m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agenda

Ordinary Council Meeting

5 May 2008

The meeting commences at 6.30pm. If members of the public are

not interested in any business recommended to be considered in

Closed Session or there is no such business, Council will ordinarily

  commence consideration of all other business at 7pm.

 


 

Notice of Meeting

 

Dear Councillors

 

Notice is given of the Ordinary Council Meeting, to be held in the Council Chambers, Lower Ground Floor, 48 Longueville Road, Lane Cove on Monday 5 May 2008 commencing at 7:00PM. The business to be transacted at the meeting is included in this business paper.

 

Yours faithfully



Peter Brown

General Manager

 

Council Meeting Procedures

 

The Council meeting is chaired by the Mayor, Councillor Ian Longbottom. Councillors are entitled to one vote on a matter. If votes are equal, the Chairperson has a second or casting vote. When a majority of Councillors vote in favour of a Motion it becomes a decision of the Council. Minutes of Council and Committee meetings are published on Council’s website wwww.lanecove.nsw.gov.au by 5pm of the Thursday following the meeting.

 

The Meeting is conducted in accordance with Council's Code of Meeting Practice. The order of business is listed in the Agenda on the next page. That order will be followed unless Council resolves to modify the order at the meeting. This may occur for example where the members of the public in attendance are interested in specific items of the agenda.

 

Members of the public may address the Council Meeting on any issue for a maximum of 3 minutes during the public forum which is held at the beginning of the meeting. All persons addressing the Meeting must speak to the Chair. Speakers and Councillors will not enter into general debate or ask questions.

 

If you do not understand any part of the information given above; require assistance to participate in the meeting due to a disability; or wish to obtain information in relation to Council, please contact Council’s Manager Governance on 99113525.

 

Please note 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.

 

 

 


Ordinary Council 5 May 2008

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

APOLOGIES

 

OPENING OF MEETING WITH PRAYER

 

ACKNOWLEDGMENT TO COUNTRY

 

public forum

 

Members of the public may address the Council Meeting on any issue for 3 minutes.

 

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

1.      ORDINARY COUNCIL MEETING - 21 APRIL 2008

 

Referred Reports FROM INSPECTION COMMITTEE 3RD MAY

 

2.       Environmental Services Division Report No. 142

SUBJECT: 28 George Street, Greenwich

 

Orders Of The Day

 

3.       Order Of The Day No. 12

SUBJECT: Meeting in the Plaza - Saturday 31 May 2008

 

General Managers Reports

 

4.       General Managers Report No. 17

SUBJECT: Draft Budget and Management Plan 2008 - 2011

 

5.       General Managers Report No. 20

SUBJECT: Asia Pacific Technology Exchange (APTEX)

 

Corporate Services Division Reports

 

6.       Corporate Services Division Report No. 24

SUBJECT: Requests for Financial Assistance - NSW Councils or the Local Government and Shires Association (LGSA)

 

Environmental Services Division Reports

 

7.       Environmental Services Division Report No. 124

SUBJECT: 83 Kenneth Street, Longueville

 

8.       Environmental Services Division Report No. 28

SUBJECT: Lane Cove Market Square Status Report

 

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

 

 

 

       


Ordinary Council Meeting 5 May 2008

 

Environmental Services Division Report No. 142

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Environmental Services Division Report No. 142

Subject:          28 George Street, Greenwich

Inspection Committee after considering the matter will refer this Report to the Ordinary Council meeting to be held on 05 May 2008.   

Record No:    DA07/304-01 - 11958/08

Author(s):       Rajiv Shankar 

 

 

Property:                     28 George Street, Greenwich

 

DA No:                         D304/07

 

Date Lodged:              11 October 2007

Amended Plans:         Yes

 

Cost of Work:              $200 000

 

Owner             :                       P & A M Bennett

 

Author:                         Rajiv Shankar

 

 

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL TO APPEAR ON DETERMINATION

Alterations and additions to existing dwelling house and erection of a carport.

ZONE

Residential 2(a2)

IS THE PROPOSAL PERMISSIBLE WITHIN THE ZONE?

Yes

IS THE PROPERTY A HERITAGE ITEM?

No

IS THE PROPERTY WITHIN A CONSERVATION AREA?

Yes

DOES DCP 1- BUSHLAND APPLY TO THE PROPERTY?

No

BCA CLASSIFICATION

Class 1a & 10a

STOP THE CLOCK USED

Yes

NOTIFICATION

Neighbours                  2, 4, 6 Mitchell St, 26, 27, 29, 31 George St, 7, 9 Richard St, 

Ward Councillors       Clr R D’ Amico, Clr R Tudge, Clr T Lawson

Progress Association Greenwich Community Association

 

REASON FOR REFERRAL:

 

The application has been called to the Planning & Building Committee by Councillor Lawson because of objections and issues relating to view sharing.

 

 

 

 


EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

 

The proposal is to carry out alterations and additions to an existing two storey dwelling house. The alterations include extension of the ground and first floors towards the rear, rear balconies and an external staircase. A carport is proposed in front of the building line. The existing garage is proposed to be extended and used as a studio.

 

Five objections have been received in response to the amended proposal. The resident of 2 Mitchell Street objects to loss of view of the Harbour Bridge, an iconic view and excessive building bulk. Residents of other adjoining properties, including No 2 Mitchell Street, object to loss of privacy from the proposed rear balconies, particularly because the rear balconies are accessible from a proposed external staircase which would enable the balconies to be use for entertainment purposes.

 

It is considered that to address the concerns raised by the neighbours, the rear balconies be deleted, the rear external staircase be deleted and the first floor not project beyond the line of the existing south facing external wall towards the rear of the dwelling house.  The application is recommended for approval subject to the above deletions and inclusion of appropriate draft conditions.

 

SITE:

 

The site is located on the southern side of George Street. The site is rectangular in shape and falls steeply away from the street.

 

The site features a two storey dwelling house with a steep roof pitch and a detached garage towards the rear along the western side boundary. Neighbouring to the east is a two storey brick dwelling house and towards the west is the rear of a two storey dwelling house. Site plan and notification plan attached (AT1 and AT2).

 

PROPOSAL:

 

The proposal is for:

 

1.   Alterations and additions to the existing ground floor including extension towards the rear. The rear dining and kitchen have been stepped down. Towards the rear is proposed a 3.0m wide deck. The deck is accessible from a proposed external staircase adjoining the deck.

 

2.   Alterations and additions to the existing first floor including extension towards the rear to create a bed room and a walk in robe. The bedroom opens on to a 3.0m wide balcony which is also accessible from the same external staircase adjoining the deck towards the rear.

 

3.   An attic, accessible from the existing internal staircase, has been proposed within the existing roof space.

 

4.   The existing garage towards the rear of the property is proposed to be extended to accommodate a WC. The alterations include provision of three French Doors which open towards the rear open space. It is proposed to use the garage as a studio.

 

5.   A carport, with a roof pitch to match the existing dwelling house, is proposed in front of the existing building line.

 

6.   A new pedestrian opening & gate in the existing front fence to access the dwelling house from the street.

 


PREVIOUS APPROVALS/HISTORY:

 

Nil

 

PROPOSAL DATA/POLICY COMPLIANCE:

 

Site Area (566.5m2)

 

PROPOSED

CODE

COMPLIES

Floor Space Ratio       (max)

0.43%

0.5

Yes

Soft Landscaped Area            (min)

46.9%

35%

Yes

Side Boundary Setback (min)

1100mm (existing)

1500mm

No

Overall Height (m)       (max)

9.0m (proposed rear extension roof)

9.5m

Yes

Ceiling Height (m)       (max)

7.5m (proposed rear extension)

9.4m (attic- roof existing)

7.0m

No

No of Storeys

2

2

Yes

Building Line    (max)

Existing/Unchanged

7.5m

NA

Foreshore Building Line(min)

NA

NA

NA

Cut and Fill      (max)

1m

1m

Yes

Deck/Balcony width    (max)

3m

3m (if elevated by >1m)

Yes

Solar Access  (min)

3 hours

3 hours to north elevation

Yes

BASIX

Yes

Required

Yes

 

OUTBUILDINGS (GARAGE, CARPORT etc)

 

 

PROPOSED

CODE

COMPLIES

Maximum floor space

66.59

10% of the allotment or 55 sq. m which ever is lesser.

No

 

 

CARPORTS IN FRONT OF BUILDING LINE

 

 

PROPOSED

CODE

COMPLIES

Building Line    (min)

Nil

7.5m

No

Proportion of Allotment Width

5.6m

50% or 6m, whichever is the lesser

Yes

Setback of Posts (min)

1m

1m

Yes

Height (ceiling to natural ground level)

3.6m

3.6m

Yes

 

REFERRALS:

 

Manager Assets

 

No objections expressed subject to conditions which have been included in the conditions attached to this report.

 

Heritage Consultant

 

The Heritage Consultant has advised that the proposal for extension to the ground and first floor levels is compatible with the existing residence and is recessive to the streetscape.

 

However in relation to the carport, he is of the view that:

 

The proposal for the carport is dominant and prominent from the streetscape.  I recommend that the roof pitch be retained, matching the residence, but that the ridge be lowered, with the roof pane over the stairs coinciding with the stairs.  This will reduce the scale and bulk of the carport in relation to the residence, and views from neighbouring properties will be enhanced.

 

Officer’s comment:  Amended plans were submitted in line with the heritage consultant’s recommendations.

 

79 (C)(1)(a)  The provisions of any Environmental Planning Instrument

 

Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 1987

 

The subject site is zoned Low Density Residential 2 (a2) under the provisions of Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 1987.  The proposal is permitted with development consent of Council.

 

Draft Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2007

 

There are no additional provisions that need to be considered with respect to the draft LEP.

 

Lane Cove Code for Dwelling Houses – September 2000

 

As indicated in the policy compliance table, the proposal complies with most of the provisions and it is considered to achieve the objectives for each provision.

 

Variations to Council’s Codes/Policies

 

The proposal does not comply with the following provisions:

 

1.         Side Boundary Setback (min):

 

The existing eastern side boundary is approximately 1100mm. The ground floor and the first floor additions follow the existing side boundary setback of the dwelling house which is considered acceptable. This is considered to achieve the objectives of the code which are to provide separation between dwellings for privacy and enable views between buildings.

 

2.         Ceiling Height (m) (max):

 

The maximum ceiling height of the proposed two storey extension towards the rear is 7.5m as against the Code’s requirement of 7.0m. The objective of the height control is to control the bulk and scale of the additions and to minimise disruption of existing view. The extension towards the rear disrupts views and completely obscures the iconic view of the harbour bridge, towards the rear of the property on No 2 Mitchell Street. Therefore it is considered that the proposal does not meet the objectives of Clause 3.3 for height of building.

 

In view of the above, condition 4 has been included in the conditions attached to this report, to reduce the building bulk of the proposal.

 

3.         Maximum floor space (Outbuildings, Carports etc):

 

A detached garage toward the rear of the property already exists. As the land slopes steeply towards the rear it is difficult to reverse a car up to the street. Therefore the applicant has proposed an addition carport in front of the building line. There are other examples of carports in front of the building line along the street.

 

The area of the carport and the outbuilding put together exceeds the maximum permissible. The objective of the outbuildings is to have a design that is compatible with the existing or proposed development and is in keeping with the amenity of the adjoining development. The proposed carport roof is compatible with the roof of the existing dwelling. The proposed carport does not impact upon the amenity of the adjoining development. Therefore it is considered that the proposal meets the objectives of Clause 6 for outbuildings.

 

4.         Carport within front Building Line (min)

 

The minimum front building line, as per Clause 3.7 of Councils DCP is 7.5m. However, carports can be supported with a lesser setback. The proposed carport meets the objectives of the clause which is to maintain an open streetscape and pedestrian safety.

 

SEPP 55 – State Environmental Planning policy No.55 – Remediation of Land

 

In accordance with Clause 7 of this instrument, Council is required to consider whether land is contaminated prior to granting consent to carrying out of development on this land. Notwithstanding that site investigations have not been carried out, the current and previous use of the site and surrounding sites have been for residential purposes and unlikely that that there has been any high risk uses. Accordingly, contamination of the site is unlikely to be an issue.

 

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 (the SREP) and Sydney Harbour Foreshores and Waterways Area Development Control Plan for the SREP (the DCP)

 

The Municipality of Lane Cove is identified as being within the Sydney Harbour Catchment of the SREP.  The subject site is also located within the Foreshores and Waterways Area as indicated on the Foreshores and Waterways Area map contained within this SREP, and as such, is subject to the DCP that complements the SREP.

 

The SREP aims to recognise, protect, enhance and maintain the catchment, foreshores and waterways and islands of Sydney Harbour and to achieve a high quality and ecologically sustainable urban environment.  Part 3 of the SREP addresses the Foreshores and Waterways Area.  Within Part 3, Division 2 sets out Matters for consideration which Council is to consider in assessing new development.  Of the clauses 20-27 listed for consideration, it is considered that the proposed works would not raise any significant issues.

 

Under the DCP the proposed works are Land Based Development and therefore subject to Section 5. It is considered that the proposed works would not raise any significant issues in relation to the two relevant sub-sections, i.e. 5.3 (Siting of buildings and structures) and 5.4 (Built form).

 

79C(1)(b)       The likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impacts in the locality.

 

It is considered that the proposed development in its current form, is likely to adversely impact on the residential amenity of the adjoining properties.   Conditions of consent have been provided to mitigate any adverse impact.

 

Privacy

 

The proposal includes a 3.0m wide and 6.7m long balcony on the first floor off a bed room which has full length bi-fold doors, towards the rear of the dwelling house. The balcony overlooks the private open spaces of the dwelling houses to the east, west and south of the subject property.


Furthermore, a staircase has been proposed from the rear yard to access the proposed ground floor and first floor balconies. This would enable the balconies to be used for entertainment purposes. In addition, an independent external access to the upper floor would increase potential for the upper floor to be used as a second dwelling which is not permitted.

 

In view of the above, condition 2 has been included in the conditions attached to this report, to reduce overlooking the neighbouring properties.

 

In addition, condition 3 has been included in the conditions attached to this report, to reduce the potential of the dwelling house  being used as a second dwelling.

 

Views

 

An objection to the development from residents of the property towards the west (2 Mitchell Street) is that the proposed development would have an adverse impact on views.

 

The ‘Code and Development Application Checklist for Dwelling Houses, Fences, Private Swimming Pools and Outbuildings’ requires that development:

 

 Minimize disruption to existing views or to achieve reasonable view sharing from adjacent development with the height and bulk of the development.

 

In determining what impact on views would result from a development, the L&EC case Tenacity Consulting vs Warringah Council (2004) NSW L&EC 347 has become the basis for the planning principle used to examine view sharing. In this Commissioner Roseth framed a series of questions which should be addressed in assessing whether the impact on views is considered unacceptable.  The following is an assessment of the application in terms of these questions which are:

 

1.         The assessment of the views to be affected. Some views (e.g. water views, views of iconic buildings) are valued more highly than others.

 

2.         Consider from what part of the property the views are obtained.  Also, consider sitting or standing views. Protection of sitting views across side boundaries are more difficult than from front and rear boundaries.

 

3.         Assess the extent of the impact.  This should be done for the whole of the property, not just the view that is affected. Views from living areas (including kitchen areas) are more significant than from bedrooms.

4.         Assess the reasonableness of the proposal that is causing the impact.  Factors include whether the proposal complies with development standards and whether view loss could be ameliorated by better design. View impact from a complying development would probably be considered acceptable, and view sharing reasonable.

 

In assessing the impact on views it is considered that:

 

1.         The views likely to be affected are high value. The views of the Harbour Bridge, an iconic structure, will be completely obscured.

 

2.         The view of the harbour bridge, which will be obscured, is from a corner of the living room which also has the kitchen. The views in a sitting and standing position obtained across the rear boundary, are likely to get obscured.

 

3.         The views being impacted are across the rear of the property and from the living area.

 

4.         The non compliances have been discussed above. The proposal can be better designed by extending the dwelling house towards the east which would not adversely impact upon the views from the dwelling house at 2 Mitchell Street.

 

Accordingly, it is considered that the proposal does not satisfy the requirements of Council’s Code and view sharing principles in relation to 2 Mitchell Street.

 

In view of the above, condition 4 has been included in the conditions attached to this report, to reduce the impact of loss of views.

 

Overshadowing

 

The proposal presents an acceptable level of overshadowing and is unlikely to significantly impact on the level of solar access to adjoining developments or over the development itself.

 

The shadow diagrams indicate that private open space & the windows serving habitable rooms in the adjoining dwelling will receive 3 hrs of sunlight between 9am & 3pm and in this regard it is considered that solar access is to be retained in accordance with the requirements of the DCP.

 

Section 79C(1)(c) - The suitability of the site for the development

 

The proposal maintains the residential use of the site. Accordingly the site is considered suitable with respect to the proposed development.

 

 

Section 79C(1)(d) - Any submissions made in accordance with this Act or Regulations.

 

The original proposal was advertised in accordance with Council’s policy of Community Consultation. 7 (seven) submissions were received.

 

The amended proposal was re-advertised in accordance with Council’s policy. 5 (five) submissions were received. The major concerns raised in the submissions are addressed below.

 

Potential loss of privacy:

 

Comment: The proposed first floor balcony towards the rear of the dwelling house is to be deleted as a condition of consent. (Condition 2).

 

The staircase being obtrusive and high:

 

Comment: The proposed rear staircase is it be deleted. (Condition 3).

 

Potential Loss of views:

 

Comment: The first floor extension has been reduced so that it does not project beyond the existing first floor building line. (Condition 4).

 

Section 79C(1)(e) - The public interest.

 

The amended proposal, as conditioned further in this report, is considered satisfactory with respect to design objectives and provisions under Council’s Code for Dwelling Houses. The amended/conditioned proposal would not create any major environmental impacts.

 


CONCLUSION

 

The application has been assessed having regard to the matters under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, relevant Planning Instruments and Council controls, as well as public good and suitability of the site. The proposal is considered to be satisfactory subject to the following conditions.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That pursuant to Section 80(1)(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, the Council grant consent to Development Application D304/07 for alterations and additions to existing dwelling house and erection of a carport at 28 George Street, Greenwich subject to the following conditions.

 

1.         (20) That the development be strictly in accordance with drawing number DA01 to DA06 Issue B dated Feb08 by Vienna Designs.

 

2.         The proposed first floor balcony towards the rear of the dwelling house is to be deleted. Amended plans shall be submitted prior to issue of Construction Certificate.

 

3.         The proposed external staircase towards the rear of the dwelling house is to be deleted. Amended plans shall be submitted prior to issue of Construction Certificate.

 

4.         The proposed first floor shall not project beyond the line of the existing south facing external wall towards the rear of the dwelling house. Amended plans shall be submitted prior to issue of Construction Certificate.

 

5.         (1) The submission of a Construction Certificate and its issue by Council or Private Certifier PRIOR TO CONSTRUCTION WORK commencing.

 

6.         (2) All building works are required to be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

 

7.         (11) The approved plans must be submitted to a Sydney Water Check agent or Customer Centre to determine whether the development will affect Sydney Water’s sewer and water mains, stormwater drains and/or easements, and if further requirements need to be met.  Plans will be appropriately stamped.  For Quick Check agent details please refer to the web site www.sydneywater.com.au see Your Business then Building & Developing then Building & Renovating or telephone 13 20 92.

 

            The consent authority or a private accredited certifier must:-

 

·           Ensure that a Quick Check agent/Sydney Water has appropriately stamped the plans before the issue of any Construction Certificate.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

8.         (12) Approval is subject to the condition that the builder or person who does the residential building work complies with the applicable requirements of Part 6 of the Home Building Act 1989 whereby a person must not contract to do any residential building work unless a contract of insurance that complies with this Act is in force in relation to the proposed work.  It is the responsibility of the builder or person who is to do the work to satisfy Council or the PCA that they have complied with the applicable requirements of Part 6.  Council as the PCA will not release the Construction Certificate until evidence of Home Owners Warranty Insurance or an owner builder permit is submitted. THE ABOVE CONDITION DOES NOT APPLY TO COMMERCIAL/INDUSTRIAL CONSTRUCTION, OWNER BUILDER WORKS LESS THAN $5000 OR CONSTRUCTION WORKS LESS THAN $12000.

 

9.         (17)  An Occupation Certificate being obtained from the Principal Certifying Authority before the occupation of the building.

 

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

 

Monday to Friday (inclusive)                     7.00am to 5.30pm

Saturday                                                   7.00am to 4.00pm

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

 

11.       (36) Stockpiles of topsoil, sand, aggregate, spoil or other material capable of being moved by water to be stored clear of any drainage line, easement, natural watercourse, footpath, kerb or roadside.

 

12.       (37) The development shall be conducted in such a manner so as not to interfere with the amenity of the neighbourhood in respect of noise, vibration, smell, dust, waste water, waste products or otherwise.

 

13.       (48) Depositing or storage of builder's materials on the footpath or roadways within the Municipality without first obtaining approval of Council is PROHIBITED.

 

Separate approval must be obtained from Council's Works and Urban Services Department PRIOR TO THE PLACEMENT of any building waste container ("Skip") in a public place.

 

14.       (49) Prior to the commencement of any construction work associated with the development, the Applicant shall erect a sign(s) at the construction site and in a prominent position at the site boundary where the sign can be viewed from the nearest public place.  The sign(s) shall indicate:

a)         the name, address and telephone number of the Principal Certifying Authority;

b)         the name of the person in charge of the construction site and telephone number at which that person may be contacted outside working hours; and

c)         a statement that unauthorised entry to the construction site is prohibited.

The signs shall be maintained for the duration of construction works.

 

15.       (50) The cleaning out of ready-mix concrete trucks, wheelbarrows and the like into Council's gutter is PROHIBITED.

 

16.       (51) A Tree Preservation Order applies in the Municipality of Lane Cove.  The Order prohibits the cutting or removal of any tree except with the consent of Council and the penalty for contravention of this Order is up to Twenty Thousand Dollars ($20,000.00).  The co-operation of all residents is sought in the preservation of the bushland character of the Municipality.  All enquiries concerning the Tree Preservation Order must be made at the Council Chambers, Lane Cove.

 

17.       Standard Condition (56) Where Lane Cove Council is appointed as the Principal Certifying Authority, it will be necessary to book an inspection for each of the following stages during the construction process.  Forty eight (48) hours notice must be given prior to the inspection being required:-

 

a)         The pier holes/pads before filling with concrete.

b)         All reinforcement prior to filling with concrete.

c)         The dampcourse level, ant capping, anchorage and floor framing before the floor material is laid.

d)         Framework including roof and floor members when completed and prior to covering.

e)         Installation of steel beams and columns prior to covering

f)          Waterproofing of wet areas

g)         Stormwater drainage lines prior to backfilling

h)         Completion.

 

18.       Standard Condition (57) Structural Engineer's details being submitted to Council and approved PRIOR TO ISSUE OF CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE for the following:-

 

a)         underpinning;

b)         retaining walls;

c)         footings;

d)         reinforced concrete work;

e)         structural steelwork;

f)          upper level floor framing;

 

19.       (63) All metal deck roofs being of a ribbed metal profile or colourbond corrugated galvanised or zincalume iron, in a mid to dark range colour and having an approved anti-glare finish.

 

20.       Standard Condition (64) A check survey certificate is to be submitted at the completion of:-

 

a          Dampcourse level;

b          The establishment of floor levels;

c          The roof framing; and

d          The completion of works.

 

Note:    All levels are to relate to the reduced levels as noted on the approved architectural plans and should be cross-referenced to Australian Height Datum.

 

21.       (66) The removal, handling and disposal of asbestos from building sites being carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Construction Safety Act and the Regulations details of the method of removal to be submitted PRIOR TO COMMENCING ANY DEMOLITION WORKS.

 

22.       (67) 

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

 

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

 

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

 

 

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

23.       (68) An automatic fire detection and alarm system, designed to ensure the occupants are given adequate warning so they can evacuate the building in an emergency, must be installed in the dwelling.

 

            This requirement is satisfied by:-

(a)        Smoke alarms installed in—

            (i)         Class 1a buildings in accordance with 3.7.2.3 of the Building Code of Australia; and

            (ii)        in Class 1b buildings in accordance with 3.7.2.4 and 3.7.2.5 of the Building Code of Australia

(b)        Smoke alarms complying with AS 3786.

(c)        Smoke alarms connected to the consumer mains power where consumer power is supplied to the building.

 

Location – Class 1a buildings (dwellings)

 

Smoke alarms must be installed in a Class 1a building on or near the ceiling in—

 

(a)        any storey containing bedrooms—

            (i)         between each part of the dwelling containing bedrooms and the remainder of the dwelling; and

            (ii)        where bedrooms are served by a hallway, in that hallway; and

(b)        any other storey not containing bedrooms.

 

Location – Class 1b buildings

 

In a Class 1b building, smoke alarms must be installed on or near the ceiling—

 

(a)        in every bedrooms; and

(b)        in every corridor or hallway associated with a bedroom, or if there is no corridor or hallway, in an area between the bedrooms and the remainder of the building; and

(c)        on each other storey.

 

24.       (70) Protection of the dwelling against subterranean termites must be carried out in accordance with AS.3660.

 

25.       (78) The site being properly fenced to prevent access of unauthorised persons outside of working hours.

 

26.       All waste generated on site shall be disposed off in accordance with the submitted the Waste Management Plan.

 

27.       (141) Long Service Levy Compliance with Section 109F of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979; payment of the Long Service Levy payable under Section 34 of the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986 (or, where such a levy is payable by instalments, the first instalment of the levy) – All building works in excess of $25,000 are subject to the payment of a Long Service Levy at the rate of 0.35%.

 

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

 

28.       (142) BASIX - Compliance with all the conditions of the BASIX Certificate lodged with Council as part of this application.

 

General Engineering Conditions

 

29        Design and Construction Standards.  All engineering plans and work shall be carried out in accordance with Council’s standards and relevant Development Control Plans except as amended by other conditions.

 

30        Pedestrian Access Maintained. Pedestrian access, including disabled and pram access, is to be maintained throughout the course of the construction as per AS 1742.3, ’Part 3 - Traffic control devices for works on roads’.

 

31        Restoration.  Public areas must be maintained in a safe condition at all times. Restoration of disturbed Council land is the responsibility of the applicant. All costs associated with restoration of public land will be borne by the applicant.

 

32        Environmental Pollution Control Pit. A stormwater pit is to be installed on the existing system, just prior to the stormwater connecting to the receiving system. Environmental pollution Control Pit is to be designed to remove pollutants from the stormwater flow. The pit is to have a minimum dimension of 600 x 600 mm, a debris screen, sediment collection sump and must be designed to drain completely dry. The pit is to be maintained at all times.

 

Engineering Conditions to be complied with Prior To Construction Certificate

 

33        Control of Stormwater Runoff. The stormwater runoff from the new impervious areas within the development shall be connected to the existing drainage system in accordance with the requirements of Lane Cove Council’s DCP Stormwater management.

            The existing stormwater system is to be certified that it is in good working order and meets the requirements set out in Council’s DCP Stormwater management. The certification is to be carried out by a fully licensed and insured plumber or a suitably qualified engineer. Where an existing element does not comply with current standards the subject element is to be replaced. Where the existing system does not comply with Councils DCP Stormwater management an application is to be made to Council for approval of an alternate system.

 

34        Footpath Damage Bond. The applicant shall lodge with Council a $1000 cash bond or bank guarantee to cover damage to Council's roads, footpaths, kerb and gutter, drainage or other assets. Lodgement of this bond is required prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

 

 

 

35        Boundary Levels. The levels of the street alignment shall be obtained from Council. These levels are to be incorporated into the design of the internal pavements, carparks, landscaping and stormwater drainage plans and shall be obtained prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

36        Residential Crossing. The residential crossing shall be constructed to the specifications and levels issued by Council. An application shall be made to Council and relevant fees / bond, (being an $800 bond, plus inspection fee of $259 plus a design fee of $150, totalling $1209, - 2007/08) is to be paid to Council prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate for the provision of street alignment levels and Council inspections.

 

37        Erosion and Sediment Control Plan. An Erosion and Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) shall be prepared by a suitably qualified consultant in accordance with the guidelines set out in the manual “Managing Urban Stormwater, Soils and Construction“ prepared by LANDCOM  ‘Fourth Edition 2004, Volume 1’.These devices shall be maintained during the construction works and replaced where considered necessary.

            The following details are to be included in drawings accompanying the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan:

            Location and design criteria of erosion and sediment control structures,

            Site access point/s and means of limiting material leaving the site

            Means of diversion of uncontaminated upper catchment around disturbed areas

            Procedures for maintenance of erosion and sediment controls

            Details and procedures for dust control.

 

Engineering Conditions to be complied with Prior to Commencement of Construction

 

38        Materials on Roads and Footpaths. Where the applicant requires           the use of council land for placement of building waste, skips or storage of materials an application for “Building waste containers or materials in a public place” is to be made. Council land is not to be occupied or used for storage until such application is approved. 

 

39        Works on Council Property. Separate application shall be made to Council's Urban Services Division for approval to complete, to Council's standards and specifications, any associated works on Council property.  This shall include vehicular crossings, footpaths, drainage works, kerb and guttering, brick paving, restorations and any miscellaneous works. Applications shall be submitted prior to the start of any works on Council property.

 

40        Public Utility Relocation. If any public services are to be adjusted, as a result of the development, the applicant is to arrange with the relevant public utility authority the alteration or removal of those affected services. Any such work being carried out at the applicant’s cost and prior to the commencement of works.

 

41        Sediment and Erosion Control. The applicant shall install appropriate sediment control devices prior to any disturbance of the existing site. The devices are to be installed in accordance with an approved plan. These devices shall be maintained during the construction period and replaced where considered necessary. Suitable erosion control management procedures shall be practiced. This condition is imposed in order to protect downstream properties, Council's drainage system and natural watercourses from sediment build-up transferred by stormwater runoff from the site.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Engineering Conditions to be complied with Prior to Occupation Certificate

 

42        Construction of Residential Driveway Crossing. A full width residential duty vehicular crossing shall be provided opposite each vehicular entrance to the site, with a maximum width of 5.0 metres and a minimum width of 3.5 metres at the boundary line. These works shall be carried out prior to the issue of the occupation certificate by a licensed construction contractor at the applicant’s expense and shall be in accordance with Council’ s issued drawings and level sheets.

 

43        Certificate of Satisfactory Completion.  Certificates from a registered and licensed Plumber, Builder, or a suitably qualified Engineer must be obtained for the following matters.  The plumber, builder is to provide a copy of their registration papers with the certificate. The relevant Certificates are to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority, prior to issue of any Occupation Certificate.

 

            Confirming that all vehicular footway and gutter (layback) crossings are constructed or reconstructed in accordance with Lane Cove Council’s ‘specification for construction of residential vehicular footpath crossings’. (When the works are satisfactory, the applicant must request the Council Crossing inspector to provide written evidence of satisfactory completion of the works.

 

            Confirming that the site drainage system has been constructed in accordance with the relevant Australian Standards and Council’s DCP Stormwater management. 

 

            All works have been completed in accordance with the issued Construction Certificate and Conditions of this determination.

 

            If Council is appointed the Principal Certifying Authority then the appropriate inspection fee is to be paid to Council with the subject documentation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Amended Site Location Plan

2 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

Neighbour Notification Plan

1 Page

 

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting 5 May 2008

 

Order Of The Day No. 12

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Order Of The Day No. 12

Subject:          Meeting in the Plaza - Saturday 31 May 2008    

Record No:    su1915 - 16408/08

Author(s):       Rebecca Ford 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Councillors are next due to meet with the public in the Plaza on Saturday 31 May 2008 between 10:30am and 12:00 midday. 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council determine representation at the Meeting in the Plaza for May.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Wrightson

Executive Manager

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

   


Ordinary Council Meeting 5 May 2008

 

General Managers Report No. 17

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    General Managers Report No. 17

Subject:          Draft Budget and Management Plan 2008 - 2011    

Record No:    SU3072 - 14983/08

Author(s):       Peter Brown; Craig Wrightson; Jane Gornall; Michael Mason; Wayne Rylands 

 

 

 

Introduction

 

Lane Cove Council, like local government generally, is under increasing pressure from a variety of sources.   These include:-

           Increasing costs;

           Revenue decreasing relative to inflation;

           An aging population;

           Cost shifting from State & Federal government; and

           Continued rate pegging from the NSW State government over more than 2 decades which has seen revenue lag behind actual costs.

 

The recent Cole Report into the exposure of local government to various structured financial products such as collateralised debt obligations (CDO’s) has only served to highlight the need for councils to manage their limited financial resources well.

 

Within this difficult context, Lane Cove through consistent resolve have been prudent and conservative financial managers achieving debt free status in 1999 whilst also investing in the municipality by undertaking significant capital projects such as the Lane Cove Aquatic Centre and accumulating sufficient funds for the new Library and Austin Street Car park.

 

Draft Budget for 2008/2011

 

Budget Summary

 

The 2008/2009 Budget was prepared using Council's normal format and arranged in program areas that reflect Council’s activities. The document contains explanatory notes that describe the activities covered by each of the programs.

 

The 2008/2009 Budget has been formulated on the basis of applying the principle of achieving a balanced budget in cash terms without the reliance on debt.   On a AAS 27 Accrual Accounting basis, Council has achieved a balanced budget with no reliance on debt.

 

To achieve this,  the 2008/2009 Draft Budget was again formulated in an environment of contestability which required individual Divisional Managers to critically evaluate and justify program expenditures, matching each against their respective funding source thus leading to the containment of costs.   I believe, the draft budget as presented will continue to facilitate the achievement of Council’s objectives in the coming 12 months.

 

Budget Highlights

 

Council is required to comply with Australian Accounting Standards Board (AASB) in the preparation and presentation of its financial information. AASB 116 now requires Council to utilise the Fair Value method of valuing its assets. Stage 1 relates to Council Buildings and Other Structures, with the value and useful life remaining calculated by a registered valuer. As a consequence the depreciated charges in relation to Buildings and Other Structures have increased significantly throughout the budget, an average increase of 29%. Whilst this does not impact on Council’s Cash Flow it does impact on Council’s Operating Budget, as depreciation is an expense. Over the coming years all categories of assets will change to this method.

 

Corporate Services

 

Administration 1.1

 

Overall the budget has been struck on the basis of a zero increase where possible.

 

The Salaries/Wages for Corporate Services have increased with the employment of the Manager – Special Projects. In 2007/2008 this position was funded from the Facilities Redevelopment Planning vote, which has been decreased in line with the reallocation.

Further to the above, the allocation for Facilities Redevelopment Planning has been further reduced as many of the preliminary investigations required for the initial projects in the Major Projects Plan have been completed. The projects from the Major Projects Plan that are currently underway are funded in the respective programs throughout the budget. The include:- Meeting House Redevelopment Program 4.3.6, Lane Cove Library Program 5.1, Austin Street Car Park 8.5, Little Street Car Park 8.5.

 

Council has a scheduled upgrade of its TRIM Electronic Document Management Server, Authority and Eservices Servers (Financial and Development Applications).

 

The Budget also includes a provisional amount for expansion of Council’s 3D Model (Simmersion) which will assist in development planning decisions and future land use planning.

 

An allocation of $160,000 has been made for the Elections due in September 2008. This up considerably from the last election cost of $82,000. The election is conducted by the State Electoral Commission and Council has already lobbied for the State Government to review its decision to seek full cost recovery for the conduct of local government elections to provide a more cost-effective and affordable election system for NSW councils.

 

Organisation Development - Administration (Program 3.1)

 

Workers Compensation Premiums are distributed amongst the programs having regard to actual costs rather than a flat fee per employee, resulting in variations compared to previous years. Council continues to enjoy a good safety record achieved through staff education and the introduction of new Workcover safety requirements, which are ongoing. Dependant on how Workcover adjusts the formula components for calculation of Workers Compensation premiums, Council's costs should not increase significantly. A premium of $250,000 has been budgeted.

 

Council’s Public & Professional Liability Insurance is through MetroPool. The premium is a slight reduction to last year. Metropool has expanded the range of insurance products it provides, Councillors and Officers, Fidelity Guarantee, Personal Accident are all now included with the Public Liability Premium. 

 

Council’s property insurance premium has risen to $152,000 as Council’s premium is calculated having regard to claims made. Council insures property through the UIP property pool, and premiums include a weighting of 50% based on actual claims made. Given Council’s recent claims, two total losses, Council’s premium will be affected for the next five years.

 

An amount of $20,000 has been included in Corporate Relations as a contingency for the development of a new form of Strategic Plan, should the Department of Local Government’s Integrated Planning and Reporting project be implemented following the 2008 election.

 

 

 

 

Environmental Services

 

Overall the Environmental Services Division is seeking to increase value to existing programme initiatives for the 2008/09 budget year.

 

Strategic Planning (Programme 2.1)

 

The Draft LEP and subsequent Development Control Plans remains the focus for 08/09.  Public exhibition and extensive consultation with a range of stakeholders will be followed by fine tuning of issues and a number of ad hoc special projects.

 

Associated with the Comprehensive LEP, Council will review its detailed planning controls and develop a comprehensive DCP to conform to the LEP.  DCP chapters would include:

 

St Leonards specialised centre;

Residential zones;

Commercial zones;

Industrial zones; &

other

 

Council also will adopt the revised Section 94 Contribution Plan in the 08/09 Financial Year subject to the current legislative review.

 

Administration (Programme 6.1)

 

The allocation provides for a slight increase in salaries to account for extra days worked by the Administrative Assistant, given the overall demand across the Division.

 

Development Control (Programme 6.2)

 

Council continues to resolve difficult DAs and minimise legal expenses.

 

Consultant expenses will increase to provide greater flexibility in the allocation of resources and concentration of the program for development of a register for fire risk nominated buildings.  Council will include Council buildings in the fire safety review.

 

Environmental Health (Programme 6.3.1)

 

Council continues to undertake inspections for food shops on a risk based approach. 

 

Council will rationalise the parking officers into the ranger’s structure to increase service flexibility.

 

Legal expenses are anticipated to continue their downward trend in line with the increased focus on and raising awareness and inspection regime.

 

Regulatory Services (Programme 6.4)

 

Council will implement the Companion Animal strategies that support sharing of finite facilities.

 

Household Garbage (Programme 9.2)

 

Council signed its waste collection and disposal contract in 05/06 and marginal increases reflect current trends and initiatives.  Council will implement the findings of a waste collection audit and develop strategies which seek to increase diversion rates above 50%.

 

 

Human Services

 

Funds have been made available to continue to implement the Social and Cultural Plans. Funds have also been allocated to begin implementation of the Disability Discrimination Plan (DDA) adopted by Council in 2007.

 

Programs across the Division have been assessed against the Plans listed above and the Sustainability Plan.

 

Major projects that will undertaken in the next twelve months include; the renewal of Meeting House (including relocation) and the Library fit-out, and monitoring of the operations of the Aquatic Centre. All of these projects and their outcomes have been positively affected by the consultation on and recommendations of Council’s major plans.

 

The Division will also be undertaking the oversighting for the rebuilding of the Tambourine Bay Boatshed, including the installation of a fire protection system.

 

It is envisaged that Lane Cove ALIVE will also have an impact on the Division, in particular in the Cultural area.

 

Kindy Cove Child Care Centre   (Program 4.3.2)

 

Kindy Cove Child Care Centre is run as a business unit of Council.  The budget is developed in close cooperation with the Management Advisory Committee.

 

In line with the 2004/5 decision of the Management Advisory Committee, Kindy Cove will again charge a different daily rate for children at the Centre.

 

The Nursery which caters for children 0-2 - rate will increase from $75.00 to $77.00 per day.

The rooms which cater for the older children – 2-5, Blue Room and Green Rooms rate will increase from $69.00 to $71.00 per day.

 

This differential rate reflects the different staffing requirements of the rooms – with the Nursery ratio – 1:4 (higher than the Doc ’s requirement of 1:5) and the other room ratios – 1:8 (2-3) and 1:10 (3-6).

 

The increase is to cover staff costs and to maintain program levels. This rate still makes the Child Care Centre one of the most affordable on the North Shore.

 

Community Services   (Programs 4.3.1, 4.3.3, 4.3.4, 4.3.5, and 5.5)

 

These programs include provision for services to youth, the aged and disabled, cultural services and community groups generally.

 

The Youth Services Program continues to provide high quality services to our residents including new initiatives such as Club 114 (for 11 to 14 year olds) and with the Youth Centre operating as a five day a week service from Tuesday to Saturday.

 

Funds have been included in the budget to continue a range of seniors programmes such as the Microwave for Seniors Cooking Classes, Seniors Week and Seniors Concerts. 

 

Funds have been allocated for the completion of the next stage of the Cultural Centre feasibility study and for publication and implementation of the Public Art Policy. A small increase has been allocated a range of cultural activities in line with the concepts of the Cultural Plan. Seed funding has been provided for an Autumn Harmony Festival.

Library and Information Services (Program 5.1)

 

The Library expenditure has predominantly been maintained at 2007/8 levels as it is anticipated that the Market Square development which will affect Service delivery and workflows. The extent and timing of such disruptions is unclear and has made budget formulation difficult.

 

The maintenance and repair budget has been reduced to $10,000 for the Lane Cove Library buildings. This is due to some items, e.g. air-conditioning units having been replaced as part off the Library relocation and these are now under warranty.

 

Facilities (Programs 4, 5 & 9)

 

Activities of this Branch are shown in programs where Council facilities appear.

 

Funds have also been included for a range of improvements to facilities including:-

 

$100,000 has been allocated for the necessary repairs to the Lane Cove Pool (outside), including the resealing of the Pool to seal the leaking sections.  Funds have also been included to cover structural repair costs associated with the indoor pool complex.

 

$35,000 has been allocated to the Community Centre to cover the ongoing replacement of air-conditioning units and to refurbish the ground floor kitchen.

 

An amount of $70,000 has been included to refurbish the playground adjacent to Centre House. The playground is used primarily by the Lane Cove Out of School Care (OOSH).

 

In 2008/9 funds have been allocated for repair work on the slate roof and repairs to tiles at Carisbrook House Museum. 

 

 

Open Space and Urban Services

 

Open Space   (Programs 5.7.1 – 5.7.6)

 

During 2008/2009 a number of capital improvements are planned for Council’s Open Space areas – including parks, sporting grounds and water recreation.

 

Further funding has been allocated towards the upgrading and replacement of Council’s playground equipment to ensure compliance with the relevant Australian Standards. This is an on-going program that will link with the Council’s (draft) Playground Strategy.

 

Funding has been allocated towards the upgrading of the boat ramp at Burns Bay Reserve. This will supplement the upgrade of the beach adjacent to the ramp in the last financial year.

 

The footpath through Shell Park will also be upgraded in this financial year.

 

The management of trees has received a funding increase this year, as previous budgets have struggled to keep pace with the amount of pruning/removal of trees occurring in recent years.

 

Funds have been included to undertake urgent repairs to Tantallon Oval’s grandstand and field lighting system.

 

Further funds have been allocated to the golf course (in line with the Master Plan and the benchmarking project) to upgrade the 17th green and to proceed with a financial feasibility study of the golf course in comparison to like structured golf courses in the surrounding region..

An amount of $15,000 has again been allocated for the aerial bundling of cables to continue Council’s program of minimising their visual impact on the community amenity.

 

Funds have been allocated for the safety audit of a number of footbridges, including at the golf course.

 

Within the Bushland budget, funds have been allocated for the Volunteer Bushcare program as well as for the regular Bushland Management Program.

 

The Bushland Program also has a number of continuing works that are funded by Grant allocations.

 

Engineering and Support Services (Program 8.1)

 

It is anticipated that a Street Environmental Capacity Study, review of Resident Parking Schemes and to further transport sustainability options identified in the Lane Cove Traffic and Transport Study. 

 

Funds have also been allocated for Council to purchase an Asset Management Software Program that will link with, and provide input into, Council’s long-term financial plan.

 

Roads (Program 8.2)

 

The Federal Roads to Recovery Program has been extended by the Federal Government and will be utilized for improvements to Council Lane between the proposed Link Road and Coles Carpark. 

 

Income from sale of plant is expected to remain consistent with last year with a nett increase in income from sale of redundant plant.

 

Council has requested a grant of $115,000 for 2008/2009 for the RTA Rehabilitation of Regional Roads Program and $22,000 for the 3x3 Program to be spent on Regional Roads. An amount of $55,000 has also been provided for regular maintenance on Regional Roads.

 

Funding has been maintained at current levels for Heavy Patching and Road Maintenance in order to maintain the target pavement condition index of .65 and for general maintenance of roads. 

 

Ancillary Works (Program 8.3)

 

Income from reinstatements/restorations and vehicular crossings have been increased to reflect an expected increase in works by the Council works staff.  Grants are also expected from the Roads and Traffic Authority for implementation of bicycle facilities and a Pedestrian Access and Mobility Plan (PAMP).

 

Additional funding has been provided for street lighting expenditure based on the IPART determination that Energy Australia could increase fees of approximately 40% over 5 years.

 

Funding has been provided for traffic management works that include:

 

·     A roundabout is proposed at the intersection of Austin St/Austin Crescent.

·     Allowance is made for the construction a number of pedestrian refuges.

 

Funding is provided for continuing the River Road West/Bridge Street/Penrose Street Road Safety Project. This will be dependent on significant community consultation and the necessary State Government approvals.

 

The York’s Corner Precinct Shops are programmed for renewal of the street furniture and footpath pavement in accordance with Council’s Neighbourhood Shopping Precinct Plan.

 

Footpaths (Program 8.4)

 

Funding has been increased in an endeavor to improve the general footpath condition.  Provision has been made for upgrading works including the provision of pram ramps at numerous key locations.

 

Parking Areas (Program 8.5)

 

The salaries for Parking Officers have been moved to Regulatory Services 6.4, as outlined previously.

 

Provision has been made for additional funding of Austin Street Carpark construction.  This involves another payment to Woolworths in accordance with the Development Deed as the work progresses. Provision has also been made for funding of the proposed Little Street Carpark development, should it proceed.

 

Funding for Parking Meter maintenance has been increased due to higher fees from the meters at St Leonards.

 

Bus Shelters (Program 8.6)

 

This program is funded under a contractual arrangement with Adshel.

 

Water Transport (Program 8.7)

 

Ongoing maintenance will be carried out. However, it has been agreed that  the State Government will take over responsibility for the ferry wharves within the Lane Cove LGA (and other Council areas adjoining the harbour) in conjunction with a 3 year plan to upgrade these wharves.

 

Street Sweeping (Program 9.3)

 

Additional funding has been provided for hand sweeping to reflect increasing tipping costs.

 

Funding has been maintained for mechanical sweeping with weekly sweeping in peak periods and 2 weekly in other times.

 

Other Garbage Expenses (Program 9.4)

 

The contract for servicing of litter bins is part of the contract for domestic waste collection.  The allocation reflects the increased State Government tipping fees which also effect Domestic Waste.

 

Urban Stormwater (Program 9.5)

 

Funding for maintenance of stormwater has been maintained.  A program of pit upgrading is expected to reduce the frequency of blockages and this program will be continued in 2008/2009.

The continuation of the Stormwater Levy will allow Council to finalise the study of the existing stormwater system and fund further capital works to replace and upgrade the system as required.

 

Other Community Facilities (Program 9.7)

 

Provision has been maintained for two staff in the Plaza. Funding has also been provided for upgrading works as recommended in the Lane Cove Alive program.


Sustainability Levy

 

This year Council continues to fastrack Sustainability initiatives utilising the 6% Sustainability Levy. Projects this year can be split into two categories new and ongoing. The new projects include:-

 

New

 

           Management of Shared Open Space - Animals

           Develop a Plan of Management for Blackman Park

           Develop Conservation Policy for Bushland Park

           Undertake GIS mapping of natural attributes (eg threatened species)

           Implement actions from Green House Action Plan.

           Library Sustainability Initiatives

           Green Building Advice Service

           Rainwater Capture for Blackman Park – Stage 1

           Lane Cove Plaza MasterPlan

           Sustainability Action Plan Review

 

Ongoing

 

           Bush Regeneration at Gore Creek Reserve, Stage 2 of 6 Year Program

           Conduct macro invertebrate monitoring, Stage 2 of 7 Year Program

           Promote Backyard Wildlife Habitat Program, Stage 2 of 7 Year Program

           Feral Animal Control, Stage 2 of 7 Year Program

           Support for Volunteer Bushcare Program

           Green Fleet – 100% CO2 abatement for Council’s Fleet

           Utilise 100% Green Power for Council’s Administration Centre

           Residential Rainwater Tank Rebate Scheme

           Implement actions from Water Saving Action Plans

           Village Graffiti Reduction Program

           Lane Cove Retail Sustainability Strategy implementation

           Community Sustainability Workshop Series

           Program Management and Education

 

Budget Revenues

 

Rates Levy

 

The Minister for Local Government has announced the actual rate peg increase as 3.2% for 2008/09. 

 

General Purpose (Ordinary) Rates

 

It is proposed to levy two (2) Ordinary Rates in 2008/2009 in accordance with S.492 and S.497(a) of the Local Government Act.

 

i.          An Ordinary Residential Rate of 0.169684 cents in the dollar, on the Land Value of all Rateable Land categorised as Residential in accordance with S.516 of the Local Government Act, (with the exception of heritage properties which are rated on their heritage value), with a Minimum Rate of $428, to yield $11,937,125.

 

ii.          An Ordinary Business Rate of 0.689860 cents in the dollar, on the Land Value of all Rateable Land categorised as Business in accordance with S.516 of the Local Government Act, with a Minimum Rate of $638, to yield $4,450,757.

 


Car Parking Special Rate

 

It is proposed to levy a Car Parking Special Rate on Business premises in Lane Cove (as per metes and bounds description as advertised in the North Shore Times on 13 June 1979), of 0.174269 cents in dollar with a minimum rate of $2 per assessment, to raise $136,500.

 

Stormwater Management Charge

 

It is proposed to levy a Stormwater Management Service Charge of $25.00 per Business Rated and Residential Non Strata Rated properties and $12.50 per Residential Strata rated properties to raise an estimated $274,438.

 

Domestic Waste Management (DWM) Charges

 

Domestic Waste Management Services are rendered by Council to all residential properties (including flats and strata’s) in the Lane Cove Municipality. DWM does not include waste services rendered to business rated properties. As provided for in the Local Government Act the “reasonable” cost of DWM is fully recoverable and is reflected in the recommended charge for Domestic Waste Management in the Management Plan.

 

The 2008/2009 Draft Budget provides for the levying of a Domestic Waste Management Charge (under S.496 of the Act) of $333 for each 80 litre MGB (or equivalent) service on all rateable and non-rateable residential properties. Additional DWM services to Owner Occupied Single Residential Dwellings is available at $4.87 per week. Charges for DWM services rendered to residential units above business premises, or extra DWM services rendered to other premises, are set out in the Schedule of Fees and Charges for 2008/2009.

 

Total estimated revenue from Domestic Waste Management Charges is $4,327,000.

 

Interest Charges

 

Interest is to be charged on overdue Rates and DWM Charges in accordance with S.566(3) of the Act. The maximum rate of interest payable has not yet been announced by the Minister.

 

Valuation Base

 

Rates for 2008/2009 will be levied on the 1 July 2007 Base Date Valuations as issued by the Valuer General.

 

Fees & Charges

 

The percentage change to the Sydney All Groups Consumer Price Index to December 2007 was 2.4%. This has been used as a basis for any recommended increases in the Schedule of Fees and Charges for 2008/2009 (which is included as Attachment 3), for those charges which are set by Council.

 

 S.611 Charges – Infrastructure Charges

 

Council is proposing to levy under S611 of the Local Government Act, on persons for the time being in possession, occupation or enjoyment of a rail, pipe, wire, pole, cable, tunnel or structure laid, erected, suspended, constructed or placed on, under or over a public place. The charges are based on the nature and extent of the benefit enjoyed by the person concerned. Council will levy a charge on AGL in respect of gas pipes occupying Council land.


Loan Borrowing

 

It is not proposed to raise any new loans. There are no renewal loans requiring refinancing during this period.

 

Salaries and Wages

 

Salaries and Wages include provision for staff progression through Council's revised Salary System. All other provisions are as per the Local Government (State) Award. Sick leave has been based on 50% of leave entitlement and is based on sick leave history.

 

Depreciation Charges

 

In accordance with the requirements of Australian Accounting Standard AAS27, the Draft Budget incorporates Depreciation of fixed assets. Depreciation theoretically is the consumption of these   assets over their useful life - amounts are provided each year to reflect this consumption and do not involve the movement of cash. As outlined earlier in the report, the method of valuation and the calculation of the useful life have changed significantly in relation to buildings this year, which has increased the depreciation charges.

 

Draft Management Plan 2008 - 2011

 

This years Management Plan has again been prepared in the Quadruple Bottom Line Framework (Environment, Social, Economic and Governance).

 

Council’s Corporate Plan establishes 6 Strategic Themes; Our Natural Environment; Our Built Environment; Our Society; Our Culture; Our Local Economy; and Our Council. These are aligned to the Quadruple Bottom Line Framework, which ensures Lane Cove is a sustainable community.

 

Council’s Management Plan proposes activities that support the goals of Council’s Corporate Plan, linking the two documents. Activities in the Management Plan are now also linked to all Council’s detailed issue plans and key progress indicators are included. The Plan also provides the opportunity to measure our progress by allowing for evaluation of service delivery and continuous monitoring of financial performance.

 

The format and contents of the Draft Management Plan comply with the requirements of the Local Government Act, 1993.   It covers the fiscal year 2008/2009 as well as for the subsequent two years, with planning emphasis placed on the first 12 months.

 

The financial information contained in the Management Plan is based on the Draft Budget. As such, the Draft Plan may need to be updated following the consideration of the Draft Budget.

 

Community Consultation

 

It is a statutory requirement that the Draft Management Plan, following Council’s initial consideration, be placed on public exhibition for a period of not less than twenty eight (28) days. Following this, Council must consider any public comments submitted before the Plan can be adopted.  

 

The public exhibition will close on 9 June 2008 with the Draft Budget and Management Plan scheduled to be placed before Council on 16 June 2008 for final adoption. Until the Management Plan is adopted, Council is unable to levy rates and charges for the fiscal year for which the plan is prepared.

 


Consultation Statement of Intent

 

The consultation is designed to provide the community with the opportunity to comment on the proposed initiatives and actions for the next three years, with a particular emphasis on the next 12 months.

 

The methods of consultation proposed are outlined below. The proposed exhibition will be at both the Civic Centre and the Library to final confirmation. 

 

Methods

 

Level of Participation

Inform

Consult

Form of Participation

Open

Open / Random

Target Audience

Whole Community

Whole Community

Proposed Medium

Exhibition/ Press release/ Advertising/ enewsletter

Survey

Indicative Timing

9 May 2008

9 May – 9 June

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

1.   Council adopt for the purpose of public exhibition, the Draft Budget for the year to 30 June 2008 to 2011, Draft Management Plan for 2008 to 2011 and Draft Fees and Charges 2008/9;

 

2.   Council proceed to public exhibition as per the consultation strategy outlined in the report; and

 

3.   following public exhibition, the Draft Management Plan, Draft Budget and Draft Fees and Charges together with any submissions received, be considered at the Council meeting to be held on 16 June 2008.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Peter Brown

General Manager

General Managers Unit

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

2008 – 2011 Draft Budget: Note: Attachment circulated separately.

175 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

2008 – 2011 Management Plan  Note: Attachment circulated separately.

63 Pages

 

AT‑3 View

2008 - 2009 Draft Fees and Charges Note: Attachment circulated separately.

33 Pages

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 5 May 2008

 

General Managers Report No. 20

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    General Managers Report No. 20

Subject:          Asia Pacific Technology Exchange (APTEX)    

Record No:    SU2627 - 16533/08

Author(s):       Peter Brown 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This report is an update on the APTEX matter and recommends a letter of support be forwarded to the joint venture partners.

 

Background

 

As Council is aware at the Ordinary meeting of Council of the 21st April 2007following consideration of General Managers Report No 17 on this matter (Attachment 1) it was resolved that:-

 

1.         The matter be deferred to the next meeting of Council.

2.         The General Manager obtain additional information regarding the proposal, including the position adopted by other North Shore Councils.

 

Current Situation

 

During the period since Council’s last meeting I have had further discussion with the Chairman of Enterprise Pacific Ltd, Mr Geoff Mullins, joint venture partner with the National Stock Exchange (NSX) in the APTEX.

 

Mr Mullins made it very clear that all the APTEX was hoping for was support in a very general and non monetary sense for the establishment of the APTEX in this region.   The term stakeholder did not need to be used and any supportive response by Council could obviously be limited in whatever way Council felt appropriate.

 

Mr Mullins also made it clear that they would like to keep Council informed of progress and would appreciate any feedback that Council felt to be appropriate as they establish this new exchange.

 

The establishment of the APTEX in the northern Sydney region is a positive for the region.   As stated by the President of NSROC, Clr. Pat Reilly, quoted in the NSROC press release (Attachment 2) “We are fortunate in having a highly skilled workforce, investment capital and entrepreneurial skill all located within the Global Arc running through Northern Sydney.”

 

“When you look at the quality of the environment here in the NSROC region you can appreciate it is an ideal site for companies and businesses wishing to locate their headquarters or their workforces.”

 

The NSROC release also stated, “Companies wishing to list on the new exchange will find it simpler and cheaper than listing on the Australian Stock Exchange, making it easier for companies with a small number of stockholders to access capital for expansion.”

 

Other Councils

 

Feedback on the position of all of the individual northern Sydney Councils on this matter is in the process of being followed up and will be provided separately to Councillors prior to the Council meeting.

 

At this stage it would appear that not all northern Sydney Councils were contacted by the joint venture partners.

 

From discussions with the General Manager of Ryde Council it is my understanding that a report recommending general support for the establishment of the APTEX will go to the  Ryde Council meeting of 20 May 2008.

 

Where to from here?

 

The establishment of the APTEX in northern Sydney is a positive for this region.   NSROC supports the establishment of such an exchange.

 

Concerns raised at the previous meeting with the possible meaning of the term stakeholder are understandable particularly in the current economic climate and coupled with some of the business and governance failings reported in recent months.   Council’s in-house solicitor has provided suitable wording that assists Council to place its support in an appropriate context and that draft letter of support is attached for Council’s consideration (Attachment 3).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:-

 

1.         Note the launch of a new technology exchange, the Asia Pacific Technology Exchange (APTEX), to be based in the northern Sydney region.

 

2.         Forward a letter of support as per Attachment 3 supporting the establishment of the APTEX in this region.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Peter Brown

General Manager

General Managers Unit

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

General Manager's Report No.17 with attachments

12 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

NSROC press release

1 Page

 

AT‑3 View

Draft letter of support

1 Page

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 5 May 2008

 

Corporate Services Division Report No. 24

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Corporate Services Division Report No. 24

Subject:          Requests for Financial Assistance - NSW Councils or the Local Government and Shires Association (LGSA)    

Record No:    su896 - 15412/08

Author(s):       Ian Naylor 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The purpose of this report is to provide Council with a draft policy on Requests for Financial Assistance from NSW Councils and the Local Government and Shires Association. 

 

Background

 

At the Council Meeting on 7 April 2008, Council in considering two requests from the LGSA for financial assistance resolved:- 

 

“…….

 

2.   Council advise the Local Government & Shires Associations that Council requires notification of the possible requests for assistance with legal costs at the earliest time possible.

 

3.   A report be prepared for Council regarding a policy dealing with requests for financial assistance in relation to local government issues”.

 

Discussion

 

The LGSA was contacted in accordance with part 2 above and they advised that it is the individual council’s responsibility to provide information to other councils about requests for financial assistance. They also indicated that in relation to legal proceedings, as the awarding of costs may not be for several years, the subsequent request for financial assistance from councils is several years after the legal proceedings commenced.  This makes it difficult to give all councils sufficient notice of a request, such is the case with the recent request from Gosford Council where the legal proceedings commenced in 2006. The LGSA also indicated that where possible, information is provided in the LGSA Local Government Weekly newsletter on requests for financial assistance.

 

In relation to part 3, from time to time, the Local Government and Shires Associations of NSW (LGSA) requests that councils assist them and NSW Councils by providing financial assistance to help off-set costs incurred in relation to legal proceedings, industry wide campaigns and councils in urgent need of financial assistance due to a natural disaster.  

 

A Draft Policy has been developed that provides that such requests for financial assistance will only be considered by Council if:-

 

(a)        the request has a direct relevance to the Lane Cove Local Government Area; or

 

(b)        the request is in relation to a natural disaster; or

 

(c)        the request relates to a local government issue and will have an impact on Lane Cove.


In terms of procedure, where assistance is to be provided, a report will be submitted to Council for consideration. Where assistance is to be declined, the General Manager will determine this under delegated authority. However, prior to advising the decision, the General Manager will advise Councillors of the decision to provide the opportunity for a Councillor to request that a report be submitted to Council for consideration and determination.

 

Consultation

 

Prior to adopting the policy it is appropriate Council undertake community consultation in relation to the proposed policy.

 

Statement of Intent

 

The consultation is designed to inform the community of the draft policy.  Any comments received will be utilised to determine whether or not to proceed with the policy and the suitability of the criteria.

 

Method

 

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

May 2008

May/June 2008

 

Conclusion

 

The draft policy will be exhibited for a period of 6 weeks and following this time, a report will be submitted to Council on the results of the community consultation.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That:-  

 

1.   The Draft Policy Requests for Financial Assistance from NSW Councils or the Local Government and Shires Association dated 5 May 2008 be endorsed for the purposes of public exhibition.

 

2.   Council proceed to public exhibition as per the consultation strategy outlined in the report.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Craig Wrightson

Executive Manager

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Request for Financial Assistance  from NSW Councils or the LGSA Draft Policy

1 Page

 

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting 5 May 2008

 

Environmental Services Division Report No. 124

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Environmental Services Division Report No. 124

Subject:          83 Kenneth Street, Longueville    

Record No:    DA05/180-01 - 10089/08

Author(s):       Stan Raymont 

 

 

Property:                                 83 Kenneth Street, Longueville, Lot 1, DP 1063151

 

DA No:                                     D180/05B

 

Date Lodged:                          25.2.08

 

Cost of Work:                          As previous

 

Owner             :                                   G.J. Miles

 

Author:                                     Stan Raymont

 

 

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL TO APPEAR ON DETERMINATION

Erection of a part single, part two storey dwelling house and swimming pool on the vacant allotment (Section 96 Modification)

ZONE

2(a2)

IS THE PROPOSAL PERMISSIBLE WITHIN THE ZONE?

Yes

IS THE PROPERTY A HERITAGE ITEM?

No – however, the subject site has a ‘Relic’ on the land pursuant to the NSW Heritage Act 1977

IS THE PROPERTY WITHIN A CONSERVATION AREA?

No

DOES DCP 1- BUSHLAND APPLY TO THE PROPERTY?

No

BCA CLASSIFICATION

Class 1a

STOP THE CLOCK USED

No

NOTIFICATION

Neighbours                              85, 96, 100 Kenneth Street; 1, 3, 5, 7 Amalfi Place; 20, 22 Belcote Road

Ward Councillors                    Central Ward

Progress Association             Longueville Residents’ Association

 

REASON FOR REFERRAL:

 

Section 96 Modification involves varying condition No.3 which was imposed by Council at its meeting of the 5th December 2005.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

 

Council at its meeting of the 5th December 2005 approved Development Application No D180/05 to erect a part single storey and part two storey dwelling house and swimming pool on the subject site subject to conditions which included:

 

            “3.        The overall ridge height of the two storey roof section of the dwelling above the proposed rumpus room is to be RL 16.97.  This is to be achieved by a split level of 2 risers (350mm) located between the proposed kitchen and living rooms.  PLANS BEING ALTERED TO COMPLY PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.”

 

A Section 96 Modification (D180/05A) has been submitted requesting:

 

            1.         Condition 3 be amended such that the ridge height of the two storey roof section of the dwelling above bedroom 1 be increased to RL 17.27 (a 300mm increase) to enable the ring beam in this section of the building to be lifted such that the windows on the west elevation of bedroom 1 can be replaced with sliding doors and the glass roof over the lower terrace be replaced with a balcony off bedroom 1.  This increased height allows the ring beam to increase to a height whilst maintaining the design integrity and allowing 2100 high doors to be incorporated.

 

There has also been an objection from Mr T Bryan on behalf of the owner of 3 Amalfi Place to the proposed ridge height of RL 17.27.

 

As a result, an agreement has been reached between the owner of 3 Amalfi Place and the owner of the subject property setting the proposed ridge height over bedrooms at a maximum of 17.15m (an increase of 180mm).

 

There also was a submission from the owner of 7 Amalfi Place objecting to any modification to this application.


7 Amalfi Place is the third property away from the subject property and is not considered to be adversely affected by this Section 96 Modification.

 

Subject to the maximum proposed ridge height over bedroom 1 not exceeding RL 17.15, the slight increase in the height of bedroom 1 and the bridge is considered satisfactory.

 

SITE:

 

The subject site is situated on the north-western side of Kenneth Street midway between the intersection with Belcote Road to the south and Amalfi Place to the north.

 

The site is Lot 1, (DP 1063151) being one of an approved subdivision of the original 83 Kenneth Street into two allotments.  The site has a water frontage to the Lane Cove River.

 

The land is currently vacant and falls steeply to the Lane Cove River.  Excavation work is being carried out to the land in accordance with the approval given to Development Application No.D180/05A.  To the south is Lot 2 of the approved subdivision of 83 Kenneth Street into two allotments and north of the site are two residential allotments rated to Amalfi Place.

 

This new subdivided lot also contains a ‘Relic’ pursuant to the NSW Heritage Act 1977.  Copy of site plan and notification plan attached (AT1) and (AT2).

 


PROPOSAL:

 

The Section 96 Modification is for:

 

1.         Condition 3 be amended such that the ridge height of the two storey roof section of the dwelling above bedroom 1 is increased to RL 17.27 (a 300mm increase) to enable the ring beam in this section of the building to be lifted such that the windows on the west elevation of bedroom 1 can be replaced with sliding doors and the glass roof over the lower terrace be replaced with a balcony off bedroom 1.  A 1.6m high slatted timber privacy screen is shown on the southern side of the balcony.

 

            This increased height allows the ring beam to increase to a height whilst maintaining the design integrity and allowing 2100 high doors to be incorporated.  In the Statement of Environmental Effects it is stated that this increase is marginal overall and is still below the standing (18m) and sitting (17.6m) eye levels from the adjoining properties and is below the RL of the front of the building at 18m.  The approved RL for the ridge at 85 Kenneth Street is 18m.

 

2.         As a consequence of this amendment to maintain the design integrity the RL of the height of the bridge linking the two pavilions will increase by 175mm at the north elevation to an RL of 16.075m.  In the Statement of Environmental Effects it is stated that this is well below the standing (18m) and sitting (17.6m) eye levels from the adjoining properties.

 

3.         Provide 4.3m x 1.7m balcony to western elevation from bedroom 1.

 

4.         Provide a vergola above rear terrace.

 

5.         Wall extension to the dressing room of bedroom 1 be extended from 3.8m to 4.5m and to the northwest corner an extension of 300mm.

 

6.         The window in guest WC on the ground floor being relocated from the southern elevation to the western elevation.

 

7.         An increased area of hard paving adjacent to the north-western side of the pool but within the 2m setback line.

 

8.         Condition 79 of the modified consent being corrected to refer to a Smooth barked apple tree.

 

PREVIOUS APPROVALS/HISTORY:

 

In terms of the subdivision of the original parcel of land, under delegated authority to the General Manager, consideration was given to Environmental Services Division Report No.63 in respect of Development Application No.D222/01 to demolish the existing dwelling on No.83 Kenneth Street and subdivide No.83 Kenneth Street into two allotments (Lot 1, No.83 Kenneth Street and Lot 2, No.85 Kenneth Street).   It was determined that the application be approved subject to conditions.

 

It should be noted that as a result of the subdivision, the subject land is burdened by an area of that land [the ‘Relic’], (VIDE DP 1063153), which has a restriction on the use to which the land can be put.  The original dwelling house on the site was demolished and the subdivision registered.  Further, Development Consent (D210/04) was issued for the erection of a dwelling house on the new lot 2 - 85 Kenneth Street on 30 November 2004.

 

Council at its meeting of 5th December, 2005 gave consideration to development consent (D180/05) for the erection of a part single-storey and part two storey dwelling house and swimming pool on the subject site.

 

The proposed dwelling-house comprised a double garage with direct entry off Kenneth Street, main entrance, family/guest bedroom, laundry, bathroom, kitchen, living and dining room areas.  Three (3) deck areas were located on this level, one deck accessed from the kitchen area, one deck from the living area and a central interlink deck with access from the study area.  A swimming pool was proposed between the dwelling and the Foreshore Building Line.

 

The first floor comprised four bedrooms, a main bathroom and rumpus room.  The main bedroom had a dressing room and ensuite and terrace area.

 

The application also intended to locate the proposed dwelling house over an existing ‘Relic’ (a feature gully) located on the site so that the ‘Relic’ is not disturbed.  This ‘Relic’ was the subject of investigation, assessment and report during the subdivision of the original single allotment into two lots.

 

It was resolved:-

 

That the application to erect a dwelling on the Lot 1 DP 1063151 - 83 Kenneth Street, Longueville be granted subject to the removal of the existing Camphor laurel tree located on the northern boundary of the subject site adjacent to 3 Amalfi Place and a replacement tree to the satisfaction of Council be planted in its place and also subject to conditions which included:-

 

“3.        the overall ridge height of the two storey roof section of the dwelling above the proposed rumpus room is to be RL 16.97. This is to be achieved by a split level of 2 risers (350mm) located between the proposed kitchen and living room. PLANS BEING ALTERED TO COMPLY PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.”

 

A Section 96 Modification (D180/05A) was then submitted for modifications including the following:

 

1.         A bridge linking the two double storey parts of the building was added above the deck and kitchen to the north.  The height of this element to achieve the bridge link was 1.3m to an RL of 15.9m.  This was below the approved roof RL of 16.97 at the rear and 18.0 at the front.  The external walls were proposed of zinc wall cladding and “expresswell” cladding and the roof was to be flat.

 

            In the Statement of Environmental Effects it was stated that the bridge roof RL of 15.9 was well below the standing (18m) and sitting (17.6m) eye levels from the adjoining properties.

 

2.         A proposed study at first floor level to the front two storey section of the dwelling.  The proposed study had a flat roof.

 

3.         The proposed rumpus room at first floor level in the rear two storey section was converted to bedroom 1.  Extensions were added to the first floor as bath 1 and dressing room.  These extensions were kept under the approved roof and extended to the limit of the eaves overhang only.  The external walls were proposed of zinc wall cladding.

 

This Section 96 Modification was approved on the 12.12.07.

 


Covenant on the Original Site

 

The original parcel of land prior to the subdivision approval in May 2002 had a covenant placed on the parcel requiring only one dwelling house to be located on the land.  This was also a matter raised by objectors to the Development Application lodged for the subdivision of the land and the development Application for the erection of a dwelling on 85 Kenneth Street. At the time of assessment of the subdivision application Council obtained legal advice to the affect that unless Council is a party to the covenant then “….they are entirely matters of private concern” and that Council only needs to address the ‘merits’ of the application.

 

On 4 August 2005 the former Manager Development Assessments and Senior Planner discussed this matter with Council’s Legal Consultant who advised, “…it was in order for Council to deal with the application subject to a condition.” 

Council’s standard condition of Consent (standard condition No 132) was included to the conditions of approval given to the Section 96 Modification D180/05A as follows:

 

‘It should be understood that this consent in no way relieves the owners or applicant from any obligation to obtain any other approval which may be required under any covenant affecting the land or otherwise nor relieve a person from the legal civil consequences of not complying with any such covenant.’

 

This condition will also be applied to this Section 96 Modification.

 

PROPOSAL DATA/POLICY COMPLIANCE:

 

Site Area (816.8m2)

 

PROPOSED

CODE

COMPLIES

Floor Space Ratio       (max)

0.48:1

.5:1

yes

Soft Landscaped Area            (min)

44%

35%

yes

Side Boundary Setback (min)

Unchanged

1.5m

n/a

Overall Height (m) (max) Rear section

7.8m

9.5m

yes

Ceiling Height (m) (max) Rear section

7.0m

7.0m

n/a

No of Storeys

Unchanged

2

n/a

Building Line    (max)

Unchanged

7.5m

n/a

Foreshore Building Line (min)

Unchanged

test 2 *

n/a

Cut and Fill      (max)

Unchanged

1m

n/a

Deck/Balcony width    (max)

Proposed rear deck 1.7m

3m (if elevated by >1m)

yes

Solar Access  (min)

additional shadow satisfactory

3 hours to north elevation

yes

BASIX Certificate

Nil

Not required for Section 96

n/a

 

*           Test 2 – where there is a foreshore escarpment, the dwelling is to be set back 2m minimum from the top of the escarpment.

 


SWIMMING POOLS

 

 

PROPOSED

CODE

COMPLIES

Concourse Edge to Neighbour’s House  (min)

unchanged

3m

n/a

Setback from boundary if concourse is <500mm above natural ground level  (min)

unchanged

 

unchanged

900mm -from internal face of pool

450mm - from edge of concourse

n/a

 

n/a

Setback from boundary if concourse is >500mm above natural ground level and adjoins public open space   (min)

n/a

1:1 setback measured from concourse edge

n/a

Height (max)

unchanged

1800mm

n/a

 

REFERRALS:

 

Development Engineer

 

The comments of the Development Engineer were requested on the Section 96 Modification and he advises that remain unchanged.

The Relic

 

One of the most significant aspects to arise from the subdivision was that the original site contains a ‘Relic’.  

 

The ‘Relic’ is located on the subject land and is a linear cultural feature, a modified, natural gully, which cuts through sandstone bedrock and “has been deliberately modified by human activity. The depth of, or the height of the sides, of the gully have been extended by the building of terrace walls. ” (Cosmos Archaeology, March 2002).

 

The Archaeological Assessment determined that the ‘Relic’ is a relic in terms of the NSW Heritage Act 1977.

 

In summary the Assessment determined that:

 

-     The feature has historic significance, as it is associated with the Amalfi Estate.

 

-     The modification of a natural feature, in this case a gully cut through sandstone, into a path has some technical significance from the manner in which the problem of accessing a jetty at the base of a sea cliff was overcome utilising the natural landscape, and with minimum effort.

 

-     The feature has some interpretive significance, as it would highlight the importance of water-based transportation to the inhabitants of Sydney’s foreshores in the nineteenth century.

 

-     The feature has minimal aesthetic significance.

 

-     The archaeological significance of the feature is relatively low.

 

The statement of significance for the ‘Relic’ as defined in the Archaeological Assessment is as follows:

 

 

“The significance of the gully situated within the property of 83 Kenneth St, which was modified to perform the function of a path or track, lies in its connection with the Amalfi Estate and its association with water transport, a once essential means of communication and supply for those who inhabited the foreshores of Sydney Harbour in the nineteenth century.”

In terms of applicable legislation the NSW Heritage Act 1977 applies. A ‘Relic’ is defined within the Act and under the Act, ‘Relics’ are automatically protected if they are over 50 years old. Further, “Relics” cannot be disturbed or altered without an excavation permit under Section 140 of the Act and Conservation Orders can be placed on sites by the Minister.

 

In summary, the Assessment concluded that ‘The burial of the feature is an acceptable, if not desirable impact while the demolition of any part of the feature is considered unacceptable without additional archaeological recording being carried out.”

 

Council’s Heritage Adviser has provided comments for the retention of the ‘Relic’ for the original application.  These comments were as follows:

 

‘The proposed dwelling will impact on the access way and result in removal of the camphor laurel tree. The subdivision was approved in 2002 with the understanding that a dwelling would be built. Little understanding of the original estate remains. Given the difficult configuration and narrowness of the site and the fact that the access way extends over at least half the site, some impact is unavoidable. It is likely that construction of footings and installation of services may be achieved with minimal disturbance to the relic. While infill of the upper section of the access way is acceptable it is recommended that the lower section, where it extends to the west of the proposed deck, be maintained and not in-filled. This would retain a link with the lower lawn, foreshore and jetty. 

 

The proposed timber stairway from the pool deck is shown in two different configurations, varying on the plan, elevation and the landscape concept drawing. It is difficult to assess the impact of construction of either configuration on the cutting and retaining walls without sections but this needs to be minimised.’ 

 

Council’s Heritage Adviser has recommended that a number of specific conditions be imposed on any approval for the original development and these specific conditions were applied to the original approval.

 

The comments of Council’s Consultant Heritage Adviser were also requested on the Section 96 Modification and are as follows:

 

“I refer to my original report of 5/10/05 and Kim Ketelby’s report of 17/10/05.

 

The proposed S96 modification includes the following:

 

·     Raise the ridge height by 300mm over Bedroom 1, bridge by 175mm

·     Balcony to western elevation off bedroom

·     Vergola over terrace

·     Minor modifications to windows walls and extent of paving.

 

None of this work has any impact on archaeological relics and earthworks associated with the former residence, Amalfi.

 

I therefore have no objection to the proposal.”

Lane Cove LOCAL Environmental Plan 1987 (Section 79c(1)(a))

 

The Section 96 Modification is permissible within the 2(a2) zoning under the Lane Cove LEP with Council’s consent.

 

ASSESSMENT

 

The original plans submitted with Development Application No.D180/05 indicated an overall roof height of RL 18.00 for the front and the rear two storey section of the proposed dwelling.

 

Following consideration of objections, Council approved the application with the following condition to reduce view impact:

 

            3.         The overall ridge height of the two storey roof section of the dwelling above the proposed rumpus room is to be RL 16 97.  This is to be achieved by a split level of 2 risers (350mm) located between the proposed kitchen and living room.  PLANS BEING ALTERED TO COMPLY PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

The applicant has submitted a Section 96 Modification (D180/05A) which has been approved on the 12th December 2007 which included converting the use of the proposed rumpus room to bedroom 1.

The applicant has now submitted a further Section 96 Modification (D180/05B) and requests:

 

1.         Condition 3 be amended such that the ridge height of the two storey roof section of the dwelling above bedroom 1 be increased to RL 17.27 (a 300mm increase) to enable the ring beam in this section of the building to be lifted such that the windows on the west elevation of bedroom 1 can be replaced with sliding doors and the glass roof over the lower terrace be replaced with a balcony off bedroom 1.

 

2.         This increased height allows the ring beam to increase to a height whilst maintaining the design integrity and allowing 2100 high doors to be incorporated.  It is stated in the Statement of Environmental Effects that this increase is marginal overall and is still below the standing (18m) and sitting (17.6m) eye levels from the adjoining properties and is below the RL of the front of the building at 18m.  The approved RL for the ridge at 85 Kenneth Street is 18.1m.

 

3.         As a consequence of this amendment to maintain the design integrity the RL of the height of the bridge linking the two pavilions will need to increase by 175mm at the north elevation to an RL of 16.075m.  It is stated in the Statement of Environmental Effects that this is well below the standing (18m) and sitting (17.6m) eye levels from the adjoining properties and is below the approved roof RL at the rear RL of 18m at the front.

 

Submitted with the original plans was a survey plan and also view diagrams.  The levels are shown as follows:

 

            1 Amalfi Place

            First floor level             17.45

            Sitting eye level           18.62

            Standing eye level       19.05

 

            3 Amalfi Place

            First floor level             16.4

            Sitting eye level           17.6

            Standing eye level       18.0

 

From this it can be seen that residents from both 1 and 3 Amalfi Place will be able to look over the rear roof ridge which comes to a point at RL 17.27 and also over the maximum height of the roof to the bridge of 16.075m.

 

However, there has been an objection received from Tony Bryan on behalf of the owner of 3 Amalfi Place to the proposed ridge height of RL 17.27.  Council has been advised that a compromise has been reached between the owner of 3 Amalfi Place and the owner of the subject property setting the proposed ridge height over bedrooms at a maximum of 17.15m (see Response to Notification later in this assessment).

 

Subject to the maximum proposed ridge height over bedroom 1 not exceeding RL 17.15, the slight increase in the height of bedroom 1 and the bridge is considered satisfactory.

 

The remaining work proposed in this Section 96 Modification is also considered satisfactory and not to adversely impact on the adjoining dwellings or the streetscape.  Note a 1.6m high slatted timber privacy screen is shown on the southern side of the proposed balcony to bedroom 1.

 

Regarding the requested modification of Condition 79.  This condition reads:

 

            “79.      A replacement Angophora costata (Smooth baked apple) tree must be planted in a suitable location within the site to replace the Camphor laurel tree.  The replacement tree must be planted before occupation of the new dwelling.  It must be from good quality nursery stock, grown to at least 100L pot size, being free of girdling roots or other defects and shall be consistent with NATSPEC specifications.”

 

Unfortunately there is a typographical error and “baked” should be “barked”.  This is corrected.

 

Other Planning Instruments

 

SEPP 55 – Contaminated Land

 

Clause 7 of the SEPP requires Council to assess whether the subject site is contaminated.  Notwithstanding that site investigations have not been carried out, the current and previous use of the site and surrounding sites for residential uses would substantially reduce the possibilities of contamination.  Accordingly, there is considered to be no contamination given the circumstances of the case.

 

SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

 

The external changes proposed in the Section 96 Modification are considered to be minor only and to comply with the planning principles and matters for consideration contained within the SREP and also to comply with the performance criteria in the DCP for the SREP.

 

Variations to Council’s Codes/PolicIes (seCTIONS 79c(1)(a), (1)(b), and (1)(c))

 

Nil

 

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

 

Two submissions were received in response to the notification of the development application and are as follows:

 

First letter, the owner of 7 Amalfi Place:

 

“I object to any modification to this application”.

 

7 Amalfi Place is the third property away from the subject property in a north-westerly direction.

 

The owner of 7 Amalfi Place was contacted by phone on the 25th March 2008.  She advised she objected to any modification to this application on principle and did not think an inspection from her property was warranted.

 

Second letter from Tony Bryan on behalf of the owner of 3 Amalfi Place.

 

            “The proposed modification has the effect of raising the roof height and the roof over bridge by 300mm and 175mm respectively.

 

            I wish to strongly object to this modification on the grounds that it causes further adverse impact on my mother’s property.  This section of 83 Kenneth is directly in front of the lounge room and balcony of my mother’s property and I ask that council reject this application.

 

            Greg Miles from 83 Kenneth Street has previously advised me that he would be seeking this modification to his property and I advised him that we would oppose this modification.

 

            Michael, I indicated the possibility of this proposal when I spoke with you on the phone on Friday 14th March regarding the issues relating to 83/85 Kenneth.  You stated to me, on the phone, that you would oppose any further modifications to 83 Kenneth that related to raising the height of the building.  I ask that you maintain this position.

 

            Given the history of this development and the major adverse impact on adjacent properties – namely 1 and 3 Amalfi Place, I ask that council reject this application.

 

            I would further add that should Mr Miles be seeking this seeking an increase internally to his building that this be offset by reducing the pitch on the roof to heave the overall RL the same as that approved in the original DA for this section of the property.”

 

Tony Bryan also sent a follow up letter which included the following:

 

            “As well as assessing the view impact of the developments at 83 Kenneth Street at the balcony level of 3 Amalfi Place, I would also like to request that you assess the impact at ground level at the back of the building i.e. outside and along the wall of the rumpus room, which is underneath the balcony.

 

            In view of council’s unwillingness at this stage to lift the covenant on 3 Amalfi Place, we will need to develop this rumpus room as part of the redevelopment of the property.  The view impact of the developments at 83 Kenneth Street will directly affect this area.”

 

Comment

 

The owner of the subject property (Greg Miles) was written to on the 26th March 2008 and requested to erect height poles and string lines of the modifications.

 

Greg Miles and Tony Bryan have subsequently had discussions regarding this Section 96 Modification and the following facsimile has been submitted by Tony Bryan:

 

            “I have discussed this with Greg Miles and have agreed a compromise.

 

            I believe that the current approved maximum RL for 83 Kenneth Street is 16.97.  Could you confirm this please?

 

            Greg had asked for an increase of 300mm, but we have agreed on a compromise of 180mm, which would take the maximum RL to 17.15.

 

            I have agreed to this on the basis that the RL of 17.15 is confirmed by independent survey at the time when construction reaches maximum height and that I receive a copy of this independent survey report confirming the height is correct.

 

            I hope that this settles the matter.”

 

The Section 96 Modification is recommended for approval subject to the ridge height over bedroom 1 not exceeding RL 17.15.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The matters in the DOP Guidelines in relation to Section 79C considerations have been satisfied.

 

The Section 96 Modification is for relatively small changes to the original approval and is considered not to adversely impact on the adjoining dwellings, streetscape and foreshore subject to conditions which include the ridge height over bedroom 1 not exceeding RL 17.15. 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That pursuant to the provisions of Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, that Development Application No.D180/05A granted by Council on 5 December 2005 for the erection of a part 1, part 2 storey dwelling house and swimming pool on the vacant allotment be amended in the following manner:

 

Condition 2 being amended to read:

 

2.         (20) That the development be strictly in accordance with drawing numbers Section 96,  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 dated Feb 08 and drawn by Linda James.

 

Condition 3 being amended to read:

 

3.         The ridge height of the two storey roof section of the dwelling above the proposed bedroom 1 is not to exceed RL 17.15.  This is to be certified by a surveyor.  PLANS BEING ALTERED TO COMPLY PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

Condition 79 being amended to read:

 

79.       A replacement Angophora costata (Smooth barked apple) tree must be planted in a suitable location within the site to replace the Camphor laurel tree.  The replacement tree must be planted before occupation of the new dwelling.  It must be from good quality nursery stock, grown to at least 100L pot size, being free of girdling roots or other defects and shall be consistent with NATSPEC specifications.

             

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Site Location Plan

2 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

Neighbour Notification Plan

1 Page

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 5 May 2008

 

Environmental Services Division Report No. 28

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Environmental Services Division Report No. 28

Subject:          Lane Cove Market Square Status Report    

Record No:    DA04/246 - 16215/08

Author(s):       Michael Mason 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council called for a status report on Conditions 144 and 145 of the Woolworths consent (DA246/04).  This report provides information as to the Energy Performance Report undertaken by Bassett Consulting, evaluation by Council and response by APP acting for Woolworths.

 

The report acknowledges commitments and actions of Fabcot (Woolworths) and draws attention to the Woolworths Corporate Sustainability guidelines that may add value to the 2005 commitments and responses provided to address consent conditions 144 and 145.

 

Introduction

 

Council at its meeting of 7 April 2008 resolved (Resolution 94/08) on the motion of Clrs Lawson and Smith that:-

 

            1.        Council receive and note the Lane Cove Market Square status report.

 

 2.        A report be prepared for the next Council meeting regarding conditions 144 and 145 of the Development Consent for the site and the implementation thereof.”

 

Purpose of Report

 

This report actions item 2 of Resolution 94/08.

 

Development Consent condition 144 of DA246/04 (as amended at 4 August 2006) states:-

 

 

144.     Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate the applicant shall submit to Lane Cove Council for approval a schedule demonstrating the implementation of the strategies and recommendations in the Energy Performance report prepared by Bassett Consulting Engineers dated 5 July 2004.

 

            In addition to the Bassett strategies and recommendations the schedule shall also address opportunities for:

 

            a)         Reuse of rainwater or stormwater.

            b)         The use of solar panels.

            c)         The use of solar hot water systems

d)         The inclusion of sustainability criteria in tender documentation, particularly with regard to the use of recycled or reusable materials

            e)         Alternatives to limit the use of plastic shopping bags.

 

A copy of the Bassett Consulting Engineer’s Energy Performance Report is included as (AT1) to this report.

 

A Construction Certificate is yet to be issued for this stage of work.

 

In October 2005 APP (Consultants to Fabcot Pty Ltd) on behalf of the applicant, submitted to Council for approval a schedule addressing the implementation of the recommendations included in the Energy Performance Report (AT2).

 

In November 2005, Council wrote to APP on behalf of the applicant requesting further information regarding the implementation of recommendations included in the Energy Performance Report (AT3).

 

The APP response has been reviewed and largely the requested information provided (AT4).  Where the information has not been provided there has been a change in context (residential land use no longer applies) or adequate justification for changes made.

 

Notwithstanding the changed land use by deleting the residential component it is considered that there are three areas in which Fabcot could be encouraged to implement the full recommendations of the Energy Performance Report (EPR).

 

The three areas relate to:-

 

Section 4.1.1   Thermal comfort levels

Section 4.1.2   Internal Zoning; and

Section 4.1.7   Outdoor and Economy Cycles

 

Section 4.1.1 Thermal Comfort Levels

 

The Energy Performance Report recommends that energy savings of up to 15% could be achieved by relaxing internal temperature ranges from 20oC – 24oC to 19oC – 25oC.

 

APP’s response to this recommendation is that the energy saving is negligible, that the temperature ranges can be set after the installation of the units to achieve these energy savings and that that the Woolworths documents will be modified to highlight that the controls have the ability to be adjusted to the 19 oC-25 oC range.

Comment

A 15% energy saving is considered by staff to be a significant saving and Woolworths could be encouraged to ensure that the 19 oC - 25 oC range is set as the default temperature range for the development.

4.1.2 Internal Zoning

The EPR recommended that independently controlled zones be provided which would result in a significant reduction in energy costs (and presumably energy consumption).

APP’s response to this recommendation is that independently controlled zones are only applied to the two specialty retail areas but not to the individual specialty retail spaces.  Provision could be achieved for internal zoning at during the tenancy fit out.

Comment

It is considered to be unlikely that individual internal zoning would be specified during tenancy fit outs and that Woolworths should be encouraged to provide internal zoning to all individual specialty retail areas as part of the development.

 

4.1.7 Outdoor Air Economy Cycles

The EPR recommended that provision should be made to allow for outdoor air ventilation to the development when outdoor air temperatures are favourable (i.e. when outdoor air temperatures are within the desired internal temperature ranges).

APP’s response to this recommendation is that Outdoor Air Economy Cycle has not been included at this stage, as it would require an increase in the size to the outside air ductwork and air louvers in addition to the controls for the operation of the economy cycle.  APP note that provision has been made to the design to allow for future installation.

Comment

Once the development is completed it is considered to be highly unlikely that the air conditioning system would be retrofitted to enable Outdoor Air Economy Cycle.  Accordingly, Woolworths should be strongly encouraged to include this provision during development.  It is also noted that as part of the Woolworths Sustainability Strategy adopted 2007, it was advised that the Rouse Hill store has an economy cycle that uses fresh and outside air instead of mechanical cooling.

 

Rainwater/Stormwater Reuse

 

Discussion has taken place with Council Engineers and subsequently confirmed in design drawings that arrangement has been made for all storm and roofwaters to be directed and contained in an on-site detention tank (OSD) located under the link road.  The OSD tank is partitioned to accommodate approximately 60 cubic metres of rain water and 280 cubic metres of stormwater.  The stormwaters will be treated by a Hume Cepter gross pollutant trap system to filter out oils, sediments and debris while the collected rainwater is to be used for toilet flushing.  This is a positive and innovative improvement to the original proposal which Woolworths have agreed to.

 

The Use of Solar Panels and Solar Hot Water Systems

 

APP responded (October 2005) that the use of solar panels and solar hot water systems in the development were not deemed to be financially viable.

 

Comment

 

It is noted that subsequent to the issue of the S96 consent dated August 2006, Fabcot has confirmed that it intended to construct a private gym in preference to the residential units approved under DA246/04D.  having regard to the changed land use, it would appear reasonable for Council to request Fabcot to review its previous advice having regard to final plans and advise Council of current opportunities to install and operate  solar panels and solar hot water systems as part of the amended land use intended.

 

Inclusion of Sustainability into Tender Criteria

 

APP responded (October 2005) that the conditions of contract specify that the contractor is to comply with the DA consent (including condition 144, therefore addressing the sustainability concerns).  APP have also advised that water efficient taps, showers, w.c.s and waterless urinals will be installed.

 

Alternatives to Limit the Use of Plastic Bags

 

APP responded (October 2005) that Woolworths are signatories to the Australian Retailers Association Code of Practice for the management of plastic bags.

 

 

Condition 145

 

The Draft Energy Management Plan was signed off by Council in November 2005 (AT5).  Although the Draft Energy Management Plan was limited in detail the condition requires the final Energy Management Plan to be submitted and approved by Council prior to occupation.

 

Comment

 

The final Energy Management Plan should be closely reviewed and evaluated when received by Council to ensure that the developer is an example of a best practice organisation with regard to energy consumption and minimising its energy footprint.

 

The need for Woolworths to adopt and articulate how it intends to not only construct an energy and water efficient building, but also how it intends to operate such in an on-going basis, is particularly relevant given the corporate commitment to ‘Doing the right thing’.

 

The ‘Doing the right thing’ document (AT6) articulates the Woolworths sustainability strategy 2007-2015.

 

This strategy document commits all new Woolworths supermarkets opening from September 2008 to conform to their sustainable design guidelines to minimise energy use and environmental impacts.

 

Other commitments include:

 

·     To work with the Green Building Council to develop a star-rating tool for supermarket interiors.

·     Engage with interested parties in the development of an ecological footprinting calculator for evaluation of supermarket interior design and fitout (page 26).

 

Adopted targets include:

 

·     All stores opened after September 2008 will be green stores.

·     Achieve 25% reduction in CO2 emissions for new sustainable store designs compared with business as usual.

 

Conclusion

 

Given the above information provided by Woolworths, it is significant clear efforts have been made to address issues raised by conditions 144 and 145 of consent DA246/04D.  However, given the intervening environmental debate within our community and the adoption of the “Doing the Right Thing” document by the Woolworths company, it is only appropriate that Woolworths be given the opportunity to review its October 2005 sustainability commitments and work with Council in an endeavour to add value and to optimise sustainability outcomes.

 

Indeed, Mr Michael Luscombe, MD and CEO concluded in his forward to the Sustainability Strategy 2007-2015 document by saying:

 

            “I encourage you to read this document and keep challenging us to do better.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That:-

 

1.         Council acknowledge the positive environmental design changes and commitments made in addressing consent conditions 144 and 145, and request Woolworths to consider the implementation of the full recommendations in relation to s4.1.1, s4.1.2 s4.1.7, of the Energy Performance Report, as outlined on this report; and

 

2.         Woolworths be requested to demonstrate how the Lane Cove store will comply with the adopted Woolworths Sustainable Design Guidelines, targets and commitments as outlined in its Sustainability Strategy 2007-2015, “Doing the right thing”.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Energy Performance Report prepared by Bassett Consulting Engineers

27 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

Letter from APP Corporation Pty Ltd dated 5 October 2005

18 Pages

 

AT‑3 View

Council request for additional information

9 Pages

 

AT‑4 View

APP's response to Council request for additional information

18 Pages

 

AT‑5 View

Draft Energy Management Report prepared by Bassett Consulting Engineers

8 Pages

 

AT‑6 View

'Doing the right thing' Sustainability Strategy 2007-2015

32 Pages