, is it necessary to consult government authorities, in particular infrastructure providers, regarding the implications of proposed rezonings and other amendments.

 

Section 62 consultation commenced in late 2000 with written requests to water, power, transport and other authorities for information on their capacity to meet the needs of increased residential and commercial/ industrial growth, their legislation, planning policies and other relevant factors. Following the preparation by 2004 of the Draft LEP, this process was undertaken a second time to update the information, with a range of authorities being added according to specific issues.

 

In the consultation 2000 – 2005, growth was envisaged to be approximately one thousand new dwellings, principally through the rezoning of the obsolete Burns Bay Road industrial area (TUTA etc) and intensification of the dwelling capacity of existing townhouse zones. Employment growth was based on the remaining capacity within existing business and industrial zones. In this context the infrastructure providers advised that their capacity would be satisfactory with augmentation as development occurred.

 

This consultation was undertaken before the publication in July 2007 of the Draft Inner North Subregional Strategy’s residential and employment growth targets. It will be necessary to undertake a third round of consultation with the various authorities to enable them to factor this growth into their comments. This will have to done during the Draft LEP’s exhibition in view of the restricted timeframe set by the Department for progressing the LEP to gazettal.

 

The comments of particular significance to date, in the context of residential and employment growth, are those from the Department of Housing and the infrastructure providers Sydney Water, Energy Australia, AGL, Telstra, the Roads & Traffic Authority etc.

 

The Department of Housing requested residential density increases in two areas in which it owns several properties. Lane Cove North, around Mindarie Street, and Murralah Place were suggested for rezoning from a detached housing zone to a townhouse zone. The Lane Cove North proposal would support the Mowbray Public School with a catchment of relatively affordable housing stock. Additionally Council had resolved in September 2006 to rezone 1-15 Centennial Avenue for townhouses (between Mowbray Road and Elizabeth Parade). In view of these factors, and to contribute to the Department’s residential targets, it was decided for consistency of land use to extend the townhouse zone from the western side of Centennial Avenue to Willandra Street, south of the existing flats and townhouse zones along Mowbray Road. Murralah Place has not been rezoned in view of traffic issues at the exit on to Penrose Street.

 

A summary of the Section 62 consultation comments received to date, and the responses made within the Draft LEP, is attached at AT5.

 

 

(iii)       Ministerial Directions (Section 117)

 

The Minister for Planning issues directions from time to time under section 117 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act., which are required to be considered in the preparation of a local environmental plan. These generally require that discussions be held with the Department where any variation to the S.117 Directions is proposed, in particular the increase, loss, intensification or other change to the existing residential, business, industrial or open space zones.

 

In order to satisfy the Draft Inner North Subregional Strategy’s growth targets, discussions have been held with the Department which resulted in several such zoning changes being proposed under the Draft LEP, principally:-

 

(a)        Residential zones:

 

The areas proposed for increased residential density, that is, from detached housing to either flats or townhouses, are located around shops and transport nodes. Residential flats are clustered around the Lane Cove Village, Lane Cove West shops and as infill along Pacific Highway and Mowbray Road, including the rezoning of part of the commercial area at the intersection of Pacific Highway and Longueville Road (see below). Townhouse areas are added in Lane Cove (see above) and in two areas on Centennial Avenue, near Mowbray Road and Burns Bay Road shops, and townhouse density in all zones is increased from 0.5:1 to 0.7:1.

 

(b)        Business zones:

 

A significant intensification of the St Leonards commercial area is proposed through floor space ratio increases, in an extension of the St Leonards Strategy endorsed in December 2006 by the Department and Lane Cove, North Sydney and Willoughby Councils. The Department supports this growth as being consistent with the Inner North Subregional Strategy’s identification of St Leonards as a Specialised Centre. The Department has reviewed its requirements under Lane Cove’s housing Strategy of 1998 for the business zone east of the rail line to include a residential component, in favour of its future focus as an employment centre within the Global Economic Corridor extending between the City and North Ryde.

 

The only area to permit a residential component would be in the Mixed Use Zone in the block between Pacific Highway and Marshall Avenue, as a transitional zone to the residential precinct to the south.

 

There is no expansion in area proposed for the Lane Cove Village or for the neighbourhood centres. For key Council properties there is intensification and a mixed range of land uses proposed in accordance with recent community consultation for the DLEP and Major Projects Plan.

 

There is a minor reduction in a portion of the Business General 3(b) zone with its rezoning to residential, on Pacific Highway between Longueville Road and Allison Avenue. This area is under-used and has had difficult access for passing trade since the construction of the entry/ exit ramps for the Lane Cove Tunnel, although businesses would retain existing use rights for as long as they wish to operate. The portion of that zone to the west of Longueville Road on the Highway will be retained to serve passing trade for uses such as service station, fast food outlet etc as at present.

 


(c )       Industrial zones:

 

The Burns Bay Road Industrial Special 4(c ) Zone is proposed for rezoning for residential flats, which would be more compatible with surrounding residential areas around Burns Bay. The Draft Inner North Subregional Strategy identifies this area as “land that could be investigated for alternative uses”. The relocation of firms from this obsolete zone, which has difficult access, to the Lane Cove West Business Park would increase their amenity and support that industrial zone. The grounds for the rezoning are detailed in the Section 64 letter at AT 3.

 

The Shell site at 150 Epping Road (east of the M2 entry) is identified in the Draft Inner North Subregional Strategy as “land with potential for a wider range of employment uses”. The details of the Department’s requirements for this site will be provided within the exhibition.

 

Prior to finalizing the rezoning of industrial lands for residential purposes, Council will need to obtain reports in accordance with the Contaminated Land Management Act to the effect that the land is suitable for that purpose.

 

(d)        Open Space zones:

 

The total area of open space zoning would not be reduced under the Draft LEP, though its location would be altered. An area of 2,900m2 approximately at 314 Burns Bay Road, Council’s disused bowling club site, is to be rezoned to residential with landscaping enhancement to the remaining major portion of the one hectare site. Community consultation has been conducted recently to explain the potential form which the future uses may take.

 

A number of unzoned, unmade roads are proposed to be zoned for open space. These are typically vegetated areas in foreshore and other culs de sac.  The Department supports these approaches to the rationalization of Lane Cove’s open space areas.  A summary of the full set of Section 117 Directions relevant to Lane Cove, and the Draft LEP’s response, is attached at AT 6.

 

B.       NSW Standard Instrument 2006 (“Template”):

 

The NSW Standard LEP provides mandatory and optional clauses. Local clauses may be inserted with Departmental consent.

 

Council has raised concerns in relation to the NSW Standard LEP’s application to NSW, being:-

 

(i)         Villa homes: There is no permissible land use and definition in the Template for “villa homes”. The LEP 1987 permits theses in the detached zone Residential 2(a1). The objective is to provide single-level housing with garden, especially for older residents who wish to down-size their homes while “ageing in place”. This supports the aim of housing affordability and choice as well as disability access. The Department’s response has been that Council is required to permit “multi-dwelling housing” throughout the Low Density Residential R2 zone (currently 2(a1)), with an objective and height control to limit it to single-storey. This approach is undesirable as it theoretically permits development applications to be lodged with a SEPP 1 objection to develop townhouses, if not flats, in the low-density residential area.

 

(ii)        Bushland: Lane Cove’s Draft LEP is permitted to provide only one open space zoning  (Public Recreation RE 1). This zone is to incorporate the two former zones under LEP 1987: Open Space Recreation 6(a) and Bushland 6(b). Council sought to apply the Environmental Conservation E2 zone, which aims “to protect, manage and restore areas of high ecological, scientific, cultural or aesthetic values”. The Department has advised that this is not permitted but that Council’s Community Land Management Plan should be relied on instead. It is therefore proposed to review the CLM Plan to ensure that it can protect natural areas in case of future pressure to expand the active recreational areas to cater for the increasing residential population. The Department has stated that it may add a more appropriate zone in a future version of the Template.

 

(iii)       Building height: This is required to be mapped and expressed in metres (rather than relative levels) which is difficult to achieve in areas of sloping topography, where, for example, a building of two storeys fronting a roadway may rise to 3-4 storeys to the rear. Height is not to be expressed in a development control plan, which formerly provided design flexibility. It is hoped that this issue will be clarified prior to gazettal.

 

(iv)       Reservation lands: The Department of Planning has advised that is no longer intends to purchase two of the four Open Space Reservation 9(c ) areas.: on the eastern side of Tambourine Bay and the western side of Woodford Bay. These two areas have had to be rezoned to match the adjacent residential zoning but now have an Environmental Protection overlay added. The practical effect is that these natural areas would be protected from development, but would remain in private ownership and so would no longer become available in future for public access.

 

Detailed descriptions of the new format in comparison with LEP 1987, and the full schedule of its amendments, will be exhibited with the Draft LEP.

 

Consultation Plan

 

In addition to the third round of Section 62 consultation with government authorities (see above), it is intended to undertake the following consultation with key stakeholders and the community generally.

 

(i)         Intent: The Consultation Plan is intended to:-

           

*          Comply with the requirements of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act

*          Notify owners of properties which may potentially be affected, directly or indirectly, by rezoning or other amendments to the planning controls relating to their properties

*          Advise adjacent councils of the amendments

*          Display the Draft LEP to enable the general public and community organisations to understand and discuss its relationship with the Draft Inner North Subregional Strategy and other state and local policies and strategic material generally

*          Consult with relevant professional and industry representatives regarding the Draft LEP’s detailed planning provisions

*          Provide staff with further opportunity for input on the implications of the Draft LEP for their areas of responsibility

*          Invite submissions on the Draft LEP to assist Council and the Department of Planning in determining the appropriate final form of the LEP

 


 

 

Inform & Consult

Consult

Inform

Consult

Consult

 

Open

Targeted

Targeted

Targeted

Targeted

Target Audience

Lane Cove Community

Adjacent Councils

Property owners & adjacent owners of lands to be rezoned

Community Progress Associations and groups, Lane Cove ALIVE

Professionals/ industry representatives:

Sustainability, planning, architecture,

property & real estate

Council Staff

Proposed Medium

Advertisements,

Press release,

Public Exhibition at Civic Centre,

Plaza display (staffed),

E-newsletter,

Letter to all property owners in LGA (where there has been a zoning change the letter will be more specific for that property),

Information sessions,

Website Exhibition and Feedback,

Meetings with community as requested

Site-specific information sessions with facilitator

Letters

Strategic eBulletin

Workshops

Workshops

Indicative Timing

January-March 08

February-March 08

February-March 08

February-March 08

December-February 08

 

(ii)        Outcomes: The Consultation Plan, and in particular submissions made on the Draft LEP, will be used to assist Council to determine the appropriate final form of the LEP for recommendation to the Department of Planning for gazettal.

 

Actions during Exhibition

 

Council will be required to undertake certain actions prior to gazettal:-

 

(i)         Market testing of the viability of floor space ratio and height controls (Department of Planning requirement)

(ii)        Contamination reports for industrial lands being rezoned for residential etc use (Contaminated Land Management Act requirement).

 


Conclusion

 

Draft Local Environmental Plan 2007 has been approved for public exhibition by the Department of Planning, with Written Authorisation and Section 65 Certificate now received.

 

The draft plan satisfies the requirements of the NSW Standard LEP format issued in March, 2006. It proposes strategies to implement the residential and employment growth targets required by the Draft Inner North Subregional Strategy published in July 2007.

 

Notwithstanding the community consultation undertaken over an extended period since the LEP 1987 review commenced, it is of particular importance to undertake a thorough community consultation process during exhibition to explain and seek views on the strategic background to the Draft LEP. This takes into account the fact that the Department’s requirements have only recently been provided to Council for the location of residential growth area across the municipality. Lane Cove Council is required by the NSW Government to finalise its LEP by March 2009.

 

 A two month exhibition period has been agreed upon with the Department of Planning, and a community consultation plan is proposed with this report.

 

It is recommended that, to implement its formal resolution of 20 September 2004, Council endorse Draft Local Environmental Plan 2007 for public exhibition.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That:-

 

1.         Council endorse Draft Local Environmental Plan 2007 as an amended form of the Draft Comprehensive Local Environmental Plan adopted on 20 September 2004,

 

2.         Draft LEP 2007 be placed on public exhibition in compliance with: any condition subject to             which the Section 65 certificate was granted by the Director-General of Planning,  Section         66 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 and the Department of           Planning’s Best Practice Guidelines,

 

3.         That exhibition be for a minimum period of 60 days, with the closing date for submissions to be no earlier than 31 March 2008 and in accordance within the Consultation Plan within this Report,

 

4.         In lieu of a local environmental study, relevant strategic background documentation and such             other matter as may be appropriate or necessary to better enable the draft plan and its             implications to be understood, including requirements under the Department of Planning’s             Draft Inner North Subregional Strategy, be exhibited simultaneously with the draft plan and

 

5.         Council note the history of the draft plan’s development.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Draft LEP 2007

109 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

DLEP 2007 History

1 Page

 

AT‑3 View

Section 64 letter to Department of Planning 18 May 2007

12 Pages

 

AT‑4 View

Strategic Framework

21 Pages

 

AT‑5 View

Section 62 Consultation summary

6 Pages

 

AT‑6 View

Section 117 Directions summary

4 Pages

 

 

 


ORDINARY COUNCIL

 

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION REPORT NO. 53

 

17 DECEMBER 2007

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council at the Meeting 17 December 2007

6/12/2007 to Ordinary Council

Environmental Services Division Report No. 53

Subject:           1 Nundah Street, Lane Cove    

Record No:     da06/236 - 37528/07

Author(s):       Peter Thomas 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

·    On 29 January 2007, Council granted a deferred commencement consent to a proposal for the demolition of the existing dwelling house and the erection of a 2 storey dwelling house.  The deferred commencement related to the deletion of the access over Council’s reserve and the design of the fence in order to protect a tree on the site.

·    A section 82 A review was submitted for consideration by Council in relation to Part A (a) of the Deferred Commencement Consent (access over the reserve).

·    An Inspection Committee was held on 1 December 2007 to consider the proposal for the retention of vehicular access over Council’s reserve to the rear/ side of the property.  Alternatives were developed with the applicant and these were also considered.

·    Council at its meeting of 3 December, 2007 considered the results of the Inspection Committee and resolved:

 

1.         The matter lay on table for two weeks.

2.         The General Manager submit a report to the Council meeting with appropriate draft conditions to provide access to the rear of the property, such condition to include appropriate public indemnity, necessary signage to indicate public ownership and any necessary controls.

 

Discussion

 

In May 2007 Council’s solicitor Dr Ian Ellis-Jones prepared a draft Deed of Agreement to cover such circumstances.  The Deed is attached in Attachment 1 to this report.

 

There are a number of points in the Deed to note, and they include:

 

1.         The Deed is operational for a 3 year period.  (Clause 2.1).

2.         Council retains the right to terminate the deed at any time, in writing.  (Clause 2.2.2)

3.         Council gives no warranty on the quality of the means of access (Clause 3.2)

4.         Parking or storage of trailers, boats etc on the reserve is not permitted (Clause 3.3)

5.         The applicant is responsible for maintenance of the access (Clause 3.5)

6.         The applicant indemnifies Council against any and all claims, actions or proceedings that may arise out of the implementation of the Deed.  (Clause 4.1) 

 

In relation to signage, Council’s Manager Open Space has indicated that signage directing the public to the park can be provided for in the next financial year.

 

If Council is of a mind to support the Section 82A review, the following is suggested:

 

1.   That Part A (a) of the deferred commencement consent be deleted.

2.   That a new Part A (a) be inserted requiring the applicant to execute the Deed of Agreement as contained in Attachment 1.

3.   That Part A (b) be deleted and condition 1 of the Development Consent be amended to delete reference to fence plans DA1300 and the following plan number inserted: 

Job 706734 –H/000285 Sheet 2/19 Con3, and Sheets 1 and 2 amended 18.06.07.

4.   That an additional condition be inserted into the development consent as follows:

74.       The use of the access through the park is subject to the applicant and Council entering into a Deed of Agreement.  This Deed will require renewal  on a tri-yearly basis.

5.   That Council’s Manager Open Space be requested to include in the upcoming financial year provision for directional signage to direct the public to the park.

 

For the information of Councillors the original report relating to the Section 82A review follows:

 

Original Section 82A Report:

 

Property:                                                         1 Nundah Street, Lane Cove

Section 82A Review Application No:              DA236/06

Date Lodged:                                                  24 July 2007

Cost of Work:                                                 $390,478.00

Owner             :                                                           S C O’Neill & C J McNaught

Author:                                                            May Li

 

 

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL TO APPEAR ON DETERMINATION

Section 82A Review of the deferred commencement of development consent 326/2006 for demolition of the existing dwelling house and construction of a two storey dwelling house with an attached single garage and boundary fences.

ZONE

2(a1) – Residential

IS THE PROPOSAL PERMISSIBLE WITHIN THE ZONE?

Yes

IS THE PROPERTY A HERITAGE ITEM?

No

IS THE PROPERTY WITHIN A CONSERVATION AREA?

No

DOES DCP 1- BUSHLAND APPLY TO THE PROPERTY?

No

BCA CLASSIFICATION

Class 1a & 10b

STOP THE CLOCK USED

No

NOTIFICATION

Neighbours

·    2,4,5 & 7 Nundah Street, Lane Cove

·    14, 16 18 20 & 22 Ralston Street, Lane Cove

Ward Councillors       

·    Gaffney, Teirney & Longbottom

Progress Association 

·    North Lane Cove Progress Association

 

 

REASON FOR REFERRAL:

 

The development application has been granted a deferred commencement approval under delegation authority.  The Section 82A Review application is submitted to Council for review of the decision in relation to the deferred commencement in accordance with Section 82A (6) of Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

 

Development application No. 236/2006 for demolition of the existing dwelling house and construction of a two storey dwelling house and erection of boundary fencing was grant a deferred commencement approval on 29 January 2007.

 

The deferred commencement consent required that the vehicular access from the subject site to Council’s Stringybark Reserve be removed and an amendment to the design of the western boundary fence.

 

The Section 82A Review application has offered an alternative design for the western boundary fence and requests the existing vehicular access through the Council reserve be retained.

 

BACKGROUND

 

The subject site is located on the northern side of Nundah Street, Lane Cove and is adjacent to Stringybark Reserve.  Prior to the lodgement of the development application, Council’s General Manager advised the owners of the property that:

 

“Unless the landowner can satisfy Council that their property has the present and ongoing benefit of a statutory approval or consent, still in force, expressly authorising vehicular access to their property over council land, all such access is prohibited and in that regard, after 60 days from the date of this letter any other permissions given or purportedly given to private land owners to use Council land for the purpose of gaining vehicular access to their respective properties is revoked and otherwise withdrawn.”

 

The proposal involves demolition of the existing dwelling house and the construction of a two storey dwelling house, including the erection of boundary fences.  It also sought to retain the existing vehicle access from the western boundary through Council’s reserve.  The design of the proposed dwelling house complies with the standards of Lane Cove Code for Dwelling Houses, Fences, Private Swimming Pools and Outbuildings.  The development application was approved as a deferral commencement.  The conditions of the deferred commencement consent state as follows:

 

The consent will not operate and it may not be acted upon until the Council or its delegate is satisfied as to the following matters:

 

a.         The portion of the current driveway that lies on Council land between the Council service road within Stringybark Reserve and the property boundary is to be removed from this consent. The existing road surface is to be taken up with minimal disturbance to the root zone of the Blue Gum Eucalyptus saligna and planted with turf.  Further the proposed gate is to be replaced with non-movable fencing.

 

b.         The proposed masonry perimeter fencing along the western boundary must not extend further than 20m in a northern direction from the street frontage at Nundah Street. The remainder of the perimeter fence is to be constructed using wooden fencing. Any excavation works for footing locations along the western boundary must be individually hand dug only when within 5m of the base of the trunk of the Eucalyptus saligna.

 

Evidence of the above matters must be produced to the Council or its delegate within 12 month of the date shown otherwise the consent shall not operate.

 

The owners of the property have lodged a Section 82A Review application and requested Council to review the above conditions relating to the deferred commencement consent.  The design of the proposed dwelling house remains unchanged to the original design.  Refer to AT1 for the S82A request and AT2 for plan details. 

 

PREVIOUS APPROVALS/HISTORY:

 

Development Application 2006/203 for demolition of the existing dwelling house and construction of a two storey dwelling house was determined under the delegation authority on 29th January 2007 by way of a deferred commencement consent.

 

Refer to AT3 for the previous planning report.

 

REFERRALS:

 

Manager Open Space

 

The Manager of Open Space has assessed the Section 82A Review application and has provided the following comment:

 

Access through Stringybark Reserve

 

The information that the applicants submitted to Council in response to Council letter of 19 April 2007 has been reviewed and discussed with Council’s in house solicitor Ian Ellis Jones.  His advice is that there is nothing in the information submitted by Mr McNaught or Mrs O’Neill that confers any express or implied rights to continue to use Stringybark Reserve as a driveway to the rear of 1 Nundah St.  The information provided did not include any written approval for the driveway through the park. In fact, the 1993 Council Report mentioned that it is Council policy not to grant such permanent rights of way.

 

Consequently, the condition still applies. 

 

Executive Manager, Open Space & Urban Services

 

The Executive Manager of Open Space and Urban Services has confirmed that the use of Council’s land for vehicular access to the property at 1 Nundah Street should be revoked and withdrawn.

 

In relation to the fence design, Council’s Manager Bushland has advised:

Condition A (b) of the deferred commencement consent was recommended by Council’s landscape architect and was imposed for the protection of a large healthy Blue Gum Eucalyptus Saligna in Council’s reserve to the north east of the existing gateway at the rear of the property.  The Manager of Bushland has reviewed the amended design of the proposed western boundary fence and stated that Condition Part A (b) of the deferred commencement consent may be amended in the following manner:

 

The proposed masonry perimeter fencing along the western boundary must not extend further than 30m in a northern direction from the street frontage at Nundah Street. The remainder of the perimeter fence must be post and rail constructed, with excavation only permitted for the upright posts.  Any excavation works for footing locations along the western boundary must be individually hand dug only when within 5m of the base of the trunk of the Eucalyptus saligna and any other tree along the boundary.

 

LANE COVE LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 1987 (Section 79C(1)(a))

 

The proposed development for a dwelling house is permissible within the zone of the subject site.  It is considered that the proposed development is not contrary to the objectives and the provisions of Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 1987.

 

OTHER PLANNING INSTRUMENTS

 

Lane Cove Code for Dwelling Houses, Fences, Private Swimming Pools and Outbuildings

 

The Section 82A Review application does not amend the design of the dwelling house and the assessment of the design of the dwelling house has been outlined in the previous planning report.

 

RESPONSE TO NOTIFICATION (Section 79C(1)(d))

 

The Section 82A Review Application was notified in accordance with Council’s notification policy. 

A submission was received from the owners of 16 Ralston Street, Lane Cove in response to the notification of the Section 82A application.  The submission raised concerns to the proposed retaining wall at the northern boundary of the subject site and states that the retaining wall would interfere with the existing fence and require special construction methods to ensure the integrity of the fence is not compromised. 

 

Officer’s Comment

 

The concerns relating to the retaining wall have been addressed by the way of conditions of the development consent (Conditions No. 19 to No. 24) in the original application assessment.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The application is submitted to Council for a review in accordance with Section 82A of Environmental Planning Assessment Act 1979.  In the event the Council after it’s review of the determination wishes to support the applicant’s request Part A of the deferred commencement would need to be deleted and Part B modified as indicated above, including the inclusion of additional fence plan numbers.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

Pursuant to the provisions of Section 82A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended, the determination of development consent 2006/203 granted a deferred commencement consent on 29 January 2007 for the demolition of the existing dwelling house and the erection of a two storey dwelling house with an attached single garage and boundary fencing on Lot 31, DP 10302 and known as 1 Nundah Street, Lane Cove is submitted to Council for review and determination. 

 

Conclusion

 

Having regard to the resolution of Council on 3 December 2007, if Council is of a mind to support the Section 82A Review, the following is provided:

 

1.   That Part A (a) of the deferred commencement consent be deleted.

2.   That a new Part A (a) be inserted requiring the applicant to execute the Deed of Agreement as contained in Attachment 1.

3.   That Part A (b) be deleted and condition 1 of the Development Consent be amended to delete reference to fence plans DA1300 and the following plan number inserted: 

Job 706734 –H/000285 Sheet 2/19 Con3, and Sheets 1 and 2 amended 18.06.07.

4.   That an additional condition be inserted into the development consent as follows:

74.       The use of the access through the park is subject to the applicant and Council entering into a Deed of Agreement.  This Deed will require renewal  on a tri-yearly basis.

5.   That Council’s Manager Open Space be requested to include in the upcoming financial year provision for directional signage to direct the public to the park.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That pursuant to the provisions of Section 82A, as amended, the determination of development consent 2006/203 granted a deferred commencement consent on 29 January 2007 for the demolition of the existing dwelling house and the erection of a two storey dwelling house with an attached single garage and boundary fencing on Lot 31, DP 10302 and known as 1 Nundah Street, Lane Cove is submitted to Council for review and determination. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Deed of Agreement

6 Pages

 

 

 


ORDINARY COUNCIL

 

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION REPORT NO. 6

 

17 DECEMBER 2007

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council at the Meeting 17 December 2007

10/12/2007 to Ordinary Council

Environmental Services Division Report No. 6

Subject:           Planning Reforms - Discussion Paper    

Record No:     SU1791 - 37785/07

Author(s):       Stephanie Bashford 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council is advised of the publication of the discussion paper:  “Improving the NSW Planning System”, which was issued for exhibition by the Minister for Planning on 29th November 2007.  A detailed report on its contents will be submitted to Council on Monday 4th February 2008, including recommendations for a submission to be made to the Department of Planning by the exhibition’s closing date of 8th February 2008.

 

A copy of the Summary Paper has been forwarded separately.

 

Background

 

The Minister has expressed a range of concerns regarding the current planning system, including:-

 

·    the approval process is too long and complex

·    too many development applications are lodged for which complying development may be suitable

·    the timeframe for preparing a local environmental plan is too slow

·    community input should be more effective

·    the links between plan-making/development approval processes and strategic outcomes is not strong enough

·    the planning system is complex and difficult to follow

·    the system is not consistent across the State

·    planning resources need to be used more effectively.

 

Discussion

 

The paper set out a series of Principles for a better planning system, comprising sustainability, transparency, accountability, efficiency, simplicity, objectivity, consistency and equity.

 

The proposed reforms are summarised as:-

 

·    gateway review to initially assess the criteria for an LEP

·    new plan-making model to reduce timeframe

·    new development assessment regime – a Planning Assessment Commission for State-significant development and Joint Regional Planning Panels

·    expand complying development criteria to increase DAs covered from 11% to 50%

·    private certification to be more accountable

·    ePlanning to expand

·    better protection for strata owners against building defects

·    a range of DA deemed refusal times instead of the mandatory 40 days only.

 

The Planning Institute of Australia and other professional bodies will be meeting to discuss the reforms during December.


A report on the discussion paper will be made to Council following detailed consideration of its contents.

 

Conclusion

 

Council is requested to note the discussion paper “Improving the NSW Planning System”, pending submission of a detailed report on its implications in early February 2008.

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council note the Minister for Planning’s discussion paper “Improving the NSW Planning System”.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

 There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


ORDINARY COUNCIL

 

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION REPORT NO. 54

 

17 DECEMBER 2007

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council at the Meeting 17 December 2007

11/12/2007 to Ordinary Council

Environmental Services Division Report No. 54

Subject:           16 Private Road, Northwood    

Record No:     DA05/357 - 38092/07

Author(s):       Michael Mason 

 

 

Background

 

Council at its meeting dated 3rd December 2007 resolved:

 

            “That the matter lay on the table until next Council meeting to allow participants in the previous mediation session to meet with Council staff then respond to the amended proposal and a further report be submitted which:-

 

            a.         outlines any submissions received;

            b.         provides a copy of amended plans; and

c.         Executive Manager to articulate reasons why the 15 reasons for refusal no longer apply.”

 

Copy of ESD report No. 48 (AT1).

 

Executive Summary

 

The above actions have been undertaken and presented in this report.  It is now appropriate that Council determine the matter.

 

Actions arising from Council Resolution 333

 

All people attending the mediation by Mr Tyrril on Saturday 27 October 2007 were forward copies of the Mediation Report (AT2), letter by the applicant’s consultant (Mr Kerry Nash) articulating further concessional amendments and the amended plan by Mr David Cant for review.  These individuals were then invited to Council on 6 December to meet with Mr Mason and invited to formally respond to the mediation report and the offers of the applicant articulated in the latest proposed amendments contained in Plans, issue Y (AT3).

 

People attending Council’s offices to view the plans, sight the documents and discuss relevant issues were:

 

R & D Shore                -           80 Northwood Road

J Berry                         -           80A Northwood Road

M Davies                     -           78 Northwood Road

J & B Larking               -           74A Northwood Road

B Longeragan               -           12 Private Road

T Bradbury                   -           14 Private Road

 

As at 11 December the following submissions have been received by Council in response to the mediation report and the proposed further concessional amendments proposed by the applicant.

 

Copies of submissions have been provided to Councillors directly for their information.

 

Submission by BR and KJ Larking of 74A Northwood Road

 

Mr & Mrs Larking provided their observations of the mediator’s report and strongly object to the removal or relocation of the Canary Island Palm.  Council is advised that Mr & Mrs Larking also request that:

 

1.         The landscape conditions designed to protect the large Brush Box tree also apply to the Canary Island Palm tree.

 

2.         The roof top terrace is inappropriate and be deleted.

 

3.         That the application be refused in it’s current form.

 

The submission also expressed concern as to the accuracy of the submitted shadow diagram and that the applicant lower the dwelling roof height by 1m.

 

Submission by R & H Loneragan

 

Mr & Mrs Loneragan have made a number of observations in regard to the Mediator’s report.  Refer to submission.

 

In relation to issues which directly impact upon the premises of 12 Private Road they:-

 

1.         Strongly object to the removal or relocation of the Canary Island Palm.

 

2.         Accept the offer for 500mm fixed louvered privacy screen to the roof viewing terrace.

 

In relation to broader general impacts they raise bulk, height and size concerns with the proposal.  Solar access, overshadowing and privacy concerns remain, particularly with regard to perceived adverse impacts to 80A Northwood Road.

 

Mr & Mrs Loneragan also call for the deletion of the proposed rooftop terrace and advised that:

 

1.         The Canary Palm Tree be retained in its present location.

2.         The garage roof be lowered 300mm to fence height as proposed by the applicant.

3.         The overall finished roof height be lowered by 500mm from that proposed in the application.  Regardless of any reduction in roof height the actual solar access minimums meet or exceed the standard required under the building code.

4.         Roof top viewing terrace to be eliminated.

 

Submission by Mr J and Mrs J Berry of 80A Northwood Road

 

Mr & Mrs Berry provided their detailed observations of the mediator’s report (refer to submission) and concluded by indicating their support for approval subject to:-

 

1.         The Canary Palm Tree be retained in its present location (Number 1).

2.         The garage roof be lowered 300mm to fence height as proposed by the applicant (Number 5).

3.         That the applicant’s design should meet the minimum standard of solar access, as it relates to our property.  We are in support of the lowering of the overall height of finished roof height by 500mm if such amendment achieves or exceeds the solar access standard.

4.         Roof Top Viewing Terrace to be eliminated (Number 4).

            Note:  We believe that the elimination of the roof top viewing terrace is a compromise amendment that will contribute materially toward easing some of the neighbour’s objections ie. Reduction in the bulk, height and size, increase in solar access, reduction of overshadowing, maintain better levels of privacy and amenity.

The following issues affecting us directly have we strongly believe, not been adequately dealt with by the DA or by Council.

5.         We are still faced with a DA which does not afford us reasonable solar access.  These are set out in Numbers 6, 13 and 19.  The DA still infringes on our privacy (Number 24).

6.         We do not believe the mediation process was fair to the complainants.  The reasons are set out in numbers 10, 11, 17, 18.  We also believe that the mediation process did not achieve “significant changes” (numbers 12, 21 and 23).

7.         We believe the Webbers could simplify the issues about trees as is set in Numbers 7 and 8.

8.         We have not been provided with adequate reasons why the views of the independent experts appointed by Council (ESD 68) have been subsequently watered down by Council staff (Numbers 14 and 15).

 

Mr. Berry was also critical of Mr Mason’s handling of the process.

 

Submission by J & T Bradbury of 14 Private Road

 

Mr  & Mrs Bradbury provided their observations of the mediator’s report (refer to submission) and advised that they:

 

1.         Strongly reject any removal or relocation of the Canary Island Palm tree.

 

2.         Accept the 500m fixed Louvre privacy screen to roof top viewing terrace.

 

With regard to potential for broader impacts the following was advised:

 

1.         The Canary Palm Tree is retained in its present location.

2.         The garage roof be lowered 300mm to fence height as proposed by the applicant.

3.         The overall height of finished roof height be lowered by 500mm and that the actual solar access minimums meet or exceed Council’s building code requirements.

4.         Roof top viewing terrace to be eliminated.

 

Submission by M & S Davies of 78 Northwood Road

 

The response by Mr & Mrs Davies (refer to submission) acknowledges the mediator’s report and:

 

1.         Accepts the need for advanced landscaping along the western boundary for properties facing Northwood Road.  They also provide comment on the extent and type of landscaping preferred to achieve necessary screening.

 

2.         Accept the provision for high (1700mm) privacy screening on the first floor balcony off the proposed dining room.

 

3.         Accept the retention of the Palm tree in the existing location.

 

4.         On broader issues they express concern that the proposed development is excessive with regard to bulk, height, position, scale and size.  Essentially they express the view that the proposal is “not considered suitable for this site”.

 

Mr & Mrs Davies suggest that further amendment and alteration would provide a positive outcome if the building is lowered, located further north and deletion of the roof terrace.

 

Submission by D & R Shore

 

Mr and Mrs Shore have made a number of observations in regard to the Mediator’s report (refer to submission).  Mr & Mrs Shore’s submission is detailed and refers to a number of issues.  However, in essence they:

 

1.         Request the Palm remain in it’s current location.

 

2.         Request that the roof terrace be deleted.

 

3.         Object to the proposed dwelling  on the grounds of privacy, excessive shadowing, chimney and excessive bulk, height and size.

 

Notwithstanding the Council resolution, a submission was also received by Mr Charles Genocchio of 76 Northwood Road.

 

Although Mr Genocchio did not attend the mediation he is an affected neighbour and his views are relevant to any consideration of this matter (refer to submission).

 

The Executive Manager’s Comments

 

Resolution 333(c) states, interalia:

 

                               “....... Executive Manager to articulate why the 15 reasons for refusal no longer apply.”

 

                   The reasons for refusal of the original application are provided in (AT4) along with relevant comments upon review of concessional amendments and draft conditions of consent.

 

                   Clearly, the site has a range of physical constraints including existing utilities, vegetation and topography that need to be accommodated.  When such is combined with many adjoining neighbours that can potentially be adversely impacted, compromise for both the applicant and adjoining residents would be necessary if a dwelling house is to be erected on No. 16 Private Road, Northwood.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council consider concessional amendments proposed by the applicant’s consultant in his letter dated 5 November 2007, amended plans Issue Y (this shows the Palm tree being retained and not the subject of relocation), the mediator’s report dated 6 November and the views and concerns of the various adjoining residents and determine the matter.

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Copy of ESD Report No. 48

4 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

Copy of the Mediator's Report

6 Pages

 

AT‑3 View

Plans Issue Y - 16 Private Road

3 Pages

 

AT‑4 View

Reasons for refusal

5 Pages

 

 

 


ORDINARY COUNCIL

 

ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES DIVISION REPORT NO. 548

 

17 DECEMBER 2007

 

 

 

 

Ordinary Council at the Meeting 17 December 2007

12/12/2007 to Ordinary Council

Environmental Services Division Report No. 548

Subject:           24-28 Lane Cove Plaza, Lane Cove    

Record No:     da07/272 - 38239/07

Author(s):       Michael Mason 

 

 

Property:                                  24-28 Lane Cove Plaza, Lane Cove

 

DA No:                                    D272/07

 

Date Lodged:                           14 September 2007

 

Cost of Work:                          $2.7 million

 

Owner :                                   Fabcot Pty Ltd and Lane Cove Council

 

Author:                         Hansen Partnership Pty Ltd (Mr Brad Roeleven)

 

 

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL TO APPEAR ON DETERMINATION

Construction of a two storey addition for the purposes of a club (gymnasium) in the place of two levels of CBD housing within the Lane Cove Market Square complex

ZONE

3(a) Business General 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?

No

BCA CLASSIFICATION

Class 9b

STOP THE CLOCK USED

No

NOTIFICATION

Neighbours                   15-29 Lane Cove Plaza; 9-25 Austin Street; 1-5 Austin Crescent; 2 Austin Street; 125-145 Longueville Road; 142-162 Longueville Road, 6-42 Lane Cove Plaza; 1 Central Avenue

Ward Councillors         All Councillors

Progress Association    All Progress Associations; Sustainability Advisory Committee; Access Committee

 

REASON FOR REFERRAL

 

Given the on-going community interest in the Lane Cove Plaza shopping complex, the proposal to remove the approved shop-top housing component and replace such with a private gymnasium, the matter has been referred to Council for determination.

 

1.       EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

This report considers a proposal to construct a two storey club (gymnasium) in the place of two levels of CBD housing within the approved Lane Cove Market Square complex.

The Market Square development is located 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 7 Austin Street, Lane Cove. 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 Archnex Designs (Heritage consultant) as well as additional assessment by staff of Lane Cove Council.

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

·      Outline of the scope of works for which consent is sought

·      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

·      Discusses the suitability of the site for this development

·      Outlines the results of the public consultation process

·      Draws a conclusion on the proposal

·      Provides a recommendation for the consideration of Council    

 

The assessment process undertaken by Hansen Partnership is typical, and reflects the matters for consideration in the assessment of any development application as identified in the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. This process is principally focused on the considering how a proposal responds to relevant legislative provisions, regulatory controls or policies of both the state government and Council, and the ‘merits’ of the proposal. Such investigations also include consultation with a range of groups, technical experts and the community.

 

This report recommends that Council grant approval to this application subject to conditions requiring a reduction in the height and floor space of the building.

 

 

 


2.      THE SITE

 

2.1     Description

 

The Lane Cove Market Square development site comprises 27 allotments in private and public ownership, as well as unzoned road. When consolidated, this land forms an irregular development site with frontages to Lane Cove Plaza, Longueville Road and Austin Street.

 

Currently this site supports the former Clancy’s supermarket and 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 residential dwelling (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 the 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.  Copy of Site Plan and Notification Plan attached (AT1 and AT2).

 

2.2    Context

 

The development site is located at the southern end of the Lane Cove village, which is a discreet and contained local centre extending in a linear format along both the Longueville and Burns Bay Road ridgelines. Within this context, the development site is positioned to the southern boundary of the Centre in the transition zone between the village’s core commercial strip and the surrounding residential and institutional precinct.

 

2.3      Relationship with the surrounding area

 

The relationship of this development site with its neighbours is summarised below:

 

·         Lane Cove Plaza is located to the north of the site, extending between Longueville Road and Rosenthal Avenue. The Plaza is fronted by retail uses housed in consistent double storey attached early 20th century forms built hard to the street frontage with cantilevered awnings. Contemporary glazed retail frontages at the ground level often contrast with the more traditional brick elevation and parapet form above.

 

·         The eastern boundary of the site abuts the side and rear of double storey retail outlets fronting Lane Cove Plaza and Longueville Road, leading towards the of the historic Library building on the corner of Austin Street. The rear of the shops fronting the Plaza and Longueville Road absorb a considerable drop in topography and present a ‘back of house’ well in excess of 3 storeys in scale. The elevations of these buildings are unsightly, consisting of blank brick walls, stairs and storage areas. The existing built form improves towards the Library.

 

·          Austin Street is located immediately to the south of the site, winding down from Longueville Road. The historic Lane Cove Public School is located opposite, presenting to both Longueville Road and Austin Street. To Austin Street the school is stepped into topography presenting traditional and mid 20th century single and double storey buildings. Brush box street trees located along either side of Austin Street unify it as a residential/institutional streetscape. 

 

3.       BACKGROUND 

 

At its meeting on 20 December 2004 Council granted approval to Development Application 246/04 (DA 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 residential apartments 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 that consent were subsequently granted by Council at meetings on 18 April 2005, 17 October 2005 and 3 December 2007.

 

An appeal to the Land and Environment Court challenging the validity of Council’s approval of DA 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 application was approved by Council at its meeting on 17 July 2006, following which the Land and Environment Court re-granted consent to DA 246/04.

 

4.      THE PROPOSAL

 

This proposal seeks consent to construct a two storey commercial style building set above the retail level of the Lane Cove Market Square complex approved under DA 246/04. The location of this new building is essentially in the same area which was approved under DA 246/04 to accommodate two levels of residential apartments.

 

The application as lodged describes the proposed new building as a gymnasium. A future separate development application would be required for the occupancy and fitout of this building should this application be approved.

 

The development is described on the plans prepared by BN Group Pty Ltd. Accompanying the application is a detailed Statement of Environmental Effects prepared by JBA Urban Planning Consultants. That statement includes numerous technical expert reports addressing a range of matters including traffic, noise, and accessibility.  Those reports are referenced as necessary throughout this assessment.

 

The hours of operation of the premises is proposed as 6am – 10pm, 7 days.  The proposed public carpark hours will remain consistent with the supermarket (6am – 1am, 7 days).

 

Although this proposal could be described as essentially seeking to replace the CBD housing component of the Lane Cove Market Square complex, it is not an amendment to DA 246/06 but a separate application in its own right. Nevertheless, it is fundamental that this proposal inherently relies upon, and could only proceed in conjunction with DA 246/04.

 

5.       EXTERNAL REFERRALS

 

No external referrals were issued.

 

6.      INTERNAL REFERRALS

6.1    Manager, Traffic

Council’s Manager Traffic provided the following assessment:

 

I have reviewed the Traffic report by Masson Wilson Twiney regarding the proposed Library, Gymnasium and Market Place development at 24-28 Lane Cove Plaza. Following my assessment of the traffic and parking component of the development, the following are my comments:

 

·       The methodology used for the traffic volumes and parking surveys are considered suitable. The comparison of the traffic and parking to be generated by similar gym facilities within the Sydney metropolitan area is acceptable.

·       The analysis of the parking requirements has been assessed and the proposed parking spaces for the proposed development are considered adequate.

·       Under topic Pedestrian and Cyclists (4.6) in the Masson Wilson Twiney report, proposed pedestrian access has been considered but there is no mention about cyclist access. The traffic consultant would need to add his comments regarding cyclist’s access.

·       The cumulative effects of the traffic and parking impacts have been assessed and the conclusions drawn by the traffic and transport consultants are accepted, subject to comments being provided regarding cyclist’s access and parking to the facility. This may also need to be reassessed in the accessibility review undertaken by Morris-Goding Accessibility Consulting. (report 21 August 2007)

6.2    Development Engineer

 

No objection raised subject to conditions.

 

6.3    Health and Building Surveyor

 

All works are to fully comply with the Building Code of Australia.

 

The Construction Certificate plans and associated specifications will need to demonstrate compliance with the BCA and the Fire Safety Consultant’s recommendations (memo from Dix Gardner 20 August 2007).  Furthermore, a report from a suitably qualified Fire Safety Consultant will be required to be submitted with the Construction Certificate application, which details how compliance is being achieved.

A satisfactory Statement of Compliance must be obtained from the Fire Safety Engineer (Warrington Fire Research) to confirm that the proposed building works have no implications on the previous fire safety engineering undertaken for the development and be submitted to the PCA prior to issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

6.4    Environmental Health Officer

 

No objections subject to conditions.

7.      APPLICABLE PLANNING CONTROLS AND POLICIES

 

The following planning instruments, codes and policies are relevant in the assessment of this application:

 

·       State Environmental Planning Policy 11 – Traffic Generating Development

·       State Environmental Planning Policy 55 –  Remediation of Land

·       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

 

8.      COMPLIANCE WITH PLANNING CONTROLS AND POLICIES

 

8.1     State Environmental Planning Policy 11 – Traffic Generating Development

 

The aims, objectives, policies and strategies of this Policy are to ensure that the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA):

 

(a)        is made aware of; and

(b)        is given an opportunity to make representations in respect of,

 

certain developments which by virtue of their size (gross floor area/total number of parking spaces) nature or location are likely to have implications for traffic management.

 

The proposed development would form part of the complex approved under DA 246/04, and would consequently rely upon the traffic and parking arrangements approved in conjunction with that application. Prior DA 246/04 was considered by the RTA’s Sydney Regional Development Advisory Committee. Their requirements were incorporated into the conditions within the approval notice issued for that earlier approval.

 

This current application does not trigger the referral requirements in SEPP 11.

 

 

 

 

8.2       State Environmental Planning Policy 55 – Remediation of Land

 

This Policy aims to promote the remediation of contaminated land for the purpose of reducing the risk of harm to human health or any other aspect of the environment. This Policy is relevant to this application as it requires that a consent authority must not consent to the carrying out of any development on land unless:

 

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

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

(c)     If the land requires remediation to be made suitable for the purpose for which the development is proposed to be carried out, it is satisfied that the land will be remediated before the land is used for that purpose.

 

This issue was investigated in conjunction with the assessment of DA 246/04 and was found to be satisfactory. It is reasonable to rely upon those same investigations and conclusions for this matter   

given the relationship between this current proposal and that earlier application.

 

8.3     Draft State Environmental Planning Policy 66 – Integration of Land use and Transport

 

This Draft Plan was exhibited from 14 September 2001 until 14 December 2001 and consequently must be considered by this assessment having regard to Section 79 C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

 

This draft plan applies to a range of land uses including retail development shopping centres and gymnasiums.

 

This draft plan aims to ensure that urban structure, building forms, land use locations, development designs, and the layout of subdivisions and streets help to achieve the following planning objectives, where applicable:

 

·      Improving accessibility to housing, employment and services by walking, cycling and public transport

·       Improving the choice of transport and reducing the dependency on cars for travel

·       Moderating growth in the demand for travel and the distances travelled, especially by car

·       Supporting the efficient and viable operation of public transport services

·       Providing for the efficient movement of freight

 

Prior DA 246/04 was found to be consistent with the terms of this Policy. It is reasonable to rely upon those same investigations and conclusions for this matter given the relationship between this current proposal and that earlier application.

 

It is also noted that the Draft SEPP contains transitional provisions to the effect that this Policy does not apply to any application lodged, but not finally determined before the commencement of this Policy.

 

 

 

8.4     Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 1987

 

8.4.1 Permissibility

 

The application as lodged and exhibited describes the proposal as seeking consent for:

 

the conversion of the residential levels within the approved development (Residential Level 1 and Residential Level 2) for the occupation and use of a gymnasium (and associated offices and amenities) with associated consequential changes to car parking and plant room arrangements.    

 

That documentation however did not address the issue of whether this current proposal is a land use that would be permissible under the LEP. A subsequent letter from the applicant, dated 5 December 2007, clarified the proposed use of the building as being a private health club, accessible only to members who have joined that club.

 

The issue of permissibility is informed by the way in which a proposal is defined under the LEP. In this instance, there are several definitions that are to be considered, being:

 

club means a building used by persons associated, or by a body incorporated, for social, literary, political, sporting, athletic or other lawful purposes whether of the same or of a different kind and whether or not the whole or a part of such building is the premises of a club registered under the

Registered Clubs Act 1976.

 

commercial premises means a building or place used as an office or for other business or commercial purposes, but does not include a building or place elsewhere specifically defined in this clause or a building or place used for a purpose elsewhere specifically defined in this clause.

 

recreation facility means a building or place used for indoor recreation, a billiard saloon, table tennis centre, squash court, swimming pool, gymnasium, health studio, bowling alley, fun parlour or any other building of a like character used for recreation and whether used for the purpose of gain or not, but does not include a place of assembly.

 

Initial assessment indicated that the use would fall within the definition of a recreation facility. Such a land use is prohibited within the 3(a) Business General zone applying to that part of the site where the building would be located. The applicant’s position is however that the use is a private health club, which would be defined under the LEP as a club, and therefore permissible under the LEP within the 3(a) Business General zone.

 

Given the need for certainty on this matter, Council’s solicitors were engaged to provide advice on whether this proposal could reasonably be defined as a club for the purposes of the LEP.

 

That advice concludes that if this proposal was limited to a gymnasium within a building used only by persons who are associated in some way for sporting, athletic or fitness purposes, it would be strongly arguable (although not certain) that the proposal could be characterised as being development for the purpose of a club, and therefore permissible with consent in the 3(a) zone. The advice also notes that it would be necessary for the applicant to demonstrate the basis which the persons using the club would be associated and that there may be a need for a ‘membership’ requirement or some form of arrangement promoting an ongoing association between users of the proposed gymnasium.

 

In considering this advice it is noted:

 

·       The applicant has confirmed that the gymnasium would only be available for use by members of that facility, which would satisfy a key component of the legal advice.

·       Any approval granted on this application should include conditions which require the specific fit-out and use of the building to be the subject of a further development application, and that any such application would need to include details sufficient to demonstrate that the operation and management of the gymnasium would fulfil the requirements of the club definition.

·       Defining this proposal as a club would be consistent with approval granted to development application 50/93 which gave consent for a gymnasium on a site in Longueville Road that is also zoned 3(a) Business General under the LEP.

 

It is concluded therefore that the proposal is permissible, with consent, under the LEP.

 

8.4.2 Aims and objectives of the Plan

 

Clause 2 of the LEP provides that general aims of this plan are to:

 

(a)     preserve and where appropriate improve the existing character and environmental quality of the land to which it applies in accordance with the indicated expectations of the community, and

(b)     integrate previous planning controls in one comprehensive document.

 

The particular aims of this plan in relation to retailing and business activities are to: 

 

(i)    confine existing business zones to the Lane Cove Shopping Centre and to prevent their expansion into surrounding residential precincts,

(ii)    protect and promote the existing village atmosphere of the Lane Cove Shopping Centre by ensuring that it retains its current local shopping centre character,

(iii)   permit the establishment, with the consent of the council, of local neighbourhood shops of a single conventional type in all residential zones, and

(iv)   enforce height controls in business zones to protect adjoining residential areas from overshadowing,

 

The particular aims of this plan in relation to conservation are to:

 

(i)     protect, maintain and effectively manage natural bushland areas,

(ii)    control all new buildings, extensions and alterations to ensure their compatibility with existing environmental character, and

(iii)   reserve river foreshores, which are in natural or partially natural condition, from change due to new development.

 

The assessment outlined within this report does not identify any circumstances where this proposal would fail to reasonably fulfil these objectives.

 

 

 

 

 

8.4.3 Zone objectives

 

Clause 9(3) of the LEP provides that consent shall not be granted to development unless Council is of the opinion that the proposal is consistent with the objectives of the zone within which the development is to be located.

 

The works the subject of this application would be located on land zoned 3(a) Business General under the LEP, which provides the following zone objectives:

 

The council shall not grant consent to the carrying out of development on land to which this plan applies unless the council is of the opinion that the carrying out of the development is consistent with the objectives of the zone within which the development is proposed to be carried out.

The assessment outlined within this report does not identify any circumstances that this proposal would be unreasonably inconsistent these objectives.

 

8.4.4  Relevant provisions

 

The remaining provisions within the LEP relevant to the consideration of this matter are addressed in the following table:

 

 

Clause

Requirement

Proposal

Compliance

 

Clause 12

Subdivision

 

 

Consent required for subdivision.

 

 

No subdivision proposed.

 

 

Not applicable

 

Clause 14

 

Demolition

 

 

Consent required.

 

 

This proposal can only proceed concurrently with the implementation and completion of DA 246/04 which includes consent for the demolition of existing structures on the subject site.

 

 

Yes

 

Clause 18A

 

Protection of heritage items, heritage conservation areas and relics.

 

 

 

 

 

Consent is required to alter a heritage item.

 

Consideration is to be given to effect of such works on the significance of the item or conservation area.

 

 

Lane Cove library is a listed heritage item, as is the adjacent Lane Cove Public School and several trees in Austin Street. Other heritage items are located in the general vicinity of the site including in Lane Cove Plaza and Longueville Road. A heritage assessment, completed by Archnex Designs, raises no objections to the proposal in terms of clause 18A. See further comments at section 9.7 below.

 

 

Yes

 

Clause 18E

 

Development on land adjoining heritage items

 

 

 

 

Council must consider the effect of a development on the heritage significance of a heritage item and on its setting when considering an application to carry out development on adjoining land.

 

 

A heritage assessment, completed by Archnex Designs, raises no objections to the proposal in terms of clause 18E. See further comments at section 9.7 below.

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

Clause 19F

 

Development of certain land –

Nos 1- 7 Austin St

 

19F(2)(a)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Building line setback of 5m from Austin St frontage for buildings other than CBD housing to provide widened footpath and landscape strip of at least 2m.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This proposal can only proceed concurrently with the implementation and completion of DA 246/04. The issue of setback to Austin Street was resolved in conjunction with that application. That setback does not alter as a consequence of this proposal.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

19F(2)(b)

A 10m setback to western boundary required for non -residential buildings to provide 2 way driveway, footpath and landscaping to facilitate access between Council Lane and Austin St.

The proposed works are more than 10m from the western boundary of the lands affected by this clause. This proposal can only proceed concurrently with the implementation and completion of DA 246/04, which complies with this control. No element of this proposal alters the manner in which DA 246/04 fulfils the requirement of this clause.  

Yes

 

19F(2)(c)

A 10m setback required from the eastern boundary for non residential buildings to provide 2 way driveway, footpath and landscaping for access from Austin Street to rear of the properties at the eastern end of Council Lane.

The proposed works are more than 10m from the eastern boundary of the lands affected by this clause. This proposal can only proceed concurrently with the implementation and completion of DA 246/04, which complies with this control. No element of this proposal alters the manner in which DA 246/04 fulfils the requirement of this clause.

Yes

 

19F(2)(d)

CBD housing is to be setback 10, 15 and 15m respectively from Austin St, the eastern and western boundaries.

This application does not propose any CBD housing.

Not applicable

 

19F(2)(e)

The roof of CBD housing is to have pitched form compatible. with Library building

This application does not propose any CBD housing.

Not applicable

 

19F(2)(f)

The ceiling of CBD housing is not to exceed highest ceiling line of Library.

This application does not propose any CBD housing.

Not applicable

 

 

19F(2)(g)

One principal retail/commercial storey is to provide at grade public access to The Plaza and public access by lifts and other suitable means to car parking areas.

Compliance with this control is achieved under DA 246/04. This proposal can only proceed concurrently with the implementation and completion of DA 246/04. No element of this proposal alters the manner in which DA 246/04 fulfils the requirement of this clause.

Yes

 

19F(2)(h)

An internal marked passageway to provide safe, direct public access at all times between The Plaza and Austin Street.

Compliance with this control is achieved under DA 246/04. This proposal can only proceed concurrently with the implementation and completion of DA 246/04. No element of this proposal alters the manner in which DA 246/04 fulfils the requirement of this clause.

Yes

19F(2)(i)

A safe pick up and set down area is to be provided at Austin St end of any car park with pedestrian access connecting to Austin Street.

Compliance with this control is achieved under DA 246/04. This proposal can only proceed concurrently with the implementation and completion of DA 246/04. No element of this proposal alters the manner in which DA 246/04 fulfils the requirement of this clause.

Yes

 

 

8.5    Lane Cove Business Zones Development Control Plan

 

Compliance with the relevant provisions the DCP is shown in the table below.

 

Clause

Requirement

Proposal

Compliance

 

Clause 2

 

Objectives

 

(i)   

 

(i) (i)    To reinforce the viability of LCS Centre in its role as a ‘local centre’ in the hierarchy of Lower North Shore Retailing.

(ii)  To widen the variety of housing choice in Lane Cove

(iii)  Promote the vitality of the Centre and provide for a diversity of uses by encouraging mixed commercial, retail, residential and development.

(iv)  Preserve ‘village’ character by encouraging modest scale of development compatible. with heritage buildings and public places.   

(v)   Minimise traffic generation from increased density.

(ii)                                 (vi)  Maximise public access through a pedestrian network which includes arcades.

(iii)                                (vii) Facilitate access throughout the Centre for people with limited mobility.  

(vii) Improve the public amenity and appearance of the Centre’s ‘rear lanes’ whist maintaining their function as services lanes for the shops.        

 

 

 

Achieved. See section 9.19 for further comments.

 

 

 

No CBD housing proposed.

 

 

This proposal will provide for a diverse range of uses across the site.

 

 

 

 

 

Refer to comments for LEP 1987 above and also at section 9.1 below. 

 

 

 

 

No residential development proposed.

 

 

The proposal does not alter public access arrangements across the site approved under DA 246/04.

 

Accessibility provisions are adequate. Further comments are provided sections 8.7 and 9.3 below.

 

Achieved. See further comments at section 9.1 below.

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

Yes

 

Clause 4

 

Building Design and Use

 

4.1 - General

 

 

 

 

 

 

(i)     Only retailing of goods and services permitted at street level on Longueville Road, Lane Cove Plaza and Burns Bay Road.

 

(ii)   Various requirements for the design and presentation of facades, parapets and shopfronts to principal retain streets, including materials and finishes.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The proposal is not located on street level.

 

 

 

 

The presentation of the development to the Plaza is satisfactory.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Not applicable.

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

Clause 5

 

Height of Buildings

 

 

Across the site, the maximum permissible height of any development above the level of the principal retail street onto which it fronts is three storeys and 9.5m

 

No part of the façade of a development facing a principal retail street shall exceed in height the highest point of the facades of the existing buildings which are nearest to it and on the same side of the street.

 

Whilst a height of three storeys is permitted above the principal retail street a facade must present as two storeys

 

 

 

 

 

Compliance with the building height plane.

 

 

 

The maximum height of the building is three storeys to the principal retail street (the Plaza) and 15.55m. See further comments at section 9.1 below.

 

 

 

The façade to the Plaza remains essentially unaltered from that approved under DA 246/04.

 

 

 

 

 

The upper level of the building is sufficiently setback that the primary façade presentation to the Plaza will present as being of two storeys. The façade approved under DA 246/04 is not significantly altered by this proposal.

 

The building sits wholly within the height plane.

 

 

No

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

Clause 6

 

Setbacks

 

 

Various requirements for the modelling of facades to achieve a suitable streetscape outcome.

 

Various requirements for the façade design and presentation to rear laneways.

 

 

 

 

The primary façade to the Plaza remains essentially the same as that approve under DA 246/04.

 

 

Yes

Clause 7

 

Floor space ratios

 

 

 

For development which is not shop top housing, the maximum FSR is 2:1

 

 

 

FSR is 2.1:1 when measured over that part of the site zoned 3A. See further comments at section 9.1 below.

 

 

No

Clause 8

 

Car parking and loading

 

 

1 space per 40m2 for retail/commercial

 

Design of parking to comply with Part V of the Plan.

 

All access and loading facilities to be accessed from rear lane and concealed from view from any public street or arcade.

 

 

For developments with FSR greater than 1:1 only one opening provided to rear lane for access to the parking and loading areas.

 

 

See comments at section 9.2 below.

 

 

See comments at section 9.2 below.

 

 

The proposal does not alter the arrangements for access to parking and loading areas approved under DA 246/04. 

 

 The proposal does not alter the arrangements for access to parking and loading areas approved under DA 246/04.

 

 

Yes

Clause 9

 

Toilet facilities

 

 

Accessible facilities to be provided to satisfy AS 1428.

 

 

This matter can be addressed by means of appropriate conditions in any consent notice should the application be approved.

 

 

Yes

Clause 11

 

Heritage

 

 

Developments on heritage listed sites to be accompanied by Heritage report addressing likely impacts per LEP 1987.

 

 

Development to be harmonious with heritage items.

 

 

See comments at section 9.7 below.

 

 

 

 

 

See comments at section 9.7 below.

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

Clause 12

 

Access and mobility

 

 

Development to comply with AS 1428, AS 4299, AS 2890 and AS 1735 and Councils DCP 5.

 

 

See comments at sections 8.7 and 9.3 below.

Yes

Clause 13

 

Energy Efficiency

 

 

Development to take into account ESD principles including:

 

(i)    Water and energy efficiency.

(ii)   Thermal mass performance.

(iii)  Water consumption.

(iv)  3.5 star NatHERS rating.

(v)   Solar heating.

 

 

An energy performance report has been provided. See further comments at section 9.13 below.

 

 

 

 

Yes

Clause 14

 

Signage

 

 

 

To comply with DLEP – amendment 35, Council’s Building Policy Code and AS 1428.

 

 

 

No signage is proposed as part of this application.

 

 

Yes

Clause 15

 

Waste Collection

 

 

To be managed in accordance with DCP 4.

 

 

See comments at section 8.6 below.

 

 

Yes

Clause 16

 

Section 94 Plans

 

 

To be required in accordance with Council’s adopted Plan.

 

 

See comments at section 8.10 below.

 

 

Yes

 

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

 

The application proposes that all wastes associated with the occupation of the building would be managed via the waste management procedures and requirements approved in conjunction with DA 246/04.  As this proposal can only proceed concurrently with the implementation and completion of DA 246/04 such an arrangement is reasonable. Appropriate conditions are included in the recommendation to this report addressing this matter.

 

8.7    Lane Cove Development Control Plan 5 – Access and Mobility

 

Accompanying this application is an Accessibility Review report prepared by Morris-Goding Accessibility consulting, which considers a range of relevant legislative and policy requirements, including this DCP.

 

The Morris-Gooding report advises that the proposal demonstrates that compliance with relevant statutory requirements can be readily achieved. To ensure such an outcome this report provides a series of recommendations for the future fitout of this building.

 

It is noted that this proposal can only proceed concurrently with the implementation and completion of DA 246/04. Assessment of that application concluded that the approved complex, of which this facility would be part, was also satisfactory in terms of the provision of access and facilities for people with disabilities. Council’s Access committee were briefed on the proposal and the Access report.

 

It is concluded that the proposal is consistent with requirements of this DCP. Appropriate conditions are therefore included in the recommendation to this report addressing this matter.

 

8.8    Lane Cove Landscape Guidelines

 

This proposal can only proceed concurrently with the implementation and completion of DA 246/04. Assessment of that application concluded that the requirements of this DCP were satisfied. No aspect of this subject application alters any landscape component of the works approved under DA 246/04.

 

8.9    Lane Cove Tree Policy

 

This proposal can only proceed concurrently with the implementation and completion of DA 246/04. Assessment of that application concluded that the requirements of this policy were satisfied. No aspect of this subject application alters any landscape component of the works approved under DA 246/04.

 

8.10  Section 94 Contributions Plan

 

This Plan allows Council to impose a requirement for a monetary payment where it approves a development that will, or is likely to, require the provision of, or increase the demand for public amenities and public services within the area.

The Plan notes (at Section 6.2) that:

 

Council is of the view that services and facilities it provides are for all sections of the community, be they residents or workers. Certain facilities, such as open space and recreation facilities are distributed throughout the municipality and, therefore, benefit both residents and the workforce. There are also some community facilities, for example the Lane Cove Library, which although centrally located, is accessible to the workforce. On this basis it is possible to show the link in demand for these services with commercial, retail and industrial development.  

 

The public works and services addressed by the Section 94 Contributions Plan fall into the broad categories of:

 

·       Car parking and traffic management;

·       Community facilities;

·       Drainage; and

·       Open space and recreation.

 

For new commercial/retail development, the Section 94 Plan requires a monetary contribution of $81.72 per square metre of Gross Floor Area, in respect of traffic management and streetscape improvements. This proposal provides for 1945.80m2 of GFA, and therefore a contribution of $159,010.77 is required. An appropriate condition is included in the recommendation to this report.

 

8.11  Planning Agreements

 

We are not aware of any planning agreements, pursuant to sections 93F-L of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, relevant to the consideration of this proposal.

 

9.      THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

 

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

 

9.1    Context and Setting

 

This issue addresses the relationship of a development to its immediate locality and primarily encompasses matters such as the built environment, existing land uses and scenic/visual elements. Consideration is also given to possible impacts upon adjacent properties.

 

Council’s Business Zones DCP provides controls that seek to ensure a built form outcome that is appropriate for the character of the locality. As noted at section 8.5 above, this proposal fails to comply with the 9.5m height limit and FSR controls in that Plan. The applicant contends that these non-compliances are acceptable on merit, given:

 

·       Council’s new Draft LEP proposes to rezone the entire development site to commercial and introduce an FSR control of 2.5:1. Under the proposed controls, the market square development, including the gymnasium element, would achieve an FSR of 1.8:1.  

·       The overall bulk and scale has previously been determined by Council as satisfactory on the site without adverse impacts upon adjoining properties. This current proposal does not intensify the approved FSR nor has any significant bulk related impacts.

·       The variation to the FSR control, at 0.1:1, is minor.

·       Council previously supported a variation to the 9.5m height limit for this site when approving DA 246/04. This proposal increases the roof height from that approved under DA 246/04 by 1.89m.

·       The proposed height is necessary to accommodate services and clearance heights required for a gymnasium usage.

·       The maximum ridge height is not readily apparent when viewed from the Plaza as the building sits within the height plane control prescribed in the DCP.

 

The justifications provided by the proponent for variations to the height and FSR controls in the DCP are not supported given:

 

·       Council’s draft LEP currently has no status, and the author is not aware of its controls in terms of rezoning of the Lane Cove town centre, and accompanying standards for FSR. In any case, this draft LEP can be given no weight as it has not been publicly exhibited or finally adopted by Council.

·       The built form of the previously approved CBD housing provided for a building element with a significantly lower height and volume than this gymnasium building, and was significantly more articulated in its presentation and profile. It is therefore not reasonable to use the form of that building as justification for that which is now proposed.

·       The building would be visible from sections of Burns Bay Road to the west, and from Council Lane at the rear of the site. The additional non-complying height and floor space contribute to this circumstance.

 

Given this the applicant was asked to amend the design to:

 

·      Reduce the overall height of the building.

·      Shift the mass of the upper level of the building to the north to improve the scale and presentation Council Lane.

·      Reduce floor space to comply with FSR control.

·      Provide greater architectural detailing to the western elevation to improve provide greater articulation and visual interest.

 

Amended plans have since been received which satisfactorily resolve the massing and presentation of the building. However no change is provided to either the height or FSR of the building.

 

It is considered that there are sufficient internal clearances within the building to allow for the roof ridge height to be reduced by 1m, without compromising the function of the floor plate. Although such a design amendment would still not achieve strict compliance with the height control, it would represent an improved outcome in reducing the overall visibility of the building. This is particularly important when considering the cumulative effect of future development along the southern side of the Plaza/Burns Bay Road, as such developments would likely seek to take their design cues from this building.   

 

A reduction in the FSR can also be achieved by reducing the size of the floor plate of the building, preferably at the upper level which would further reduce the scale of the proposal.

 

This report therefore includes a condition which requires the above changes to be incorporated into plans submitted for approval with any Construction Certificate for this building.

The proposal is not considered to result in any adverse outcomes for adjoining land uses terms of loss of solar access or the erosion of any views or vistas. 

 

9.2    Access, transport and traffic

 

Access

 

The proposal relies upon arrangements for vehicular access as approved under DA 246/04.  

 

Parking quantity and layout

 

DA 246/04 as originally approved generated the need for 149.3 parking spaces. This figure increases to 196.3 spaces once allowance is made for:

 

·       Replacing the CBD housing component with this proposed gymnasium building.

·       Reduction in demand requirements following recently approved amendments which reduced the quantity of retail floor space.

 

In addition to providing parking generated by the proposed activities, the Lane Cove Market Square development also sought to replace the 98 public parking spaces lost from the site and in Austin Street, as well as providing 4 dedicated staff parking spaces.

 

With these additional requirements, the required parking provision becomes 298.3 spaces. DA 246/04 as currently approved, including all amendments, provides a total of 330 on site parking spaces.

 

Therefore, allowing for all of the demand proposed by DA 246/04, plus that generated by this current proposal, and replacing all lost public parking, a surplus of 31.7 (says 32) onsite parking spaces would result.

 

Traffic generation and impacts

 

Refer to comments at section 6.1 above.

 

Construction 

 

This proposal can only proceed concurrently with the implementation and completion of DA 246/04. This report therefore recommends conditions consistent with DA 246/04 including for compliance with the approved Construction Management Plan, incorporating controls on curfews for vehicles during school drop of and pick up times.

 

Service and delivery vehicles

 

The proposal relies upon the arrangements for service and delivery vehicles as approved under DA 246/04.  

 

Pedestrians and cyclists 

 

The proposal relies upon the arrangements for pedestrian access across the site and cyclist facilities as approved under DA 246/04. Pedestrian access arrangements into the building from the Lane Cove Market Square complex are satisfactory as discussed at section 8.7 above.

 

9.3    Pedestrian access (mobility)

         

Refer to comments at section 8.7 above.

 

9.4   Pedestrian safety

 

The issue of pedestrian safety was considered in detail in conjunction with the assessment of DA 246/04. This proposal can only proceed concurrently with the implementation and completion of DA 246/04.

 

No aspect of this subject application alters any provisions of the consent granted to development DA 246/04 to ensure appropriate arrangements for pedestrian safety both during construction and upon occupation of that complex.

 

The recommendation to this report includes conditions to ensure that the requirements for pedestrian safety required under DA 246/04 apply equally to this proposal.

 

9.5    Public domain

 

Public domain issues are generally measured with regard to recreational opportunities, the provision and management of public spaces in and around a development, and pedestrian linkages and access between a development and public areas.

 

This proposal can only proceed concurrently with the implementation and completion of DA 246/04. The works approved under that DA were considered to successfully integrate with the public domain by providing a mix of land uses appropriate to the setting and context of the site, and also incorporating adequate areas of public space and pedestrian linkages between the development and public areas.

 

This application does not alter the public domain outcomes achieved by DA 246/04.

 

9.6    Utilities

 

Appropriate conditions are included in the recommendation to this report to ensure that adequate utility services are provided.

 

 

9.7    Heritage

 

The matter is relevant as the development site includes the heritage listed Lane Cove Library building. Additionally, there are numerous items of heritage, both built and landscape elements, in proximity to the site.

 

A heritage impact statement prepared by Graham Brooks and Associates (GBA) accompanies the application. It provides an assessment of the heritage impact of this proposal, prepared against the heritage requirements of the Lane Cove LEP 1987, and the Guidelines for the Assessment of Heritage Impact prepared by the Heritage Office of the NSW Department of Planning. The GBA report provides the following conclusions:

 

       The proposed gymnasium will be located at too great a distance, and with a sufficient

          number of approved architectural buffer elements in the intervening space, to preclude

         the possibility of its having any negative impact, either visual or physical, on the listed

         heritage items.

       The addition of an easily accessible community facility, adjacent to the Lane Cove Plaza

         and the approved Lane Cove Market Square development, will enhance the social

         amenity of the precinct and complement the Council’s overall strategic vision for a

         vibrant, “alive” Lane Cove Village.

 

The GBA report was critically evaluated by Archnex Designs, who has provided the following assessment:

 

·       The proposed gymnasium is to occupy an area over the proposal that connects through to Lane Cove Plaza that was previously designed as residential accommodation.

·       The volume of the upper floor of the gymnasium is setback from the parapet to the Lane Cove Plaza approximately 15m.

·       The architectural expression of the north wall of the proposed upper gymnasium level is neutral in that it presents a series of louvers, below a relatively thin roof plane.

·       The proposed external materials, finishes and colours of the façade as presented to the Lane Cove Plaza are neutral and recessive.

·       Heritage impacts upon the items at Nos. 2-4, 6-8 and 10 Lane Cove Plaza will be negligible due to the relative setback of the bulk of the upper gymnasium level, although there will be additional bulk visible in views from the west/northwest, over the single storey shop facades and parapets - though not to an extent that there will be adverse visual impacts on the settings of the items.

·       Separation distances from the Lane Cove library building and other identified heritage items in the vicinity(Public school) are sufficient and the architectural expression of the proposed upper gymnasium level is such that it will either not be discernible within the setting of the items, or will be unobtrusive.

·       While the orthographic would suggest that the proposed additional volume would/will be visible, the topography and intervening buildings, including the proposed Lane Cove Market Square complex, will largely preclude visibility of the addition.

 

In view of the above analysis the Archnex assessment concludes that the proposal should not give rise to adverse heritage impacts on either the significance or setting of the times in the vicinity, including those adjacent to the east, being the shops the shops fronting the Lane Cove Plaza.

 

9.8    Water

 

Council’s Manager, Assets raises no objection to the nominated arrangements for stormwater collection and disposal.

 

9.9    Soils

 

The issue of soil contamination been addressed at section 8.2 above.

 

9.10  Air and microclimate

 

Potential exists for the air quality of the locality to be affected as a consequence of dust caused from the construction processes.

 

This proposal can only proceed concurrently with the implementation and completion of DA 246/04. This report therefore recommends conditions consistent with DA 246/04 regarding construction management matters.

 

9.11     Flora and Fauna

 

This matter relates to the maintenance of biodiversity through the management of critical habitats, threatened species and ecological communities.

 

This issue was previously investigated in conjunction with the approval of DA 246/04.  As noted, this proposal can only proceed concurrently with the implementation and completion of DA 246/04.

 

No aspect of this subject application alters any provisions of the consent granted to development DA 246/04 regarding the preservation and protection those trees which are to be retained as part of that earlier approval.

 

9.12    Waste 

 

See comments at section 8.6 above.

 

9.13  Energy and Sustainability.

 

Accompanying this application is an Energy Performance report prepared by Bassett Consulting Engineers which outlines strategies that would assist in the development achieving a low level of potential energy rating through the use of active and passive measures.

 

This report recommends conditions to ensure the strategies as outlined in that report, plus requirements for water conservation and reuse, are included in a management plan to be submitted for approval prior to the issue of any construction certificate for this building.

 

9.14   Noise and vibration

 

Mixed use developments, and sites located on an interface between commercial and residential precincts, have the potential to impact upon the amenity of those who reside in or around them.

 

Accompanying the application is an acoustic report prepared by Bassett Acoustics. That report has regard to:

 

·       Noise from internal activities associated with the operation of the gymnasium.

·       Noise from mechanical plant.

·       Traffic Noise.

·       Noise intrusion into residential area

 

In summary the report concludes:

 

·       Mechanical plant used for the gym tenancy will be designed to comply with the noise emission and noise intrusion criteria. Final details for the required noise attenuation measures can only be determined once the specific plant has been selected.

·       A preliminary assessment suggests that 6mm glazing will be sufficient to meet internal acoustic requirements.

·       The potential for noise from additional traffic generated by the gym to cause significant increases in noise levels is unlikely.

 

Council’s Environmental Health officer has reviewed the report and has suggested conditions relating to the noise report and ongoing monitoring of the site.

 

The terrace is to be provided with self closing doors, and no amplified music is to be provided in the area, or the terrace used for classes without prior development approval.

 

9.15   Natural hazards

 

No natural hazards, such as subsidence, flooding, bushfire or the like, have been identified as affecting this site.

 

9.16 Technological hazards

 

No technological hazards, such as land contamination, have been identified.

 

9.17 Safety, security and crime prevention

 

Crime prevention through environmental design (CPTED) is a recognised method of incorporating measures that are able to reduce opportunities for crime through the considered design of buildings and places.

 

This issue is of greater significance for those levels of the Lane Cove Market Square which sit below the proposed gymnasium particularly as those levels include spaces for public access outside of typical core trading hours.

 

This issue was previously investigated in conjunction with the approval of DA 246/04.  This proposal can only proceed concurrently with the implementation and completion of DA 246/04.

 

No aspect of this subject application alters any provisions of the consent granted to development DA 246/04 regarding CPTED measures.

 

Notwithstanding, the recommendation to this report includes conditions to ensure that the requirements for pedestrian safety required under DA 246/04 apply equally to this proposal.

 

9.18 Social impacts

 

This issue considers the potential costs and benefits of a development in terms of the health and safety of a community, a sense of place, community facilities, social interaction and the management of social change.

 

Potential negative social impacts relate to health and safety for the community, particularly during the construction phase as a consequence of increased and intensive activity around the site. This matter was considered in conjunction with DA 246/04 and addressed via suitable conditions in the consent notice for that application.

 

This development is otherwise anticipated to have positive social outcomes given that it would:

 

·       Provide for leisure and recreation opportunities, albeit as a club.

·       Contribute to an active CBD precinct.

 

9.19 Economic impacts

 

The introduction of additional retail floor space into an existing activity centre raises issues as to likely impacts, both costs and benefits, particularly with regard to income, existing and future businesses, and employment. This issue was considered in detail in conjunction with the assessment of DA 246/04 for the Lane Cove Market Square complex, of which this application essentially would become a component.

 

The conclusions reached with regard to DA 246/04 indicated that overall the development would result in a likely economic benefit to the community. As this proposal does not seek to increase the retail component of the approved Market Square development no adverse economic impacts are anticipated.

  

9.20  Site design and internal design

 

This matter relates to the consideration of a how a development responds to opportunities and constraints offered by a particular site. It also requires an assessment of the built form, presentation and management of space of a development.

 

The proposed gymnasium is designed to integrate into the approved Lane Cove Market Place complex. Its built form and design is satisfactory subject to modifications identified in this report including a reduction in height and FSR.

 

9.21  Construction

 

Given the relationship of this proposal to prior DA 246/04 the proponent is relying upon the same construction management arrangements as approved for that application. Such an approach is reasonable.

 

This report therefore recommends appropriate conditions to ensure this outcome is achieved.

9.22  Cumulative impacts

 

This matter requires consideration of the timing and effects of impacts. The report has noted various possible impacts, and has also shown that such impacts can be controlled.

 

10.    THE SUITABILITY OF THE SITE FOR THE DEVELOPMENT

 

This proposal is essentially an amendment to a component of the Lane Cove Market Square complex approved under prior DA 246/04. The works approved under that earlier application demonstrated that proposal is 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.

 

This outcome was further confirmed through the outcomes of the proceedings before the Land and Environment Court.

 

The proposal the subject of this application is similarly considered suitable for the subject site.

 

11.     PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS

 

The application was publicly advertised from 4 October 2007 until 18 October 2007, and was available for inspection at the Council Civic Centre and Lane Cove Library.

 

A total of 6 submissions were received in response to the notification of the development application.  The matters raised in those submissions are summarised, and grouped into related issues, and addressed below.

 

·       An increase in the height of the roof of the building would affect the amenity of adjacent  22 Lane Cove Plaza through loss of sun, light, air, views, privacy.

 

Comment:

 

There are no windows to overlook this adjacent site. Overlooking from balcony and terrace areas can be ensures by appropriate design of balustrades. The eastern and northern aspect enjoyed by this adjacent site, and the solar access that permits, would not be compromised. Afternoon shadow cast over this site at midwinter, would increase from that associated from the CBD housing, but not significantly.

 

·       The facility should be located outside of the village centre.

 

         Comment:

 

         It is appropriate to locate such facilities within established centres to take advantage of facilities,    infrastructure and access to public transport services. 

 

·       Lack of car parking. Traffic congestion and parking would be greater than that associated with the approved apartments. The extra traffic from the gymnasium would have an unacceptable impact upon the amenity of nearby residents. The submission ignores this issue.

 

         Comment:

 

          There would be a surplus of 32 parking spaces. Traffic issues are considered at sections 6.1 and 9.2 above.

 

·       Impacts upon the safety of pedestrians from increased traffic.

 

         Comment:

 

         Arrangements for addressing pedestrian safety are achieved through the consent granted on DA    246/04. Similar requirements would be applied to this application.

 

·       The use is prohibited within the zone, is inconsistent with zone objectives, and does not comply with DCP.

 

         Comment:

 

         The use is defined as a permissible within the zone, as outlined at section 8.4.1 above.

 

·       The demand for a gymnasium is not substantiated. The proposal would compete directly with Lane Cove Aquatic Centre which is on community owned land. A debate is to be had with the community as to whether it is appropriate for Council owned land to be used for a privately owned and operated gymnasium. If it is appropriate, why does it have to be on this site where traffic and access are major issues.


        
Comment:

 

         The way in which Council owned land might be used, and any competition issues with other          Council owned facilities, is a matter for Council.

 

·       Concern that the application was not reasonably notified to nearby residents who would have an interest in this matter. Objectors to the original DA were not notified of this proposal, and consideration should be deferred until this is done. The DA should be more widely notified in local media.

 

         Comment:

 

         The public notification was in accordance with all State and Council regulations and policies.  The public notification of the original development proposal reflected the broader community interest shown and is not  necessary to the same extent for this application.  Arrangements for the public notification of the application are a matter for Council.

 

·       The local road system is inadequately and misleadingly described in the applicant’s traffic report in terms of their function and characteristics. The extrapolation of traffic from other gymnasiums in speculative.

         Comment:

 

         Traffic issues are considered at sections 6.1 and 9.2 above. 

 

·       How much is the development above the height limit. Although site lines from the Plaza may not be affected by this extra height, it will be apparent when viewed from Council Lane from the west. This is exacerbated by the gym being pushed back towards the south.

 

Comment:

 

         The roof ridge of the proposed building would be 1.89m higher than the highest point of the          approved CBD housing element of the Market Square complex. Amended plans have moved the           upper level of the building 4m to the north, away from Council Lane, to reduce the scale and             presentation of the building when viewed from that area. 

 

·       The building will look like a fibro extension of a solid masonry building. The whole of the materials and colours should be shown on coloured drawings and material samples submitted to Council.

 

Comment:

 

          Amended plans provided by the applicant indicate that the external finishes of the proposed         building will largely continue with external materials and finishes consistent with the balance of          the Market Square complex. The recommendation includes a condition requiring the final schedule of materials and finishes to be submitted to Council for approval.

 

·       The energy report does not commit Woolworths to significant energy initiatives. There is no

         mention of solar power generation even though the site is well suited for it.

 

Comment:

 

         Conditions are included in the recommendation addressing this matter.

 

·       There is no mention regarding sound insulation if a loud PA system is to be used for aerobic classes. Such noise would interfere with the amenity and ambience of the Plaza.

 

Comment:

 

          Included in the recommendation to this report is condition requiring full details of noise     attenuation measures for the operations of the gymnasium to be outlined in the future             development application required for the occupation and fit out of these premises.

 

·       The Lane Cove Alive Board is of the view that the Woolworths proposal will be a major benefit to Lane Cove. The Board does not raise any concerns about the removal of the CBD housing but is supportive of such housing in the village and is of the view that there may be other opportunities for housing to be provided.

 

 

 

Comment:

 

         Opportunities for CBD housing remain on other sites within the Village centre.

 

·       The gymnasium will be a consumer magnet and will provide opportunities for cross fertilization within the village. However parking is at a premium and concern is raised about the apparent loss of parking.

 

Comment:

 

         A surplus of 32 parking spaces would be available on the site after taking into account the            parking demand generated by the existing approved Lane Cove Market Square complex, this     proposed gymnasium and the replacement of all public parking lost from the site and in Austin        Street.

 

12.    THE PUBLIC INTEREST

No circumstances have been identified to suggest that this development is not in the public interest.

13.    CONCLUSION

 

This report considers a proposal to construct a two storey commercial style building set above the retail level of the Lane Cove Market Square complex approved under DA 246/04. The location of this new building, at the northern end of the complex, is essentially the same area which was approved under DA 246/04 to accommodate two levels of residential apartments. The proposed new building, defined as a club under LEP 1987, would be used as gymnasium. A future separate development application would be lodged for the occupancy of this building should this application be approved.

 

It is our position, upon balancing advice received from all relevant sources, that this development is fundamentally sound in terms of its design, function and relationship with its neighbours. We are also satisfied that the proposal has reasonably responded to relevant planning controls and generally achieves their associated outcomes.

 

However, notwithstanding this underlying support, certain issues have been identified that warrant the modification of the proposal to reduce the height and size of the building.

 

These matters can be reasonably resolved and accordingly approval of the application is recommended subject to the nominated conditions.  

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT pursuant o Section 80(1)(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended , the Council grants development consent to Development Application 07/272 for the construction of a two storey addition for the purposes of a club (gymnasium) in the place of two levels of CBD housing within the Lane Cove market Square complex on land known as 24-28 Lane Cove Plaza, Lane Cove subject to the following conditions:

 

1.         The proposal is to be completed strictly in accordance with the following drawings and supporting information received with the application, except as otherwise amended by this Notice:

           

            Architectural Plans prepared by BN Group Pty Ltd:-

 

Drawing No.

Title

Date

Revision

GA 108

Library/Plaza level

22.8.2007

B

GA 109

Gym level 1

24.8.2007

B

GA 110

Gym level 2

10.12.2007

C