HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
CIVIC CENTRE, MACMAHON STREET, HURSTVILLE.
__________________________________


SUMMARY OF ITEMS CONTAINED IN THE
DIVISIONAL MANAGER - DEVELOPMENT AND HEALTH - SECTION ONE' REPORT
TO THE MEETING OF THE DEVELOPMENT, HEALTH AND PLANNING COMMITTEE
TO BE HELD ON 95 11 29TH NOVEMBER, 1995-



05:01 Ward Councillors Reports
05:01.01 71-73 Queens Road, Hurstville (192/95)
Residential Flat Building -
Modification Of Consent Section 102 Of Epa Act, 1979

05:02 Development Applications - Hurstville Ward
05:02.01 20-24 Dalcassia Street, Hurstville (191/95)
Residential Flat Building
05:02.02 37 New England Drive, Kingsgrove (222/95)
Attached Dual Occupancy

05:03 Development Applications - Penshurst Ward
05:03.01 108 Penshurst Street, Penshurst (117/95)
Detached Dual Dwellings
05:03.02 123 Morts Road, Mortdale (207/95)
Attached Dual Occupancy

05:04 Development Applications - Peakhurst Ward
05:04.01 1023 Forest Road, Lugarno (285/95)
Detached Dual Occupancy
05:04.02 30-32 Coleridge Street, Riverwood (161/95)
Residential Flat Building
05:04.03 4 Woodcliff Parade, Lugarno (189/95)
Attached Dual Occupancy
05:04.04 29 William Road, Riverwood (407/95)
Long Day Child Care Centre

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH
DIVISIONAL MANAGER - DEVELOPMENT AND HEALTH - SECTION ONE
REPORT NO 01TO THE DEVELOPMENT, HEALTH AND PLANNING COMMITTEE
TO BE HELD ON 95 11 29TH NOVEMBER, 1995-


The General Manager
Hustville City Council
The Civic Centre
HURSTVILLE

Dear Sir,

Hereunder is my report No.01 to be submitted to the DEVELOPMENT, HEALTH AND PLANNING Committee:-


05.01 WARD COUNCILLORS REPORTS



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.01.01 71-73 QUEENS ROAD, HURSTVILLE (192/95)
RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING - MODIFICATION OF CONSENT
SECTION 102 OF EPA ACT, 1979
(Report by Manager, Planning Services, Mr. M. Buckley)



Applicant : Oceanview Group
Proposal : RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING - MODIFICATION OF CONSENT SECTION 102 OF THE EPA ACT
Zoning : Zone No. 2 Residential
Residential Development
Control Plan 1994 : Development Area D
Owners : Mr H Reed, Mr E Piccolani
Existing Development : Two Residential Cottages
Cost of Development : $1,280,000

PRECIS OF REPORT

1. 14 x 2 bedroom residences (amended).

2. Redesign of driveways and drainage.

3. Easement no longer required to Hudson Street.

4. Recommendation: Approval.


Council at its Meeting held on 18 October, 1995, considered a request by the applicant to modify the "deferred commencement" consent. Council resolved "that the matter be deferred for Ward Councillors for inspection, negotiation on design and further report."

Point "B" of the deferred commencement consent on density was addressed by the report to Council held on 18 October, 1995, and is reproduced below. However, the applicant has now addressed "Point A" being the matter of the drainage easement through the adjoining properties, 67-69 Queens Road, currently the subject of a development application for residential units. The applicant for that site has altered the vehicular access to the site by widening the driveway facing Hudson Street. This has been increased to 6.0 metres to allow vehicles to enter the site without conflict with vehicles leaving the basement ramp.

Point "A" of the "deferred commencement" consent regarding drainage has been discussed with Council's Manager, Development Advice, in which he advises that natural flow under gravity can be achieved to the footpath, down the verge into Hudson Street in lieu of Queens Road. The alternative method is considered appropriate as the adjoining development proposes its access ramp in the position of the intended easement.

The report to the Council Meeting held on 18 October, 1995 is reproduced below :

The application before Council requests reconsideration to condition B of the "deferred commencement" granted by Council at its meeting of 30 August 1995.

The following conditions A and B are required to be addressed prior to the consent can operate:

A. The formal registration in the Land Titles Office of the one metre wide drainage easement through No's 67 & 69 Queens Road, to benefit No's 71-73 Queens Road, Penshurst. This is to be registered within six months of the date of this "deferred commencement" and documentary evidence is to be produced to Council within this six months.

B. The applicant is to mediate with Council with a view to reducing the density of the proposal by way of the removal of the fourth floor.

The original development application was for the establishment of 14x2 and 2x1 bedroom units. Condition B was introduced to require the applicant to mediate with Council. The applicant has now submitted amended plans which have provided for a reduction of 2x1 bedroom units and retained 2x2 bedroom units within the roof space. The basement area is reduced and the remainder of the three (3) floors are unaltered.

The issues are Bulk and the provision of landscaped area.

Bulk:

The design now utilises the roof area and provides terraces also within the roof setback away from the external wall below. The bulk of the building has been contained towards the middle of the building as opposed to a normal four storey construction.

Landscaped Area:

Adequate provision for deep landscaping is available around all boundaries for suitable screen planting. It should be noted that the applicant has given the ground floor units private courtyard areas in lieu of balconies or terraces. A condition of consent will require the private courtyards to be given over to common useage.

Assessment of Amended Plan:

I draw Council's attention to the recent Court decision made by the Honourable Mr Justice Bannon regarding the appeal of 14-16 Cairns Street, Riverwood. The issue of Height, Bulk and Density was explored by Council's consultant Town Planner, Mr T Byrnes, where he states that in his opinion, the proposal "..... did not meet the intended form of development in either documents which is 2-3 storey building with additional accommodation in the roof". Mr Justice Bannon did not "..... believe that it (14-16 Cairns Street) complies with the form of development intended by the makers of the Development Control Plan, as it contains four storeys rather than three storeys with additional accommodation in the roof". Together with Mr Justice Bannons concern of the use of ground level landscaping, this application is put to Council for consideration.

Heritage Item

The subject site adjoins the south-eastern boundary of No 75 Queens Road known as Yarra-mundi owned by the Sydney Anglican Schools Corporation. The building situated on the corner of Queens Road and The Avenue is listed on Council's Heritage Items under LEP No. 50. These provisions require Council to consider the effect of the proposed development on the heritage significance of the item and its setting.

The assessment of the proposal is such that it will have little impact on the building as the item is some 20 metres away, to the west, of the proposed flat building. As a condition of consent, the common boundary will be screened with deep landscaping to minimixe overviewing from future occupants onto the surrounding grounds belonging to the School. The grounds used by the School will not be significantly affected by overshadowing due to the location of the proposed flat building being east of the heritage item.

To acquaint Councillors with the various aspects of the original proposal, the report to the Council meeting of 30 August 1995 is reproduced below.

"Existing and Surrounding Development

The subject site consists of two allotments located on the southern side of Queens Road west of the intersection with Hudson Street. The site accommodates two single storey residences of masonry and tile roof construction with detached garages. The land has a fall of approximately 1.5m across the allotments.

The locality is a mixture of higher density 3 storey above carparking flat buildings and fibro/tin/tile cottages (such as in Hudson Street). The area is predominantly of a mixed residential character.

Section 90

The site has been inspected and the proposal examined in accordance with the provisions of Section 90 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, and the following comments are submitted for consideration.

Statutory Requirements

The subject site is zoned No: 2, Residential, under the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 1994, and the proposal is permissible within the zoning with Council consent. The proposal has been assessed against the provisions of Council's Repealed & Draft Residential Development Control Plan 1994 and is generally in compliance with the provisions of these RDCP's.

The proposal is subject to an appeal to the Land and Environment Court of N.S.W.

Proposed Development

The proposal is for the demolition of the existing cottages and the erection of a four storey residential building above basement carparking of brick and tile construction. The building will accommodate 2x1 bedroom and 14x2 bedroom units.

The allotment is an irregular shaped allotment and the proposal will provide variable distance setbacks to the adjoining property. This includes 4 metre setbacks to the southern and eastern (in order to retain existing palm trees) and a 2.7 metre setback to the south-western boundary. One large tree will be removed to the rear of the property. A front setback of 6.2 metres is proposed to the streetfront, which is approximately one metre in front of the adjoining property to the north-east.

Council currently has a development application for units at No's 67-69 Queens Road, the adjoining properties, which have a fall to Hudson Street. Should that application be approved, a condition of its consent will require those properties to provide a 1 metre wide drainage easement to benefit No's 71 & 73 Queens Road, the subject site.

Therefore, stormwater drainage for this application will be to Hudson Street by gravity via that easement.

Tabled Information


Proposed
Repealed DCP
Com
pliance
draft DCP
Rep
Dft
Site Area
963.5m2
-
-
-
Unit Density
16
n/a
-
No
9
Development Area ( D )
-
-
-
-
-
Building Height
12m
12m
Yes
Yes
12m
Private Open Space
15m2
15m2
Yes
Yes
12.5m2
Landscaped Area
445m2
433.5m2
Yes
Yes
433.5m2
Building Setbacks: Front
6.2m
5.4m
Yes
Yes
6m
Side
Rear
2.7
4m
0.9m
-
Yes
No
No
No
7m
6m
Residential Parking
16
16
Yes
Yes
16
Visitor Parking
5
4
Yes
Yes
4
Frontage
24.56 m
-
Yes
Yes
24.0 m
Comment

Side/Rear Setbacks

The application generally complies with the standards set down under the Repealed RDCP, being the Code under which the development was designed and lodged. However, consideration must be given to provisions of the Interim RDCP and in this regard the application greatly exceeds the density control of 1 per 105m2 and also cannot comply with the side/rear setback requirements, being 7 metres. To accommodate a 3 storey building on this 24.56 metre wide allotment such setbacks would reduce the building floorplate size to 249m2, or 26% of the total site, which would be an unrealistic situation for a site of this nature.

Unit Density

The proposal is for a Unit Density Yield of 16 whereas under the draft RDCP the yield at 1 per 105m2 is 9. Clearly, this 7 unit yield greater than the Interim Density Yield, is in the most part attributable to the proposed 4th floor of residences totalling 4 units. This 4th Floor is partially inset within the roofspace in order to reduce the Bulk/Scale impact to a degree this is achieved. Although the building would not be in character with the existing residences adjoining, it is noted that the locality is characterised by traditional older style 3 storey above ground level carparking residential flat buildings. These existing buildings do not offer great character to the existing streetscapes, whereas, the current proposal does provide a reasonable effort to improve the character of developments of this nature in this locality and reflects the general bulk and scale of other flat buildings. However, as part of the recommended deferred commencement for the drainage easement the applicant will be required to reduce the density, preferably by eliminating the fourth floor. The fourth floor accommodates 2 x 1 and 2 x 2 bedroom units.

Manager Building Services

The application has been referred to the Manager of Building Services who has raised no objections to the proposal subject to standard conditions and advisory notes. It is noted that the original application had deficiencies with regards to a fire rated exit from the basement carpark which has now been suitably addressed.

Manager Development Advice

The application was referred to the Manager of Development Advice who raised no objection to the proposal subject to all stormwater draining by gravity to the kerb and gutter in Hudson Street via a registered one meter wide easement, the standard onsite detention conditions and the applicant complying with Council's standard crossing requirements.

Public Notification and Comment

The proposal was advertised in the Leader and the adjoining residents were notified by letter, inviting them to view the plans and submit comments on the proposal within twenty one (21) days. One objection was registered, the concerns are outlined below.

Density

The site is not capable of accommodating 16 units. The issue of density yield has been previously addressed in this report and will form part of the consent.

Height

The proposed building will be too high to compliment the built form in locality. This issue has also been partially addressed in the "Unit Density" discussion in this report. However, it should be reiterated that the building proposed complies with the height controls of both the repealed and draft RDCP's. The major issue is in relation to bulk of the building as the proposal does not comply with the minimum side boundary setbacks under the draft RDCP. The bulk of the building does increase the extent of overshadowing of adjoining properties, however, in this instance the adjoining landowners have not objected to this development. The particular objector resides on the other side of the street in another unit development. Any overshadowing resulting would only relate to either morning or afternoon solar access to the adjoining allotments due to the northerly orientation of the allotment.

Lack of Public Facilities

The increase in population will have a further drain on public facilities in the locality. Clearly, all development takes advantage of existing public infrastructure whilst also making Section 94 Contributions to Councils for upgrading or acquisition of such facilities. In this particular case, the site is in relatively close walking distance, proximity to the Hurstville Town Centre (shopping, library, medical centres, public transport) whilst a major park is located within approximately 15 minutes walk of the site. It is contended that due to the sites' close proximity to Hurstville, that the locality is one of the more suitable sites for development.

Summary

The proposed development has been designed in accordance with the objectives and provisions of the Repealed RDCP and, short of deleting the 4th floor, cannot comply with the Draft RDCP principles relating to envelope, setback and Unit Densities. Bulk and Scale comparisons with a 3 storey above carparking residential building located directly to the south of the land would illustrate that for this particular comparison the building is of similar bulk and scale.

Therefore, it is believed that approval should be sought. However, due to the situation with the stormwater drainage, it is considered more appropriate to grant a "deferred commencement" approval, subject to the applicant registering the easement with the Land Titles Office."

Conclusion

The applicant has redesigned the proposal in light of condition B and although there is roof accommodation, the objectives of the repealed and draft Development Control Plan have been met. It is therefore recommended that the amended plans be accepted.

Overview

The applicant has attempted to alleviate difficulties in drainage and driveway access to the satisfaction of the Development and Health Division. Therefore it is recommended that the amended development application be approved subject to appropriate conditions.

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .01.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 71-73 QUEENS ROAD, HURSTVILLE (192/95)
RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING - MODIFICATION OF CONSENT
SECTION 102 OF EPA ACT, 1979
(Report by Manager, Planning Services, Mr. M. Buckley)


. Recommendation 71-73 QUEENS ROAD, HURSTVILLE (192/95)
RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING - MODIFICATION OF CONSENT
SECTION 102 OF EPA ACT, 1979
(Report by Manager, Planning Services, Mr. M. Buckley)



RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council as the consent authority, permit the modification of consent under Section 102 of the EPA Act, 1979, and grant a development consent for the establishment of a three (3) storey flat building with attic accommodation consisting of 14 x 2 bedroom units at No. 71-73 Queens Road, Hurstville, subject to the following conditions:

Compliance in all respects with Job 0170 Amended Drawing No's 1/8-6/8 tables and documentation prepared by Oceanview Group dated May, 1995, received by Council on 27 September 1995, and amended plans 2/8 and 3/8 - driveway and basement parking, submitted with DA 192/95, except where amended by the conditions of consent.

2. A Building Application being submitted to and approved by the Council in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1993, accompanied by detailed building plans, specifications, and the payment of relevant building application fees.

3. Payment to Council of a contribution pursuant to Section 94(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. The purpose of the contribution is for open space/ community recreation facilities.

The contribution is based on the criteria of any development that results in a nett increase in the City's population which will create extra demand on open space and community recreation facilities. Therefore the requirement for additional open space and embellishment of existing open space is a direct measurable consequence of the approved development.

The contribution is $40,682 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

4. Payment to Council of a contribution pursuant to Section 94(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. The purpose of the contribution is for community services and facilities.

The contribution is based on the criteria of any development that results in a nett gain of people living in the City or a change in the population structure which will create extra demand on community services and facilities.

The contribution is $4,534 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

5. The applicant to provide an on site detention (OSD) facility designed by a professional hydrological/hydraulic engineer, showing computations of the inlet and outlet hydrographs and stage/storage relationships of the proposed OSD using the following design parameters:

6. Stormwater drainage plans prepared by a qualified practising hydraulics engineer being submitted to Council with the Building Application. The layout of the proposed drainage system including pipe sizes, type, grade, length, invert levels, etc., dimensions and types of drainage pits are to be shown.

7. All stormwater is to drain by gravity (except basement level) via a pipeline located adjacent to the kerb in Queens Road such that the water exits into the gutter in Hudson Street.

8. Applicant to pay Council to:
9. In accordance with the survey plan and levels submitted by Oceanview Group, the proposed residential building shall not exceed RL 31.25 at the main ridge line.

10. The vehicular driveway and visitor car parking spaces shall be suitably constructed and sealed in material other than natural coloured concrete or bitumen and drained to Council's specifications. Footpath and crossing levels are to be obtained from the Engineering Division at a fee set by Council.

11. The ground levels of the site shall not be raised/lowered or retaining walls constructed on the boundaries unless specific details are submitted to and approved by Council at Building Application stage.

12. All building materials shall be compatible in colour and texture throughout the whole project. Details and colour of building materials shall be submitted with the Building Application.

13. The area and/or work being the subject of the development consent, shall not be occupied or the use commence until a final inspection has been made and a Certificate of Classification has been issued by Council.

14. The side and rear boundaries of the site shall be fenced with either 1.8 metre high lapped and capped paling fences (suitably stained) or 1.8 metre high colour bond metal fencing, to Council's satisfaction. This work is to be completed prior to the issue of Certificate of Classification. It is to be the responsibility of the developer to ascertain which type of fence is preferred by the adjoining property owners.

15. All access driveways, queuing areas, ramps, gradients and the like for basement and ground level parking areas are to conform with the provisions of Australian Standard AS 2890-1-1993 - Parking Facilities except where otherwise required by Council. Details are to be submitted with the Building Application for approval.

16. All car spaces shall have minimum dimensions of 2.5m X 5.5m, except for disabled spaces which shall have minimum dimensions of 3.0m X 5.5m.

17. Each proposed single garage shall have a minimum clear door jamb width of 2.7 metres. Details shall be submitted with the building application.

18. Visitor spaces to be identified on strata plan and spaces to be suitably signposted on site using metal screw-on or rivet-on type signs.

19. A minimum height between the floor surface and the lowest overhead obstruction shall be 2.1 metres for all areas traversed by cars. A minimum of 3.6 metres headroom shall be provided over all areas traversed by service vehicles.

20. The submission of a detailed landscape plan to the satisfaction of the Manager, Planning Services, with the building application. This plan is to be prepared by an approved landscape consultant. The plan is to include details of the species, size and number of all plant material, together with the surface treatment of all areas. Landscaping shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Manager, Planning Services in accordance with the approved plan prior to occupation of the building. All landscaping shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Manager, Planning Services.

Note: In addition the Landscape Plan is to identify all existing trees by Botanical and Common names, having a height which exceeds 3 metres or a girth greater than 300mm at 450 mm above ground level, and their relationship, by scale to the proposed development. NO trees are to be removed or lopped without Council approval.

21. The developer and his agents shall take all measures to prevent damage to trees and root systems during site works and construction.

22. Perimeter planting along side and rear boundaries shall be such as to provide a dense-foliaged plant screen of trees and shrubs over a broad height range to minimise the effect of the development upon adjoining development. Details are to be shown of the submitted landscape plan.

23. Compliance with the requirements of Sydney Electricity in relation to the provision of a site within the subject land for the establishment of an electricity kiosk type substation, if required for the locality. Prior to submission of building plans, the developer shall present details of the development in writing to Sydney Electricity and obtain confirmation of that authority's requirements. The kiosk site shall be dedicated at the applicant's expense for use of Sydney Electricity.

24. Where a sub-station kiosk is required, such shall be suitably located and screened, and details of screening and location shall be submitted with the landscape plans and shall be to the satisfaction of Council.

25. No burning of demolition or waste materials shall be carried out on the subject site.

26. All plumbing except stormwater downpipes and vent pipes shall be kept within the building and not exposed to public view.

27 Any trade waste containers are to be screened from public view and are not to obstruct or interfere with the use of loading and parking facilities and accessways. Such bins are to be stored within 12 metres from the front boundary.

28 Permanent power poles are to be either painted or stained with a suitable colour to the satisfaction of Council, prior to the issue of Certificate of Classification.

ADVISORY NOTES REGARDING THE SUBMISSION OF A BUILDING APPLICATION

A) The Engineers details submitted with the building application shall include shoring of excavated areas.

B) A separate WC and wish hand basin shall be provided at ground floor level in accordance with Table F2.1 of the Building Code of Australia.

C) Mechanical Exhaust and Ventilation Details shall be provided with the building plans for the basement parking and laundry/bathrooms.

D) At no time during construction shall soil building materials, equipment or refuse be deposited on Council's roadway or footpath area. Details shall be submitted with the building application indicating :

E) Egress from the basement level carpark shall be provided in accordance with Part D of the Building Code of Australia. Egress via exits shall be to a road or open space.

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.02 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS - HURSTVILLE WARD



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.02.01 20-24 DALCASSIA STREET, HURSTVILLE (191/95)
RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING
(Report by Manager, Planning Services, Mr. M. Buckley)



Applicant : Oceanview Group Pty. Ltd.
Proposal : RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING (AMENDED)
Zoning : Zone No. 2 - Residential
Residential Development
Control Plan 1994 : Development Area "D"
Owners : Mr. C. Neil
Existing Development : Residential Cottages
Cost of Development : $4,480,000

PRECIS OF REPORT

1. A total of 36 units (33 x 2 and 3 x 3 bedrooms) - Amended.

2. Previous applications :
(i) 52 units (Stage 1 and 2)
(ii) 38 units (excluding Stage 2)

3. Engineers and Building Surveyors raise no objection subject to conditions.

4. Two (2) objections received.

5. Recommendation - approval.


The application before Council seeks favourable consideration for the establishment of an amended proposal which consists of two buildings having a total number of 36 units on properties 20, 22 and 24 Dalcassia Street and 21 and 23 Gordon Street, Hurstville.

Existing and Surrounding Development

The subject site is surrounded by single dwellings and a number of three (3) level flat buildings in Dalcassia Street. Dora Street, opposite, has developed from the previous flat zone enabling flat buildings to reach Gordon Street and continue on to Pearl Street, opposite Hurstville Oval. The subject properties in Gordon Street have an unrestricted view across to Hurstville Oval. Properties on the western side of Dora Street (corner Gordon Street Nos 73-75) have had an approval from Council to construct nine (9) home units which are nearing completion.

History

The original development application for 56 units over the subject properties, with the addition of 15 and 17 Gordon Street, was lodged with Council on 12 May, 1995. However, due to the applicant failing to secure No. 19 Gordon Street, the proposal was amended to reflect the subject properties now before Council.

The applicant did submit amended plans which were advertised for 34 x 2 and 4 x 3 bedroom units, in which two (2) submissions were registered. Further mediation on the proposal took place with Council's Manager, Planning Services and Town Planning consultant Mr. Bruce Goldsmith, which resulted in a further reduction in units to 36, an increase in boundary clearances and a more acceptable building form/design.

Section 90

The site has been inspected and the proposal examined in accordance with the provisions of Section 90 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, and the following comments are submitted for consideration.

Statutory Requirements

The subject site is zoned No. 2, Residential under the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 1994, and the proposal is permissible within the zoning with Council consent. The proposal has been assessed against the provisions of Council's repealed Residential Development Control Plan 1994 and amended Interim Residential Code 1995.

Council at its Meeting held on 17 July, 1995 resolved :

"THAT applications submitted to Council prior to 13 July, 1995 be considered according to their merit using Section 90 considerations and taking into account as heads of consideration both the plan in force when submitted and the draft Multi Unit Residential Development Control Plan - 1995 on display."

Council's Planning staff have assessed the subject application and others, against this resolution of Council and the following report acknowledges this statement.

Proposed Development

The proposed development will amount to two (2) separate buildings having individual basement parking and vehicular access with three (3) levels and a fourth level within the roof space.

Building A : This building is sited on the corner of Gordon and Dora Streets with its vehicular access to basement parking off Gordon Street. Each floor will consist of four (4) units with two (2) units in the roof area. The resultant makeup of Building A is 3 x 3 and 11 x 2 bedroom units, three (3) double and eleven (11) single garages with four (4) visitor spaces.

The basement compartment observes a boundary clearance of a minimum of 3.298 metres to Gordon Street, 4.66 metres to Dora Street and 4.0 metres adjoining properties in Gordon Street on the north. This enables the provision of deep landscaping around the site for screen planting.

Building B : The building is the larger of the two and addresses both Dora and Dalcassia Street with its main pedestrian and vehicular entry off Dora Street. This building will be serviced by a lift. As with Building A, each ground floor unit has been given a designated area around the building for private courtyard. The three floors are divided each by 6 x 2 bedroom units with the roof area having 4 x 2 bedroom units. Boundary clearances of basement range from 1.1 metre (in part) to Dora Street increasing to 3.15 metres, 5.67 metres to Dalcassia Street and 2.6 to 4.7 metres common with the adjoining property.


Tabled Information

Proposed
Repealed DCP
Com
pliance
draft DCP
Rep
Dft
Site Area
2692 m2
-
-
-
-
Density
36
-
Yes
No
25.6
Development Area "D"
Building Height
12.0 m
12.0 m
Yes
Yes
12.0 m
Private Open Space: Balconies
12,0 m2
15.0 m2
No
Yes
12.0 m2
Landscaped Area
1314 m2 48.8%
45%
Yes
Yes
1211.4 m2
45%
Building Setbacks: Front
Building A
6.0/7.5 m
6.0 m
Yes
Yes
6.0 m
Building B
5.4/6.1 m
6.0 m
Yes
Yes
6.0 m
Side/rear
2.98/4.0 m
N/A
Yes
No
7.0/6.0 m
Residential Parking
39
37
Yes
Yes
37
Visitor Parking
10
10
Yes
Yes
10
Building Envelope - side
5.5m/45o
5.5m/45o
Yes
No
1.5m/45o
Frontage
26.9/39.0 m
N/A
Yes
Yes
24.0 m
Comment : Repealed DCP 1994 - The proposal complies in all respects with the repealed DCP, however, the table above indicates proposed balconies having an area of 12.0 square metres. This was altered at the request of Officers of Council to comply with the Interim Code.

Interim Code 1995 - As acknowledged earlier in the report, the application was lodged in May, 1995 under the provisions of the repealed DCP. Amendments were made at various stages of assessment through mediation to reach common ground of compliance more towards the Interim Code.

The amended proposal fails to comply with two (2) requirements of the Interim Code 1995, they are :

i) Density

The proposal consists of 36 units where the Interim Code restricts unit numbers to 25. Although the proposal complies numerically with the repealed code and the majority of the interim code, the density has been determined in line with other previous residential flat buildings approved by Council, i.e., that is an acceptable density of a minimum of 70 square metres. The proposal achieves a density of 74.7 square metres which is quite adequate in terms of accommodating affordable housing within Hurstville and other transport model centres serviced by an existing infrastructure.

ii) Side Boundary Setbacks

The proposal would not achieve a 7.0 metre clearance to the side boundaries. However, it should be mentioned that due to the subject sites having three (3) street frontages, there is only, in theory, one side boundary i.e., on the east side. This runs from Dalcassia Street to Gordon Street, adjacent to the existing two (2) single storey dwellings currently zoned "D" and capable of being redeveloped. The proposed setback on the eastern boundary of 2.98 metres to Building B is for a total building length of 18.0 metres (2 x 9m) of kitchen and living areas over a boundary length of 39.77 metres. The remainder of the building observes a 4.0 metre alignment to this boundary and complies with the repealed DCP. Any future redevelopment on these side boundaries to each adjacent allotment would ideally have a greater building setback to take advantage of the north-western aspect.

Manager, Building Services (South)

The matter was referred to the building surveyor for assessment against the provisions of the Building Code of Australia. No objection is raised subject to the appropriate conditions and advisory notes to be addressed by the applicant on submission of a building application.

Manager, Development Advice

No objection is raised subject to conditions regarding on-site detention, splayed corners and new driveways.

Public Notification and Comment

The proposal was advertised in the "St. George and Sutherland Shire Leader" and adjoining residents were notified by letter and given twenty-one (21) days in which to view the plans and submit any comments on the proposal. Two (2) submissions were registered and their concerns are outlined below :

It should be pointed out to Councillors that the advertised plans at the time were for 4 x 3 and 34 x 2 bedroom units. As a result of mediation, the applicant has further reduced the unit numbers by 1 x 3 and 1 x 2 bedroom units now having a proposal of 36 units.

i) "There is no four storey buildings in Dora Street and the construction of them will create a negative precedent."

Comment : The repealed DCP permitted attic space above three (3) levels. The original plans failed to comply with this requirement and did provide a fourth level. The amended plans comply with the original objectives, that of roof space with a finished building height similar to existing flat buildings in the immediate area. For Council's information the 1989 code for Flat Buildings allowed a maximum height of 10.5 metres to the eaves, in which case after a 22o pitch roof, on average, raised the finished height a further 2.0 metres. In this case the overall building height is 12.0 metres.

ii) "Appearance of two multi storey buildings will negatively affect local environment as it will increase traffic in Dora Street, air pollution, noise. The high buildings will block the sun for the ground and first level units in the buildings on the opposite side of Dora Street, most of trees on the proposed construction site will be removed and that will not contribute to creation of healthy climate."

Comment : It is acknowledged that there will be an increase in traffic, however, the existing volume of traffic in Dora Street is as such that the proposal will not detrimentally burden the street and the surrounding street system. With regard to noise and air quality, noise would be contained generally within the building and the subject site. Air quality is at present out of Council's control and is a State and Federal issue.

The buildings are placed on the subject site enabling all units to have some sunlight at various times of the day. Morning shadows in mid-winter will be cast on the western side of Dora Street affecting a number of ground and first floor units, however, this is early morning and such shadowing would diminish as midday approaches.

There is little vegetation on site worthy of retaining. The Gordon Street property is occupied by a Jacaranda tree however, site works may see the tree removed. The remaining site area is a mixture of small shrubs and exotic species. As part of any consent granted by Council a detailed landscaped plan is required to be submitted at the building application stage for approval.

Summary

The subject site has the benefit of three (3) street frontages which enables the building form to address each street. As a result it is therefore suggested that important parts of the proposed buildings such as corners should be articulated to give some interest and acknowledge each corner site. The corners in question are Gordon/Dora Streets and Dalcassia/Dora Streets. A condition of consent will require the applicant to submit a redesign of these specific corners for the building application and be approved by the Manager, Planning Services.

The amended proposal put forward by the applicant has merit with regard to design and livable floor space. The location of the subject site (like others approved by Council in Dora, Carrington and Bond Streets) has the advantage of an existing infrastructure consisting of community facilities, retail/office centre, Hurstville Oval and surrounding passive and active parks.

Council's interim Residential Development Code 1995, for Development Area "D" encourages .... "high density housing forms in localities in close proximity to public transport and community services." Furthermore the proposal provides the opportunity for compatible infill development ensuring no sites are isolated.

Although the proposal has attic space for a total of six (6) units the overall height of each building is within the maximum 12.0 metres and be similar in height with existing flat buildings.


Therefore it is recommended that the amended proposal as submitted, be approved subject to conditions.


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .02.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 20-24 DALCASSIA STREET, HURSTVILLE (191/95)
RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING
(Report by Manager, Planning Services, Mr. M. Buckley)


. Recommendation 20-24 DALCASSIA STREET, HURSTVILLE (191/95)
RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING
(Report by Manager, Planning Services, Mr. M. Buckley)



RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council as the consent authority grant development consent for the establishment of two (2) separate residential flat buildings totalling 36 units (33 x 2 and 3 x 3 bedrooms) on land known as 21-23 Gordon Street and 20 - 24 Dalcassia Street, Hurstville, subject to the following conditions :

1. Compliance in all respects with Amended Drawing Nos 1-7/7 Job No. 2023 tables and documentation prepared by Oceanview Group Pty. Ltd., dated 14 November, 1995 and submitted with DA 191/95, except where amended by the conditions of consent.

2. A Building Application being submitted to and approved by the Council in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1993, accompanied by detailed building plans, specifications, and the payment of relevant building application fees.

3. The hours of work on the site during demolition of the existing building or excavation of the site and construction of the proposed building shall be limited to the hours of 7 am to 5 pm Monday to Saturday inclusive with no work on Sundays, Good Friday, Christmas Day or Public Holidays.
PLEASE NOTE : A separate application for demolition work is required to be lodged with Council for approval prior to the commencement of the work.

4. Payment to Council of a contribution pursuant to Section 94(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. The purpose of the contribution is for open space/ community recreation facilities.

The contribution is based on the criteria of any development that results in a nett increase in the City's population which will create extra demand on open space and community recreation facilities. Therefore the requirement for additional open space and embellishment of existing open space is a direct measurable consequence of the approved development.

The contribution is $108,063 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

5. Payment to Council of a contribution pursuant to Section 94(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. The purpose of the contribution is for community services and facilities.

The contribution is based on the criteria of any development that results in a nett gain of people living in the City or a change in the population structure which will create extra demand on community services and facilities.

The contribution is $12,045 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

6. The applicant to provide an on site detention (OSD) facility designed by a professional hydrological/hydraulic engineer, showing computations of the inlet and outlet hydrographs and stage/storage relationships of the proposed OSD using the following design parameters:

* For events up to a 2% annual exceedance probability (AEP) design event as defined by Australian Rainfall and Runoff (May 1987), maximum peak site discharge resulting from the development shall not be greater than peak site discharge under existing conditions for all durations up to the time of concentration with OSD included and of the same AEP.

* Where the stormwater discharge points are connected to the street gutter system, the peak flow from the site shall not increase the width of gutter flow by more than 200mm at the design storm.

* The OSD facility shall be designed to meet all safety requirements and childproof safety fencing around the facility must be provided where the OSD facility is open or above ground when the design peak storage depth is greater than 300mm.

7. Stormwater drainage plans prepared by a qualified practising hydraulics engineer being submitted to Council with the Building Application. The layout of the proposed drainage system including pipe sizes, type, grade, length, invert levels, etc., dimensions and types of drainage pits are to be shown.

8. All stormwater is to drain by gravity to the kerb and gutter in Gordon Street.

9. A 1m wide easement to drain water is to be created over the subject site to benefit the lands adjoining the eastern boundary known as 16 & 18 Dalcassia Street to allow their stormwater to be drained to the kerb and gutter in Gordon Street. The easement is to be registered prior to occupation of the dwelling or with any plan of subdivision prior to issue of a Building Certificate. Where the easement is located under a proposed garage the developer is to pipe that portion of the easement to the satisfaction of Council.

10. In accordance with the survey plan and levels submitted by Oceanview Group Pty. Ltd., the proposed flat buildings A and B shall not exceed RL 68.35 and 70.15 at the main ridge line.

11. The vehicular driveway and visitor car parking spaces shall be suitably constructed and sealed in material other than natural coloured concrete or bitumen and drained to Council's specifications. Footpath and crossing levels are to be obtained from the Engineering Division at a fee set by Council.

12. The ground levels of the site shall not be raised/lowered or retaining walls constructed on the boundaries unless specific details are submitted to and approved by Council at Building Application stage.

13. All building materials shall be compatible in colour and texture throughout the whole project. Details and colour of building materials shall be submitted with the Building Application.

14. The area and/or work being the subject of the development consent, shall not be occupied or the use commence until a final inspection has been made by Council and a Certificate of Classification has been issued.

15. The side and rear boundaries of the site shall be fenced with either 1.8 metre high lapped and capped paling fences (suitably stained) or 1.8 metre high colour bond metal fencing, to Council's satisfaction. This work is to be completed prior to the issue of Certificate of Classification. It is to be the responsibility of the developer to ascertain which type of fence is preferred by the adjoining property owners.

16. Specific details are to be submitted for approval with the building application that indicates the finished height, materials and ground levels of any front fencing to Gordon Street, Dora Street and Dalcassia Street.

17. All access driveways, queuing areas, ramps, gradients and the like for basement and ground level parking areas are to conform with the provisions of Australian Standard AS 2890-1-1993 - Parking Facilities except where otherwise required by Council. Details are to be submitted with the Building Application for approval.

18. All car spaces shall have minimum dimensions of 2.5m X 5.5m, except for disabled spaces which shall have minimum dimensions of 3.0m X 5.5m.

19. Each proposed single garage shall have a minimum clear door jamb width of 2.7 metres. Details shall be submitted with the building application.

20. All entry and exit points and one or two way circulation movements are to be clearly signposted to the satisfaction of Council.

21. The dedication to Council of a 3m x 3m splay to Gordon Street/Dora Street and Dalcassia Street/Dora Street for the purpose of road widening. The dedication shall be registered prior to the issue of a Building Certificate.

22. Applicant to pay Council to
a) Replace all redundant crossings with kerb and gutter
b) Replace the brick kerb and gutter in both Dora Street and Gordon Street with 150mm high kerb and gutter at the correct levels.
c) Resheet the road shoulders to match this new kerb and gutter.
d) Replace the old 1.22 metre wide concrete path in Dora Street with a 1.52 metre wide by 800mm thick concrete path.
Quote given on request.
OR
Construction of the above work by the applicant subject to:
a) This work being carried out in accordance with Council's conditions and specifications.
b) Payment of Council's administration fee.

23. Visitor spaces to be identified on strata plan and spaces to be suitably signposted on site using metal screw-on or rivet-on type signs.

24. A minimum height between the floor surface and the lowest overhead obstruction shall be 2.2 metres for all areas traversed by cars. A minimum of 3.6 metres headroom shall be provided over all areas traversed by service vehicles.

25. The submission of a detailed landscape plan to the satisfaction of the Manager, Planning Services, with the building application. This plan is to be prepared by an approved landscape consultant. The plan is to include details of the species, size and number of all plant material, together with the surface treatment of all areas. Landscaping shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Manager, Planning Services in accordance with the approved plan prior to occupation of the building. All landscaping shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Manager, Planning Services.

Note: In addition the Landscape Plan is to identify all existing trees by Botanical and Common names, having a height which exceeds 3 metres or a girth greater than 300mm at 450 mm above ground level, and their relationship, by scale to the proposed development. NO trees are to be removed or lopped without written Council approval.

26. Perimeter planting along the north-eastern boundaries shall be such as to provide a dense-foliaged plant screen of trees and shrubs over a broad height range to minimise the effect of the development upon adjoining development. Details are to be submitted on the landscape plan to Council for approval.

27. Compliance with the requirements of Sydney Electricity in relation to the provision of a site within the subject land for the establishment of an electricity kiosk type substation, if required for the locality. Prior to submission of building plans, the developer shall present details of the development in writing to Sydney Electricity and obtain confirmation of that authority's requirements. The kiosk site shall be dedicated at the applicant's expense for use of Sydney Electricity.

28. Where a sub-station kiosk is required, such shall be suitably located and screened, and details of screening and location shall be submitted with the landscape plans and shall be to the satisfaction of Council.

29. No burning of demolition or waste materials shall be carried out on the subject site.

30. All plumbing and vent pipes shall be kept within the building and not exposed to public view.

31. Any trade waste containers are to be screened from public view and are not to obstruct or interfere with the use of loading and parking facilities and accessways. Such bins are to be stored within 12 metres from the front boundary. The structure housing the bins is to be designed to reflect the approved building. Details are to be submitted with the building plans.

32. Permanent power poles are to be either painted or stained with a suitable colour to the satisfaction of Council, prior to the issue of Certificate of Classification/Building Certificate.

33. The applicant is to amend the building design at the corner of Gordon/Dora Street (Building A) and Dalcassia/Dora Streets (Building B) to address the dominance to Dora Street by articulation of the design. Details are to be submitted with the building application after consultation with Council's Manager, Planning Services.

34. All Council's street trees are to be protected during construction and appropriate measures of protection are to be submitted with the landscape plan.

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.02.02 37 NEW ENGLAND DRIVE, KINGSGROVE (222/95)
ATTACHED DUAL OCCUPANCY
(Report by Town Planner, Mr. C. King)



Applicant : Oceanview Group
Proposal : ATTACHED DUAL OCCUPANCY
Zoning : Zone No. 2 - Residential
Residential Development
Control Plan 1994 : Development Area "C"
Owners : S. & M. Najem
Existing Development : Residence
Cost of Development : $220,000

PRECIS OF REPORT

1. Proposed two storey attached townhouses, each four (4) bedrooms.

2. Stormwater drainage to New England Drive.

3. Nine (9) objections received.

4. Recommendation - approval.



Existing and Surrounding Development

The site is located on the eastern side of New England Drive within close proximity of Peter Lowe Reserve. The site is presently encumbered by a 1.22 metre wide drainage easement along the southern boundary.

Erected on site is a single storey brick and tile cottage which will be demolished to enable the proposed development. A number of mature trees are located across the rear boundary of the allotment and these are proposed to be retained.

The adjoining premises are predominantly brick and tile cottages. The property to the north is two storey whilst those to the south and east are single storey. The locality is predominantly one of a single and two storey residential character.

Section 90

The site has been inspected and the proposal examined in accordance with the provisions of Section 90 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, and the following comments are submitted for consideration.

Statutory Requirements

The subject site is zoned No. 2, Residential under the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 1994, and the proposal is permissible within the zoning with Council consent. The proposal has been assessed against the provisions of Council's repealed Residential Development Control Plan 1994 and amended Interim Residential Code.

Proposed Development

The proposal is to demolish an existing residence on the land and to erect in its stead an attached dual occupancy building. The building shall be two storey brick and tile construction accommodating 2 x 4 bedroom dwellings.

The building is designed to accommodate a single garage with a second carpark space accommodated within the driveway. The design provides for the retention of existing mature trees along the rear boundary.


Although the design provides garages at the streetfront, it proposes panelled doors, which when combined with staggered unit facade promotes an acceptable streetfront facade. The building is partially excavated, approximately 0.5 metres and will satisfactorily drain to the existing stormwater pipeline at the rear of the land.


Tabled Information


Proposed
Repealed DCP
Com
pliance
draft DCP
Rep
Dft
Site Area
597.3 m2
-
-
-
-
Density
2
-
-
No
1.89
Development Area "C"
Building Height
8.2 m
9.5 m
Yes
Yes
9.0 m
Private Open Space:
55.0 m2
60.0 m2
No
No
60.0 m2
Landscaped Area
306.0 m2
299.0 m2
Yes
Yes
299.0 m2
Building Setbacks: Front
5.7 m
5.1 m
Yes
Yes
4.5 m
Side/rear
1.2 m
0.9 m
Yes
No
2.0 m
Residential Parking
4
(2 stack)
4
Yes
Yes
4
Frontage
16.765 m
N/A
-
No
24.0 m
Comment : Private Courtyard - The proposed development does not provide a 60 square metre courtyard of continuous area, for Unit 1. The proposed courtyard is 55 square metres. The required area for the courtyard may be easily achieved by bringing forward to the street Unit 1 by 0.7 metres. This would then achieve a rear courtyard of 60 square metres and retain a 5.5 metre carspace within the driveway. It is recommended that should the development be approved that this 0.7 metre relocation be imposed conditionally.

Side Boundary Setbacks - The proposal does not provide side boundary setbacks in accordance with the new standards proposed under the draft RDCP. The proposal does, however, comply with the building envelope controls of both the repealed and draft RDCP.

The side boundary setbacks are adequate under the Building Code of Australia and are considered acceptable in this instance.

Density - The subject application was lodged in May, 1995 prior to the repeal of the RDCP. The site area is 597.3 square metres, being 33 square metres less than is required by Council's interim density control of one per 315 square metres. This represents a 5% variation on the land area requirement for two units. Considering that this development was originally submitted under the original RDCP it is considered reasonable to accept a 5% variation.

Manager, Building Services (South)

The matter was referred to the building surveyor for assessment against the provisions of the Building Code of Australia. No objection is raised subject to the submission of a building application and the relocation of a streetfront drainage culvert clear of the proposed driveways.

Manager, Development Advice

This matter was referred to the Manager, Development Advice who raised no objections to the development subject to standard conditions.

Public Notification and Comment

Adjoining residents were notified by letter and given fourteen (14) days in which to view the plans and submit any comments on the proposal. Nine (9) submissions were registered and their concerns are outlined below :

i) Overshadowing

Adjoining southern property has objected to overshadowing. The proposed building will significantly overshadow the adjoining southern property during winter, to the extent that the site will be overshadowed in some form at any time during the day in winter. In winter the rear yard of the adjoining lot will receive morning sun but the northern wall of this property will only receive late afternoon sun. As the subject land is on the northern side of the adjoining property overshadowing is unavoidable, as this would be the case even should the subject proposal have been for a single two storey residence.

Planning consultants acting on behalf of property owner No. 35 brought to Council's attention the inconsistencies with the applicant's shadow diagram during 9.00 am and 3.00 pm on 22 June (winter). The applicant who was already advised by Council officers of this discrepancy, submitted amended plans which were compared with the planning consultant's shadows. As a result both sets of plans were similar with the exception of the 9.00 am shadow extending further over the adjoining site as depicted by the consultant's plans. However, the impact of overshadowing by the proposal is quite clear in both cases.

ii) Privacy/Overlooking

Concerns are raised at the proposed first floor balconies which provide opportunity to overlook adjoining properties. This objection is well founded and it is recommended that should Council determine to approve the development that the design be amended to :

a) Remove the master bedroom balconies to Units 1 and 2 as they are setback from the street behind the adjoining property building lines resulting in privacy concerns.

b) The rear balcony for bedrooms 3 and 4 in Unit 2 be reduced in size to an area east only of bedroom 4 and that the southern side of the balcony be screened from adjoining property.

iii) DCP Objectives

Concerns raised that the proposal does not comply with the objectives of Development Area "B" under the RDCP. It is noted that the subject site is in a "C" area and is consistent with the objectives of the Interim Residential Code 1995

iv) Building Envelope

Objection that building does not fit within the envelope. Calculations show that the building, which includes 0.5 metre excavation, complies with the RDCP envelope control.

v) Private Courtyard/Open Space

It is argued that the proposal does not provide 60 square metres of private open space with acceptable dimensions. As previously discussed, Unit 1 falls short of the 60 square metres, however, this can be achieved by reducing the streetfront setback for this unit.

The total 50% landscaped area requirement is achieved.

vi) Building Form/Streetscape

It is argued that the building design is not complimentary to the streetscape. It is noted that the streetscape is typical of this locality being 1950's and 1960's style brick and tile single storey residences. However, in this immediate area the adjoining allotment to the north accommodates a part two storey residence which overshadows the subject land and one allotment further north is also a new two storey residence nearing completion. It is considered that the proposed building will not be out of character with the existing streetscape built form.

vii) Subdivision Covenants

Objections were raised to the development on the basis of 1920 covenants placed on the subdivision which restricted development to single dwellings. Pursuant to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, Council's are not held responsible to consider covenants over land that were created between the purchasers and sellers. LEP 1994, Clause 24 states that the operation of any covenant, restriction, agreement or similar instrument shall not apply to development.

Summary

The building, as designed, generally conforms with the requirements of the draft and repealed RDCP's. Although the development will result in overshadowing of No. 35 New England Drive to the south it is considered the development has merit and is recommended for approval.




HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .02.02
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 37 NEW ENGLAND DRIVE, KINGSGROVE (222/95)
ATTACHED DUAL OCCUPANCY
(Report by Town Planner, Mr. C. King)


. Recommendation 37 NEW ENGLAND DRIVE, KINGSGROVE (222/95)
ATTACHED DUAL OCCUPANCY
(Report by Town Planner, Mr. C. King)



RECOMMENDATION


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.03 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS - PENSHURST WARD



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.03.01 108 PENSHURST STREET, PENSHURST (117/95)
DETACHED DUAL DWELLINGS
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. T. Christy)



Applicant : Patricia Walker
Proposal : DETACHED DUAL DWELLING
Zoning : Zone No. 2 - Residential
Residential Development
Control Plan 1994 : Development Area "B"
Owners : Patricia Walker
Existing Development : Single Dwelling
Cost of Development : $$80,000

PRECIS OF REPORT

1. Detached dual dwellings.

2. Front dwelling is heritage listed under Council's LEP 1994.

3. Proposal requires a pump-out for the driveway and rear dwelling.

4. No objections received.

5. Proposal complies with the objectives of Council's repealed RDCP 1994 and Council's Interim Residential Code 1995 and its amendments.

6. Recommendation - approval.


Existing and Surrounding Development

The site currently has a single cottage which forms part of a semi-detached dwelling. It is identified in Council's LEP as a heritage item and has also been given a classification type "A" for heritage significance in Council's Heritage Study dated 1988.

The land itself slopes to the rear and a 150mm sewer pipe traverses the site towards the rear.

History


24/3/95Development application lodged. Applicant advised that additional information is required.
24/4/95Amended plans received.
11/5 - 25/5/95Adjoining owners/residents notified of proposal.
June, 1995Letter received from adjoining resident stating they were not interested in granting a stormwater easement.
3/7/95Applicant advised of repeal of Council's RDCP and the subsequent backlog of development applications.
7/8/95Applicant advised to redesign the rear dwelling for privacy reasons.
14/8/95Heritage Branch of Department of Urban Affairs and Planning notified of the proposal.
9/11/95Final drainage plans received

Section 90

The site has been inspected and the proposal examined in accordance with the provisions of Section 90 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, and the following comments are submitted for consideration.

Statutory Requirements

The subject site is zoned No. 2, Residential under the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 1994, and the proposal is permissible within the zoning with Council consent. The proposal has been assessed against the provisions of Council's repealed Residential Development Control Plan 1994 and is amended Interim Residential Code.

Proposed Development

The proposal is for the erection of a single storey detached three bedroom dwelling at the rear of the site. Vehicular access for both dwellings is via a common driveway (partly existing) along the northern boundary with a proposed garage, with an opening of 3.04 metres, for the rear dwelling and the use of an existing carspace for the front dwelling to allow sufficient manoeuvring area. Along the length of the front dwelling the driveway is only 2.4 metres wide, paved, with an additional 600mm planting. It is believed special consideration should be given to this narrow width due to the narrow width of the site and the fact that the front house has heritage significance. Also, the car from the rear dwelling will be able to come and go in a forward manner.

Private open space for both dwellings is located on the northern side of each dwelling.

Due to the slope of the land, the proposal is for a pump-out system for the rear dwelling and driveway with the front dwelling draining its roofwater to Penshurst Street by gravity. The applicant had approached the owners of the property to the rear, requesting a drainage easement. The required easement had been valued at $30,000 and the owners to the rear were advised of this. However, they stated that "no amount of compensation would be adequate for us to allow this stormwater easement through our property."

The applicant has tried to limit the impact on the privacy of adjoining residents by splitting the rear dwelling and lowering the rear portion by 530mm. This adds some character to that residence and lowers the dining/living and kitchen areas.

To ensure the proposal reaches the 45% landscaping for single storey development, it is suggested that the design of the return-bay for the rear garage is slightly altered. At present there is a large expanse of paving parallel to the rear boundary which is not necessary. The bay itself has only to extend 2.0 metres parallel to the rear boundary instead of the proposed 3.61 metres and can start 1.0 metre south of the north-western side boundary instead of from the boundary. Details can be shown with the building application and this will reduce the amount of hard surface proposed.


Tabled Information

Proposed
Repealed DCP
Com
pliance
draft DCP
Rep
Dft
Site Area
702.0 m2
-
Yes
Yes
630.0 m2
Density
2
-
Yes
Yes
2.2
Development Area ( B )
Building Height
5.0 m
9.5 m
Yes
Yes
6.0 m
Private Open Space:
54m2 - 96m2
50 - 60 m2
Yes
Yes
50 - 60 m2
Landscaped Area
325.13 m2
(46%)
351 m2
(45%)
No
Yes
315 m2
(45%)
Building Setbacks: Front
5.5 m
5.5 m
Yes
Yes
4.5 m
Side/rear
0.95/7.99 m
-/-
Yes/Yes
No/Yes
1.35/ -
Residential Parking
2
2
Yes
Yes
2
Building Envelope - front
3.5m x 45o
3.5m x 45o
Yes
Yes
3.5m x 45o
- rear
3.5m x 45o
3.5m x 45o
Yes
Yes
1.5m x 45o
Frontage
10.71 m
-
Yes
No.
15.0 m
Comment : Repealed RDCP - The proposal complies with all requirements under the repealed RDCP apart from the total landscaping requirement. The proposal provides 46.3% which is 26 square metres short.

However, on 23 August, 1995, Council adopted an amendment to the Interim Code which allows a 5% reduction of total landscaping if all dwellings are single storey. Since both dwellings are single storey and the existing dwelling is a heritage item which should be maintained as it is, it is considered reasonable that Council allow this 5% reduction policy to be adopted for this proposal.

Interim Residential Code - The proposal generally complies with the objectives of the Interim Code, i.e., single storey detached dwellings. However, it does not comply with the following three (3) criteria :

i) Side setback to the proposal varies from 950 mm to 3.86 metres on the north-western side and 2.0 metres on the south-eastern side, whereas the Interim Code requires 1.35 metres. It is only a length of 7.9 metres that is less than the required 1.35 metres and this is along the north-western side with only a toilet window and laundry door, so will have little impact on the adjoining residents.

ii) Building envelope at the side of the site - the proposal complies with 3.5 metre height under the repealed RDCP but not the 1.5 metre height and 45o under the Interim Code. The structure in question is only 7.9 metres in length on the north-western boundary.

iii) Street Frontage - the proposed site is 10.71 metres wide instead of the required 15.0 metres. However, the application was originally lodged under the repealed RDCP which had no minimum frontage so a concession should be given in this instance, especially since the proposal generally complies with the requirements of the Interim Code, no objections were received, and it will have a minimal impact on adjoining residents. Further to note, an approval was granted on 2 November, 1994 for a similar dual occupancy at No. 106 Penshurst Street (next door) which has the exact same frontage and the front house forms the other half of the heritage semi-detached building.

Manager, Building Services (North)

The proposal was referred to the appropriate building surveyor who raised no objections provided stormwater could be adequately drained and an OSD. facility could be provided.

Manager, Development Advice

No objections were raised by the Manager, Development Advice provided OSD. is provided, roofwaters from the existing dwelling drain by gravity to the kerb and gutter in Penshurst Street whilst the remaining stormwater from the site is pumped to the same kerb and gutter and the standard conditions regarding crossings are adhered to.

Public Notification and Comment

Adjoining residents were notified by letter and given fourteen (14) days in which to view the plans and submit any comments on the proposal. No submissions were registered.

Summary

The proposed dual occupancy complies with the objectives of both the repealed RDCP 1994 and the amended Residential Code 1995. The applicant has endeavoured to lessen any impacts on adjoining residents by stepping the rear of the rear dwelling and also providing generous setbacks to the rear and southern boundaries.

No response was received from the Heritage Branch so it is assumed that they concur with the development. It is generally believed that the applicant has preserved the heritage nature of the site. Therefore recommendation is for approval.


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .03.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 108 PENSHURST STREET, PENSHURST (117/95)
DETACHED DUAL DWELLINGS
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. T. Christy)


. Recommendation 108 PENSHURST STREET, PENSHURST (117/95)
DETACHED DUAL DWELLINGS
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. T. Christy)



RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council as the consent authority grant development consent for the establishment of a detached single storey dual occupancy at No. 108 Penshurst Street, Penshurst, subject to the following conditions :

1. Compliance in all respects with Drawing No RL 950305 tables and documentation prepared by Roger M. Lee dated 23 March and amended 8 August, 1995 and submitted with DA 117/95, except where amended by the conditions of consent.

2. A Building Application being submitted to and approved by the Council in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1993, accompanied by detailed building plans, specifications, and the payment of relevant building application fees.

3. The hours of work on the site during demolition of the existing building or excavation of the site and construction of the proposed building shall be limited to the hours of 7 am to 5 pm Monday to Saturday inclusive with no work on Sundays, Good Friday, Christmas Day or Public Holidays.
PLEASE NOTE : A separate application for demolition work is required to be lodged with Council for approval prior to the commencement of the work.

4. Payment to Council of a contribution pursuant to Section 94(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. The purpose of the contribution is for open space/ community recreation facilities.

The contribution is based on the criteria of any development that results in a nett increase in the City's population which will create extra demand on open space and community recreation facilities. Therefore the requirement for additional open space and embellishment of existing open space is a direct measurable consequence of the approved development.

The contribution is $2,119 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

5. Payment to Council of a contribution pursuant to Section 94(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. The purpose of the contribution is for community services and facilities.

The contribution is based on the criteria of any development that results in a nett gain of people living in the City or a change in the population structure which will create extra demand on community services and facilities.

The contribution is $236 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

6. The applicant to provide an on site detention (OSD) facility designed by a professional hydrological/hydraulic engineer, showing computations of the inlet and outlet hydrographs and stage/storage relationships of the proposed OSD using the following design parameters:

* For events up to a 5% annual exceedance probability (AEP) design event as defined by Australian Rainfall and Runoff (May 1987), maximum peak site discharge resulting from the development shall not be greater than peak site discharge under existing conditions for all durations up to the time of concentration with OSD included and of the same AEP.

* Where the stormwater discharge points are connected to the street gutter system, the peak flow from the site shall not increase the width of gutter flow by more than 200mm at the design storm.

* The OSD facility shall be designed to meet all safety requirements and childproof safety fencing around the facility must be provided where the OSD facility is open or above ground when the design peak storage depth is greater than 300mm.

7. Stormwater drainage plans prepared by a qualified practising hydraulics engineer being submitted to Council with the Building Application. The layout of the proposed drainage system including pipe sizes, type, grade, length, invert levels, etc., dimensions and types of drainage pits are to be shown.

8. Roofwaters from the existing dwelling to drain by gravity to the herb and gutter in Penshurst Street, the remaining stormwater from the site to be "pumped" to the same kerb and gutter. Details are to be submitted with the building application

9. In accordance with the survey plan and levels submitted by Roger M. Lee, the proposed single storey dwelling shall not exceed 5.0 metres at the main ridge line.

10. The vehicular driveway and visitor car parking spaces shall be suitably constructed and sealed in material other than natural coloured concrete or bitumen and drained to Council's specifications. Footpath and crossing levels are to be obtained from the Engineering Division at a fee set by Council.

11. The ground levels of the site shall not be raised/lowered or retaining walls constructed on the boundaries unless specific details are submitted to and approved by Council at Building Application stage.

12. All building materials shall be compatible in colour and texture throughout the whole project. Details and colour of building materials shall be submitted with the Building Application.

13. The building and or work being the subject of the development consent shall not be occupied until a final inspection has been carried out by Council and a Building Certificate issued.

14. The side and rear boundaries of the site shall be fenced with either 1.8 metre high lapped and capped paling fences (suitably stained) or 1.8 metre high colour bond metal fencing, to Council's satisfaction. This work is to be completed prior to the issue of Certificate of Classification. It is to be the responsibility of the developer to ascertain which type of fence is preferred by the adjoining property owners.

15. Each proposed single garage shall have a minimum clear door jamb width of 2.7 metres. Details shall be submitted with the building application.

16. If the existing crossing is damaged during the construction of the rear dwelling, applicant is to pay Council to construct a 100mm thick concrete crossing reinforced with F72 mesh.
Quote given on request.
OR
Construction of the above work by the applicant subject to:
a) This work being carried out in accordance with Council's conditions and specifications.
b) Payment of Council's administration fee.

17. No approval is expressed or implied to the subdivision of the subject land or dwelling/s. For any future Torrens/Strata subdivision, a separate Development Application is required to be submitted to and approved by Council.

18. Should the applicant wish to subdivide the subject dual dwelling at a later date, the relevant authorities are to be contacted regarding their requirements prior to laying any cables or services; Australian Gas Light Company, Telecom and the Sydney Water Board.

19. Payment to Council for an additional garbage service on occupation of the new dwelling. For relief from the second garbage service the landowner shall signify, in writing, that one service is sufficient for the approved dual dwelling developments on the site and that there is no intention to seek approval for a subdivision of the lands by way of a strata subdivision or the like.

20. The vehicular driveway and visitor car parking spaces shall be suitably constructed and sealed in material other than natural coloured concrete or bitumen and drained to Council's specifications. Footpath and crossing levels are to be obtained from the Engineering Division at a fee set by Council.

21. The site being landscaped with trees and shrubs to the satisfaction of Council's Development and Health Division, prior to the issue of a Building Certificate.
NOTE: No trees are to be removed or lopped without written approval from Council.

22. No burning of demolition or waste materials shall be carried out on the subject site.

23. All plumbing and vent pipes shall be kept within the building and not exposed to public view.

24. Permanent power poles are to be either painted or stained with a suitable colour to the satisfaction of Council, prior to the issue of Certificate of Classification/Building Certificate.

25. The return bay for the rear garage is to be reduced in size to allow marginally more landscaping and reduce the amount of paved surface, but also to retain sufficient manoeuvrability out of that garage. Details are to be shown with the building application for approval.

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.03.02 123 MORTS ROAD, MORTDALE (207/95)
ATTACHED DUAL OCCUPANCY
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. I. Yap)



Applicant : Robert Hodge Constructions
Proposal : ATTACHED DUAL OCCUPANCY
Zoning : Zone No.2 - Residential
Residential Development
Control Plan 1994 : Development Area B
Owners : Tyrone Hodge
Existing Development : Vacant
Cost of Development : $190,000

PRECIS OF REPORT

1. 2 x 3 bedroom two storey dwellings.

2. Stormwater to drain by gravity to Sydney Water pipeline.

3. Building and Engineering Departments have no objections.

4. No submissions were received from adjoining owners.

5. Submitted under repealed DCP.

6. Recommendation: Approval


Section 90

The site has been inspected and the proposal examined in accordance with the provisions of Section 90 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, and the following comments are submitted for consideration.

Statutory Requirements

The subject site is zoned No. 2, Residential under the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 1994, and the proposal is permissible within the zoning with Council consent. The proposal has been assessed against the provisions of Council's repealed Residential Development Control Plan 1994 and draft Multi Unit Residential Development Control Plan.

Existing and Surrounding Development

The existing site currently is vacant and totalled approximately 465 sq. metres in area. It has a 24.82m street frontage and an easement which accommodates Sydney Water Controller stormwater pipeline which cuts diagonally across the rear yard. Particular constraints exist on the site due to the positioning of three large trees and the shape of the land.

Proposed Development

The proposal is to erect 2 x 3 bedroom attached townhouses both fronting Morts Road.

The new dwelling is to be of brick and tile construction and is in line with adjoining neighbouring developments.

Previous plans submitted by the applicant were amended due to the fact that the building is too bulky in its appearance. The roof form has been changed with the reduction in pitch and the second storey layout of the second dwelling is concealed behind the first dwelling.

Each dwelling will have a private courtyard at the back of the site. Extensive landscaping is proposed for privacy purposes.


Tabled Information

Proposed
Repealed DCP
Com
pliance
draft DCP
Rep
Dft
Site Area
465m2
-
-
-
-
Density
2
n/a
-
no
1.5
Development Area B
Building Height
7.6m
9.5m
yes
yes
9m
Private Open Space:
60m2
60m2
yes
yes
60m2
Landscaped Area
232m2
232m2
yes
yes
232m2
Building Setbacks: Front
3.5m
3m
yes
no
4.5m
Side/rear
0-4m
0.9m
no
no
2m
Residential Parking
2
2
yes
yes
2
Frontage
24.82m
n/a
-
yes
15m
Comment:

Density: Under the draft Residential Development Control Plan, the site has insufficient area to accommodate two dwellings at the rate of one per 315m2. This application was lodged in May 1995 under the repealed Development Control Plan under which no density requirement applied.

Side Boundary Setback Under the draft Residential Development Control Plan, a minimum side setback of 2 metres is required to side boundaries where a two storey building is proposed. The proposal does not comply with this requirement on the ground floor where garage wall/s being parallel at the boundaries, whilst the second storey section is set back at 1.7 metres. Although the whole building is not set back to 2 metres, the building is at a height of only 7.6 metres and is well within the building envelope.

In regard to the walls of the garages, it should be noted that Council may resolve to approve a wall of a Class 1 building extending closer than 900mm to an adjoining boundary alignment it if meets with the siting requirements of the Local Government (Approval) Regulation 1993 - Clause 57 (2). The proposal complies with the requirements of Clause 57 (2) in that the wall does not contain windows and it is considered impracticable to require strict compliance because of the conditions of the site and provisions of dead space which could not be used for private courtyard area.

Under the provisions of the repealed Residential Development Control Plan, (Pge. 37) it is stated that "walls without windows may be built to side boundaries where the maximum height is 3 metres..., maximum length is 35% of each abutting property boundary, maximum length of the wall does not exceed 10m and etc. ..." It is in this instance that the encroachment is considered in compliance with the development control. The encroachment of the 4.5 metre building line under the draft DCP is required to clear the easement at rear. The encroachments are only by the corners of the proposed building.

No real impact on the adjacent residence is envisaged from these encroachments. Furthermore, no objections were received from the adjoining owners when notification took place in August 1995.

Manager, Building Services

The application was referred to the Manager, Building Services, who raised no objections to the development, however, raised the issue of the garage wall being less than 900mm from the boundary (abovementioned) and removal of existing significant trees.

The proposal will result in a loss of two trees which are in poor health. Council's Tree Inspector was asked to comment on the proposal and investigate the matter and has concluded that the Eucalyptus situated at the south-western corner be retained.

Manager, Development Advice

The applicant was referred to the Manager, Development Advice who raised no objections to the proposal subject to conditions in regard to all stormwater, Section 94 contribution and vehicular crossing.

Public Notification and Comment

Adjoining residents were notified by letter and invited to view the plans and submit comments on the proposal within fourteen (14) days. No objections were registered.

In Summary

Apart from minor inconsistencies with the RDCP, which have been addressed elsewhere, the amended proposal is considered acceptable. Approval is therefore recommended.



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .03.02
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 123 MORTS ROAD, MORTDALE (207/95)
ATTACHED DUAL OCCUPANCY
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. I. Yap)


. Recommendation 123 MORTS ROAD, MORTDALE (207/95)
ATTACHED DUAL OCCUPANCY
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. I. Yap)



RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council as the consent authority allow the garage wall to extend closer than 900mm to an adjoining boundary alignment and allow the establishment of a two storey brick/tile attached dual occupancy at No. 123 Morts Road, Mortdale, subject to the following standard conditions.

1. Compliance in all respects with amended Drawing tables and documentation prepared by Norman Molica dated 17.10.95 and submitted with DA 207/95, except where amended by the conditions of consent.

2. A Building Application being submitted to and approved by the Council in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1993, accompanied by detailed building plans, specifications, and the payment of relevant building application fees.

3. The hours of work on the site during demolition of the existing building or excavation of the site and construction of the proposed building shall be limited to the hours of 7 am to 5 pm Monday to Saturday inclusive with no work on Sundays, Good Friday, Christmas Day or Public Holidays.
PLEASE NOTE : A separate application for demolition work is required to be lodged with Council for approval prior to the commencement of the work.

4. Payment to Council of a contribution pursuant to Section 94(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. The purpose of the contribution is for open space/ community recreation facilities.

The contribution is based on the criteria of any development that results in a nett increase in the City's population which will create extra demand on open space and community recreation facilities. Therefore the requirement for additional open space and embellishment of existing open space is a direct measurable consequence of the approved development.

The contribution is $2,967 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

5. Payment to Council of a contribution pursuant to Section 94(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. The purpose of the contribution is for community services and facilities.

The contribution is based on the criteria of any development that results in a nett gain of people living in the City or a change in the population structure which will create extra demand on community services and facilities.

The contribution is $331 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

6. Payment to Council of a contribution pursuant to Section 94 (1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. The purpose of the contribution is for the provision of drainage services.

The contribution is based on the criteria of any development that results in a nett gain of people living in the City or a change in the population structure which will create extra demand on drainage services.

The contribution rate for Georges River catchment is $1.77 per square metre of gross land area of the subject site. The amount is $823.05 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

7. Stormwater drainage plans prepared by a qualified practising hydraulics engineer being submitted to Council with the Building Application. The layout of the proposed drainage system including pipe sizes, type, grade, length, invert levels, etc., dimensions and types of drainage pits are to be shown.

8. All stormwater to drain by gravity to the Sydney Water Controller stormwater pipeline which cuts diagonally across the rear yard. All connections to this pipeline to be to Sydney Water's conditions.

9. In accordance with the survey plan and levels submitted by Roger Boxall, Registered Surveyor, the proposed dwelling/s shall not exceed RL 16.7 at the main ridge line as measured vertically from any nominated point from natural ground level to the roof line directly above that point.

10. The vehicular driveway and visitor car parking spaces shall be suitably constructed and sealed in material other than natural coloured concrete or bitumen and drained to Council's specifications. Footpath and crossing levels are to be obtained from the Engineering Division at a fee set by Council.

11. The ground levels of the site shall not be raised/lowered or retaining walls constructed on the boundaries unless specific details are submitted to and approved by Council at Building Application stage.

12. All building materials shall be compatible in colour and texture throughout the whole project. Details and colour of building materials shall be submitted with the Building Application.

13. The side and rear boundaries of the site shall be fenced with either 1.8 metre high lapped and capped paling fences (suitably stained) or 1.8 metre high colour bond metal fencing, to Council's satisfaction. This work is to be completed prior to the issue of Certificate of Classification. It is to be the responsibility of the developer to ascertain which type of fence is preferred by the adjoining property owners.

14. The building and or work being the subject of the development consent shall not be occupied until a final inspection has been carried out by Council and a Building Certificate issued.

15. Applicant to pay Council to construct a new 100mm thick concrete vehicular crossing unreinforced. Quote given on request.
OR
Construction of the above work by the applicant subject to:
a) This work being carried out in accordance with Council's conditions and specifications.
b) Payment of Council's administration fee.

16. No approval is expressed or implied to the subdivision of the subject land or dwelling/s. For any future Torrens/Strata subdivision, a separate Development Application is required to be submitted to and approved by Council.

17. Payment to Council for an additional garbage service on occupation of the new dwelling. For relief from the second garbage service the landowner shall signify, in writing, that one service is sufficient for the approved dual dwelling developments on the site and that there is no intention to seek approval for a subdivision of the lands by way of a strata subdivision or the like.

18. Should the applicant wish to subdivide the subject dual dwelling at a later date, the relevant authorities are to be contacted regarding their requirements prior to laying any cables or services; Australian Gas Light Company, Telecom and the Sydney Water Board.

19. Provision is to be made for separate electricity and drainage services if a future subdivision application is to be made to Council.

20. The submission of a detailed landscape plan to the satisfaction of the Manager, Planning Services, with the building application. This plan is to be prepared by an approved landscape consultant. The plan is to include details of the species, size and number of all plant material, together with the surface treatment of all areas. Landscaping shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Manager, Planning Services in accordance with the approved plan prior to occupation of the building. All landscaping shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Manager, Planning Services.

Note: In addition the Landscape Plan is to identify all existing trees by Botanical and Common names, having a height which exceeds 3 metres or a girth greater than 300mm at 450 mm above ground level, and their relationship, by scale to the proposed development. NO trees are to be removed or lopped without written Council approval.

21. No burning of demolition or waste materials shall be carried out on the subject site.

22. Permanent power poles are to be either painted or stained with a suitable colour to the satisfaction of Council, prior to the issue of Certificate of Classification/Building Certificate.

23. The eucalyptus tree at approximately 15 metres in height situated at the south-western corner of the subject site is to be retained.

24. The developer and his agents shall take all measures to prevent damage to the eucalyptus tree (Condition No. 23) and root systems during site works and construction.

ADVISORY NOTES REGARDING THE SUBMISSION OF A BUILDING APPLICATION

A) Occupancies are to be separated by construction achieving a FRL not less than 60/60/60 and extend to the underside of the roof covering and carport construction is to comply with specification C1.9 of the Building Code of Australia.

B) Details of boundary wall constructions which indicate future maintenance can be carried out from within the property shall be submitted with the building application.

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.04 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS - PEAKHURST WARD



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.04.01 1023 FOREST ROAD, LUGARNO (285/95)
DETACHED DUAL OCCUPANCY
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. I. Yap)



Applicant : A. & N. Marouche
Proposal : DETACHED DUAL OCCUPANCY
Zoning : Zone No. 2 - Residential
Residential Development
Control Plan 1994 : Development Area "A"
Owners : A. & N. Marouche
Existing Development : Brick Cottage
Cost of Development : $110,000

PRECIS OF REPORT

1. Construction of a single storey dwelling with a bedroom in the roof space.

2. Stormwater drainage to Forest Road.

3. Creation of a 1.0 metre wide drainage easement to benefit No. 1015A Forest Road, at the rear.

4. Five (5) objections were received.

5. Recommendation - approval.


Existing and Surrounding Development

The subject land is located on the north-eastern side of Forest Road approximately 400 metres from Boggywell Creek. Existing on site is a single storey brick cottage with a tile roof, having a setback of 6.0 metres from the street frontage.

There are two (2) large trees at the back of the site, both are in poor health and are to be removed. The adjoining land is characterised by a similar housing style, generally of single storey construction. Lugarno Public School is approximately 100 metres away to the west whilst local stores are a five minute walk.

The land falls 1.43 metres from the left t the right and steeply towards the street gutter.

Section 90

The site has been inspected and the proposal examined in accordance with the provisions of Section 90 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, and the following comments are submitted for consideration.

Statutory Requirements

The subject site is zoned No. 2, Residential under the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 1994, and the proposal is permissible within the zoning with Council consent. The proposal has been assessed against the provisions of Council's repealed Residential Development Control Plan 1994 and amended Interim Residential Code.

Proposed Development

The proposal is to maintain an existing one storey house with additional construction of a single garage below ground level and the erection of a single storey dwelling with rooms in the roof space at the rear of the site. A new carport is to be provided towards the front of the site for the rear dwelling in between the western boundary and the existing building. The new dwelling will accommodate two (2) bedrooms at ground floor level, lounge, dining, kitchen, foyer, a study (which could easily be converted to a bedroom) a storage area below natural ground level and a bedroom within the roof space.

A private courtyard is orientated to the north for greater solar access and extensive landscaping is proposed at all of the front, side and back of the existing building for privacy purposes.


Tabled Information

Proposed
Repealed DCP
Com
pliance
draft DCP
Rep
Dft
Site Area
642.96 m2
-
-
-
-
Density
2
-
-
Yes
2
Development Area "A"
Building Height
7.7 m
9.5 m
Yes
No
6.0 m
Private Open Space:
72/93 m2
70 m2
Yes
No
100 m2
Courtyard Dimension
6x8 m
5x6 m
Yes
Yes
5x6 m
Landscaped Area
354.5 m2
353.63 m2
Yes
Yes
353.63 m2
Building Setbacks: Front
6.0 m
6.0 m
Yes
Yes
4.5 m
Side/rear
1.0 m
0.9 m
Yes
No
1.35 m
Residential Parking
4 Stacked
4
Yes
Yes
4
Building Envelope - front
3.5 x 45o
3.5 x 45o
Yes
Yes
3.5 x 45o
- rear
3.5 x 45o
3.5 x 45o
Yes
No
1.5 x 45o
Frontage
15.24 m
N/A
Yes
Yes
15.0 m
Comment : Private Open Space - Under the draft RDCP a total minimum area of 100 square metres private open space is required for a dwelling containing three (3) or more bedrooms. It is to be noted that this application was lodged in June, 1995 under the repealed RDCP where only an area of 70 square metres applied.

Setbacks - The proposal complies with the previous side boundary setback requirements under the repealed RDCP. However, under the draft RDCP the minimum required setback is 1.35 metres and the proposal is for 1.0 metre. As the proposal appears as a single storey dwelling and is in compliance with the previous building envelope, the 1.0 metre setback is considered adequate. The proposed distance complies with the statutory 900mm clearance under the Local Government Act 1993.

Building Envelope - The proposal does not comply with the draft RDCP due to Council's decision to adopt a new rear building envelope of 1.5 x 45 degrees. This new envelope is significantly less than the existing envelope which starts at a height of 3.5 metres.

Building Height - The repealed Code permitted attic space within rear single storey dwellings. Such dwellings were limited to a 9.5 metre building envelope. The Interim Code now restricts all development in Areas "A" to single storey. It is considered that as no dormer windows face the rear boundary privacy is maintained for No. 1015A Forest Road.

Manager, Building Services (South)

The matter was referred to the building surveyor for assessment against the provisions of the Building Code of Australia. No objection is raised subject to the submission of a building application.

Manager, Development Advice

The application was referred to the Manager, Development Advice who raised no objections to the proposal subject to standard conditions and the creation of a stormwater easement to benefit No. 1015A Forest Road, Lugarno.

Public Notification and Comment

Adjoining residents were notified by letter and given fourteen (14) days in which to view the plans and submit any comments on the proposal. Five (5) submissions were registered and their concerns are outlined below :

i) Closeness of the development to the side and rear fence line

Comment : It is to be noted that a 900mm side boundary setback is acceptable under the draft RDCP and Local Government Act 1993 for a detached building under Class 1. The Interim Code requires 1.35 metres for the rear boundary and with the proposal observing 1.0 metre, this is considered acceptable.

ii) Privacy

The objector has indicated that there are three (3) windows located adjacent to the western side of the adjoining property boundary which could overlook their backyards.

Comment : A meeting was held with Mr. Marouche (owner) on 7 November, 1995 to discuss the possibility of removing the western living area window and increasing the level of the dining room window so that it has a minimum sill height of 1.5 metres. These alterations will, in effect, reduce the potential of overlooking.

Mr. Marouche had agreed to remove the eastern lounge window, however requested that the dining window remain as proposed. Dining rooms and bedrooms are habitable areas which do not have a major impact on the neighbouring privacy. However, it is recommended that should the application be approved, a condition be imposed that trees be planted along the eastern boundary to alleviate the extent of overlooking risks.

iii) Devaluation of neighbouring properties

Comment : Concerns in regard to this dual occupancy development devaluing other properties is speculative and is not a reflection of any prospective purchaser's view. Land values may well increase rather than decrease when the surrounding property owners realised the potential of their site for additional development.

iv) Height

Comment : In terms of height, a number of two and three storey dwellings exist directly opposite the subject site, one being at No. 1 McManus Place, Lugarno. The proposed finished height of the development is approximately 7.7 metres, and although 1.6 metres above the maximum 6.0 metre height restriction under the Interim Code, no windows face the western side or rear boundaries to compromise privacy to adjoining residents. The velux window in the roof on the eastern elevation is considered acceptable for light and ventilation to a bedroom.

v) Shadowing effect

Comment : The objection was made by a property owner who resides two blocks away from the subject site. There is approximately 15 metres separation between the proposed development and the neighbouring objector's building.

The properties located to the east and west will be overshadowed. However, this will be restricted to either afternoon or morning, but not for prolonged periods of the day.

vi) External appearance of the development

Comment : The proposed materials of the building are to be brick and concrete roof which is considered compatible in colour and texture with the surrounding neighbourhood buildings. Apart from the new carport, only a small glimpse of the new building at the back portion of the subject property could be seen from Forest Road. In terms of whether the development is aesthetically pleasing or not, the building is considered satisfactory.

Summary

The development is generally in accordance with the provisions of the repealed and Interim RDCP's. Subject to minor design changes to remove the western living room window, the development is considered acceptable. Therefore it is recommended that approval be granted.


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .04.02
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 1023 FOREST ROAD, LUGARNO (285/95)
DETACHED DUAL OCCUPANCY
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. I. Yap)


. Recommendation 1023 FOREST ROAD, LUGARNO (285/95)
DETACHED DUAL OCCUPANCY
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. I. Yap)



RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council as the consent authority grant development consent for the erection of a single storey brick veneer building detached dual occupancy at No. 1023 Forest Road, Lugarno, subject to the following conditions :

1. Compliance in all respects with Drawing tables and documentation prepared by NGM Design & Construction dated June, 1995 and submitted with DA 285/95, except where amended by the conditions of consent.

2. A Building Application being submitted to and approved by the Council in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1993, accompanied by detailed building plans, specifications, and the payment of relevant building application fees.

3. The hours of work on the site during demolition of the existing building or excavation of the site and construction of the proposed building shall be limited to the hours of 7 am to 5 pm Monday to Saturday inclusive with no work on Sundays, Good Friday, Christmas Day or Public Holidays.
PLEASE NOTE : A separate application for demolition work is required to be lodged with Council for approval prior to the commencement of the work.

4. Payment to Council of a contribution pursuant to Section 94(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. The purpose of the contribution is for open space/ community recreation facilities.

The contribution is based on the criteria of any development that results in a nett increase in the City's population which will create extra demand on open space and community recreation facilities. Therefore the requirement for additional open space and embellishment of existing open space is a direct measurable consequence of the approved development.

The contribution is $2,967 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

5. Payment to Council of a contribution pursuant to Section 94(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. The purpose of the contribution is for community services and facilities.

The contribution is based on the criteria of any development that results in a nett gain of people living in the City or a change in the population structure which will create extra demand on community services and facilities.

The contribution is $331 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

6. Payment to Council of a contribution pursuant to Section 94 (1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. The purpose of the contribution is for the provision of drainage services.

The contribution is based on the criteria of any development that results in a nett gain of people living in the City or a change in the population structure which will create extra demand on drainage services.

The contribution rate for Georges River catchment is $1.77 per square metre of gross land area of the subject site. The amount is $1,138 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

7. Stormwater drainage plans prepared by a qualified practising hydraulics engineer being submitted to Council with the Building Application. The layout of the proposed drainage system including pipe sizes, type, grade, length, invert levels, etc., dimensions and types of drainage pits are to be shown.

8. All stormwater to drain by gravity to the kerb and gutter in Forest Road.

9. In accordance with the survey plan and levels submitted by J. P. Bates & H Wood, the proposed single dwelling shall not exceed RL 73.19 at the main ridge line.

10. The vehicular driveway and visitor car parking spaces shall be suitably constructed and sealed in material other than natural coloured concrete or bitumen and drained to Council's specifications. Footpath and crossing levels are to be obtained from the Engineering Division at a fee set by Council.

11. The ground levels of the site shall not be raised/lowered or retaining walls constructed on the boundaries unless specific details are submitted to and approved by Council at Building Application stage.

12. All building materials shall be compatible in colour and texture throughout the whole project. Details and colour of building materials shall be submitted with the Building Application.

13. The side and rear boundaries of the site shall be fenced with either 1.8 metre high lapped and capped paling fences (suitably stained) or 1.8 metre high colour bond metal fencing, to Council's satisfaction. This work is to be completed prior to the issue of Certificate of Classification. It is to be the responsibility of the developer to ascertain which type of fence is preferred by the adjoining property owners.

14. The building and or work being the subject of the development consent shall not be occupied until a final inspection has been carried out by Council and a Building Certificate issued.

15. Applicant to pay Council to construct a 100mm thick unreinforced
Quote given on request.
OR
Construction of the above work by the applicant subject to:
a) This work being carried out in accordance with Council's conditions and specifications.
b) Payment of Council's administration fee.

16. A 1m wide easement to drain water is to be created over the subject site to benefit the lands adjoining the rear boundary known as 1015A Forest Road to allow their stormwater to be drained to the kerb and gutter in Forest Road. The easement is to be registered prior to occupation of the dwelling or with any plan of subdivision prior to issue of a Building Certificate. Where the easement is located under a proposed garage the developer is to pipe that portion of the easement to the satisfaction of Council.

17. No approval is expressed or implied to the subdivision of the subject land or dwelling/s. For any future Torrens/Strata subdivision, a separate Development Application is required to be submitted to and approved by Council.

18. Payment to Council for an additional garbage service on occupation of the new dwelling. For relief from the second garbage service the landowner shall signify, in writing, that one service is sufficient for the approved dual dwelling developments on the site and that there is no intention to seek approval for a subdivision of the lands by way of a strata subdivision or the like.

19. Should the applicant wish to subdivide the subject dual dwelling at a later date, the relevant authorities are to be contacted regarding their requirements prior to laying any cables or services; Australian Gas Light Company, Telecom and the Sydney Water Board.

20. Provision is to be made for separate electricity and drainage services if a future subdivision application is to be made to Council.

21. The submission of a detailed landscape plan to the satisfaction of the Manager, Planning Services, with the building application. This plan is to be prepared by an approved landscape consultant. The plan is to include details of the species, size and number of all plant material, together with the surface treatment of all areas. Landscaping shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Manager, Planning Services in accordance with the approved plan prior to occupation of the building. All landscaping shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Manager, Planning Services.

Note: In addition the Landscape Plan is to identify all existing trees by Botanical and Common names, having a height which exceeds 3 metres or a girth greater than 300mm at 450 mm above ground level, and their relationship, by scale to the proposed development. NO trees are to be removed or lopped without written Council approval.

22. No burning of demolition or waste materials shall be carried out on the subject site.

23. Permanent power poles are to be either painted or stained with a suitable colour to the satisfaction of Council, prior to the issue of Certificate of Classification/Building Certificate.

24. Each proposed single garage shall have a minimum clear door jamb width of 2.7 metres. Details shall be submitted with the building application.

25. The western window servicing the living room above ground floor is to be removed. Details are to be submitted with the building application.

26. Planting along the western side boundary adjacent to the proposed development will be such as to provide a dense-foliaged screen over a broad height to minimise the effect of overlooking of the development upon adjoining development. Details are to be submitted on the landscape plan to Council for approval.

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.04.02 30-32 COLERIDGE STREET, RIVERWOOD (161/95)
RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. T. Christy)



Applicant : K & H Johnson
Proposal : RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING
Zoning : Zone No. 2 - Residential
Residential Development
Control Plan 1994 : Development Area "D"
Owners : Mr. & Mrs. Arnold and Mr. & Mrs. Pejovski
Existing Development : Two Single Storey Dwellings
Cost of Development : $1,000,000

PRECIS OF REPORT

1. Amended plans for fourteen (14) residential units, reduced from an original application of fifteen (15).

2. Mediation process involved to reduce the number of units and the size of the building.

3. Complies with Council's repealed RDCP and objectives of the Interim Code.

4. No objections from Manager, Building Services or Manager, Development Advice.

5. Three (3) objections received.

6. Recommendation - approval.


Existing and Surrounding Development

The subject site is located on the corner of Nettleton Avenue and Coleridge Street, Riverwood. It has a gradual fall across the site towards Nettleton Avenue as well as sloping to the rear, away from Coleridge Avenue.

Presently, there exists two detached single storey residences which front Coleridge Street with the dwelling on the corner having a detached fibro garage. A number of fibro outbuildings exist over the site. Parallel to the rear boundary, for a width of 3.05 metres, there is a Council easement for drainage and a right-of-way.

The property to the rear is developed by way of a single fibro residence, whilst the adjoining side property (No. 34) is a two storey brick residence.




History


28/4/95DA lodged for three storey residential units consisting of 15 units and basement parking
30/5/95Adjoining owners/residents notified of application for 21 days
17/8/95Applicant advised to amend application for numerous reasons. This was a result of extensive assessment and taking into account Council's draft MURDCP and previous application
Early SeptemberAmended plans received where minor alterations had been made including moving basement further to the rear, increases to setbacks from Nettleton Street, decreasing the height and marginally increasing the deep landscaping areas. This proposal still involved 15 units.
26/9/95Applicant advised that this proposal was not adequate, particularly when comparing it to similar ones. Applicant advised to delete 2-3 units.
10/11/95Amended application received for a three storey residential flat building consisting of a total of 14 x 2 bedroom units with basement parking.
The "attic" space has been deleted, the rear setback of the main wall has been increased by 1.0 metre and the basement area has decreased. The elevations have less impact than the original application due to the decrease in roof space and the side and rear elevations generally limited to bedrooms. Therefore it was not considered necessary to re-notify adjoining owners

Section 90

The site has been inspected and the proposal examined in accordance with the provisions of Section 90 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, and the following comments are submitted for consideration.

Statutory Requirements

The subject site is zoned No. 2, Residential under the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 1994, and the proposal is permissible within the zoning with Council consent. The proposal has been assessed against the provisions of Council's repealed Residential Development Control Plan 1994 and amended Interim Residential Code.

Proposed Development

The amended proposal is for the establishment of a three storey residential flat building consisting of 14 x 2 bedroom units with basement parking. Five (5) units are located on the ground and first floor, with four (4) units on the second floor.

The applicant has tried to minimise the impact onto adjoining residences by locating only one (1) balcony per floor to overlook adjoining properties. The other balconies front either Coleridge Street and/or Nettleton Avenue. Unfortunately, north is to the rear of the site, so the units located in the north-western corner need to have those balconies and their kitchen windows facing north. All other overlooking windows are bedrooms.

The applicant has tried to address the corner of the two streets by stepping the top floor around the corner and providing a large terrace area for that unit. This helps reduce the bulk of the building on the corner. Pedestrian access is split with the front units (to Coleridge Street) on each floor sharing a common stairwell and the three units to the rear on each floor sharing a second common stairwell.

Deep screening landscaping is proposed along the front and rear boundaries, as well as the northern half of the western side boundary. Smaller plants are proposed along the eastern boundary fronting Nettleton Avenue. Full details will be given with the building application should the application be approved.


Tabled Information

Proposed
Repealed DCP
Com
pliance
draft DCP
Rep
Dft
Site Area
965.1 m2
-
Yes
No
1740 m2
Density
14
-
Yes
No
9
Development Area "D"
Building Height
12.0 m
12.0 m
Yes
Yes
12.0 m
Private Open Space:
12.0-13.75m2
15.0 m2
No
Yes
12.0 m2
Landscaped Area
450.0 m2
434 m2
Yes
Yes
434 m2
Building Setbacks: Front
5.0/6.0 m
4.5 m
Yes
Yes
6.0 m
Side/rear
3.4-4.0 /
3.5-4.5 m
- / -
Yes/Yes
No/No
4-7/6.0m
Residential Parking
14
14
Yes
Yes
14
Visitor Parking
4
4
Yes
Yes
4
Building Envelope
5.5m/45o
5.5m/45o
Yes
No
1.5m/45o
Frontage
24.3 m
-
Yes
Yes
24.0 m
Comment : - Repealed RDCP - The proposal complies with all of the requirements of the repealed RDCP, with the exception of the size of the balconies. These were modified during the mediation process to comply with the draft Code and to help reduce the overall bulk of the building and increase setbacks from boundaries.

Draft RDCP - The proposal generally complies with the objectives of the draft, but fails to meet the numerical standards in the following issues :

» density requirement - The proposal is for five (5) units more than that permitted under the density, however the applicant has mediated extensively with Council officers and deleted units which were located in the attic and were permissible under the repealed RDCP which was in force when this application was lodged. Therefore this is considered an appropriate compromise between the two codes since the amended proposal achieves a density of 69 square metres per unit based on site area has adequate landscaping surrounding the units and is a design which minimises the overlooking of adjoining residences. (In actual floor area the units are between 76 and 109 square metres)

» Building Envelope and Side Setbacks - The proposal does not comply with the new building envelope, due to the envelope only extending 1.5 metres from natural ground level before starting the 45 degree angle. This non-compliance is a result of the side setbacks being encroached by 600mm on the ground and first floors and 3.6 metres on the third level.

Manager, Building Services (South)

The matter was referred to the building surveyor for assessment against the provisions of the Building Code of Australia. No objection is raised subject to the submission of a building application.

Manager, Development Advice

No objections were raised provided the standard conditions for stormwater disposal and crossings are adhered to. It is further stated that the applicant is to extinguish the existing 3.05 metre wide right-of-way and drainage easement located adjacent to the rear boundary. Also, the applicant is to create and register a 1.0 metre wide stormwater easement parallel and adjacent to the rear boundary to benefit Nos. 36 and 38 Coleridge Street.

Public Notification and Comment

The original proposal was advertised in the "St. George and Sutherland Shire Leader" and adjoining residents were notified by letter and given twenty-one (21) days in which to view the plans and submit any comments on the proposal. Two (2) submissions were registered during the notification period and one (1) was received two weeks later. Their concerns are outlined below :

i) High level of traffic that will be generated as well as the increase in on-street parking. There is already a high amount of traffic which uses Coleridge Street and Nettleton Avenue.

Comment : It is expected that some increase in traffic will occur, however, the proposal provides one car space per dwelling and four (4) visitor spaces on-site, in accordance with Council's repealed RDCP 1994 and Council's Interim Code 1995 Also because the site is on a corner, traffic is not congested in one street alone.

ii) The nature of the environment will be changed from low density to high.

Comment : Council has rezoned this section of Coleridge Street for residential flat buildings due to the close proximity to shops and railway station. The intent of the rezoning is to increase the residential density in areas that are close to facilities/services and which can cope with the increased demands.

iii) Decrease in privacy

Comment : It is true that privacy of adjoining properties will be affected, however the applicant has tried to minimise this impact by locating most of the balconies and living areas to the streets.

Summary

The applicant has tried to reach a compromise between the repealed code, under which the original application was lodged and with which it fully complied, and the Interim Code which came into force in July, 1995.

The usual impact of loss of privacy and sunlight are not as evident in this proposal due to the siting of two streets along the eastern and southern boundaries and the design of the living rooms and balconies to front those streets.


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .04.03
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 30-32 COLERIDGE STREET, RIVERWOOD (161/95)
RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. T. Christy)


. Recommendation 30-32 COLERIDGE STREET, RIVERWOOD (161/95)
RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. T. Christy)



RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council as the consent authority grant development consent for the establishment of 14 x 2 bedroom units at Nos. 30-32 Coleridge Street, Riverwood, subject to the following conditions :

1. Compliance in all respects with Amended Drawings, Job No. 9591 tables and documentation prepared by T. S. Wun dated 7 November, 1995 and submitted with DA 161/95, except where amended by the conditions of consent.

2. A Building Application being submitted to and approved by the Council in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1993, accompanied by detailed building plans, specifications, and the payment of relevant building application fees.

3. The hours of work on the site during demolition of the existing building or excavation of the site and construction of the proposed building shall be limited to the hours of 7 am to 5 pm Monday to Saturday inclusive with no work on Sundays, Good Friday, Christmas Day or Public Holidays.
PLEASE NOTE : A separate application for demolition work is required to be lodged with Council for approval prior to the commencement of the work.

4. Payment to Council of a contribution pursuant to Section 94(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. The purpose of the contribution is for open space/ community recreation facilities.

The contribution is based on the criteria of any development that results in a nett increase in the City's population which will create extra demand on open space and community recreation facilities. Therefore the requirement for additional open space and embellishment of existing open space is a direct measurable consequence of the approved development.

The contribution is $40,682 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

5. Payment to Council of a contribution pursuant to Section 94(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. The purpose of the contribution is for community services and facilities.

The contribution is based on the criteria of any development that results in a nett gain of people living in the City or a change in the population structure which will create extra demand on community services and facilities.

The contribution is $4,910 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

6. Payment to Council of a contribution pursuant to Section 94 (1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. The purpose of the contribution is for the provision of drainage services.

The contribution is based on the criteria of any development that results in a nett gain of people living in the City or a change in the population structure which will create extra demand on drainage services.

The contribution rate for Georges River catchment is $1.77 per square metre of gross land area of the subject site. The amount is $1,709 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

7. Stormwater drainage plans prepared by a qualified practising hydraulics engineer being submitted to Council with the Building Application. The layout of the proposed drainage system including pipe sizes, type, grade, length, invert levels, etc., dimensions and types of drainage pits are to be shown.

8. All stormwater to drain by gravity to the kerb and gutter in Nettleton Street.

9. A 1m wide easement to drain water is to be created over the subject site to benefit the lands adjoining the rear boundary known as Nos. 34, 36 & 38 Coleridge Street to allow their stormwater to be drained to the kerb and gutter in Coleridge Street. The easement is to be registered prior to occupation of the dwelling or with any plan of subdivision prior to issue of a Building Certificate. Where the easement is located under a proposed garage the developer is to pipe that portion of the easement to the satisfaction of Council.

10. In accordance with the survey plan and levels submitted by ,the proposed flat building shall not exceed 12.0 metres at the main ridge line as measured vertically from any nominated point from natural ground level to the roof line directly above that point. The finished RL to the main ridge line is to be submitted with the building application.

11. The vehicular driveway and visitor car parking spaces shall be suitably constructed and sealed in material other than natural coloured concrete or bitumen and drained to Council's specifications. Footpath and crossing levels are to be obtained from the Engineering Division at a fee set by Council.

12. The ground levels of the site shall not be raised/lowered or retaining walls constructed on the boundaries unless specific details are submitted to and approved by Council at Building Application stage.

13. All building materials shall be compatible in colour and texture throughout the whole project. Details and colour of building materials shall be submitted with the Building Application.

14. The area and/or work being the subject of the development consent, shall not be occupied or the use commence until a final inspection has been made by Council and a Certificate of Classification has been issued.

15. The side and rear boundaries of the site shall be fenced with either 1.8 metre high lapped and capped paling fences (suitably stained) or 1.8 metre high colour bond metal fencing, to Council's satisfaction. This work is to be completed prior to the issue of Certificate of Classification. It is to be the responsibility of the developer to ascertain which type of fence is preferred by the adjoining property owners.

16. All access driveways, queuing areas, ramps, gradients and the like for basement and ground level parking areas are to conform with the provisions of Australian Standard AS 2890-1-1993 - Parking Facilities except where otherwise required by Council. Details are to be submitted with the Building Application for approval.

17. All entry and exit points and one or two way circulation movements are to be clearly signposted to the satisfaction of Council.

19. Applicant to pay Council to construct :
a) Replace all redundant laybacks and crossing with kerb and gutter
b) Construct a 150mm thick concrete crossing reinforced with F72 mesh
c) Construct a 1.52 metre wide by 80mm thick concrete path in both Coleridge Street and Nettleton Avenue.
Quote given on request.
OR
Construction of the above work by the applicant subject to:
a) This work being carried out in accordance with Council's conditions and specifications.
b) Payment of Council's administration fee.

20. A minimum height between the floor surface and the lowest overhead obstruction shall be 2.2 metres for all areas traversed by cars. A minimum of 3.6 metres headroom shall be provided over all areas traversed by service vehicles.

21. The submission of a detailed landscape plan to the satisfaction of the Manager, Planning Services, with the building application. This plan is to be prepared by an approved landscape consultant. The plan is to include details of the species, size and number of all plant material, together with the surface treatment of all areas. Landscaping shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Manager, Planning Services in accordance with the approved plan prior to occupation of the building. All landscaping shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Manager, Planning Services.

Note: In addition the Landscape Plan is to identify all existing trees by Botanical and Common names, having a height which exceeds 3 metres or a girth greater than 300mm at 450 mm above ground level, and their relationship, by scale to the proposed development. NO trees are to be removed or lopped without written Council approval.

22. A retaining edge of masonry or other approved barrier of a minimum height of 150 mm shall be erected around the landscaped areas to contain the soil and mulch material and to prevent the encroachment of motor vehicles.

23. Perimeter planting along the northern and western boundaries shall be such as to provide a dense-foliaged plant screen of trees and shrubs over a broad height range to minimise the effect of the development upon adjoining development. Details are to be submitted on the landscape plan to Council for approval.

24. Compliance with the requirements of Sydney Electricity in relation to the provision of a site within the subject land for the establishment of an electricity kiosk type substation, if required for the locality. Prior to submission of building plans, the developer shall present details of the development in writing to Sydney Electricity and obtain confirmation of that authority's requirements. The kiosk site shall be dedicated at the applicant's expense for use of Sydney Electricity.

25. Where a sub-station kiosk is required, such shall be suitably located and screened, and details of screening and location shall be submitted with the landscape plans and shall be to the satisfaction of Council.

26. Extinguish the existing 3.05 metre wide right-of-way and drainage easement adjacent to the rear boundary prior to the issue of the Certificate of Classification.

27. No burning of demolition or waste materials shall be carried out on the subject site.

28. All plumbing and vent pipes shall be kept within the building and not exposed to public view.

30 Any trade waste containers are to be screened from public view and are not to obstruct or interfere with the use of loading and parking facilities and accessways. Such bins are to be stored within 12 metres from the front boundary. The structure housing the bins is to be designed to reflect the approved building. Details are to be submitted with the building plans.

31. Applicant to pay Sydney Electricity to relocate the electric light pole clear of the new crossing or remove completely.

32. Permanent power poles are to be either painted or stained with a suitable colour to the satisfaction of Council, prior to the issue of Certificate of Classification/Building Certificate.

33. A minimum of 45% of the total site area is to be used as landscaping. This is not to include any driveway or balcony areas. Details are to be shown with the building application.

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.04.03 4 WOODCLIFF PARADE, LUGARNO (189/95)
ATTACHED DUAL OCCUPANCY
(Report by Manager, Planning Services, Mr. M. Buckley)



Applicant : Toni Hulme & Millad Rouhana
Proposal : ATTACHED DUAL OCCUPANCY
Zoning : Zone No. 2 - Residential
Residential Development
Control Plan 1994 : Development Area "A"
Owners : T. Hulme
Existing Development : Vacant Land
Cost of Development : $250,000

PRECIS OF REPORT

1. Amended plans for an attached two storey dual occupancy.

2. Complies with the repealed DCP and the majority of the Interim Code.

3. No objections raised by the Building Surveyor or Engineers.

4. Two (2) objections received.

5. Recommendation - "deferred commencement" consent.


The application before Council seeks favourable consideration for the establishment of an attached two storey dual occupancy at No. 4 Woodcliff Parade, Lugarno.

Existing and Surrounding Development

The subject site is the residue of the larger portion of 4 Woodcliff Parade that was the subject of 6 x 3 bedroom townhouses approved by the Land and Environment Court of NSW. The site has a 18.29 metre frontage to Woodcliff Parade and totals 530 square metres in area.

The land falls away from the street and drainage will be via an easement through the rear property and discharge to Council's land in Bayside Drive. This arrangement is nearing finalisation with Council.

The surrounding development is a mixture of housing types ranging from single to two storey brick dwellings. The adjoining property on the east (No. 2 ) is a white brick residence with in-ground pool, while the adjoining property to the north is a split two storey dark brick residence with in-ground pool.

History

The proposal was first lodged with Council on 12 May, 1995, however, the applicant was advised of concerns regarding design and as a result of various discussions with the applicant, designer and planning consultant the plans were amended to reflect the concerns and recent views raised by Councillors.

Section 90

The site has been inspected and the proposal examined in accordance with the provisions of Section 90 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, and the following comments are submitted for consideration.

Statutory Requirements

The subject site is zoned No. 2, Residential under the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 1994, and the proposal is permissible within the zoning with Council consent. The proposal has been assessed against the provisions of Council's repealed Residential Development Control Plan 1994 and amended Interim Residential Code 1995.

The site is within Development Area "A" in which the following objectives apply :

* encourage development which :

i) is in the form of detached houses,

ii) is compatible with the scale and character of the existing detached housing, and

iii) has a high proportion of natural ground surface to maximise natural surface drainage and tree planting."

With regard to points (i) and (ii) Council should note the following Control :

"Attached dwellings are not permitted in Development Area "A". However, Council will consider applications for duplexes or similar at the street frontage where it is satisfied that the building form has the appearance of a single dwelling."

Proposed Development

The proposal involves the excavation of an area of approximately 99 square metres of ground in the middle of the site to accommodate basement parking for four (4) vehicles. The basement extends to a maximum of 1.0 metre above natural ground level in accordance with the Interim Code. Ground level accommodates family/dining, kitchen, laundry and lounge. Three (3) bedrooms and a study is proposed for the first floor of each occupancy. The slope of the land is such that a patio is provided off the rear of the dwellings leading to private courtyard area.

The front of the building is treated separately to give the impression of a single building but still defining two occupancies (similar to the approved plans for 5 Llewellyn Street, Oatley).

The building provides for relief from a bland face wall to the rear and front elevations by the attachment of a small balcony to each first floor master bedroom (rear) and the smaller of each bedrooms at the front.

The front setback of 6.0 metres and 7.0 metres is achieved to allow a safe and useable driveway to a stacked basement area for each dwelling.


Tabled Information


Proposed
Repealed DCP
Com
pliance
draft DCP
Rep
Dft
Site Area
530.0 m2
-
-
No
630.0 m2
Density
2
-
-
No
1.6
Development Area "A"
Building Height
7.9 m
9.5 m
Yes
Yes
9.0 m
Private Open Space:
71.7 m2
70.0 m2
Yes
No
100.0 m2
Landscaped Area
302.0 m2
291 m2 (55%)
Yes
Yes
55%
Building Setbacks: Front
6.0/7.0 m
4.5 m
Yes
Yes
4.5 m
Side/rear
2.0/9.5 m
900mm
Yes
Yes
2.0/6.0 m
Residential Parking
4
4
Yes
Yes
4
Building Envelope - side
3.5 x 45o
3.5 x 45o
Yes
Yes
3.5 x 45o
- rear
3.5 x 45o
3.5 x 45o
Yes
Yes
1.5 x 45o
Frontage
18.29 m
-
Yes
Yes
15.0 m
Comment : Repealed DCP 1994 - The proposal totally complies with the repealed DCP 1994.

Interim RDCP - The proposal complies with all numerical standards required by the Interim Code with the exception of the minimum site area of 630 square metres (2 x 315 square metres density). The provision of private open space had been provided as per the repealed Code however, 71.7 square metres has been provided for each dwelling excluding terraces. However Council should be aware that the application was submitted in May, 1995 when Council had no intention of introducing a density control of 315 square metres per dwelling or to increase the provision of private open space.

As indicated earlier in the report the proposal complies with the objectives of Development Area "A" in that the building will have the appearance of a single dwelling.

Basement Parking - The applicant has provided garages to each occupancy, however, they are stacked. It is the opinion of the Development and Health Division that the proposal be amended to allow the accommodation of double garages (side by side) for each occupancy.

It is considered that as the parking area is below natural ground level and with ground level landscaping to each corner of the site, the dominant appearance of two double garages is diminished from street level. Furthermore, with stacked parking, there would be no inconvenience for the occupants manoeuvring the vehicles on and off site. This requirement will form part of any development consent.

Manager, Building Services (South)

The matter was referred to the building surveyor for assessment against the provisions of the Building Code of Australia. No objection is raised subject to the submission of a building application.

Manager, Development Advice

No objection is raised to the proposal subject to all drainage being connected to the gully pit in the kerb and gutter in Bayside Drive via a registered 1.0 metre wide drainage easement.

Public Notification and Comment

Adjoining residents were notified by letter and given fourteen (14) days in which to view the plans and submit any comments on the proposal. Two (2) submissions were registered and their concerns are outlined below :

i) "The previous allocation for no more than five dwellings has now grown to eight. Despite objections from residents your council has always bowed to the wishes of the developer, ignoring the damage to the local environment and the devaluation of adjoining properties.

Development in our area should be compatible with existing development and not of a nature that decreases the values of surrounding properties."

Comment : The establishment of developments such as townhouses and dual occupancies in the majority of cases have little impact towards devaluation of properties. In some cases new development often increases values.

The development complies with the objectives of the Interim RDCP and is not out of character with immediate residential building forms surrounding or, of that in Lugarno.

ii) "1. The dual occupancy is not in keeping with the homely dwellings that have been built with accord to Councils specifications approximately 25 years ago.

2. The fact that now on three land allotments the total number of dwellings has grown, from Councils previous allowance of no more than five, to now eight dwellings, with its attendant problems of numbers of inhabitants and motor vehicles.

3. All the buildings will be cement render of a colour which cannot be determined and not as was once stipulated, a brick of varied choice.

4. The plans show a full length study window looking directly into our bathroom and toilet.

Summing up, it is regrettable that the residents of Lugarno, after so many years of painstaking and expensive landscaping to preserve the natural area, are now being held to ransom by greedy developers to maximise their profits, and to destroy forever a pristine peninsular."

Comment : As mentioned, dual occupancy is a permissible use and the design is in keeping with the general building form of the area. Parking of vehicles has been addressed by this proposal and by the Land and Environment Court of N.S.W. on the 6 x 3 bedroom townhouses approved on the rear allotment.

The finished materials are the subject of a condition of consent that they supply details of colour, etc. A building with a concrete tile roof, cement rendered texture and painted, is an acceptable finish and often characterised by contemporary building forms. The first floor study windows to each dwelling can be of obscure glass. This will be a condition of consent.

Summary

Overall, the applicant has attempted to comply with the provisions of the Interim Residential Code, although submitting the application prior to the repealing of the RDCP 1994.

The proposal provides a character of building that is acceptable by today's standards and does not detract from the characteristics of existing dwellings in the street, but in fact, will enhance the streetscape.

It is therefore recommended that the application be approved subject to conditions.

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .04.04
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 4 WOODCLIFF PARADE, LUGARNO (189/95)
ATTACHED DUAL OCCUPANCY
(Report by Manager, Planning Services, Mr. M. Buckley)


. Recommendation 4 WOODCLIFF PARADE, LUGARNO (189/95)
ATTACHED DUAL OCCUPANCY
(Report by Manager, Planning Services, Mr. M. Buckley)



RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council as the consent authority grant a "deferred commencement" development consent for the establishment of an attached two storey dual occupancy at No. 4 Woodcliff Parade, Lugarno (residue allotment having frontage to Woodcliff Parade of 18.29 metres) subject to the following conditions :

A. The formal registration in the Land Titles Office of the Torrens Title subdivision of 4 Woodcliff Parade - Lot 2 DP 793262 into separate allotments as approved by Council. This subdivision is to be registered within six (6) months of the date of this "Deferred Commencement" consent, and documentary evidence is to be produced to Council prior to the development consent being able to operate from the following conditions.

1. Compliance in all respects with Amended Drawing No CG1 tables and documentation dated 24 October, 1995 and submitted with DA 189/95, except where amended by the conditions of consent.

2. A Building Application being submitted to and approved by the Council in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1993, accompanied by detailed building plans, specifications, and the payment of relevant building application fees.

3. The hours of work on the site during demolition of the existing building or excavation of the site and construction of the proposed building shall be limited to the hours of 7 am to 5 pm Monday to Saturday inclusive with no work on Sundays, Good Friday, Christmas Day or Public Holidays.
PLEASE NOTE : A separate application for demolition work is required to be lodged with Council for approval prior to the commencement of the work.

4. Payment to Council of a contribution pursuant to Section 94(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. The purpose of the contribution is for open space/ community recreation facilities.

The contribution is based on the criteria of any development that results in a nett increase in the City's population which will create extra demand on open space and community recreation facilities. Therefore the requirement for additional open space and embellishment of existing open space is a direct measurable consequence of the approved development.

The contribution is $4,662 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

5. Payment to Council of a contribution pursuant to Section 94(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. The purpose of the contribution is for community services and facilities.

The contribution is based on the criteria of any development that results in a nett gain of people living in the City or a change in the population structure which will create extra demand on community services and facilities.

The contribution is $520 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

6. Payment to Council of a contribution pursuant to Section 94 (1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. The purpose of the contribution is for the provision of drainage services.

The contribution is based on the criteria of any development that results in a nett gain of people living in the City or a change in the population structure which will create extra demand on drainage services.

The contribution rate for Georges River catchment is $1.77 per square metre of gross land area of the subject site. The amount is $938 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

7. Stormwater drainage plans prepared by a qualified practising hydraulics engineer being submitted to Council with the Building Application. The layout of the proposed drainage system including pipe sizes, type, grade, length, invert levels, etc., dimensions and types of drainage pits are to be shown.

8. All stormwater is to drain by gravity to the gully pit in the kerb and gutter in Bayside Drive via a registered 1.0 metre wide drainage easement.

9. In accordance with the survey plan and levels submitted by the applicant, the proposed attached dual occupancies shall not exceed RL 57.71 at the main ridge line as measured vertically from any nominated point from natural ground level to the roof line directly above that point.

10. The vehicular driveway and visitor car parking spaces shall be suitably constructed and sealed in material other than natural coloured concrete or bitumen and drained to Council's specifications. Footpath and crossing levels are to be obtained from the Engineering Division at a fee set by Council.

11. The ground levels of the site shall not be raised/lowered or retaining walls constructed on the boundaries unless specific details are submitted to and approved by Council at Building Application stage.

12. All building materials shall be compatible in colour and texture throughout the whole project. Details and colour of building materials shall be submitted with the Building Application.

13. The building and or work being the subject of the development consent shall not be occupied until a final inspection has been carried out by Council and a Building Certificate issued.

14. The side and rear boundaries of the site shall be fenced with either 1.8 metre high lapped and capped paling fences (suitably stained) or 1.8 metre high colour bond metal fencing, to Council's satisfaction. This work is to be completed prior to the issue of Certificate of Classification. It is to be the responsibility of the developer to ascertain which type of fence is preferred by the adjoining property owners.

15. All access driveways, queuing areas, ramps, gradients and the like for basement and ground level parking areas are to conform with the provisions of Australian Standard AS 2890-1-1993 - Parking Facilities except where otherwise required by Council. Details are to be submitted with the Building Application for approval.

16. The proposed garages to each occupancy shall be double garages (side by side) having internal dimensions of 5.5 x 5.5 metres. Details are to be submitted with the formal building application.

17. Applicant to pay Council to construct :
a) construct two 100mm thick unreinforced concrete crossings
b) Replace redundant layback with kerb and gutter.
Quote given on request.
OR
Construction of the above work by the applicant subject to:
a) This work being carried out in accordance with Council's conditions and specifications.
b) Payment of Council's administration fee.

18. A minimum height between the floor surface and the lowest overhead obstruction shall be 2.2 metres for all areas traversed by cars. A minimum of 3.6 metres headroom shall be provided over all areas traversed by service vehicles.

19. The submission of a detailed landscape plan to the satisfaction of the Manager, Planning Services, with the building application. This plan is to be prepared by an approved landscape consultant. The plan is to include details of the species, size and number of all plant material, together with the surface treatment of all areas. Landscaping shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Manager, Planning Services in accordance with the approved plan prior to occupation of the building. All landscaping shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Manager, Planning Services.

Note: In addition the Landscape Plan is to identify all existing trees by Botanical and Common names, having a height which exceeds 3 metres or a girth greater than 300mm at 450 mm above ground level, and their relationship, by scale to the proposed development. NO trees are to be removed or lopped without written Council approval.

20. No approval is expressed or implied to the subdivision of the subject land or dwelling/s. For any future Torrens/Strata subdivision, a separate Development Application is required to be submitted to and approved by Council.

21. Should the applicant wish to subdivide the subject dual dwelling at a later date, the relevant authorities are to be contacted regarding their requirements prior to laying any cables or services; Australian Gas Light Company, Telecom and the Sydney Water Board.

22. Payment to Council for an additional garbage service on occupation of the new dwelling. For relief from the second garbage service the landowner shall signify, in writing, that one service is sufficient for the approved dual dwelling developments on the site and that there is no intention to seek approval for a subdivision of the lands by way of a strata subdivision or the like.

23. Provision is to be made for separate electricity and drainage services if a future subdivision application is to be made to Council.

24. No burning of demolition or waste materials shall be carried out on the subject site.

25. All plumbing and vent pipes shall be kept within the building and not exposed to public view.

26. Permanent power poles are to be either painted or stained with a suitable colour to the satisfaction of Council, prior to the issue of Certificate of Classification/Building Certificate.

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.04.04 29 WILLIAM ROAD, RIVERWOOD (407/95)
LONG DAY CHILD CARE CENTRE
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. T. Christy)



Applicant : Jacqueline Ward
Proposal : LONG DAY CHILD CARE CENTRE
Zoning : Zone No.2 - Residential
Residential Development
Control Plan 1994 : Development Area C
Owners : Mr. & Mrs. Ward (Formerly Mr. Ovcak
and Ms. Ellis)
Existing Development : Single dwelling
Cost of Development : $80,000

PRECIS OF REPORT

1. Long day child care centre for fifty-nine (59) children.

2. The Department of Community Services have endorsed the submitted plans.

3. Sixteen (16) letters of objection received.

4. Recommendation - Refusal.


Existing and Surrounding Development

The subject site currently has a single-storey brick residence set back 8.2m from the front boundary to William Road. This extends for a length of approximately 17m and is located 1.1m from the eastern side boundary and approximately 5m from the western side boundary. A driveway currently exists part-way along the western side boundary.

The site is located across from Riverwood Park and is approximately 500m from Riverwood Station and 300m from Salt Pan Creek. The surrounding properties are predominantly single storey detached dwellings, however, some two storey dwellings do exist.

William Road represents a quiet residential street at the Riverwood Park end. As one moves closer to Belmore Road, problems of parking and traffic exist due to the close proximity to the railway station. Commuters park in William Road particularly between Belmore Road and Bennett Lane (adjacent to Riverwood Park).

Section 90

The site has been inspected and the proposal examined in accordance with the provisions of Section 90 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, and the following comments are submitted for consideration.

Statutory Requirements

The subject site is zoned No. 2, Residential under the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 1994, and the proposal is permissible within the zoning with Council consent.

Proposed Development

The proposal is to convert an existing single storey dwelling into a one and two storey building in order to accommodate a long day child care centre. The centre will operate from 7.30 am to 6.00 pm, Monday to Friday and will house 59 children. The breakdown of children is proposed to be 20 x 0-2 year olds, 20 x 2-3 year olds and 19 x 3-6 year olds with a maximum of ten (10) staff members at any one time.

The existing single storey portion of the building will be used for the office/staff room, kitchen, washing machine, nappy change area and cot areas.

The new 11-15m extension of the dwelling downstairs will be the nursery and covered outdoor area, whilst the upstairs will be used for the 2-3 and 3-6 year olds.

The front of the dwelling is located 8.2m from the front boundary. The two-storey portion would start approximately 19.4m from the front boundary and extend to 37.2m from the front boundary (more than half of the site's length).

Stack parking for five (5) cars is proposed to be provided along the western side boundary extending from the front boundary to the back of the proposed dwelling. This parking is only to be used by staff members.

The land behind the house, extending to the rear boundary is proposed to consist of assorted play areas, such as sandpits and play tunnels. The nursery play areas have been separated from the 2-6 year old play areas in accordance with Department of Community Services guidelines.


Tabled Information


Proposed
Required by DCS
Required by Council
plianceCompliance
Site Area
927.5m2
Internal Area
105m2 (5.25m2 ea.)

163m2 (4.18m2 ea)
3.25m2/child less than 2 yrs

4.18m2/child more than 2 yrs
-


-
Yes


Yes
External Area
102.48m2 (5.1m2 ea.)

295.24m2 (7.6m2 ea.)
4.96m2/child less than 2 yrs

6.96m2/child more than 2 yrs
-


-
Yes


Yes
Carparking
5
-
5
Yes
Landscaped Area
530.9m2 (57%)
-
463.75m2 (50%)
Yes

Comment:

Concern is raised at the use and size of the building for such an activity in a quiet residential area which consists predominantly of detached single-storey dwellings.

The proposal is considered to be an over-development of the site and out of character with the surrounding area. An establishment of this size for 59 children will create problems of noise, privacy, traffic and parking within the residential area. According to the "Guide to Traffic Generating Developments" produced by the Roads and Traffic Authority, the following data is an average of increased traffic movement expected during drop-off and pick-up times.

PEAK VEHICLE TRIPS/CHILD


Centre Type
7.00am - 9.00 am
2.30pm - 4.00pm
4.00pm - 6.00 pm
Pre-school
1.4
0.8
-
Long Day Care
0.8
0.3
0.7
Before/After Care
0.5
0.2
0.7
Based on this, the number of cars generated for fifty-nine (59) children for this long day care centre between 7.00 am and 9.00 am would be 47.2 vehicle trips. Between 4.00 pm and 6.00 pm it calculates to 41.3 vehicle trips. The guidelines also stated that the average length of stay for all centres is between 6 and 8 minutes per car.

Due to the low density residential character of this area, this increase will substantially affect the existing residents, particularly when the section of the road between Belmore Road and Bennett Street is already used for commuter parking, creating a single laned road and thus limiting car movements in the street.

The building itself extends for approximately 28m and finishes 37m from the front boundary. The rear portion of this house is two-storey and extends beyond the adjoining premises, thus compounding the effects of privacy and also being out of character with the surrounding environment.

Manager, Building Services (South)

The proposal was referred to the Manager, Building Services who raises no objection to the proposal provided a building application is submitted and all enclosed internal rooms are to be mechanically vented and artificially lit. Further, if the proposal was approved, a bath/shower with a babies bench would have to be provided for the children's use. It currently does not comply with the Building Code of Australia in this respect.

Manager, Community Services

The Manager, Community Services was approached, particularly regarding the need of child care centres in the Riverwood area. She advised that there is definitely a need for the centre in that area, particularly for 0-2 year olds; however, did believe that it was important to look at the quality of a development as well as its need in the community.

Manager, Development Advice

No objections were raised to the proposal provided all stormwater drained by gravity to the kerb and gutter.

Public Notification and Comment

The proposal was advertised in the Leader and adjoining residents were notified by letter, inviting them to view the plans and submit comments on the proposal within twenty-one (21) days. Sixteen (16) submissions were registered, including one from the Hurstville Residents Association and one from the Riverwood Area Neighbourhood Watch. Their concerns are outlined below:

1. Parking and Traffic Problems: William Road is a narrow road. Commuters park from Belmore Road down to Bennett Lane and sometimes further, thus creating a situation where two cars cannot pass in William Road. Further, since increases due to the Montessori School, the Riverwood Plaza development and the opening of the motorway, William Road (and others in the area) are now used as short-cut roads, which was never the intention. This proposal will only increase the existing problems of parking and traffic.

Comment: This is a serious concern which Council officers agree with. As mentioned in the report, this proposal could produce an average 47.2 vehicle trips each morning and 41.3 vehicle trips between 4.00 pm and 6.00 pm each afternoon. This increase in traffic volume, compounded with the existing problems, will, it is believed, detrimentally decrease the quiet residential amenity of the neighbourhood.

2. The proposal is out of character with the surrounding environment. The area is zoned residential and maintains a mixture of detached dwellings with no commercial enterprises. It should be relocated to a commercial zone , due to its size.

Comment: The surrounding area is one of low density with predominantly single-storey detached dwellings. This building is quite different in that it is mainly a large building, two-storey and it extends for 30 metres on the block. This is out of character with the adjoining premises, not to mention its commercial use to house fifty-nine (59) 0-6 year olds.

3. If this is approved, will Council consider kerb and guttering the park side and provide adequate drainage? The road is narrow and will not sustain the cars, also the area from Henry Road to Bennett Lane along the park floods, causing a quagmire. This will only cause havoc to the parents as they drive or park in William Road.

Comment: A check with Council's Engineering Division has confirmed that the dirt area on the side of the road may become boggy when it rains. There is no plan in the immediate future to kerb and gutter this section and it is a separate issue which should be taken up with Council's Engineering Division. However, it is agreed by Council officers that if this section becomes boggy, it will cause problems for parents trying to park and drive past.

4. The proposal will increase noise and create a loss of privacy and sunlight to adjoining residents.

Comment: It is believed that a centre housing fifty-nine (59) 0-6 year olds will definitely increase the noise of the immediate area. There will be the added noise of children and parents combined with cars opening doors and driving past. It will be detrimental to the existing quiet, low density residential area that the residents currently enjoy. The two-storey nature of the building and its length along the site means that it will have an impact on the privacy of those dwellings adjoining and to the rear, and may cause a loss of morning sunlight to the property on the western side. It extends further than most houses in the street.

5. The centre has no off-street parking facilities or a drop-off/pick-up point for parents.

Comment: The proposal complies with Council's parking requirements of one car space per two employees or part thereof. However, when considering the existing traffic and parking problems in the street, the design of this proposal is very poor. The staff parking is such that five (5) spaces are located one behind the other along the western side boundary. Therefore, if any staff member wants to leave, a situation could arise where four cars have to be moved to let the first car out.

Parents themselves have to park in the street and, as mentioned earlier, the average length of time is for 6-8 minutes per child. The high number of children for the centre, combined with the existing traffic/parking problems in William Road could create a potentially dangerous and noisy situation in peak drop-off and pick-up times. This is definitely undesirable in a low density residential area.

6. The centre has an unacceptable fire hazard, particularly since thirty-nine (39) children will be located on the first floor and the ground floor currently has bars on the windows.

Comment: The proposal was referred to the appropriate Building Manager, who advised that there are no objections at this stage. There are two forms of egress to the first floor (one being an external stairwell) and it generally complies with the requirements of the Building Code of Australia.

7. The proposal is insufficient in that:

* There is only one (1) toilet for the staff;
* The office and staff room have no viewing of the cot rooms or ground floor nursery;
* There is no office/staff facility on the first floor;
* The submitted plans have no date, no name of the drawer, no bearing and no street name.

Comment: It is agreed that the quality of the pans is poor and they do lack the information stated above. However, the proposal complies with the Building Code of Australia requirements for the provision of toilets. Also, no office or staff facility is required upstairs; and downstairs, the office and staff rooms are meant to be separate from the nursery/cot area to provide a space where staff can have their allocated breaks. Council's Manager, Community Services could not find a problem with this layout of office and staff room facilities.

8. The centre could possibly increase its hours of operation in the future. At present, the hours are quite long, being 7.30 am to 6.00 pm, meaning that staff could be there from 7.00 am to 7.00 pm.

Comment: Should this application be approved, any increase in hours of operation have to also be approved through Council. It is considered, however, that the proposed hours are quite long, particularly since the street is purely residential.

9. There are already three (3) pre-schools/childcare centres in close proximity. This should be located closer to a commercial centre.

Comment: The Manager, Community Services stated that there is definitely a need for this type of facility, particularly for 0-2 year olds, as most pre-schools do not cater for 0-2 year olds. However, it is agreed that the size of this proposal with the number of children proposed, is not necessarily best located within a quiet residential area which currently has parking problems. One must look at the quality of the development as well as the need of the proposal in the area.

10. The proposal will de-value surrounding properties.

Comment: There is no evidence to suggest whether this proposal will or will not devalue the surrounding properties. However, it cannot be argued that it will not have an impact on surrounding neighbours, due to its sheer size, bulk and scale in a residential area.

11. The proposal will cause an increased burden on existing stormwater and sewerage systems.

Comment: The proposal was referred to Council's Engineering Division who raised no objections to the proposed use, provided all stormwater drains by gravity to the kerb and gutter in William Road.

The Water Board is responsible for maintaining/upgrading the sewer system, so they would need to be approached regarding this.

In Summary

While it is recognised that Council supports the need for a new child care centre in the area, it is considered that this site is unsuitable. The proposal is considered to be too large for the surrounding residential area, it is out of character and will only compound existing problems of parking and traffic. It is considered to be not in the public interest, an over-development of the site and totally unsuitable for the immediate area. This view is one which is shared by the local residents. Therefore, recommendation is for refusal.

It is advised that if Council, as the consent authority, should determine to refuse the application as it stands, there is a high probability that the applicant will seek to exercise her right of appeal to the Land and Environment Court.



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .04.05
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 29 WILLIAM ROAD, RIVERWOOD (407/95)
LONG DAY CHILD CARE CENTRE
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. T. Christy)


. Recommendation 29 WILLIAM ROAD, RIVERWOOD (407/95)
LONG DAY CHILD CARE CENTRE
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. T. Christy)



RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council as the consent authority refuse the application for a long day child care centre for fifty-nine (59) children at No.29 William Road, Riverwood, on the following grounds:


1. The proposed site is an inappropriate location . [Section 90(1)(h)]

2. The proposal is an intensification of the use of the site. [Section 90 (1)(h)(o)]

3. The proposal is an over-development of the site. [Section 90 (1)(f)]

4. The proposal will cause an unacceptable increase in traffic in the immediate area. [Section 90 (1)(j)]

5. The site, bulk, size, scale and character of the proposed use are inappropriate. [Section 90 (1)(e)]

6. The proposal will disturb the quiet nature of the immediate area. [Section 90 (1)(h)(o)]

7. The proposed parking is unacceptable with regard to accessibility. [Section 90 (1) (i)]

8. The proposal will detrimentally impact on the existing and likely future amenity of the neighbourhood. [Section 90 (1) (o)]



................../Section 2

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
CIVIC CENTRE, MACMAHON STREET, HURSTVILLE.
__________________________________


SUMMARY OF ITEMS CONTAINED IN THE
DIVISIONAL MANAGER - DEVELOPMENT AND HEALTH - SECTION TWO' REPORT
TO THE MEETING OF THE DEVELOPMENT, HEALTH AND PLANNING COMMITTEE
TO BE HELD ON 95 11 29TH NOVEMBER, 1995-


06:01 Ward Councillors' Reports

06:02 Building Applications - Hurstville Ward
06:02.01 133 Vanessa Street, Kingsgrove Consideration Of Section 82 Objection (Report By Manager, Building Services, Mr. T. Dartnell)

06:03 Building Applications - Penshurst Ward

06:04 Building Applications - Peakhurst Ward
06:04.01 43 Ogilvy Street, Peakhurst Outbuilding Exceeding 80 Sq. Metres (Report By Environmental Health & Building Inspector, Mr. M. Yeung)

06:05 Miscellaneous And Other Matters
06:05.01 Review Of Local Government Nursing Services By The N.S.W. Department Of Health And The Future Of The Hurstville Home Nursing Service (H.N.S.) (C/00042) (Report By Manager, Environmental Services, Mr. G. Young)
06:05.02 Amendments To Disorderly Houses Act, 1943 - Operation Of Brothels (T/01222, Pt.1)
06:05.03A Proposed Waste Minimisation And Management Bill, 1995 (W00014)

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH
SECTION 2


06.01 WARD COUNCILLORS' REPORTS

THERE ARE NO WARD COUNCILLORS REPORTS IN RESPECT OF BUILDING APPLICATIONS FOR THIS MEETING

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.02 BUILDING APPLICATIONS - HURSTVILLE WARD



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.02.01 133 VANESSA STREET, KINGSGROVE Consideration of Section 82 Objection (Report by Manager, Building Services, Mr. T. Dartnell)

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .02.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 133 VANESSA STREET, KINGSGROVE Consideration of Section 82 Objection (Report by Manager, Building Services, Mr. T. Dartnell)

. Recommendation 133 VANESSA STREET, KINGSGROVE Consideration of Section 82 Objection (Report by Manager, Building Services, Mr. T. Dartnell)


RECOMMENDATION

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.03 BUILDING APPLICATIONS - PENSHURST WARD

THERE ARE NO BUILDING APPLICATIONS FOR PENSHURST WARD FOR THIS MEETING.

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.04 BUILDING APPLICATIONS - PEAKHURST WARD



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.04.01 43 OGILVY STREET, PEAKHURST Outbuilding Exceeding 80 Sq. Metres (Report by Environmental Health & Building Inspector, Mr. M. Yeung)


Applicant: Mr. & Mrs. Robinson (BA689/95)

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .04.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 43 OGILVY STREET, PEAKHURST Outbuilding Exceeding 80 Sq. Metres (Report by Environmental Health & Building Inspector, Mr. M. Yeung)

. Recommendation 43 OGILVY STREET, PEAKHURST Outbuilding Exceeding 80 Sq. Metres (Report by Environmental Health & Building Inspector, Mr. M. Yeung)


RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council accept the justification for the proposed size of the carport and garage, and resolve to approve the building application, subject to standard

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.05 MISCELLANEOUS AND OTHER MATTERS



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.05.01 REVIEW OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT NURSING SERVICES BY THE N.S.W. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND THE FUTURE OF THE HURSTVILLE HOME NURSING SERVICE (H.N.S.) (C/00042) (Report by Manager, Environmental Services, Mr. G. Young)

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .05.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation REVIEW OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT NURSING SERVICES BY THE N.S.W. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND THE FUTURE OF THE HURSTVILLE HOME NURSING SERVICE (H.N.S.) (Report by Manager, Environmental Services, Mr. G. Young)

. Recommendation REVIEW OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT NURSING SERVICES BY THE N.S.W. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND THE FUTURE OF THE HURSTVILLE HOME NURSING SERVICE (H.N.S.) (Report by Manager, Environmental Services, Mr. G. Young)


RECOMMENDATION

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.05.02 AMENDMENTS TO DISORDERLY HOUSES ACT, 1943 - OPERATION OF BROTHELS (T/01222, PT.1)

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .05.02
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation AMENDMENTS TO DISORDERLY HOUSES ACT, 1943 - OPERATION OF BROTHELS (T/01222, PT.1)

. Recommendation AMENDMENTS TO DISORDERLY HOUSES ACT, 1943 - OPERATION OF BROTHELS (T/01222, PT.1)


RECOMMENDATION

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.05.03A PROPOSED WASTE MINIMISATION AND MANAGEMENT BILL, 1995 (W00014)


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .05.03A
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation PROPOSED WASTE MINIMISATION AND MANAGEMENT BILL, 1995 (W00014)

. Recommendation PROPOSED WASTE MINIMISATION AND MANAGEMENT BILL, 1995 (W00014)


RECOMMENDATION