m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agenda

Ordinary Council Meeting

19 July 2010

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 on Monday 19th July 2010 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 Win Gaffney. 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 www.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 19 July 2010

 

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 JUNE 2010

 

 

Orders Of The Day

 

2.       Order Of The Day No. 9

SUBJECT: Council and Committee Meeting Schedule - August 2010

 

3.       Order Of The Day No. 13

SUBJECT: Citizenship Ceremony - 21st July 2010

 

4.       Order Of The Day No. 14

SUBJECT: One Association Convention

 

Notices of Motion

 

5.       Notice of Motion No. 5

SUBJECT: Policy of Not Using Eggs Sourced from Caged Chickens

 

Corporate Services Division Reports

 

6.       Corporate Services Division Report No. 41

SUBJECT: 2010 Local Government Association Conference and Annual NSROC Conference

 

Open Space and Urban Services Division Reports

 

7.       Open Space and Urban Services Division Report No. 28

SUBJECT: Mowing Nature Strip Policy

 

Environmental Services Division Reports

 

8.       Environmental Services Division Report No. 310

SUBJECT: 177 Greenwich Road, Greenwich

 

9.       Environmental Services Division Report No. 253

SUBJECT: 3 Amalfi Place, Longueville

 

10.     Environmental Services Division Report No. 21

SUBJECT: LEP  Review 2010 - Shell  Site, 150 Epping Road

 

11.     Environmental Services Division Report No. 22

SUBJECT: 19 Glenview Street, Greenwich

 

12.     Environmental Services Division Report No. 23

SUBJECT: Development Conributions (Section 94 Plan) - Departmental Advice

 

13.     Environmental Services Division Report No. 24

SUBJECT: 71 Northwood Road, Northwood

 

Human Services Division Reports

 

14.     Human Services Division Report No. 27

SUBJECT: NSW Community Building Partnership Program

 

15.     Human Services Division Report No. 28

SUBJECT: Federal Funding - Federal Government Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program

 

16.     Human Services Division Report No. 29

SUBJECT: Library Fit Out Progress Report No 12  

 

 

 

 

               


Ordinary Council Meeting 19 July 2010

 

Order Of The Day No. 9

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Order Of The Day No. 9

Subject:          Council and Committee Meeting Schedule - August 2010    

Record No:    SU1915 - 15228/10

Author(s):       Kirsty Fleming 

 

 

 

The Council and Committee Meeting Schedule for the August 2010 is proposed as follows:-

 

 

August             2                      Ordinary Council

                                                Planning and Building Committee

                                                Services and Resources Committee

 

August             16                    Ordinary Council

                                                Planning and Building Committee

                                                Services and Resources Committee

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the Council and Committee Meeting Schedule for August 2010 be adopted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ian Naylor

Acting Executive Manager

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 19 July 2010

 

Order Of The Day No. 13

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Order Of The Day No. 13

Subject:          Citizenship Ceremony - 21st July 2010    

Record No:    SU28 - 27750/10

Author(s):       Millie  Stephen 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

A Citizenship Ceremony will be conducted in the Council Chamber on Wednesday 21st July 2010, commencing at 7pm. A Councillor is required to attend the Ceremony and speak to the new citizens about local government.

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That a Councillor be nominated to attend the Citizenship Ceremony of 21st July 2010 and speak to the new citizens about local government.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Peter Brown

General Manager

General Managers Unit

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 19 July 2010

 

Order Of The Day No. 14

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Order Of The Day No. 14

Subject:          One Association Convention    

Record No:    su203 - 27993/10

Author(s):       Ian  Naylor 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The Local Government and Shires Association is holding a 2 day Convention in Sydney on 16th and 17th August 2010 to discuss recommendations from its taskforce for forming One Association to represent Local Government.   This report recommends that Council endorse the attendance of the Mayor, Council Gaffney to join the General Manager at this convention.

 

Discussion

 

The Local Government and Shires Association has formed a taskforce to make recommendations on how best to form One Association to represent Local Government.  Council has received correspondence from the Chair of the taskforce, shown attached as AT-1, inviting all Mayors and General Managers to attend the One Association Convention to be held on 16th and 17th August in Sydney.   At this convention the members of the taskforce will present these recommendations for forming One Association and the convention will vote on these recommendations. 

 

Each member Council will be permitted one vote for the purposes of the convention.  While the decisions made at the convention will not be binding, it will shape the way forward for each Association to vote on at their respective conferences.  The Local Government and Shires Association has distributed a discussion paper for the convention which is shown attached as

AT-2.

 

The cost of the convention is $297.  There are funds available in the Councillors Conference budget to cover this cost.

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council endorse the attendance of the Mayor, Council Gaffney and the General Manager at the One Association Convention to be held on 16th and 17th August in Sydney.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ian Naylor

Acting Executive Manager

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Letter Of Invitation - Convention - One Association For Local Government In NSW

2 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

One Association Taskforce Discussion Paper

28 Pages

 

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting 19 July 2010

 

Notice of Motion No. 5

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Notice of Motion No. 5

Subject:          Policy of Not Using Eggs Sourced from Caged Chickens    

Record No:    SU825 - 28025/10

Author(s):       Councillor Shauna Forrest 

 

 

Background

 

Due to the exposure of the adverse conditions experienced particularly by caged hens in the egg industry, there has been a movement worldwide to abolish this practice and to adopt the much more humane method of free range egg production. Most people do not wish to be participants in cruelty but by purchasing ‘caged’ eggs one is responsible for the prolonged suffering of ‘battery’ hens.

 

The benefit of this motion for Council to adopt a policy of not using eggs sourced from caged chickens is in Council being seen to be ethical and promoting ethical choices to its community. Council’s participation would follow its commitment to Sustainability; would follow the lead of the European Union and California; and may help shape the future of agricultural production in Australia.

 

On January 28th 1999 The European Union voted to be CAGE FREE by 2012, based solely on the ideal of ameliorating cruelty. On November 4th 2008 Californian Proposition 2  “prohibit(ed) the cruel confinement of farm animals in a manner that does not allow them to turn around freely, lie down, stand up and fully extend their wings” and will come into effect on 1st January 2015.

 

Australia should be a country subscribing to humane farming practices and part of the movement away from the cruelty of battery or caged system for egg laying chickens. Australia should not be part of, or comparing itself to those countries in the world with the worst farming practices.

 

All cage producers trim the beaks of their birds with infra-red or hot blades. Caged laying chickens, stand on wire, live without a nest, in the space equivalent to the size of an A4 piece of paper. Certified ‘free-range’ farmers do not trim the beaks of their birds. ‘Barn-laid’ do not allow the hens to have any access to the outdoors and is a euphemism of what happens to birds in high-stocking densities. The labelling system should prevent eggs produced in high-density environments from being labelled '’free range'’.

 

We would not subject our domestic pets to these cruel caged conditions, so should not support the continuance of such cruelty to farmed animals in the name of cheaper food or greater profits.

 

New South Wales Councils: North Sydney, Hornsby, Mosman, Manly, Waverley, Warringah, Marrickville, Randwick, Cessnock, Holroyd, Newcastle, Parramatta,  Sydney, Leichhardt,  Byron, Coffs Harbour and Shoalhaven have already passed similar motions to ban the use by Council of products made with caged eggs, as did Clarence, Launceston and Hobart Councils of Tasmania in 2008. These decisions were made in every case on the grounds of banning the cruelty of the battery/cage system.

 

As there is no Australia-wide standard for ‘free range-eggs’ at the moment, though the ‘free range eggs’ label can and should be checked to see what particular standard was used. For example, The National Association for Sustainable Agriculture Australia (NASAA) and Australian Certified Organic are two common standards which are most similar to Animal Liberation standard. The Animal Liberation standard ensures there is no chance of egg substitution taking place by the producers.


 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:-

 

1.    Adopts a policy of not using eggs sourced from caged chickens. This policy will include but not be limited to the following situations:-

·                  The use of non-cage eggs be stipulated in any future tenders or contracts relating to the supply of food in which Council is a party;

·      All future catering arrangements will only be made with caterers who can guarantee that they use non-cage eggs; and

·      Where there is no option but to source food from a vendor who uses caged chicken eggs, "No eggs" will be Council's preferred option.

 

2.    Publicise this policy on its website and that the General Manager write directly to all known suppliers of food products to Council notifying them of the new policy position.

 

3.    Applaud other Lane Cove businesses, organisations and households who adapt a similar policy.

 

4.    Support any similar motions at the LGA, NSROC and in any other area in which it may be expected to voice a position, relevant to this policy.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Councillor Shauna Forrest

Councillor

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

The Real Facts Caged Chickens

2 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

Battery Hen Fact Sheet

2 Pages

 

 

   


Ordinary Council Meeting 19 July 2010

 

Corporate Services Division Report No. 41

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Corporate Services Division Report No. 41

Subject:          2010 Local Government Association Conference and Annual NSROC Conference    

Record No:    su203 - 27987/10

Author(s):       Ian  Naylor 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The 2010 Local Government Association Conference will be held from Sunday 24th October until Wednesday 27th October 2010 in Albury.  The theme of the Conference is ‘Modernising Local Government’.  The purpose of this report is to call for motions from Councillors for both the Local Government Association and NSROC Conferences and endorse the voting delegates for the Local Government Association Conference.

 

Discussion

 

Voting Delegates

 

At this stage, the Mayor, Councillor Gaffney and Councillors Bennison, Brooks-Horn, Longbottom and Palmer have confirmed that they will be available to attend this years Conference.  Council is entitled to three voting delegates at the Conference. The number of voting delegates for each council is determined using a sliding population scale. Council in the past have also provided an opportunity for other Councillors to attend as an observer. 

 

Motions for the 2010 Local Government Association Annual Conference

 

Council has received correspondence from the Local Government Association (LGA) calling for motions to be debated at its Annual Conference.  Any motion would need to be adopted at one of the next two Council meetings in order to meet the deadline for submitting motions being 9th August 2010. 

 

Councils may submit any motion, however, to be considered before the Conference a motion:-

·      MUST relate to one of the identified conference issues/themes;

·      MUST NOT attempt to enforce one council's position on other councils;

·      MUST NOT cause detriment to one council over another;

·      MUST deal with the issues/themes at a regional/state or national level (ie: the motion must not be a single council issue); and

·      MUST address the conference theme of "Modernising Local Government”.

 

Themes for the 2010 Conference

1.    Modernising the Financing of Local Government;

2.    Modern Approaches to Community Wellbeing; and

3.    Modern Approaches to the Natural & Built Environment.

 

Motions which do not comply with the guidelines will be referred to the Executive for action prior to the Conference.  There is more detail on submitting motions for the above themes at the LGA website: - http://www.lgsa-plus.net.au/www/html/3373-motions-and-business-papers.asp

 


Proposed Motions

 

It is proposed to submit two motions on the following topics:-

·     That cyclists over 18 years be required to register their bicycle in the same way motorists are required to register their vehicle and that registration fees collected be made available to NSW local governments to be utilised for improved bike facilities; and

·     That the legislation for tendering be amended to allow regional organisation of councils to appoint tenderers without the need for member councils to endorse proposed tenderers.

 

NSROC Conference

 

Council has received correspondence from NSROC calling for motions of regional significance to be debated at its Annual Conference on 29th July 2010.  Any motion would need to be adopted at this Council Meeting.  It is proposed to seek NSROC’s support for the two proposed motions for the LGA Conference detailed above.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council:-

 

1.   Give consideration to voting delegates for 2010 Local Government Association Conference;

 

2.   Endorse the 2 motions in the body of the report and give consideration to further motions for the LGA Conference; and

 

3.   Give consideration to motions of regional significance for the NSROC Conference.

 

 

 

 

 

Ian Naylor

Acting Executive Manager

Corporate Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

LGA Conference 2010 Draft Program

3 Pages

 

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting 19 July 2010

 

Open Space and Urban Services Division Report No. 28

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Open Space and Urban Services Division Report No. 28

Subject:          Mowing Nature Strip Policy    

Record No:    su4070 - 26663/10

Author(s):       Susan  Butler 

 

 

 

Executive Summary

The Draft Mowing Nature Strip Policy has been on public exhibition and a number of submissions have been received.  Some minor amendments have been made to the draft policy and application form following the consultation period and the proposed policy is now ready for adoption by Council.

 

Background

The draft policy and application form were developed so that those residents who are in need of assistance from Council to maintain the nature strip, because they do not have the financial and physical capability to maintain the grass themselves and have no other alternative, are able to be helped.

 

The draft policy and application form were tabled at the Council meeting on 1 February 2010.  A letter was then sent to the 48 residents who are currently receiving this service providing a copy of the draft policy and draft application form. An ad was placed in the North Shore Times and the draft policy placed on Council’s website and notification made through Council’s e-newsletter.

 

Discussion

Responses were received from 21 residents, consisting of 13 applications on the draft form, 4 written and 3 verbal requests for the service to continue and 1 phone call to say that the tenants were maintaining the nature strip.  No responses were received from the 17 residences in Marshall Ave.

 

Of the 13 applications submitted on the draft form, 9 were from residents who satisfied all the eligibility criteria, with 1 other satisfying all except for having family assisting in mowing the grass within the property.  The other 3 did not satisfy the income status as they are not pensioners.

 

There were 4 written requests asking that the service continue although the residents do not satisfy the draft eligibility criteria.  Reasons given include the financial and potential health burden.  Other reasons given are that part of the nature strip is a Council community facility, including facilities such as a bus stop, well accessed path way, the wide nature strip is a park area, or that there is an electricity kiosk on the nature strip.

 

The lack of response from some residents may be due to a reluctance by some people to complete the application form or because the residents are aware that they do not satisfy the eligibility criteria.

 

The policy was also discussed at the Access Committee.  A number of submissions were received from other residents commenting on the draft policy.  These submissions support the policy, with some suggested amendments, as set out in the following table.


 


Suggested Amendment

Type

Response

Extend eligibility to holders of service pensions or a white or gold Veterans benefits card (Criteria 3a. 3)

Individual submissions

War Service Pension holders are included. 

Consider extending eligibility to low income self funded retirees (Criteria 3a. 3)

Individual Submissions

Difficulty in assessing income. No change to draft policy proposed.

Delete reference to relatives and friends as this requirement is somewhat demeaning; change to say no other household members who can help (Criteria 3a. 4)

Individual Submissions

Retain reference to relatives, but delete reference to friends.

Include reference to having family members who can pay for a contractor to mow the nature strip (Criteria 3a. 4)

Individual

Too difficult for Council to assess this. However, Section 2b amended to include a reference to a contractor mowing the grass on behalf of the resident.

Undertake review every second year, not annually to reduce the administrative load and reduce pressure on elderly. Clients who fail to renew should be followed up and given assistance to complete the form if necessary. (Section 4)

Individual Submissions

List needs to be reviewed annually as part of budget preparation.

The policy is to improve appearance of streetscape and also should also ensure a safe environment for pedestrians and users of the nature strip. (Section 2)

Individual Submissions

Amend Section 2 “Responsibility” to include that nature strips are to provide a safe environment.

Use policy to enforce care of nature strip where a resident does not maintain the nature strip to the same standard as neighbours.

Individual

Policy can be used.

Clarify whether this applies to rental properties.

Councillor

Policy applies to residents of Lane Cove, not only landowners.

 

A number of other minor changes were suggested to clarify the policy.  The proposed amendments have now been made to draft policy and associated application form.  The proposed policy is attached as AT-1.

 

Council staff will now write to those eligible applicants to confirm their nature strip mowing service. They will also write to those who have written or filled in an application form but have been assessed as ineligible, explaining why they are not eligible and that they may resubmit if they can provide additional information to support their application.

 

Council staff will also write to those whose nature strip has been mowed to date but did not make a submission or fill in the draft application form, informing them that the service will be discontinued and they need to make a formal application if they consider that they are eligible under the new policy.

 

Conclusion

The submissions have been reviewed and a number of minor changes have been made to the draft policy and application form. The proposed Mowing Nature Strip Policy is now ready for adoption by Council.


 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the proposed Mowing Nature Strip Policy dated July 2010 be adopted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Wayne Rylands

Executive Manager

Open Space and Urban Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Proposed Nature Strip Mowing Policy July 2010

3 Pages

 

 

  


Ordinary Council Meeting 19 July 2010

 

Environmental Services Division Report No. 310

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Environmental Services Division Report No. 310

Subject:          177 Greenwich Road, Greenwich    

Record No:    DA08/179-01 - 27705/10

Author(s):       Rajiv Shankar 

 

 

Property:                     177 Greenwich Road, Greenwich

 

DA No:                         D179/08 (Section 96 modification)

 

Date Lodged:              27 May 2010

 

Cost of Work:              $480 000 (original cost)

 

Owner:                                    L Robinson

 

Applicant:                    L Robinson

 

 

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL TO APPEAR ON DETERMINATION

Alterations and additions to the existing dwelling house, new swimming pool and carport. (increase in width of deck, additional windows to storeroom, clothes line, flue and sliding gate)

ZONE

Partly R4 High Density Residential

Partly E2 Environmental Conservation

IS THE PROPOSAL PERMISSIBLE WITHIN THE ZONE?

The proposal is permitted under “existing use” provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

IS THE PROPERTY A HERITAGE ITEM?

No

IS THE PROPERTY WITHIN A CONSERVATION AREA?

No

DOES DCP 1- BUSHLAND APPLY TO THE PROPERTY?

No

BCA CLASSIFICATION

Class 1a & 10a &10b

STOP THE CLOCK USED

No

NOTIFICATION

Neighbours:                124, 1-16 / 171-175, 181, 179, Greenwich Rd.

Ward Councillors:      Clr W Gaffney, Clr D Brooks-Horn, Clr P Palmer, Clr R Tudge.

Progress Association:            Greenwich Community Association

Others:                      Lane Cove Bushland & Conservation Society

 

REASON FOR REFERRAL

 

The application has been referred to Council because the original application was considered by the Planning & Building Committee meeting of 1st December 2008.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

·      The proposal is to make modifications to the approved development application, originally considered by the Planning & Building Committee meeting of 1st December 2008, for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling house, new swimming pool and carport.  

·      The amendments are to extend the rear basement deck by 1.0m towards the west (rear), install clothes line, add a door and two windows to the undercroft, delete rear ground floor deck and pergola, provide clear glass, instead of obscure, to top south west corner of the void, install sliding gate to the existing driveway and install a flue to south facing external wall.

·      Council was advised by the resident of an adjoining property, of works being carried out which were not in accordance with the approved plans. Council raised this issue with the Private Certifier who instructed the applicant to lodge a Section 96 modification application for the amendments proposed and the unauthorised works.

·      All the proposed amendments have been carried out with the exception of Install a sliding gate to the existing driveway.

·      Three submissions have been received after the proposal was notified. Two of the three submissions are from the resident of the dwelling house towards the south. 

·      The extension to the width of deck, which has already been carried out, is not supported because the approved deck is already in excess of the maximum permissible width as per Council’s Development Control Plan.

·      The proposal to provide clear glass, which is presently clear glass, instead of obscure, to top south west corner of the void is not supported as it overlooks the pool area of the adjoining property towards the south.

·      The remaining proposed amendments are supported.

 

SITE

 

The site is located on the western side of Greenwich Road. The site is irregular in shape with Lane Cove River towards the western side. The site falls steeply away from the street.

 

The site features a two storey brick and tile dwelling house with the two storey portion towards the rear and single storey portion towards the street. The dwelling house appears to be single storey when viewed from the street. A portion of the land towards the road is zoned R4 High Density Residential and a portion of the site towards the rear is zoned E2 Environmental Conservation.

 

Substantial portion of the works approved in DA179/08 on 10 December 2008 have already been completed.

 

Neighbouring to the south is a two storey dwelling house with a pool towards the rear. It has a high brick front boundary fence which returns along the side boundary. The boundary fence return encroaches to some extent upon the subject property.

 

Neighbouring to the north is a three storey residential flat building.  Site Plan and Notification Plan attached (AT1 and AT2).

 

PROPOSAL

 

The proposal is the modification of the approved development consent DA179/08. The modifications include the following:-

·     Extend the rear basement deck by 1.0m towards the west (rear) - Already carried out

·     Install a clothes line within the northern side boundary setback - Already carried out

·     Add a door and two windows, all facing towards the west (rear), to the undercroft which is used for services such as water tanks and heating / cooling systems - Already carried out

·     Delete the rear ground floor deck and pergola off Bed 1 - Already carried out

·     Provide clear glass, instead of obscure, to the top south west corner of the void - Already carried out

·     Install a sliding gate to the existing driveway- Proposed

·     Install a flue to the south facing external wall - Already carried out

 

PREVIOUS APPROVALS/HISTORY

 

DA179/08 - Alterations and additions to the existing dwelling house, new swimming pool and carport - Approved on 10th December 2008.

 

PROPOSAL DATA/POLICY COMPLIANCE

 

Remain unchanged.

 

REFERRALS

 

Building Surveyor

 

The installation and location of the flue on the external wall was discussed with the building surveyor. No objection was raised subject to certification that the installation be carried out in accordance with the manufacturers’ specifications.

 

S.96(2) MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION

 

96(2)(a)  The development to which the consent relates to is substantially the same development

 

The proposed changes are relatively minor in nature and as such the proposed development is substantially the same as to that which was approved by Council.

 

96(2)(b)  Consultation with relevant Minister, public authority or approval body

 

There is no requirement to consult with the Minister, public authority or approval body as a result of the proposed modifications.

 

96(2)(c)  Any submissions made

 

The proposal was advertised in accordance with Council’s policy of Community Consultation. Total of three submissions have been received in response to the notification of the development application. Two of the three submissions are from the resident of the dwelling house towards the south.  The issues raised in the submission are discussed later in the report.

 

S.79(C) MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION

 

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

 

Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009

 

A portion of the site towards the rear is zoned E2 Environmental Conservation. The existing dwelling is on the portion of the land which is zoned R4 High Density Residential. According to Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 dwelling houses are not permitted on land zoned R4 High Density Residential.

 

Notwithstanding the above, the proposal does not include a change of the existing use. The existing use is considered a lawful use because a consent DA179/08 was issued on 10th December 2008 which is before the coming into force of Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 on 19th February 2010 which has the effect of prohibiting the use. As per Clause 107 of the EP&A Act 1979, the proposal is permitted with development consent of Council.

 

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

 

There are no draft planning instruments that need to be considered.

 

79(C)(a)(iii)  The provisions of any Development Control Plan

 

The provisions of Council’s Development Control plan would remain unchanged.

 

79(C)(b)  The likely impacts of the development

 

The Likely impacts of the proposed amendments are discussed below:-

 

1.    Extend the rear basement deck by 1.0m towards the west (rear)  - Already carried out.

 

The amenity objectives in Part C clause 1.7 include:-

 

1.  To provide reasonable acoustic and visual privacy for neighbouring properties.

2.  Minimise overlooking between adjoining dwellings and their private open spaces.

 

Clause 1.7.2 - Privacy and Acoustic subclause (c) states:-

 

Elevated decks, terraces or balconies greater than 1m above ground level (existing) to living areas are not to exceed a maximum depth of 3.0m of usable area. Deeper decks may be considered if privacy to adjoining properties is addressed.

 

The width of the existing deck is 4.1m which is already more the maximum permitted by the DCP. A further increase in the width of the deck by 1.0m would make the width of the deck 5.1m which would be substantially more than the maximum permitted by the DCP.

 

The increased width of the deck would increase overlooking of the pool area of the adjoining property towards the south. In addition, the increased width would permit substantially large gatherings which would have the potential to adversely impact upon the amenity of the adjoining neighbours towards south. This would not be in accordance with the above stated objectives of DCP.

 

In view of the above the extended portion (1.0m wide) of the rear basement deck is recommended  for deletion as a draft condition of consent. (Refer draft condition 67).

 

2.    Install a clothes line within the northern side boundary setback  -  Already carried out

 

A clothes line has been installed on the northern wall of the existing dwelling house within the northern side boundary setback.

 

According to subdivision 11 clause 2.22 of the State Environmental Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes), installation of the clothes line in this location is “exempt development” and does not require Council approval. Therefore no concerns are raised in this report with regard to the clothes line.

 

3.         Add a door and two windows, all facing towards the west (rear), to the undercroft which is used for services such as water tanks and heating / cooling systems  - Already carried out

 

The undercroft of the basement is utilised for services such as rainwater tanks and heating/cooling systems. This area has rock outcrops and cannot be utilised for habitable purposes. The proposed door would provide access to the undercroft for maintenance of services which is considered reasonable.

 

Two narrow windows with glass louvers have been proposed on the western wall. These windows would provide light and ventilation to the undercroft which is used for services. These windows would not impact upon the amenity of the adjoining properties and therefore considered reasonable.

 

4.         Delete the rear ground floor deck and pergola off Bedroom 1 - Already carried out

 

The pergola off Bedroom 1 indicated in the ground floor plan is required to be deleted as per condition 2 of the consent. The applicant has complied with this condition of consent.

 

The applicant has chosen to make the deck off Bedroom 1 as non trafficable. This would reduce potential overlooking the adjoining properties. Therefore, no concerns are raised with regard to this change.

 

5.         Provide clear glass, instead of obscure to the top south west corner of the void  - Already carried out

 

According to condition 4 of the consent all window panes of the south facing double height living room are to be fixed and obscure glass to prevent overlooking the pool area of the adjoining dwelling house towards the south.

 

There is no overlooking of the pool area from the living room on the basement level. However, a small portion of the pool area is visible from the ground floor hall adjoining the double height area. 

 

The south facing windows to the double height living room are reasonably large and provide adequate diffused light through the obscure glass. In addition, adequate light, ventilation and views from the living room are available towards the west. There is no justification to have clear glass on the window towards the side of the subject property and in any way compromise privacy of the adjoining property towards the south. Obscure glass to this south facing window would not compromise the amenity of the living room of the subject property.

 

In view of the above it is recommended that condition 4 of the consent remain unchanged.

 

6.         Install a sliding gate to the existing driveway  -  Proposed

 

It is proposed to install an 1800mm high sliding gate along the front boundary for the purpose of security. The gate is proposed to be made of horizontal slats and would be translucent. It is considered reasonable to have a security gate along the front boundary.

 

As the existing fence is less than 1800mm, it is considered appropriate that the height of the proposed gate should not be more than the height of the existing fence. This is required as a condition of consent. 

(Refer condition 68)

 

7.         Install a flue to the south facing external wall  -  Already carried out

 

A flue, on the south facing external wall, would emit fumes similar to those emitted by a gas boosted hot water unit which is “exempt development” as per subdivision 23A Clause 2.46A & B of the State Environmental Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes). Therefore it considered that a flue in this location is considered acceptable as long as the heater and flue are installed as per the manufactures specifications.

 

No objection has been raised by Council’s building surveyor to the installation and location of the flue on the external wall subject to certification that the installation be carried out in accordance with the manufacturers’ specifications. (Refer condition 69)

 

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

 

An approval for the DA has already been granted and it is considered that the proposed alteration will not affect the suitability of the site for this development.

 

79(C)(d)  Any submissions made

 

The proposal was advertised in accordance with Council’s policy of Community Consultation. Total of three submissions have been received in response to the notification of the development application. Two of the three submissions are from the resident of the dwelling house towards the south.  The issues raised in the submission can be summarised as follows.

 

Issues raised by the resident of the dwelling house towards the south:-

 

The rear deck has been built with a southern side boundary setback of 1.2m which is less than the minimum side boundary requirement of 1.5m

 

Comment

 

An additional draft condition has be included in the consent which would require the Principal Certifying Authority to confirm that southern side boundary setback is 1.5m (refer condition 70)

 

The rear deck has been extended beyond 4.1m further towards the west.

 

Comment

 

The extended portion (1.0m wide) of the rear basement deck is deleted as a draft condition of consent.

 

The door and windows installed in the basement were not indicated in the original plans approved by Council.

 

Comment

 

The proposed door and two narrow windows with glass louvers on the western wall would provide access, light and ventilation to the undercroft for maintenance of services. These doors and windows would not impact upon the amenity of the adjoining properties and therefore considered reasonable. 

 

One south-facing double height window panel is clear instead of obscure as required by Councils condition of consent.

 

Comment

 

As indicated in the report above, the south-facing double height window should have all panels as obscure as required by condition 4 of the consent. It is recommended that condition 4 the consent remains unchanged.

 

A vent from a room heater towards the southern wall would allow fumes to go directly into the adjoining property towards the south.

 

Comment

 

The heater and flue would be installed as per the manufactures specifications.

(Refer condition 69).

 

The screen installed along the boundary does not screen the deck. 

 

Comment

 

The decision for installation of the screen along the boundary and deletion of the privacy screen along the southern edge of the rear deck was made after much negotiation between the neighbours in Council’s Planning and Building Committee meeting of 1 December 2008.

 

There is no dispute over the property boundary as suggested by the applicant.

 

Comment

 

Any dispute between the adjoining neighbours with regard to property boundary is a matter between the neighbours and not for Council to consider.

 

Issues raised by the resident of 175 Greenwich Road, a Residential Flat Building towards the north:-

 

The clothes line is installed within the northern boundary setback. The clothes line is within the eye-line of the water views and when used is ugly, unsightly and intrusive.

 

Comment

 

As indicated in the report above, according to State Environmental Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes), installation of the clothes line in this location is “exempt development” and does not require Council approval. Therefore no concerns are raised with regard to the clothes line.

 

The noise that is generated from the extended rear balcony is excessive.

 

Comment

 

The decision for the increased width of the rear basement deck was made after much negotiation between the neighbours in Council’s Planning and Building Committee meeting of 1 December 2008.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The application has been assessed having regard to the 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. The matters under Section 96 and Section 79C of the EP&A Act have been considered and are adequate and satisfactory.


 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That pursuant to the provisions of section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, the development consent D179/08  granted on 10 December 2008 for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling house, new swimming pool and carport, on 177 Greenwich Road, Greenwich is amended in the following manner:-

A.    Amend condition number 1 as under:-

1.       (20) That the development be strictly in accordance with drawing number (job no. 26/07) 1/4  to 4/4 Amend: B dated 17 May 2010 by Kerry McGrath.

B.    Additional conditions

67.     The extended portion (1.0m wide) of the rear basement deck is deleted.

68.     The height of the front gate shall not be higher than the existing timber front fence.

69.     The living room gas heater and the flue shall be installed in accordance with the manufacturer’s specifications. Certification to this effect shall be submitted prior to the issue of occupation certificate.

70.     The Principal Certifying Authority to confirm that southern side boundary setback is 1.5m prior to the issue of occupation certificate.

C.    Condition 4 of the existing consent requiring the use of obscure glass to the south facing windows is reaffirmed and the variation not supported.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Site Location Plan

1 Page

 

AT‑2 View

Neighbour Notification Plan

1 Page

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 19 July 2010

 

Environmental Services Division Report No. 253

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Environmental Services Division Report No. 253

Subject:          3 Amalfi Place, Longueville    

Record No:    DA08/319-01 - 20510/10

Author(s):       Rajiv Shankar 

 

 

Property:                     3 Amalfi Place, Longueville

 

DA No:                         D319/08 Second Section 96 modification.

 

Date Lodged:              16 April 2010

 

Cost of Work:              $1 500 000 (original cost)

 

Owner:                                    A J & M J Bryan

 

Applicant:                    A J Bryan

 

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL TO APPEAR ON DETERMINATION

Section 96 modification seeking to delete Part A of the deferred commencement consent for the demolition of the existing single storey dwelling house and construction of a two storey dwelling house.

ZONE

Local Environmental Plan 2009 - R2 - Low Density Residential

IS THE PROPOSAL PERMISSIBLE WITHIN THE ZONE?

Yes

IS THE PROPERTY A HERITAGE ITEM?

No

IS THE PROPERTY WITHIN A CONSERVATION AREA?

No

DOES DCP 1- BUSHLAND APPLY TO THE PROPERTY?

No

BCA CLASSIFICATION

Class 1a

STOP THE CLOCK USED

No

NOTIFICATION

Neighbours                  83, 85, 94, 96, 100 Kenneth St, 18, 20, 22, 24, 26, 28, 30, 51 Mary St, 1, 2, 4, 5, 6,  7, 8, 10 Amalfi Pl, 90 William Edward Street.

Ward Councillors       Clr W Gaffney, Clr A Smith, Clr S Forrest, Clr S Bennison

Progress Association Longueville Residents Association.

Others                        Wotton Kearney, Ingham Planning

 

REASON FOR REFERRAL

 

The application has been referred to Council because of the context of the original application and the fact that it was also considered by the Planning and Building Committee.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

·     This section 96 application was submitted under the provisions of LEP 2009. The original application was submitted and determined under LEP 1987.

·     Council granted a deferred commencement consent to a development application for the demolition of the existing building and the erection of a two storey dwelling house.

·     A covenant on the subject property restricts redevelopment of the site and includes “that no two-storey building shall be erected on the said lot”.

·     The impact upon views, which may have been one of the reasons for the imposition of the covenant, was considered in the assessment of the original application.

·     Council approved the original application as a deferred commencement consent which required the applicant to have the covenant removed or varied to allow for the construction of the proposed two storey dwelling house before the consent is activated. 

·     The original application was considered under the Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 1987.  This plan required Council to take covenants into consideration as part of the assessment process.  The Section 96 modification is subject to the recently gazetted Local Environmental Plan 2009, which does not deal with covenants in the same manner as LEP 1987.

·     The current proposal is to delete Part A- deferred commencement condition in view of Clause 1.9A (1) of Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009, to allow for the construction to proceed.

·     Clause 1.9A (1) of Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 indicates that any agreements, covenants or other similar instrument that restricts the carrying out of development do not apply to the extent necessary to serve that purpose.

·     The Section 96 modification was notified and 2 submissions were received.  Issues raised included the weakening of the enforcement of the covenant, the development would not be substantially the same development and there being no planning justification for the modification.

·     The proposal is supported, with the deletion of Part A- deferred commencement condition.  Part B conditions would remain unchanged.

 

SITE

 

The site is located on the south western side of Amalfi Place. The site is irregular in shape with an area of 1315sq.m. The site falls away from the street and is occupied by a single storey brick and tile dwelling house. An in-ground pool is located towards the rear which is proposed to be retained. There are a number of trees towards the front and the rear of the subject property.

 

Neighbouring to the east is a single storey brick dwelling house and towards the west is a two storey dwelling house. 

 

PROPOSAL

 

The proposal is a section 96 modification seeking the deletion of Part A – Deferred Commencement Consent 319/08 dated 31st August 2009.

 

Part A of the development consent is as follows:-

 

“PART A – DEFERRED COMMENCEMENT CONSENT

 

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

 

1.         The removal or modification of the covenant to allow the development as proposed in DA319/08.

 

Documentary evidence as requested or the above information must be submitted to Council within 24 months of the granting of this deferred commencement consent.  Commencement of the approval cannot commence until written approval of the submitted information has been given by Council.

 

Pursuant to Clause 95(5) of the Regulations under the Act, Council will notify you in writing if Part A of this consent has been satisfied and the date from which this consent operates.”

 

The proposed deletion of Part A of this consent is on the basis that the previous LEP required covenants to be taken into consideration by Council as part of the assessment of a proposal.  This requirement was removed by the Minister for Planning with the gazettal of LEP 2009, in particular Clause 1.9A (1) of LEP 2009.

 

It should be noted that this does not remove the need for the applicant to have the covenant varied or removed, as this is a separate obligation of the owner, and an Advice is provided on the consent which it is not proposed to remove.  The Advice states:

 

It should be noted 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 not relieve a person from the legal civil consequences of not complying with any such covenant.

 

This would serve to remind the owner of the land or future owners that the land is affected by a covenant.

 

PREVIOUS APPROVALS/HISTORY

 

DA309/ 08 -     Demolition of the existing single storey dwelling house and construction of a two storey dwelling house – Approved as deferred commencement consent.

DA210/1996 -  Terrace extension.

 

PROPOSAL DATA/POLICY COMPLIANCE

 

The proposed data and policy compliance would remain unaltered.

 

REFERRALS

 

Legal Advice

 

Legal advice was sought with regard to Clause 1.9A (1) of Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009.

The clause states:-

 

“For the purpose of enabling development on land in any zone to be carried out in accordance with this Plan or any other development consent granted under the Act, any agreements, covenants or other similar instrument that restricts the carrying out of development does not apply to the extent necessary to serve that purpose”.

 

Council’s legal advice was that:-

·     If the consent is modified by the deletion of the condition, the development would remain substantially the same.

·     The clause applies to “any development consent granted under the Act”. Therefore, it would also apply to an earlier development consent granted under Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 1987.

·     Council may entertain the application and in the exercise of its discretion, determine it.

·     The present deferred commencement condition is, as much as anything, simply a reminder to the developer that the removal of the covenant is another necessary step in the process of implementing the development.

 

A copy of Council’s legal advice has been circulated to Councillors.

 

S.96(2) MATTERS FOR CONSIDERATION

 

96(2)(a)  The development to which the consent relates to is substantially the same development

 

Council has granted a deferred consent for the construction of a two storey dwelling house. The proposed deletion of the deferred commencement condition would not alter the physical form of the approved development in any manner. Therefore, the proposed development would remain substantially the same as to that which was approved by Council.  Council’s solicitor has confirmed in their advice that the development remains substantially the same development.

 

96(2)(b)  Consultation with relevant Minister, public authority or approval body

 

There is no requirement to consult with the Minister, public authority or approval body as a result of the proposed modifications.

 

96(2)(c)  Any submissions made

 

The proposal was advertised in accordance with Council’s policy of Community Consultation. Two submissions have been received. The issues raised in the submissions are discussed later in the report.

 

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

 

Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009

 

The subject site is zoned R2 - Low Density Residential under the provisions of Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009.  The proposal is permitted with development consent of Council.

 

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

 

The LEP 2009 contains a number of differences to the original LEP 1987, however other than the removal of the LEP 1987 requirements in relation to covenants, there are no further relevant matters that would affect this proposal. There are no draft Environmental Planning Instruments that need to be considered with respect to the proposed development. 

 

79(C)(a)(iii)  The provisions of any Development Control Plan

 

The provisions of Council’s Development Control Plan remain unchanged.

 

79(C)(b)  The likely impacts of the development

 

The original application for the demolition of the existing dwelling house and construction of a two storey dwelling house was considered under the provisions of Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 1987(LEP1987).  Under the LEP, Council was required to take the covenant into consideration in assessing the original development application.

 

There exists a covenant on the subject property which restricts redevelopment of the site and includes “that no two-storey building shall be erected on the said lot”.

 

The impact upon views, which may have been one of the reasons for the imposition of the covenant, was already considered in the assessment of the original application and subsequent deferred commencement approval DA319/08.

 

Clause 17A of (LEP1987) suspended covenants on certain land in Lane Cove. However, the subject property is not listed as one where the covenant has been suspended.  Therefore, the application was approved as a deferred commencement consent which required the applicant to have the covenant removed or varied to allow for the construction of the proposed two storey dwelling house before the consent is activated.

 

In February 2010, Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 was gazetted.  Clause 1.9A (1) of the LEP 2009 states that any agreements, covenants or other similar instrument that restricts the carrying out of development does not apply to the extent necessary to serve that purpose. Therefore, private covenants are no longer a relevant consideration for Council in the assessment of development applications under Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009.

 

Notwithstanding the above, the deletion of the deferred commencement condition does not relieve the owner or the applicant of any obligation under the covenant. This has already been indicated as an advice in the consent which is 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.”

 

The applicant is seeking the removal of the Deferred Commencement aspect of the determination as it would no longer be relevant under LEP 2009.

 

The proposed deletion of the deferred commencement condition would not alter the physical form of the approved development in any manner. Therefore, the proposed amendment would not result in any additional impacts on the amenity of the adjoining and adjacent development beyond those previously considered by Council.  The matter of the covenant for this and other properties affected by covenants are now essentially private matters between owners.

 

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

 

An approval for the DA has already been granted and it is considered that the proposed amendment would not affect the suitability of the site for this development.

 

79(C)(d)  Any submissions made

 

The proposal was advertised in accordance with Council’s policy of Community Consultation. Two submissions have been received. The issues raised in the submissions are addressed below.

 

·     The condition should not be deleted because the protection afforded by the enforcement of the covenant should be maintained.

 


Comment

 

The impact upon views, which may have been one of the reasons for the imposition of the covenant, was considered in the assessment of the original application, which was determined as a deferred commencement approval.  The impact on views was determined prior to the granting of the deferred commencement consent, following a detailed view analysis being submitted by the applicant.

 

·     The proposed development would not be substantially the same as previously approved by Council.

 

Comment

 

Council has considered and granted consent for the construction of a two storey dwelling house. The proposed deletion of the deferred commencement condition would not alter the physical form of the approved development in any manner. Therefore, the proposed development would remain the same as to that which was approved by Council.  Council’s solicitor’s have confirmed that the development would be “substantially the same” development.

 

·     Clause 1.9A (1) of Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 is not relevant.

 

Comment

 

As indicated in the legal advice above, Clause 1.9A (1) relates to “any development consent granted under the Act”. Therefore, it would also apply to this development consent granted under Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 1987.  The Section 96 modification is also being considered under the current LEP 2009, which does not deal with covenants in the same manner.

 

·     There is no planning justification and the condition has the same justification now as it did when it was imposed by Council.

 

Comment

 

The intent of the covenant has already been taken into consideration during the assessment of the original application. Clause 1.9A (1) of Lane Cove Local Environmental Plan 2009 indicates that covenants that restricts the carrying out of development do not apply. Therefore the deferred commencement condition can be deleted to allow the construction to proceed.  The Advice in relation to the covenant is to remain, as are the owner’s obligations to deal with the covenant.

 

79(C)(e)  The public interest

 

The proposed amendment would not create any additional environmental impacts or in any way adversely affect the adjoining properties to a greater degree than the original consent granted.  As such it is considered that the development is in the public interest.

 

Clause 1.9A(1) directs Council to not consider such covenants affecting the land.  This clause was placed in LEP 2009 by the Department of Planning, notwithstanding this Council’s express advice it did not support such.

 

 It is worth noting that Council considered the original application on merit and was of the view that the proposed dwelling house would not adversely impact upon existing views of up hill properties.

 

As stated elsewhere in this report, removal of the deferred commencement component does not relieve the applicant/ owner of the need to address issues raised by the covenant.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The application has been assessed having regard to the relevant Planning Instruments and Council controls. The proposal development would be substantially the same as previously approved by Council.  The proposed amendment would not create any additional impacts on the adjoining properties. The matters under Section 96 and Section 79C of the EP&A Act have been considered and are considered to be adequate and satisfactory.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

Pursuant to the provisions of section 96 of the Environment al Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, the deferred commencement consent D319/08 granted on 31st August 2009 for demolition of the existing single storey dwelling house and construction of a two storey dwelling house (Deletion of Part A - deferred commencement condition), 3 Amalfi Place, Longueville is amended in the following manner:-

 

PART A – Deleted

 

PART B  

1.       That the development be strictly in accordance with drawing numbers DA02- DA5 & DA7 dated 24 Oct 2008 by Martin Pickrell Design except as amended by the following conditions.

2.       The proposed dwelling shall be lowered so that the highest level of the roof shall not be higher than RL 21.550. Amended plans shall be submitted prior to the issue of Construction Certificate.

3.      A check survey certificate is to be submitted by a registered surveyor certifying that the highest level of the first floor roof is no higher than RL 21.550, prior to installation of the roof covering.

4.      The south facing bedroom 1 window shall have a window sill height of a minimum of 1.5m from the finished floor level.

5.      The first floor rear balcony shall have a 1.8m high privacy screen along the southern side of the balcony.

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

7.       All building works are required to be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

8.       Lane Cove Council charges a fee of $30 for the registration of any Part 4A Certificates (compliance, construction, occupation or subdivision certificates) issued by an accredited certifier under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

9.       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.

10.     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.

11.     An Occupation Certificate being obtained from the Principal Certifying Authority before the occupation of the building.

12.     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.

13.     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.

14.     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.

15.     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.

16.     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.

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

18.     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; and

h)    Completion.

19.     Structural Engineer's details being submitted PRIOR TO ISSUE OF CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE for the following:-

a)    Underpinning;

b)    Retaining walls;

c)    Footings;

d)    Reinforced concrete work;

e)    Structural steelwork; and

f)     Upper level floor framing.

20.     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.

21.     A check survey certificate is to be submitted at the completion of:-

a)    Dampcourse level;

b)    The establishment of the first floor level;

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.

22.     Noise from domestic air conditioners is not to be audible in any adjoining dwelling between the hours of 10:00pm and 7:00am on weekdays or between the hours of 10:00pm and 8:00am on weekends and public holidays. 

If the noise emitted from the air conditioning unit results in offensive noise, Council may prohibit the use of the unit, under the provisions of the Protection of the Environment operations Act 1997.

23.     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.

24.         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:-

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

ii)     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.

iii)    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.

iv)    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.

25.     Protection of the dwelling against subterranean termites must be carried out in accordance with AS.3660.

26.     All spillage deposited on the footpaths or roadways to be removed at the completion of each days work.

27.     The site being properly fenced to prevent access of unauthorised persons outside of working hours.

28.     Compliance with Australian Standard 2601 - The Demolition of Structures.

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

30.     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.

31.     BASIX - Compliance with all the conditions of the BASIX Certificate lodged with Council as part of this application.

32.     A Tree Preservation Order applies in the Lane Cove local government area. The order prohibits the cutting or removal of any tree except with the consent of Council, which must be strictly and fully complied with, and the penalty for contravention of this order is up to One million one hundred thousand ($1,100,000).  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.

 

33.     The protection on site, without damage, of all existing trees, excepting those shown in the approved plan to be removed or pruned.  Irrespective of this consent permission from Council must be obtained for the removal or pruning of any trees, including the cutting of any tree roots greater than 40 mm in diameter.

34.     There must be no stockpiling of topsoil, sand, aggregate, spoil or any other construction material or building rubbish on any nature strip, footpath, road or public open space park or reserve.

35.     All materials brought onto the site must be weed free.

36.     Rubbish must be stored in sealed in a locked container / cage.  Any building rubbish that is not contained must be cleaned up immediately, including the immediate worksite, surrounding area and/or public open space.

37.     A 1.8 m high fence of chain mesh shall be erected a radial distance of not less than 2.4m from the trunk of the Water gum street tree. The fenced area shall not be used for the storage of building materials, machinery, site sheds, or for advertising and the soil levels within the fenced area shall remain undisturbed.

38.     A 1.8 m high fence of chain mesh shall be erected a radial distance of not less than 3m from the trunk of the Italian Cypress located at the rear of the Site adjacent to the pool.  The fenced area shall not be used for the storage of building materials, machinery, site sheds, or for advertising and the soil levels within the fenced area shall remain undisturbed.

          The 1.8m high chain link wire boundary fence shall be used as a tree protection zone for all existing trees at the front of the Site. The fence must have a setback distance of not less than 2.4m from the trunk of any tree. 

39.     A waterproof sign must be placed on every second panel of all tree protection zones stating ‘NO ENTRY TREE PROTECTION AREA – this fence and sign are not to be removed or relocated for the work duration.’  Minimum size of the sign is to be A3 portrait with NO ENTRY TREE PROTECTION ZONE in capital Arial Font size 100, and the rest of the text in Arial font size 65.

40.     All tree protection fencing and signage must be erected PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE including demolition or site preparation and remain in place for the duration of the development.

41.     There must be no soil disturbance within tree protection areas, including any activities associated with the construction other than topdressing on completion of the landscaping works to a maximum of 50mm, within the approved tree protection zones of the trees shown on the approved plan to be retained.  All activity within the Tree Protection Area must be undertaken with hand tools.

42.     Hedging plants must be of such a species that they may be maintained at a mature height of no more than 5m from soil level. The foliage of hedge plants shall be maintained at a height of 5m by ongoing and continuous pruning annually or more frequently as required.

43.     The Applicant must ensure that all landscaping is completed to a professional standard, free of any hazards or unnecessary maintenance problems and that all plants are consistent with NATSPEC specifications.

General engineering conditions

44.     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.

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

46.     Works on Council Property: Separate application shall be made to Council's urban services division for approval to complete, 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.

47.     Permit to Stand Plant: Where the applicant requires the use of construction plant on the public road reservation, an “Application for Standing Plant Permit” shall be made to Council. Applications shall be submitted and approved prior to the start of any related works. Note: allow 2 working days for approval.

48.     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.

49.     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. All costs associated with the relocation or removal of services shall be borne by the applicant.

50.     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’.

51.     Council Drainage Infrastructure: The proposed construction shall not encroach onto any existing Council stormwater line or drainage easement. If a Council stormwater line is located on the property during construction, Council is to be immediately notified. Where necessary the stormwater line is to be relocated to be clear of the proposed building works. All costs associated with the relocation of the stormwater line are to be borne by the applicant

52.     Services Prior to any excavation works, the location and depth of all services must be ascertained. All costs associated with adjustment of the public utility will be borne by the applicant.

53.     Car parking: All parking and associated facilities are to be designed and constructed in accordance with AS 2890 Series.

54.     Rainwater Reuse Tanks: The proposed rainwater tank is to be installed in accordance with Council’s rainwater tank policy and relevant Australian standards.

Note:

§  Rainwater draining to the reuse tank is to drain from the roof surfaces only. No “on - ground” surfaces are to drain to the reuse tank.  “On - ground” surfaces are to drain via a separate system.

§  Mosquito protection & first flush device shall be fitted to the reuse tank.

§  The overflow from the rainwater reuse tank is to drain by gravity to the receiving system.

 

 

55.     Stormwater requirement Stormwater runoff from all impervious areas shall be collected and disposed of using the following mechanism

·        All impervious areas are to drain to an absorption system.  

·        Environmental pollution control pit is to be installed just prior to the connection to the street system

The design and construction of the drainage system is to fully comply with, AS-3500 and Council's DCP-Stormwater management. The design shall ensure that the development, either during construction or upon completion, does not impede or divert natural surface water so as to have an adverse impact upon adjoining properties.

Engineering conditions to be complied with prior to construction certificate

56.     Drainage Plans new: A stormwater drainage plan prepared and certified by a suitably qualified engineer is to be submitted to the Principle Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the construction certificate. The design is to be certified that it fully complies with, AS-3500 and Council's DCP-Stormwater management. The design is to include the requirements set out in condition

57.     Council infrastructure damage bond: The applicant shall lodge with Council a $1000 cash bond or bank guarantee. The bond is to cover the repair of damage to Council's roads, footpaths, kerb and gutter, drainage or other assets as a result of the development. The bond will be released upon issuing of the occupational certificate. If Council determines that damage has occurred as a result of the development, the applicant will be required to repair the damage. Repairs are to be carried out within 90days from the notice. All repairs are to be carried in accordance with council’s requirements. The full bond will be retained if council’s requirements are not satisfied. Lodgement of this bond is required prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

58.     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 Fourth Edition 2004 Volume 1’’ prepared by LANDCOM. The plan is to be submitted to the principal certifying authority to prior to the issue of the construction certificate 

59.     Replacement of Vehicular Crossing: The vehicular crossing servicing the property shall be reconstructed prior to the issue of the occupation certificate. The Vehicular crossing shall be constructed to the specifications and levels issued by Council. ‘Construction of residential Vehicular Footpath Crossing’ application shall be submitted to Council prior to the issue of the construction certificate. All works associated with the construction of the crossing shall be completed prior to the issue of the occupational certificate

60.     Excavation greater the 1m: Where there are structures on adjoining properties including all Council infrastructures, located within 5 meters of the proposed excavation.

The applicant shall:-

a)    seek independent advice from a suitably qualified engineer on the impact of the proposed excavations on the adjoining properties

b)    detail what measures are to be taken to protect those properties from undermining  during construction

c)    provide Council with a certificate from the engineer on the necessity and adequacy of  support for the adjoining properties

 

       The above matters are to be completed and documentation submitted to principle certifying authority prior to the issue of the constructions certificate

d)    Provide a dilapidation report of the adjoining properties and Council infrastructure. The dilapidation survey must be conducted prior to the issue of the construction certificate. The extent of the survey must cover the likely “zone of influence” that may arise due to excavation works, including dewatering and/or construction induced vibration. The dilapidation report must be prepared by a suitably qualified engineer.

          A second dilapidation report, recording structural conditions of all structures originally assessed shall be submitted to the principle certifying authority prior to the issue of the occupational certificate.

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

61.     Design of retaining structures: All retaining structures grater than 1m in height are to be designed and certified for construction by a suitably qualified engineer. The structural design is to comply with, all relevant design codes and Australian standards. The design and certification shall be submitted to the Principle Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate

Engineering conditions to be complied with prior to commencement of construction

62.     Erosion and sediment control: The applicant shall install appropriate sediment control devices prior to the start of any works on the site. The devices are to be installed in accordance with the approved plan satisfying condition ‘(C1) Erosion and sediment control plan’. The devices shall be maintained during the construction period and replaced when necessary.

Engineering Conditions to be complied with Prior to Occupation Certificate

63.     Certificate of Satisfactory Completion: Certificates from a registered and licensed Plumber or a suitably qualified Engineer must be obtained for the following matters. The plumber 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 the occupation certificate confirming that the site drainage system has been constructed in accordance with the relevant Australian Standards and Council’s DCP-Stormwater management.   

ADVISES:

1.       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.

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 19 July 2010

 

Environmental Services Division Report No. 21

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Environmental Services Division Report No. 21

Subject:          LEP  Review 2010 - Shell  Site, 150 Epping Road    

Record No:    SU4044 - 26585/10

Author(s):       Michael Mason 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

A formal Planning Proposal has been submitted to Council by Rose Group to rezone 150 Epping Road to part High Density Residential R4 and part Environmental Conservation E2 from Light Industrial IN2. The development of approximately 400 residential flats would include a minimum of 10% affordable housing and social facilities for residents. The bushland portion would maintain or enhance existing public paths. A copy of the submission is attached as AT 1.

 

This report recommends that Council support the Planning Proposal for the purpose of submitting it to the Department of Planning’s “Gateway” process. The Gateway, introduced in July 2009, is the first step in preparation of an amendment to a local environmental plan, at which the Department determines whether the LEP amendment is approved to continue to the second stage which may include undertaking detailed studies and consultation with government agencies and the community.

 

Key issues which may require further assessment include scale of development, private covenants, bushfire, contamination, social factors, traffic and air quality.

 

The proposal’s endorsement by Council for submission would allow subsequent consideration by Council of the above issues and others in the studies and public submissions resulting from the Department’s Gateway determination. Council would then have the opportunity, based on that more detailed material, to support appropriate zoning, floor space ratio and height, and resolution of other issues, if it wishes to finalise an LEP amendment for the site.

 

That would also be the appropriate stage to determine the features of a voluntary planning agreement or other arrangements, in particular relating to affordable housing and the use by the community of the bushland section of the site.

 

It is recommended that Council support and endorse the Rose Group’s Planning Proposal to rezone 150 Epping Road as part High Density Residential R4 and part Environmental Conservation E2, for submission to the Department of Planning seeking approval through its “Gateway” process for amendment to Lane Cove LEP 2009.

 

Background

 

The site at 150 Epping Road has a total area of 3.17 hectares, of which 1.82 hectares is proposed for redevelopment, the remainder being bushland. It is currently occupied by a Shell service station, fast food outlet and convenience store. Prior to an amendment to LEP 1987 in 1993 to permit those uses, at around which time Catra Pty Ltd (part of Rose Group) purchased the site, it appears to have been occupied by industrial buildings and car parking. In 2001 Rose Group proposed a residential rezoning during the LEP review process.

 

The rezoning was supported by Council for both DLEP 2007 and DLEP 2008, on the grounds of strong community submissions that this would minimise the impact on existing residential suburbs while assisting to achieve the Metro Strategy’s residential targets. It was not however supported by the Department, on the grounds of the Metro Strategy’s retention of employment land in that area, so that the site was required to retain its industrial zoning for both exhibitions and in the subsequent gazettal of the LEP. The Department indicated in April 2009 nevertheless that it would consider the proposal as a possible LEP amendment following further documentation being provided by the owner. (The chronology of documents and discussions is summarised in the Planning Proposal at pages 3-5.)

 

The submission contains the following Attachments:-

1.    Planning Proposal;

2     Attachment 1: Draft LEP Amendment;

3.    Voluntary Planning Agreement offer;

4.    Net Community Benefits Test; and

5.    Previous Local Environmental Study (LES) requirements.

 

Discussion

 

The purpose of this report is to review the Rose Group submission and advise Council accordingly.  It outlines relevant issues and, in particular, those discussed in the Rose Group submission.

 

Process for LEP Preparation

 

The Gateway process for preparing an LEP, introduced by the Department in July 2009, has the following steps:-

·      Planning proposal — the relevant planning authority (Council) is responsible for the preparation of a planning proposal, which explains the effect of and justification for the plan. This planning proposal may be initially prepared by the applicant and submitted to Council.

·      Gateway — The Minister (or delegate) determines whether the planning proposal is to proceed. This gateway acts as a checkpoint to ensure that the proposal is justified before further studies are done and resources are allocated to the preparation of a plan. A community consultation process is also determined at this time. Consultations occur with relevant public authorities and, if necessary, the proposal is varied.

·      Community consultation — the proposal is publicly exhibited (generally low impact proposals for 14 days, others for 28 days). A person making a submission may also request a public hearing be held.

·      Assessment — The relevant planning authority (generally Council in liaison with the Department) considers public submissions and the proposal is varied as necessary. Parliamentary Counsel then prepares a draft local environmental plan — the legal instrument.

·      Decision — With the Minister’s (or delegate’s) approval the plan becomes law and is published on the NSW legislation website.

 

Compliance of Rose Group’s Planning Proposal with the Gateway Process

 

A planning proposal is required to comprise four parts:-

            Part 1 - Objectives:     a statement of the plan’s purpose

Part 2 - Explanation:   how the new planning controls would achieve the purpose

Part 3 - Justification:   A - the net community benefit of the proposal

                                    B - consistency with the state and local strategic planning framework

                                                C - environmental, social and economic impact

                                                D – State and Commonwealth interests

            Part 4 - Community consultation

 

The Planning Proposal submitted by Rose Group follows the Department’s format as above.

 

Key Issues to be Resolved Subject to Gateway Approval

 

These include, but may not be limited to, the following:-

1)         Scale of Development – the LEP requires controls for FSR and Height to be included in the proposal in addition to zoning:-

a)    FSR:

For the developable 1.8ha section, Rose Group proposes a floor space ratio

of 2.2:1, equating to 1.26:1 over the whole site. It is an increase above the approximately 1.8:1 FSR over the developable area permitted under the current LEP 2009’s 1.1:1 over the whole site.

This is considered acceptable, and would allow approximately 400 dwellings which would support development of a sense of community on this isolated site.  A lower FSR may be achieved at the subsequent LEP exhibition or a development application stage depending on the height limit decided upon (see below).

b)    Height:

A height of 44 metres is proposed. This potentially would permit up to 15 storeys, but is explained by the applicant as allowing for 9-12 storeys above basement/ podium levels on a site set below road level by 1-3 storeys approximately.

This scale would be greater than other residential development in Lane Cove, including the 25 metres height on the TUTA site on Burns Bay Road and 30 metres on the Little Lane site. The 12-storey industrial building at 18 Orion Road is not considered a precedent, as its scale relates to bonuses in return for loss of land for construction of Sam Johnson Way, and it is located in the industrial zone limited generally to 18 metres. Nor is the Nuss building on the Willoughby side of Epping Road typical of scale on the Lane Cove side. They are nevertheless part of the unique visual catchment for this site.

To assist Councillors to consider the appropriate height, a visual analysis was undertaken by an architecture consultant for Council (ATs 2 and 3). This provides a range of options from low to extreme. It is emphasised that staff do not support the consultant’s highest tower option or the specific site plan building footprints, and it is not suggested that Rose is proposing these.  The photo-montages are indicative only of varying effects on typical view-lines from the surrounding area.

It is recommended that the proposal be submitted to the Gateway with the FSR and height unchanged. This would allow for Council consideration of a range of factors, varying from the site’s setting against the Epping Road escarpment to viewlines from the Lane Cove National Park, and in the light of any public submissions received on exhibition. If it were considered appropriate to reduce the height, this would have to be balanced against the aim of providing dwellings, including affordable housing, as part of Council’s residential target, and perceived view impacts.

2)         Private Covenants

 

The Planning Proposal recognises that there are outstanding issues in relation to private covenants with SC Johnson, owner of adjacent property, applying to 150 Epping Road – in particular relating to whether or not the land may be used for residential development. Notwithstanding the LEP 2009’s provision (section 1.9A) suspending covenants to enable development, these are considered to be matters requiring resolution between the private parties prior to finalisation of an LEP amendment. SC Johnson has expressed strong concern to Council regarding this proposed rezoning yet made no comment in the DLEP 2008 process. A summary is attached ( AT 2), this being a preliminary submission prior to formal exhibition of a proposal.

 

3)         Bushfire

 

The Planning Proposal also recognises that issues remain to be addressed for the Rural Fire Service. This is expected to be one of the government authorities required by the Department to be consulted if Gateway approval is given.

 

4)         Contamination

 

Council would, prior to approving the LEP’s finalization, require the applicant to provide expert advice that the site is capable of remediation to a standard acceptable for residential development.

 

5)         Social factors

 

The site is isolated from the locality’s residential development and the applicant would at the appropriate stage be expected to indicate to Council the anticipated demographic group and that its proposed on-site social facilities are adequate and appropriate for the residents.

 

6)         Traffic

 

The Planning Proposal refers to a Traffic Impact Assessment stating that there would be equivalent or less traffic generated from the redevelopment under the proposed planning controls than the current use (page 26).  Again greater clarity would be required at the appropriate stage regarding the current numbers of vehicles visiting the site only as passing trade.

 

The traffic data received to date had been based on earlier estimates of lower floor space ratio and dwelling numbers. Council would require submission of a traffic study updated to the current dwelling density and vehicle generation estimates for assessment by Council’s Traffic Manager.

 

7)         Air quality

 

Odour was identified as an issue needing to be further addressed and the submission advises (page 27) that this would be the subject of an environmental study for the proposal’s D.L.E.P. exhibition.

 

8)         Voluntary Planning Agreement

 

The “Preliminary terms of proposed Developer Contributions” dated 21 April 2010 would be the subject of detailed negotiations post-Gateway. The comment is made however in relation to   Paragraphs 1 and 2 – “The provision of public access to the Environmental Conservation E2 land/ walking tracks” that it has been suggested by members of the community that public rights of way apply already over the site, as a result of covenants/ rights of way etc required at the time of purchase.

 


Strategic context

 

1)         State Strategies

 

The 2005 Metropolitan Strategy is supported by the Draft Inner North Subregional Strategy, which identifies the site as: “Land with potential to allow for a wider range of employment uses”.

 

The proposal refers to the economic impacts relating to the displacement of jobs if the site is not redeveloped for industrial use, suggesting that this would be offset by the economic benefit of increased customers to nearby retail centres (page 30). It is noted however that the additional consumers in retail centres would occur in any case as a result of the dwelling increases under Lane Cove’s residential target, whether they are located on this site or elsewhere. The Department of Planning’s issue is a different one, that of the retention of adequate employment land capacity for production of those consumer goods.

 

The Metro Strategy is under review this year and it is expected that the 2010 version will take into account the recently- released Metropolitan Transport Plan. This plan increases the residential target for the Inner North to 39,400 new dwellings from 30,000 (targets for individual local government areas have not been updated yet). In relation to this site the Department of Planning will be expected to advise Council following the Gateway submission on the relative importance it attaches to residential land relative to employment land in achieving the objectives of the Metro Strategy.

 

2)         Local Strategies

 

The LEP 2009 represents Council’s strategy for achieving residential and employment growth. The dwelling numbers proposed for this site are not required in order to meet Lane Cove’s residential target under the Metro Strategy for 2031, since this has been achieved already by the Department’s high density zoning of the Mowbray Road precinct. The target for 2036 may be released later this year by the Department and would guide consideration of this proposal closer to its exhibition.

 

Community Consultation

 

The Department of Planning will determine the consultation timeframe (14 days for minor sites or 28 days generally) and stakeholders to be consulted.

 

Process

 

The Department has indicated that, having deferred this site from the LEP 2009 process, it may permit this proposal to go forward to the Gateway as a spot rezoning. This could be determined by such factors as the State Government’s desire to accelerate the provision of affordable housing or the needs and timeframe of the applicant.

 

The Department has nevertheless indicated a general preference for LEP amendments to be submitted in a single set of documentation for the Gateway process. For that reason, if Council endorses this Planning Proposal for 150 Epping Road, it may be required to be incorporated with a number of editing and other matters relating to LEP 2009.

 

It is recommended that a flexible approach be taken by Council if it approves the proposal, to allow for discussions with the Department as to the appropriate options for submission to the Gateway.

 


Conclusion

 

It is recommended that Council support the Planning Proposal by Rose Group to rezone 150 Epping Road to part High Density Residential R4 and part Environmental Conservation E2 from Light Industrial IN2, for the purpose of submitting it to the Department of Planning’s “Gateway” process.

 

The rezoning was supported by Council for both DLEP 2007 and DLEP 2008, on the grounds of strong community submissions and that this would minimise the impact on existing residential suburbs while contributing to the Metro Strategy’s residential targets.

The Planning Proposal has been provided in the format required by the Department of Planning for its Gateway process for LEP amendments.  Its submission would allow subsequent consideration by Council of the studies and public submissions resulting from the Department’s Gateway determination. Council would then have the opportunity, based on more detailed material, to decide the appropriate zoning, floor space ratio and height when it wishes to finalise an LEP amendment for the site. That would also be the appropriate stage to determine the features of a voluntary planning agreement or other arrangements, in particular relating to affordable housing and the use by the community of the bushland section of the site.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council endorse Rose Group’s Planning Proposal, to rezone 150 Epping Road as part High Density Residential R4 and part Environmental Conservation E2, for submission to the Department of Planning seeking approval through its “Gateway” process for amendment to the Lane Cove LEP 2009.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

LEP 2010 Rose Planning Proposal 150 Epping Rd 13.7.10

56 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

Report No.1 Design Option 1 (by Rose) Comments From Tim Williams (Architect) - 24.5.10

8 Pages

 

AT‑3 View

Report No. 2 Design Options 2 and 3 (Tim Willliams) - 26.5.10

7 Pages

 

AT‑4 View

S.C. Johnson Objections

3 Pages

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 19 July 2010

 

Environmental Services Division Report No. 22

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Environmental Services Division Report No. 22

Subject:          19 Glenview Street, Greenwich    

Record No:    da09/294 - 26911/10

Author(s):       Peter Thomas 

 

 

Executive Summary

At the Council meeting of 21st June 2010 Council resolved that a report be submitted on the details of the Council legal fees expended in defending the Appeal against the refusal to grant development consent for DA09/294 (19 Glenview Street, Greenwich).  The Appeal was discontinued by the applicant prior to the hearing and expenditure was $11,710.60.

 

Background and Discussion

A development application for alterations and addition to the existing residential building to convert 3 flats into 1 dwelling, construction of a detached second dwelling over a basement carpark , alterations to the existing pool and Torrens title subdivision, including a stratum subdivision of the basement (detached dual occupancy development with stratum and Torrens subdivision) was rejected on 17th March 2010.

 

The applicant appealed the refusal in the Land and Environment Court.  Council defended the Appeal, however prior to the matter going to hearing, the applicant sought to discontinue the Appeal.

 

The matter of the discontinuance was discussed with Council’s Solicitors and Council was advised:-

“In our view, therefore, Council has reasonable prospects of getting some form of costs order against the Applicant herein and we recommend that Council instruct us to make such an application on Monday next.

We have spoken to Dennis Wilson, the barrister briefed to represent Council on the planning appeal, and he has also advised that Council ought to succeed on an application for costs”.

 

The motion for discontinuance was heard on 31st May 2010 and the Court agreed to the discontinuance.  Council sought costs in the matter, however the Court was of the view that both parties had acted reasonably in the circumstances and ordered that each party pay their own costs.

 

Council’s costs in defending the Appeal were $11, 710.60.

 

Conclusion

 

In light of the legal advice, the decision to seek costs is considered reasonable in the circumstances.

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receive and note the above report.

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.


Ordinary Council Meeting 19 July 2010

 

Environmental Services Division Report No. 23

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Environmental Services Division Report No. 23

Subject:          Development Contributions (Section 94 Plan) - Departmental Advice    

Record No:    SU3482 - 28024/10

Author(s):       Stephanie Bashford 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

The purpose of this report is to advise Council of recent announcements by the NSW Government regarding development contributions and the implications for Lane Cove.  Development contributions, known as Section 94 contributions, are payable to councils for developments which would increase the number of residents or workers using local facilities.

 

The Department of Planning had foreshadowed amendments to the development contributions system to be made from 1st July 2010, including changes to the range of items for which councils would be permitted to charge contributions.  The planned changes have now been deferred until further notice.

 

There is to be no change at present to the contribution rates applying in Lane Cove for new developments.  Lane Cove has been required to apply a cap of $20,000 per dwelling since June 2009.  The timing of Lane Cove’s Section 94 Plan review will however be affected.  Council will provide a further report to Council when information is made available by the Department.

 

Background

 

(i)         13th January 2009 - The Minister for Planning announced a $20,000 per dwelling cap but invited councils to apply for exemptions for the coming year, in a circular attached at (AT1). Council submitted an application for exemption and a copy is attached at (AT2).

 

(ii)        1st June 2009 - The Minister for Planning advised Lane Cove that its application for exemption had been refused and that the $20,000 cap was to apply from 8 June 2009 (AT 3).  The grounds given related to the significant proportion of the contribution under Lane Cove’s Section 94 plan based on cost recovery of historic expenditure.

 

(iii)       4th June 2010 - The NSW Premier announced a revised approach for setting local development contributions and local council rates, including:-

·   A $20,000 per residential dwelling limit on contributions for all councils, including those previously exempted; and

·   Allowing councils to apply for special rate variations for legitimate council costs arising from development.

 

The Direction did not apply to:-

·    Voluntary planning agreements;

·    Monetary contributions (fixed percentage levies – these do not apply under Lane Cove’s current Section 94 Plan);

·    Affordable housing contributions; and

·    Land dedication or material public benefits received in lieu of monetary contributions.

 

Further legislative changes additional to the above were to be introduced from 1st July 2010, with guidelines to follow later in the year. A copy of the Department of Planning’s circular providing details is attached at (AT4).

 

(iv)     10th June 2010 - The Local Government & Shires Association (LGSA) issued an email surveying information on the impacts for NSW councils of the State Government’s announcement that it would significantly reduce the range of items for which development contributions could be charged.  This was understood by the LGSA to be limited to funding 'essential' infrastructure such as land acquisition (for open space and community facilities), roads, stormwater and transport facilities.  It would exclude recreational facilities, civic and community facilities.

 

Council’s response, advising that Lane Cove’s Section 94 Plan is under review since the gazettal of its new LEP, is attached at (AT5).

 

(v)     5th July 2010 (received, undated) - The Department of Planning advised that, as a result of the views expressed by councils on the proposed changes, further work is to be undertaken by the Department before the new arrangements are finalised, and that the commencement date has been deferred from 1st July 2010 (AT6).

 

Discussion

 

In terms of the implications for Lane Cove contributions, the imposition of a $20,000 per dwelling cap does not change Lane Cove’s current contribution rate, because that cap had already been applied to Lane Cove since 1st June 2009.  The rates charged by Lane Cove prior to that cap were generally below the $20,000 limit in any case.  The cap has now been applied to all councils equally from 7th June 2010, including those which had been granted exemptions last year, as discussed above.

 

The deferral until further notice of legislative changes, relating to the types of infrastructure for which contributions may be charged, affects the timing and content of Lane Cove’s Section 94 Plan review.  However work is continuing by staff compiling the recommended works estimated to be required as a result of growth under the new LEP 2009, pending further clarification by the Department.

 

Conclusion

 

Council is asked to note the report advising of recent announcements by the NSW Government regarding development contributions. These include:-

(i)      confirmation of a $20,000 per dwelling cap on development contributions to apply to all NSW councils, including those which had been formerly exempted; and

(ii)      the deferral of legislative changes relating to the types of infrastructure for which development contributions may be charged.

 

The Department of Planning had foreshadowed legislative amendments to the development contributions system to be made from 1st July 2010.  The planned changes have now been deferred until further notice.

 

There is to be no change at present to the contribution rates applying in Lane Cove for new developments following the Department’s confirmation of a $20,000 cap to apply to new dwellings for all NSW councils.  Lane Cove has been required to apply a cap of $20,000 per dwelling since June 2009.

 

A further report to Council will be made after any further advice is received from the Department of Planning on development contributions and, in particular, the implications for Lane Cove’s Section 94 Plan review.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receive and note the report.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Departmental  Circular 23rd January 2009 with Ministerial Direction 13th January 2009

6 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

Application For Exemption From Cap 27.2.09

2 Pages

 

AT‑3 View

Minister For Planning's Letter Refusing Exemption 1st June 2009

2 Pages

 

AT‑4 View

Department of Planning Circular of 4th June 2010

4 Pages

 

AT‑5 View

Council's Response to LGSA Survey on Infrastructure Contributions 17th June 2010

2 Pages

 

AT‑6 View

Department of Planning Letter Deferring Legislative Amendments Received  5th July 2010

1 Page

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 19 July 2010

 

Environmental Services Division Report No. 24

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Environmental Services Division Report No. 24

Subject:          71 Northwood Road, Northwood    

Record No:    DA09/254 - 28077/10

Author(s):       Michael Mason 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Council resolved to defer the determination of the application for the purpose of mediation and a further report be submitted to the first Council meeting in July 2010.

·     All relevant parties agreed to enter mediation in an effort to reach agreement on outstanding issues.

·     Mediation was undertaken on Thursday 1st July 2010.

·     A mediated agreement resulted.

·     Staff have amended draft conditions and endorsed final submitted plans in accordance with the mediated agreement reached by all participating parties.

·     All parties call upon Council to agree to the removal of the Jacaranda tree located at the rear of the site to ameliorate impacts of the proposed development.

·     The recommendation is that Council consider the mediated agreement and determine the application.

 

Discussion

 

Council resolved at it’s meeting of 7th June 2010:-

 

159      “Resolved on the motion of Councillors Forrest and Brooks-Horn that the matter be deferred for the purpose of mediation with a further report to be submitted to Council on the first Council meeting in July 2010.”

 

Having regard to the above resolution the following information is provided.

 

Parties to Mediation

 

The Executive Manager confirmed with the owners of 71 Northwood, 69 Northwood, 75 Northwood and 75A Northwood Road their willingness to enter mediation to resolve outstanding issues relating to the development application to demolish an existing dwelling house and construct a new dwelling house and make alterations to a detached garage.

 

The Mediation Process

 

Mediation was undertaken at Council’s Civic Centre by Mr Mason and Mr Andrew Thomas on Thursday 1st July 2010.

 

The owner/applicant of 71 Northwood Road was accompanied by his Architect and Project Manager.

 

All parties signed the standard agreement to mediate and were advised that Council’s mediation process is without prejudice and voluntary for all parties.

 


Mediation Agreement

 

I wish to advise Council that the participants to the mediation reached agreement in the following terms:-

 

Mediated Agreement

·     Move the rear of the proposed dwelling house to the east on all levels so as to be in line with the decks at the rear/west side of 69 Northwood Road.

·     Landscape planting in the rear yard of 71 Northwood Road that is along the common side boundary to 69 Northwood Road to be no greater than 2m.

·     Remove the Jacaranda tree in the rear yard of 71 Northwood Road.

·     Delete draft conditions 2 and 3 in relation to privacy treatments/measures for both 69 and 75A Northwood Road.

·     Move the entire proposed dwelling house 250mm toward the wall of the existing dwelling house at 69 Northwood Road.

·     Curved additions to commence from both of the rear northwest and southwest ground floor corners of the proposed dwelling house on both the lower ground and ground floor levels.

·     The proposed curved infills at each of the rear/west corners of the first floor level are to be setback an additional 500mm from the southwest corner closest to 75A Northwood Road, and an additional 350mm from the northwest corner and also 350mm from the corner of the curve on the north side of the living room wall closest to 69 Northwood Road.

·     Revisions to internal room layouts not subject to Council input.

·     A privacy screen wall 1.7m in height above the finished floor level of the sunroom is to extend beyond the rear/northwest corner of the first floor level of the proposed dwelling house so as to prevent overlooking from that sunroom of the bedroom windows on the south side of 69 Northwood Road.

·     Staff to discuss tree protection measures to accommodate construction at the front of the site.

 

Addendum

 

Notwithstanding the list of Proposed Amendments above, the applicant’s propose the following additional amendments so as to further reduce the concerns of the adjoining neighbours:-

·     The first floor level is to be setback an additional 150mm to the east on the rear/ northwest corner of the proposed dwelling house, and an additional 350mm to the east from the corner on the south side of the external living room wall.

·     A louvered sun shade is to be attached above the rear/west facing windows of bedrooms 2 and 3 on the ground floor level to replace the proposed roof.

 

All neighbours have acknowledged the addendum amendment and raise no objection to their inclusion into the agreement.

 

The final plans (to be tabled) articulate the above amendments which are also reflected in new draft conditions.

 


Trees

 

As part of the mediated agreement, all parties formed the view that the removal of the Jacaranda tree located in the rear yard of 71 Northwood Road would ameliorate perceived impacts for a number of owners.

 

This issue is raised as it did not form part of the Council staff assessment of the original proposal and is in conflict with draft condition 50 of the report to Council dated 17th May 2010.

 

“50      The Jacaranda tree and Eucalypt tree at the rear of the site are to be retained and protected.   A 1.8 m high chain mesh fence shall be erected a radial distance of not less than 4m from the trunk of the Jacaranda tree and the Eucalypt tree located in the rear yard.  The tree protection area shall not be used for the storage of building materials, machinery, site sheds, or for advertising and soil levels within the tree protection area shall remain undisturbed.”

 

It was also agreed that the Eucalypt tree should remain and be protected.

 

Having regard to the agreement by mediation all participants call for the removal of the Jacaranda tree.  This matter was referred to the Manager, Open Space for comment.

 

The original comment of the tree officer called for the two trees at the rear of the site (Eucalypt and Jacaranda) to be retained.  The Manager, Open Space has confirmed the view that the Jacaranda tree should remain.

 

Development conditions 50, 54 and 55 have been amended to delete reference to the Jacaranda tree should Council agree to the removal of the Jacaranda tree.

 

Development conditions 48 and 49 have been amended to reflect the need to facilitate construction access to the site while protecting the trees and shrubs located forward of the existing dwelling house.

 

Conclusion

The mediated agreement, notwithstanding the call for the Jacaranda tree to be removed, provides the owners with a development proposal that meets their needs while accommodating the concerns of adjoining neighbours.

 

All parties to the mediation have made compromises and now call for Council to determine the application.  It is recommended that Council consider the mediated agreement and determine the application.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That pursuant to Section 80(1)(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, the Council grants development consent to Development Application D254/09 for the demolition of the existing dwelling house, the erection of a dwelling house on 3 levels, alterations to a garage roof, earthworks and associated retaining walls and water tanks on Lot 3 DP 564291, and known as 71 Northwood Road, Northwood subject to the following conditions:-

Plans

1.         (20) That the development be strictly in accordance with drawing numbers:-

·     0902/DA01-08, Issue L, dated 9.7.10; and

·     0902/DA20-25, Issue L, dated 9.7.10 by Flourish Architectural Services except as amended by the following conditions.

Specific

2.         Deleted

3.         Deleted

4.         In order to reduce the potential to overlook the rear of the property to the west, at 11 Kellys Esplanade, from the filled areas of the lower level rear yard, the 5 trees within the setback area between the rear boundary and the adjoining retaining wall when planted are to have a height equivalent to 1.7m above the finished ground level of the site retained by this adjoining retaining wall.  PLANS ARE TO BE AMENDED TO COMPLY PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

5.         In order to reduce their potential impact on views from the rear yard of the adjoining dwelling house to the north, at 69 Northwood Road, the height of the 5 trees along the rear boundary is to be maintained so that it would not exceed 5m.

6.         Engineering details of all retaining walls are to be submitted as part of a Construction Certificate.

7.         No approval is granted, or implied, for either a dual occupancy or a swimming pool or an external shower on the site.

8.         In order to avoid possible confusion, floor plans submitted with a Construction Certificate are to exclude any reference to works proposed below the 29m contour.

9.         In order to prevent any new work encroaching on a neighbouring property, and/or the adjoining right-of-way access, all new work is to be located wholly within the subject site.  If any doubt is raised, Council may request the submission of a survey report.

General

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

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

12.       (137)  Lane Cove Council charges a fee of $30 for the registration of any Part 4A Certificates (compliance, construction, occupation or subdivision certificates) issued by an accredited certifier under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

13.       (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.

14.       (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.

15.       (17)  An Occupation Certificate being obtained from the Principal Certifying Authority before the occupation of the dwelling house, garage and retaining walls.

16.       (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.

17.       (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.

18.       (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.

19.       (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.

20.       (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.

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

22.       (60) A temporary connection to be made to the sewers of Sydney Water (where available) with an approved toilet structure and toilet fixtures being provided on the site BEFORE WORK IS COMMENCED.  Where the Sydney Water sewer is not available a "Chemical Closet" type toilet shall be permitted.

23.       (61)  All timbers complying with Timber Framing Code AS 1684-79.

24.       (62) All glazing is to comply with the requirements of AS 1288.

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

26.       (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.

27.       (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), the principal certifying authority may approve the use of rock pick machines providing that:-

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

(ii)        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.

(iii)       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.

(iv)       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.

28.       (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.

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

30.       (72) The demolition works being confined within the boundaries of the site.

31.       (73) The site being cleared of all debris and left in a clean and tidy condition at the completion of all works.

32.       (74) All demolition works being completed within a period of three (3) months from the date of commencement.

33.       (76) All machinery used on the site during demolition shall have a noise emission no greater than 75dB(A) when measured at a radius of 7.0 metres from the specified item.

34.       (77) All spillage deposited on the footpaths or roadways to be removed at the completion of each days work.

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

36.       (79) Compliance with Australian Standard 2601 - The Demolition of Structures.

37.       (130)  Compliance with the Waste Management Plan submitted under this application.

38.       (132)  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.

39.       (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.

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

41.       (143) Prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, the applicant must make written application to Council for the provision of domestic waste services.

Landscape

42.       (300)  A Tree Preservation Order applies in the Lane Cove local government area. The Order prohibits the cutting or removal of any tree except with the consent of Council, which must be strictly and fully complied with, and the penalty for contravention of this Order is up to one million, one hundred thousand ($1,100,000).  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.

43.       (302)  Irrespective of this consent, permission from Council must be obtained for the  pruning of any trees protected by Council’s Tree Preservation Order, including the cutting of any tree roots greater than 40 mm in diameter.

44.       (303)  There must be no stockpiling of topsoil, sand, aggregate, spoil or any other construction material or building rubbish on any nature strip, footpath, road or public open space park or reserve.

45.       (305)  All Aboriginal sites and relics in NSW are protected under the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974.  If during the course of construction an Aboriginal site or relic is uncovered, works must cease and the Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Lands Council and the NSW National Parks and Wildlife Service must be notified immediately.

46.       (306) All materials brought onto the site must be weed free.

47.       (308)  Rubbish must be stored in a locked container / cage.  Any building rubbish that is not contained must be cleaned up immediately, including the immediate worksite, surrounding area and/or public open space.

48.       All trees and shrubs located in existing perimeter garden beds must be retained and protected.  A 1.8 m high chain mesh fence shall be erected 500mm inside the edge of the perimeter garden beds encompassing all vegetation. The tree and garden protection areas shall not be used for the storage of building materials, machinery, site sheds, or for advertising and soil levels within the tree protection areas shall remain undisturbed.

49.       The New Zealand Christmas bush must be retained and protected. A 1.8 m high chain mesh fence shall be erected a radial distance of not less than 2m from the trunk of the New Zealand Christmas bush located in the centre of the front yard. The tree protection area shall not be used for the storage of building materials, machinery, site sheds, or for advertising and soil levels within the tree protection area shall remain undisturbed.

50.       The Eucalypt tree at the rear of the site is to be retained and protected.  A 1.8 m high chain mesh fence shall be erected a radial distance of not less than 4m from the trunk of the Eucalypt tree located in the rear yard. The tree protection area shall not be used for the storage of building materials, machinery, site sheds, or for advertising and soil levels within the tree protection area shall remain undisturbed.

51.       A waterproof sign must be placed on all tree protection zones stating ‘NO ENTRY TREE PROTECTION ZONE – this fence and sign are not to be removed or relocated for the work duration.’  Minimum size of the sign is to be A3 portrait with NO ENTRY TREE PROTECTION ZONE in capital Arial Font size 100, and the rest of the text in Arial font size 65.

52.       All tree protection measures and signage must be erected PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE OR THE COMMENCEMENT OF WORKS, WHICHEVER OCCURS FIRST. This includes demolition or site preparation works, and tree protection measures must remain in place for the duration of the development, including construction of the driveway crossing.

53.       (354)  Footing, trench or excavation that is within 3m of any tree greater than  4m in height, including neighbouring trees, must be carried out using hand held tools only with no tree roots greater than 40mm diameter to be severed or damaged.

54.       (371)  There is to be no excavation, including that required for a dispersal trench,  within 4m of the Eucalypt tree located at the rear of the property.

55.       Deleted 

56.       (382)  The Applicant must ensure that there are sufficient number of groundcovers and low shrubs established in the proposed garden bed adjacent to the rear boundary line. The plant material shall be planted at appropriate distances and depths to eliminate bare mulched gardens areas within twelve (12) months of completion of all landscaping works. The plant material used shall be indigenous to the Lane Cove area.

57.       (383)  The Applicant must ensure that all landscaping is completed to a professional standard, free of any hazards or unnecessary maintenance problems and that all plants are consistent with NATSPEC specifications.

57A      Landscape planting in the rear yard of the subject site that is along the common side boundary to 69 Northwood Road is to be no greater than 2m in height.

General Engineering Conditions

58.       (A1) 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.

59.       (A2) Materials on Roads and Footpaths: Where the applicant requires the use of Council land for placement of building waste, skips or storing materials a “Building waste containers or materials in a public place” application form is to be lodged. Council land is not to be occupied or used for storage until such application is approved. 

60.       (A3) Works on Council Property: Separate application shall be made to Council's Urban Services Division for approval to complete, 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.

61.       (A4) Permit to Stand Plant: Where the applicant requires the use of construction plant on the public road reservation, an “Application for Standing Plant Permit” shall be made to Council. Applications shall be submitted and approved prior to the start of any related works. Note: allow 2 working days for approval.

62.       (A5) 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.

63.       (A6) 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. All costs associated with the relocation or removal of services shall be borne by the applicant.

64.       (A7) 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’.

65.       (A8) Council Drainage Infrastructure: The proposed construction shall not encroach onto any existing Council stormwater line or drainage easement. If a Council stormwater line is located on the property during construction, Council is to be immediately notified. Where necessary the stormwater line is to be relocated to be clear of the proposed building works. All costs associated with the relocation of the stormwater line are to be borne by the applicant.

66.       (F1) Overland Flow around Buildings To prevent stormwater from entering the building the finished habitable lower ground floor level, and the front/east end of the ground floor level of the dwelling house, must each be a minimum of 150mm above the adjacent finished ground level.

67.       (R2) Rainwater Reuse Tanks: The applicant is to install a rainwater reuse system with a minimum effective capacity of 18,000 Litres. Rainwater tanks are to be installed in accordance with Council’s rainwater tank policy and relevant Australian standards. The plumbing requirements are as follows

·     Rainwater draining to the reuse tanks is to drain from the roof surfaces only. No “on - ground” surfaces are to drain to the reuse tank.  “On - ground” surfaces are to drain via a separate system.

·     Mosquito protection & first flush device shall be fitted to the reuse tank.

·     The overflow from the rainwater reuse tank is to drain by gravity to the receiving system.

·     Rainwater tank is to be connected to all new toilets, one cold water washing machine tap and one outside tap within the development.

68.       (S1) Stormwater requirement Stormwater runoff from all impervious areas shall be collected and disposed of using the following mechanism

·     All roof areas are to drain to the reuse system with overflow to a dispersal trench

·     All other areas to drain to the dispersal trench

·     Environmental pollution control pit is to be installed just prior to the connection to the dispersal trench

The design and construction of the drainage system is to fully comply with, AS-3500 and Council's DCP-Stormwater Management. The design shall ensure that the development, either during construction or upon completion, does not impede or divert natural surface water so as to have an adverse impact upon adjoining properties.

Engineering conditions to be complied with prior to Construction Certificate

69.       (D1) Drainage Plans new: A stormwater drainage plan prepared and certified by a suitably qualified engineer is to be submitted to the principal certifying authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. The design is to be certified that it fully complies with AS-3500 and Council's DCP-Stormwater Management.

70.       (D1) Excavation greater than 1m: Where there are structures on adjoining properties including all Council infrastructures, located within 5m of the proposed excavation.

The applicant shall:-

(a)  seek independent advice from a suitably qualified engineer on the impact of the proposed excavations on the adjoining properties

(b)  detail what measures are to be taken to protect those properties from undermining  during construction

(c)  provide Council with a certificate from the engineer on the necessity and adequacy of support for the adjoining properties.

The above matters are to be completed and documentation submitted to principal certifying authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

(d)  provide a dilapidation report of the adjoining properties and Council infrastructure. The dilapidation survey must be conducted prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. The extent of the survey must cover the likely “zone of influence” that may arise due to excavation works, including dewatering and/or construction induced vibration. The dilapidation report must be prepared by a suitably qualified engineer.

A second dilapidation report, recording structural conditions of all structures originally assessed shall be submitted to the principal certifying authority prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

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

71.       (T1) Design of retaining structures: All retaining structures grater than 1m in height are to be designed and certified for construction by a suitably qualified engineer. The structural design is to comply with, all relevant design codes and Australian Standards. The design and certification shall be submitted to the principal certifying authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate

72.       (B1) Council infrastructure damage bond: The applicant shall lodge with Council a $1000.00 cash bond or bank guarantee. The bond is to cover the repair of damage to Council's roads, footpaths, kerb and gutter, drainage or other assets as a result of the development. The bond will be released upon issuing of the Occupation Certificate. If Council determines that damage has occurred as a result of the development, the applicant will be required to repair the damage. Repairs are to be carried out within 14 days from the notice. All repairs are to be carried in accordance with Council’s requirements. The full bond will be retained if Council’s requirements are not satisfied. Lodgement of this bond is required prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

73.       (C1) Erosion and Sediment Control Plan: 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 Fourth Edition 2004 Volume 1’’ prepared by LANDCOM. The plan is to be submitted to the principal certifying authority to prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

Engineering Condition to be Complied With Prior to Commencement of Construction

74.       (C2) Erosion and sediment control: The applicant shall install appropriate sediment control devices prior to the start of any works on the site. The devices are to be installed in accordance with the approved plan satisfying condition ‘(C1) Erosion and sediment control plan’. The devices shall be maintained during the construction period and replaced when necessary.

Engineering Condition to be Complied With Prior to Occupation Certificate

75.       (M2) Certificate of Satisfactory Completion:  Certificates from a registered and licensed Plumber or a suitably qualified Engineer must be obtained for the following matters. The plumber 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 the site drainage system has been constructed in accordance with the relevant Australian Standards and Council’s DCP-Stormwater Management.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.

  


Ordinary Council Meeting 19 July 2010

 

Human Services Division Report No. 27

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Human Services Division Report No. 27

Subject:          NSW Community Building Partnership Program    

Record No:    SU932 - 28270/10

Author(s):       Jane  Gornall 

 

 

Executive Summary

In June 2009, the NSW Government announced a Community Building Partnership Program.  The program provided an amount of $300,000 for building local community projects for every electoral district. There was an additional amount of $100,000 to be invested in electoral districts with high unemployment. The program is available again in 2010.

 

Applications opened on 15th June and close on 23rd July 2010.  A copy of the call for applications is attached as AT-1.

 

This report lists projects that Council might consider applying for under the NSW Community Building Program.

 

Discussion

Community Building Partnership Program (NSW Government)

 

Members of Parliament have been asked to invite applications from community groups and local Councils.  Applicants are required to demonstrate how their project will deliver positive results for their community, through job creation and community, social, recreational or environmental outcomes.

 

Successful projects will be announced in December 2010 with projects needing to be completed by December 2011.

 

Applications from Council will require the allocation of matching funds.  A copy of the Council resolution confirming commitment and funding matching the grant funding is required to be attached to the project submission form.

 

Applications from community groups do not need matching funds.

 

For the 2009 grant round  the following groups were successful:-

 

Applicant

Project Description

Funding  

Lane Cove Community Aid Service

Relocation of the front office, Lane Cove

$10,449.00

Lane Cove Music & Cultural Association

Community Centre Restoration Project

$10,000.00

Lane Cove Occasional Child Care Inc

Alterations to existing child care centre, Lane Cove

$60,000.00

Longueville Sporting Club Pty Ltd

Community Facility facelift and maintenance project

$30,000.00

 

Council provided letters of support for the last three successful applications.

 


The following range of projects are put forward for Council’s consideration for the 2010/2011 funds.

 

The first two applications are Council applications and are to be funded on a 50/50 basis. Funds are available in the relevant budgets to provide Council’s contribution to the projects.

 

Upgrade of the Kindy Cove Child Care Centre Playground - $60,000

 

Council opened the Centre in 1976  and while there have been some modifications to the playground since that time there has been no overall planning and design of new plantings for the centre. As a heavily used playground and garden the impact of thirty four years of up to 58 children five days a week is showing.

 

The Kindy Cove Management Advisory Committee has been working towards planning for an upgraded playground and garden area for some years. The total cost of the project is expected to be $120,000.  Funds have been transferred from the Kindy Cove reserves to commence work on this project in 2010/2011 with the expectation being that additional funds will be transferred from the reserves once more funding is available.  The provision of grant funds will allow for the Reserves to be retained for other purposes.

 

Bicycle Facilities - Linemarking and Signposting of Various Routes -$26,000

The highest priority areas are:-

Burns Bay Road access to the Village and access from Riverview to Figtree Bridge.

 

Joint application – From Council and the Greenwich Sports Club - Bob Campbell Oval Drainage Improvements - $20,000

 

Council has allocated an amount of $15,000 in its current budget for this project.  It is anticipated that the project will cost $40,000.  Discussions with the following groups indicate that funds up to a total of $5,000 from Greenwich Sports Club, the Greenwich Village Games Committee and KDSA (Kuringai District Soccer Association) can be provided to assist with the project.

 

The following grant application will be submitted by the Country Club:-

Lane Cove Country Club - Uplight Project  - $20,000

Estimated costs to provide energy efficient uplights to trees along the 9th fairway. The lights would enhance the natural beauty of the golf course setting when viewed at night from the clubhouse and enhance the club's appeal within the community. Council is investigating whether it would be viable for these lights to utilise solar energy.

 

Conclusion

 

The availability of these State government grants, are an opportunity for Council to undertake or bring forward works that require funding currently not available.

 

The above works are provided for Council’s consideration.  Council has not been requested to put the items for the NSW grants in priority order but may wish to do so.

 


 

RECOMMENDATION

That Council:-

1.    Write to the Lane Cove Country Club and recommend that they submit an application for the NSW Community Building Partnership Grant Funds for an amount of $20,000 being the total cost of the project.

2.    Provide a letter of support for the application for the Lane Cove Country Club.

3.    Liaise with the Greenwich Sports Club, the Greenwich Village Games Committee and KDSA (Kuringai District Soccer Association) regarding the amount of contribution that could             be provided from these organisations towards the upgrading of the drainage at the Bob     Campbell Oval.

4.    The Greenwich Sports Club, the Greenwich Village Games Committee and KDSA (Kuringai District Soccer Association) be requested to write letters of support for the application.

5.    Indicates its support for submission of the following projects and provision of matching funds for the Community Building Partnership Program (NSW) – the amount listed below is Council’s contribution:-

(i)    Upgrade of Kindy Cove Child Care Centre Playground - $60,000;

(ii)   Joint Application – Bob Campbell Oval drainage - $20,000; and

(iii)  Bicycle Facilities – linemarking and signposting of various routes - $26,000.

           

 

 

 

 

 

Jane  Gornall

Executive Manager - Human Services

Human Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

NSW Government 2010 Community Building Partnership

1 Page

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 19 July 2010

 

Human Services Division Report No. 28

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Human Services Division Report No. 28

Subject:          Federal Funding - Federal Government Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program    

Record No:    SU3237 - 28274/10

Author(s):       Jane  Gornall 

 

 

Executive Summary

The Australian Government on the 18th June, 2010 announced the third round of funding under the Regional and Community Infrastructure Program (RCLIP).  The Government has made an additional amount of $100 million dollars available.  The funds have been allocated to Councils as a one-off payment.  In this round of funding Lane Cove has been allocated an amount of $66,000.

To receive the funds, Councils must submit eligible projects to the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government (‘the Department).  Eligible projects must be additional or additional stages of current projects and represent value for money.

This Report provides additional information about the program and suggests projects for submission.

 

Discussion

Council has previously received funds for the following projects under the Regional and Community infrastructure Program:-

Round 1- total funds $188,000

a)    Gore Creek Reserve – Gore Creek picnic area - $45,000;

b)    Lane Cove Police Station – funds would cover non-budgeted items – acoustic covers, sand-pit and asbestos removal - $30,000;

c)    Northwood Ferry Shelter - $100,000 for refurbishment of the current shelter; and

d)    Plaza upgrade – additional funds to assist in the refurbishment of the Plaza - $13,000.

All of the above projects have been completed and an opening date/s is being arranged.

Round 2 – total funds $67,000

Upgrade of the area in the front of the Lane Cove Library on Longueville Road. Upgrade to include new landscaping; seats, and benches.

This project is in the planning stage with designs being prepared for community consultation. It is anticipated that all work will be completed by October 2010.

 

Guidelines

For the funding programs the guidelines make it clear that eligible projects must be additional or additional stages of current projects and represent value for money. Additional projects are those which have not been included in the local government financial budget for 2010/2011, are new or can be brought forward as a result of the RCLIP funding.  The projects must be ready to commence construction within six months of signing the Funding Agreement [contract]).

In general the funding can be spent on:-

•     social and cultural infrastructure (e.g. art spaces, gardens);

•     recreational facilities (e.g. swimming pools, sports stadiums);

•     tourism infrastructure (e.g. walkways, tourism information centres);

•     children, youth and seniors facilities (e.g. playgroup centres, senior citizens’ centres);

•     access facilities (e.g. boat ramps, footbridges); and

•     environmental initiatives (e.g. drain and sewerage  upgrades, recycling plants).

The Department’s listing of examples of community infrastructure is included in the attachments to this Report.

Funding can be used for:-

•       construction or fit-out;

•       preparatory work such as necessary engineering and geotechnical studies;

•       land surveys and site preparation; and

•       project management.

Funding is not available for activities such as ongoing costs (e.g. operational costs and maintenance), transport infrastructure, such as roads, or related infrastructure covered by the Roads to Recovery or Black Spots programs.

 For the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program  - the following timetable applies:

•     Council needs to submit project/s for funding to the Australian Government by 30th July, 2010

•     Progress Report by 1 March, 2011

•     Second progress Report by 1 September, 2011

•     Completion by 31st December, 2011 

•     Final Report by 1 February, 2012

Council has a large range of projects for which additional funding would be of assistance, however the tightness of the timetables limits the range of projects that Council can guarantee can be completed within the time constraints.

Projects for Consideration

The following suggestions including estimated costs are presented for Council’s consideration.  They are not listed in any order of preference.

For the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program - $66,000

Library Square Upgrade – additional works - $40,000

An amount of $67,000 from Round 2 of the Regional and Local Community Infrastructure Program has already been allocated to this project.  Planning for the upgrade is well underway with Community consultation being scheduled to commence late August 2010.  Stage 1 of the work is due for completion in October 2010.  The provision of additional funds would allow for the area to be upgraded to be increased to include the space around the cenotaph.

The work will include:-

·     23 panels of balustrade around cenotaph = 23 x $980 = $22,540

·     Extension to concrete slab - gaps where old entry ramp & tree pit have been removed - 56 sq m x $42 = $2,352

·     New posts & chain around cenotaph = $1000

·     2 additional seats = $4000

·     Replacement street tree with structural soil & porous paving, tree guard = $2800

·     Temporary fencing, service location, site investigations re tree roots under pavers etc = $7308

Community Centre – refurbishment of the top floor of the Community Centre into an Art Gallery space - $26,000

An amount of $120,000 has been allocated in the budget for this project. The addition of extra funding will assist with the completion of the project. The additional funds will be targeted towards installing environmentally sustainable furnishings; fittings and paint.

Conclusion

The tight deadlines for these funding programs has limited the range of projects that can be recommended to Council.  The projects brought before Council are ones that the responsible Divisions can commit to completing within the required period.

 

Council may wish to amend or vary the recommended list.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

That:-

1.    Council receive and note the Report.

2.    Council agree to the following projects being submitted to the Department of Infrastructure, Transport, Regional Development and Local Government (‘the Department’) as Council’s nominated projects for the Regional and Community Infrastructure Program (RCLIP) -

a)      Library Square Upgrade – additional works $40,000

b)      Community Centre – refurbishment of the top floor of the Community Centre into an Art Gallery space - $26,000

3.    The General Manager be delegated to amend the projects listed if it becomes clear that they will not meeting the guidelines of the funding program.

 

 

 

 

 

Jane  Gornall

Executive Manager - Human Services

Human Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Guidelines - Regional and Local Community infrastructure Program - Round 3 - 2010/11 - $100 million

10 Pages

 

 

 


Ordinary Council Meeting 19 July 2010

 

Human Services Division Report No. 29

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Human Services Division Report No. 29

Subject:          Library Fit Out Progress Report No 12    

Record No:    SU1459 - 28518/10

Author(s):       Jane  Gornall 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

This is the twelfth and final report on the progress of the fit-out of the Lane Cove Library.  The Report updates Council and the Community as to the progress of the fit-out of the Library building and celebrates the official end of the project.

 

Stage 1, the new section of the Library within the Market Square Development opened for business on 26th February 2010.

 

Stage 2, the refurbishing of the original building, commenced on 23rd February 2010 and was officially handed over to Council on Monday 5th July 2010.

 

The official opening was held on Friday 9 July with a Family Fun Day on Saturday 10th July 2010.  

 

Discussion

 

Since the last Report to Council on Monday 13th June 2010, the builders have worked hard to ensure that the older section of the Library was ready for practical completion and for the official opening date. The builders needed to hand over Stage 2 in time for the Library staff to re-occupy the area ready for commencing ‘trading’ on Saturday 10th July 2010.

 

While Stage 1 of the building had significant challenges including leaks, delays due to Mainbrace priorities, and changes in design, the old section posed its own problems.

 

The original 1924 tiled roof was found to be so fragile that in some places the sky was visible from below.  The replacement of the tiles necessitated the removal of the eaves. The eaves were asbestos and were removed by a specialised contractor.

 

The retiling of the roof delayed the works on the 3rd level of the building due to safety concerns while the roofers worked overhead. Installation of the new roof was hampered by the heavy rain that fell almost as soon as part of the roof was removed.

 

As outlined in previous reports once the floor and its supports were uncovered it was found that some areas of the floor were unsupported. There has needed to be some revision to structural design due to previously reported issues including the installation of additional joists.

 

Additional quantities of asbestos were also found once the building was empty, including under the bathroom tiles and under the carpet. All of the asbestos was removed as part of Stage 2.

 

Cost

 

As part of Council’s agreement with Woolworths/Fabcot, Council received the shell of the Library to the value of $3.3 million. The shell was exactly that, a concrete shell.

 


Council, via Buildcorp, installed the following in the building:-

·     plumbing;

·     electrical and cabling works;

·     wall linings;

·     ceiling panels and ceilings;

·     air-conditioning;

·     fire sprinklers and fire services;

·     security installation (camera and door locks);

·     computer cabinets;

·     a lift;

·     light-fittings;

·     carpets;

·     art-hanging system; and

·     built-in furniture.

 

Council on the 17th August accepted a tender from Buildcorp Interiors for the fitout of the building. The estimated time for completion was 13/3/2010, the construction time estimated by Buildcorp was the shortest provided by any of the tenderers.  While the final completion date was 5th July 2010 this was still earlier than the timelines provided by a number of the prospective tenderers.

 

While some of the final accounts are still to be received the costing for the Library is estimated to be $7,014,200.

 

An amount of $6,320,012 was spent on the physical building fit-out, including the following costs:-

·     Architects fees;

·     Development application fees; 

·     Consulting engineers costs (structural, hydraulic ,electrical and acoustical engineers);

·     Assessment of the tender documentation and tender review process;

·     Buildcorp Interiors costs;

·     Asbestos removal;

·     Replacement of the 1924 tile roof, eaves and some of the structural supports;

·     Reinforcement of the top wooden floor;

·     Extensive fire-rating between Stage 1 and 2 to ensure that fire in the construction area did not affect Stage 1;

·     Access audits;

·     Fire safety compliance reports;  and

·     Fire brigade inspections.

 

The Buildcorp Interior costs also included a range of loose furniture, the self-check machines, and clocks.

 

An amount of $526,656.72 was spent directly by the Library on Library shelving and small furniture items.

 

An amount of $341,519 was spent from the Sustainability Levy (over two years) on ensuring that the large equipment installed was more sustainable.  This included upgrading the air-conditioning system, buying green-rated carpet, and installing the solar panels on the roof of the Library.

 

There is still some areas of discussion between Council and Fabcot/Woolworths and Mainbrace about some of the defects and omissions that have occurred in regard to the building. These issues include the difference in the electricity to be provided to the Library and that delivered and payment for the concrete floor that was installed at the main floor level. The floor was raised at that level to enable Woolworths height room for their dock.

 

Library Opening

 

An official opening of the Library was held on Friday 9th July, 2010 with over 100 people attending.

 

A family fun day was held on Saturday 10th July 10 with a range of activities planned to encourage all age groups to visit the Library. The Junior Library section proved to be the centre of the day’s activities as it was the first day this section of the library had been unveiled.  At 10.00am the area near the Junior Library was filled with parents and eager children.  The ribbons cordoning off the area were cut by the Mayor, Councillor Win Gaffney ably assisted by three of the Library competition winners.  As soon as the ribbon was cut the area was full of excited children (and parents).

 

As part of preparing for the opening, the Library had run three competitions. One of which was a colouring competition for ages up to 8 years of age where participants coloured in the two  possums sitting on the tree branch. The other two were writing competitions (one for 9 - 14 years of age and one for 15 years and up) participants were asked what they liked best about Lane Cove Library.

 

The Library recorded that they had 2,668 visitors to the Library as part of the fun-day.

Staff handed out 700 balloons and anyone in Lane Cove would have seen balloons held by children everywhere.  Between 200-300 children had their faces painted outside the front of the Library. The face painting was conducted by Stringybark Child Care Centre.  “Good Health Through Food” presented by Carol Selva Rajah was attended by 20-30 observers (and tasters).  Two reptile shows were held with 200 children attending and the creative beading workshop had 55 participants.  Additionally, about 400-500 children enjoyed the activities of the juggler and magician who also created the animal balloons and the North Sydney Playgroup Association had 45 excited children attend their activities. The Association brought in Children's seating, games and activities for toddlers to have fun.

 

Two movies were screened -

·     ‘Cloudy With a Chance of Meatballs’ (for the younger set) with - 56 attendees; and

·     ‘Avatar’ with 60 attendees.

 

Annual Statistics

 

The full listing of the annual statistics for the Library will appear in July monthly report but the response of the public to the Library thus far has been excellent.

 

For the period July 2009 to June 2010 Lane Cove Libraries lent 503,607 items compared to 485,101 items the previous year. This is an increase of 18,506 items, or 3.8%. This is particularly pleasing as Lane Cove Library was closed for several weeks in February, it demonstrates the popularity of the “new” Library which opened 26th February 2010.

 

The Library is currently undertaking a user satisfaction survey which will be reported back to Council in the coming months.  The comments whether via the survey or over the desk at the Library or in the community in general have been overwhelmingly positive, the following quote is an example:-

 

‘I visited your new Library today and was very impressed. Great design, functionality and feel.

What a tremendous community asset.’

 

 

 

Conclusion

 

The opening of the Library brings to a close a project that began a significant number of years ago. The overwhelming response to the new Library has been positive with residents praising Council for its foresight in relation to the building.  People who have come to visit the Library from other areas have noted the great diversity of ages and backgrounds of people who are utilising the facility. Allied to the diversity of age patterns is that everyone seems to have found their favourite place to read the newspaper, plug in a laptop, research their family history, simply take time out, or read to their child or grandchild.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That Council receive and note the Report.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jane  Gornall

Executive Manager - Human Services

Human Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

There are no supporting documents for this report.