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 96 09 25TH SEPTEMBER, 1996-



05:01 Ward Councillors' Reports
05:01.01 35, 37, 37A & 39 Hampden Street, Beverly Hills (178/96)
Three Storey Residential Development Consisting Of
11X3 And 10X2 Bedroom Dwellings With Basement Carparking

05:01.02 25 Southern Street, Oatley (534/95)
Detached Two Storey Dual Occupancy

05:03 Development Applications - Penshurst Ward
05:03.01 8 Rosebery Street, Penshurst (119/96)
Detached Two Storey Dual Occupancy

05:04 Development Applications - Peakhurst Ward
05:04.01 15A Waratah Street, Oatley (234/96)
Detached Dual Occupancy

05:04.02 14 Depot Road, Peakhurst (275/96)
Gymnasium For Gymnastics

05:04.03 168-178 Boundary Road, Peakhurst (29/96)
Aged Care Hostel

05:05 Miscellaneous And Other Matters
05:05.01 Development Applications Received Between 1 July And 31 August, 1996
05:05.02 Development Applications Determined Under Delegated Authority

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 96 09 25TH SEPTEMBER, 1996-


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 35, 37, 37A & 39 HAMPDEN STREET, BEVERLY HILLS (178/96)
THREE STOREY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT CONSISTING OF
11X3 AND 10X2 BEDROOM DWELLINGS WITH BASEMENT CARPARKING
(Report by Town Planner, Mr. M. Wilson)



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .01.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 35, 37, 37A & 39 HAMPDEN STREET, BEVERLY HILLS (178/96)

. Recommendation 35, 37, 37A & 39 HAMPDEN STREET, BEVERLY HILLS (178/96)


RECOMMENDATION


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.01.02 25 SOUTHERN STREET, OATLEY (534/95)
DETACHED TWO STOREY DUAL OCCUPANCY
(Report by Town Planner, Mr. J. Brannan)



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .01.02
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 25 SOUTHERN STREET, OATLEY (534/95)
DETACHED TWO STOREY DUAL OCCUPANCY
(Report by Town Planner, Mr. J. Brannan)


. Recommendation 25 SOUTHERN STREET, OATLEY (534/95)
DETACHED TWO STOREY DUAL OCCUPANCY
(Report by Town Planner, Mr. J. Brannan)



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 8 ROSEBERY STREET, PENSHURST (119/96)
DETACHED TWO STOREY DUAL OCCUPANCY
(Report by Trainee Planner, Mr. J. Brannan)



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .03.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 8 ROSEBERY STREET, PENSHURST (119/96)

. Recommendation 8 ROSEBERY STREET, PENSHURST (119/96)


RECOMMENDATION


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 15A WARATAH STREET, OATLEY (234/96)
DETACHED DUAL OCCUPANCY
(Report by Town Planner, Mr. M. Wilson)



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .04.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 15A WARATAH STREET, OATLEY (234/96)
DETACHED DUAL OCCUPANCY
(Report by Town Planner, Mr. M. Wilson)


. Recommendation 15A WARATAH STREET, OATLEY (234/96)
DETACHED DUAL OCCUPANCY
(Report by Town Planner, Mr. M. Wilson)



RECOMMENDATION


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.04.02 14 DEPOT ROAD, PEAKHURST (275/96)
GYMNASIUM FOR GYMNASTICS
(Report by Junior Planner, Mr. J. Brannan)



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .04.02
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 14 DEPOT ROAD, PEAKHURST (275/96)
GYMNASIUM FOR GYMNASTICS
(Report by Junior Planner, Mr. J. Brannan)


. Recommendation 14 DEPOT ROAD, PEAKHURST (275/96)
GYMNASIUM FOR GYMNASTICS
(Report by Junior Planner, Mr. J. Brannan)



RECOMMENDATION


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.04.03 168-178 BOUNDARY ROAD, PEAKHURST (29/96)
AGED CARE HOSTEL
(Report by Divisional Manager, Mr. D. Beaumont)



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .04.04
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 168-178 BOUNDARY ROAD, PEAKHURST (29/96)
AGED CARE HOSTEL


. Recommendation 168-178 BOUNDARY ROAD, PEAKHURST (29/96)
AGED CARE HOSTEL



RECOMMENDATION


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 96 09 25TH SEPTEMBER, 1996-


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:-


05.04.04A 57-59 WOODLANDS AVENUE, LUGARNO (298/95)
MEDIUM DENSITY DEVELOPMENT - TEN (10) DWELLINGS
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. T. Christy)



ADDENDUM


Applicant : JCS Developments
Proposal : MEDIUM DENSITY DEVELOPMENT
TEN (10) DWELLINGS IN TOTAL
Zoning : Zone No. 2 - Residential
Residential Development
Control Plan 1994 : Development Area "A"
Owners : JCS Developments
Existing Development : Two Single Dwellings
Cost of Development : $1 million

PRECIS OF REPORT

1. Amended application is for 10 x 3 bedroom dwellings. Original application was for twelve (12) dwellings.

2. The applicant is seeking an encroachment to Council's Foreshore Building Line.

3. The application must be considered against the requirements of Council's repealed Residential Development Control Plan, Council's Interim Residential Development Code and Section 90 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as it was lodged with Council on 3 July, 1995.

4. The applicant has had ongoing negotiations with Council's officers for twelve (12) months.

5. Seventeen (17) submissions were received together with one (1) petition.

6. Recommendation - Approval.



Existing and Surrounding Development

The subject site entails two properties that extend from Woodlands Avenue to the Georges River. One of those is a battleaxe allotment. They have a natural terracing effect for the majority of the slope towards the river with the last section defined by a steep rocky escarpment. This provides extensive views over the Georges River and Illawong area.

The site has a variety of trees and scrubby bushland with some clearings. There has been ten (10) trees identified as significant.

The land falls directly south from Woodlands Avenue to the river. A foreshore building line runs across the site and is measured 80.0 metres from the front boundary of the property.

The surrounding sites are similar in nature, with a mixture of battleaxe and conventional shaped allotments. The predominant form of development is that of single dwellings varying from single storey to three storeys in height, depending on the slope of each individual allotment. they all try to take advantage of the views and there are a number of scattered dwellings in close proximity to the subject site which encroach the foreshore building line.

On 13 December, 1995 Council approved an application for thirty (30) dwellings at No. 81 Woodlands Avenue.

History

3/7/95Application submitted to Council.
6/7/95Applicant sent a letter outlining areas of non-compliance and also further information required.
6/12/95A further letter sent to the applicant as no response had been received.
18/12/95Letter from the applicant detailing that two mediation meetings had been conducted, one on 20 October, 1995 and the second on 4 December, 1995. The applicant was still undergoing mediation talks and wished to continue with the application.
10/6/96Amended plans received.
18/6/96 to 9/7/96Adjoining neighbours notified and an advertisement placed in the "St. George and Sutherland Shire Leader".
21/8/96Amended plans received which reduced the extent of excavation required and addressed the variation sought to the foreshore building line in more detail.

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, Council's Interim Residential Development Code and its relevant amendments and Section 90 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.

Proposed Development

The amended proposal is for 10 x 3 bedroom dwellings which step down the site, taking into advantage the natural terracing of the site. The dwellings have been split into three main groups consisting of two (2) at the front near the street (one behind the other), five (5) dwellings in the centre of the block adjacent to No. 55 woodlands Avenue and three (3) located further south on the site. These last three stop just short of an approved residence at No. 61 Woodlands Avenue, which adjoins the site to the east.

The dwellings have been designed in a step formation to take advantage of the southerly views over the Georges River. They step down the block and each unit is located towards the centre of the site to minimise the impact on the adjoining dwellings and also the site. The private open space for each dwelling is located in a terrace which forms the roof of the adjoining dwelling to the south. The exception to this being the two dwellings located closest to the street, both being two storey townhouses and having their private open space at ground level. Also units 1 and 4 (being the most southerly uni of each individual cluster of buildings) have their private open space at ground level.

Vehicular access is via a common driveway which starts on the eastern side of the block and changes to the western side 48.43 metres from the front boundary. This is primarily to achieve less of a gradient on the driveway and to create a greater setback between the existing dwelling at No. 55 Woodlands Avenue. The parking for each dwelling is located either beneath the dwellings and/or north of the dwellings. They are primarily excavated into the ground to reduce the bulk of the buildings.

The design of the eight (8) dwellings that step down the site is that the living areas and two bedrooms face directly south and open up to large terrace areas. This is to take advantage of the views. A third bedroom, bathroom, laundry and kitchen area are located against the northern wall. The dwellings have been designed this way to take advantage of the southerly views and the southerly fall of the land whilst maintaining minimum bulk and height in the overall development. Windows to the side elevations have been limited to reduce the loss of privacy to those adjoining dwellings.

The two (2) townhouses located at the front of the site are situated on reasonably flat land and hence are of a more conventional style. The lounge, dining, kitchen, laundry and garage are on the ground floor with three bedrooms, ensuite and bathroom upstairs.

Encroachment on Foreshore Building Line

As stated previously, the foreshore building line has been nominated as 80.0 metres measured perpendicular to the front boundary. The subject site is approximately 220.0 metres in length and has a natural terrace effect until the last approximately 50.0 metres where a steep escarpment drops to the Georges River.

The applicant believes that the foreshore building line has not taken account of the natural topography of the site. A copy of their letter has been reproduced below.

"The Council, by resolution dated 17 August, 1994, adopted a Foreshore Building Line affecting the subject, and adjoining properties having frontage to the Georges River. The line affecting the subject property is set at 80 metres, as measured from its front boundary to Woodlands Avenue. The proposed development encroaches on this line by virtue of the fact that, at its most southerly extent, it is 150 metres from the front boundary of the property. At this point it is some 65 metres from Mean High Water Mark, which delineates the southern boundary of the subject site.

The objectives of the Foreshore Building Line control, whilst not explicitly stated in the Instrument, are implicit from the wording of the Clause and are commonly understood from the broader application of such controls. They go to the likely visual impact of development when viewed from the waterway to which the line relates. This is taken to be the case even though the subject line is fixed by reference to the front boundary of the property and not by reference to the waterway itself.

The topographical features of land adjacent to waterways is often used as the basis for establishing a foreshore building line. In most such cases the extent of the foreshore building line is fixed by reference to a distance from Mean High Water Mark. Such a basis means that the line often coincides with specific topographical features, for example, changes in level, benches and small plateaux. In the case of the subject property, whilst that part of the Foreshore Building Line which affects the site and the immediately surrounding properties is fixed by reference to the front boundary, a short distance to the east the Line is fixed by reference to Mean High Water Mark. In part it is set at 60 metres and in part at 30 metres from that alignment. If either such requirements applied to the subject site, the proposed development would comply.

The proposal under consideration has been designed to be responsive to the topographical characteristics of the site with regard to its waterfront location. These characteristics are considered to be the type of exceptional feature contemplated by the wording of Clause 19 of the Local Environmental Plan as forming the circumstances where encroachments on the Foreshore Building Line may be justified.

The proposed development itself is of a stepped form and follows the terrain as closely as possible and the dwelling closest to the southern boundary is set back from the most pronounced topographical feature of the site. This feature is a cliff some 20 metres in height which separates the northern part of the site from the lower level closest to the water. It is some 60 metres from Mean High Water Mark and would appear to be the type of feature beyond which development should not extend. As a result the proposal will have only minimal visibility when the site is viewed from the River. To the extent that it might be considered necessary, the proposal could be made even more unobtrusive through the use of suitable materials appropriately coloured, as well as by landscaping, thereby further mitigating any potential visual impact.

On the basis of our assessment of the proposal it is our opinion that it will have only a marginal impact when the site is viewed from the Georges River and that it will therefore have an acceptable aesthetic appearance from such vantage points. Under these circumstances, it is also our opinion, that Council may, by virtue of the provisions of Clause 19 (6) of Hurstville Local Environmental Plan, 1994, grant consent to the application under consideration even though the proposal encroaches on the Foreshore Building Line.

There is one further aspect to the assessment of this aspect of the proposal. That is the fact that there are other buildings in the locality, either existing or approved, which are located beyond the Foreshore Building Line and as close to Mean High Water Mark as the southern part of the subject proposal. Whilst such precedents should not, in themselves, justify the proposal under consideration, they do, nevertheless, reinforce the argument that the encroachment by the subject proposal on the Foreshore Building Line is justified in the circumstances of this particular case.

It should also be noted that 5.5 of the dwellings and their terraces encroach the foreshore building line, however, the whole development stops short of an adjoining dwelling being built at No. 61 Woodlands Avenue.


Tabled Information

Proposed
Repealed
DCP
Com
pliance
Draft
DCP
Rep
Dft
Site Area
4900.0 m2-
Yes
Yes
3150.0 m2
Density
10 dwgs
-
Yes
Yes
15.5 dwgs
Development Area "A"
Building Height
7.0/6.9 m
9.5 m
Yes/Yes
Yes/No
9.0/6.0 m
Private Open Space:
100-272 m2
70.0 m2
Yes
Yes
100 m2 ea
Landscaped Area
2900 m2
(59%)
2695 m2
(55%)
Yes
Yes
including beyond the foreshore line, the escarpment and the proposed buildings
2695 m2
(55%)
Building Setbacks: Front
5.0 m
58.0 m
No
Yes
4.5 m
Side/rear
3.0 m / approx 70m
0.9/0.9 m
Yes/Yes
Yes/Yes
2.0-1.35m/
0.9 m
Residential Parking
20
20
Yes
Yes
20
Visitor Parking
4
4
Yes
Yes
4 (1 per 3 dwgs)
See Comment
Building Envelope - Front of the site
3.5m/45o
3.5m/45o
Yes
Yes
3.5m/45o
- rear of the site
1.5m/45o
3.5m/45o
Yes
No
1.5m/45o
Frontage
16.15 m
-
Yes
Yes
15.0 m min

Comment : Repealed RDCP - The proposal complies with the regulations of Council's repealed code, with the exception of the front setback. The front setback used to be determined by the average of the adjoining dwellings which, in this case, equates to 58.0 metres. This is excessive and a more reasonable setback of 6.0 metres probably would have been imposed. This proposal is only 1.0 metre forward of that.

Height and Building Envelope - The proposed dwellings step down the site and the applicant has designed them this way to specifically reduce the bulk and try to comply with Council's height limit of 6.0 metres for the "rear" of the site. The majority of the dwellings do comply, with the maximum encroachment being 0.9 metres. The sloping nature of the site makes it difficult to comply with the 6.0 metre height limit and Council's Code acknowledges this.

Council's Code also states that a development should not excavate more than 0.5 metres in order to comply with the building envelope. This proposal does excavate more than the specified 0.5 metres, however, again it is due to the sloping nature of the site and the fact that the applicant has tried to step the dwellings down the slope to reduce the overall bulk whilst retaining the southerly views.

Manager, Building Services

The proposal was referred to the appropriate building surveyor who raised concerns as to the grades of the driveway for emergency pedestrian access and possible loss of trees. Also, the internal access to units 1-6 was not considered appropriate under the requirements of the Building Code of Australia.

The applicant has been asked to mirror-reverse the floor plans of units 1-6 to comply with the access requirements under the Building Code of Australia. Also to possibly provide direct access to some of the units, without going through the driveway area. Details of these will be shown with the building application. Some stairs may need to be located in addition to the driveway to comply with Building Code of Australia requirements for emergency situations. Again, these specific details will be submitted with the building application.

Manager, Development Advice

The proposal was referred to the manager who raised no objections subject to :

- all stormwater draining by gravity to the Georges River,

- encroachment of the foreshore building line to allow this development,

- registration of a 1.0 metre wide drainage easement to benefit No. 59A Woodlands Avenue,

- conditions regarding kerb and gutters, crossings and footpaths.

Tree Preservation Officer

No objections were raised as long as the trees indicated on the plan to remain, do so. Please note, a site inspection on 11 September, 1996, revealed that an Angophora located below No. 59 Woodlands Avenue, did, in fact, blow over in the storms on 7-9 September. Unfortunately, it was nominated on the plans for retention.

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. Fifteen (15) individual submissions with two (2) petitions attached were registered and their concerns are outlined below :

i) The development is located in Development Area "A" which has certain environmental constraints which should be met to protect the "sensitive foreshore" area.

Comment : Council's Interim Residential Code allows medium density in Development Area "A". The application is designed to take up less building area on the site by staggering the dwellings down the site. Also the dwellings are proposed to be set back approximately 15.0 metres from the escarpment to protect the native flora and fauna.

ii) The proposal contravenes Council's code in relation to "detached housing", not compatible with existing housing in the street, excessive excavation, excessive bulk, encroaching the foreshore building line and is two and three storey in some parts.

Comment : This proposal was originally submitted under Council's repealed Residential Development Control Plan and through a negotiation process has been amended to comply with most of the requirements under the Interim Residential Development Code. The proposal has been designed in its current form to deliberately take into account the existing sloping nature of the site and the fact that it is located near the foreshore.

The dwellings have been attached and staggered down the slope with the intention of lessening the overshadowing and privacy concerns of immediate neighbours. Also, this reduces the amount of land that the buildings cover. Earlier plans proposed detached housing but problems were encountered with excessive height and privacy.

Unfortunately to keep the site coverage to a minimum and also to comply with Council's height requirement, the proposal involves excavation. The excavation has been amended since the plans were on neighbour notification, the garages at Level 6 have been raised in height by 1.5 metres. However the excavation has a depth of up to 4.0 metres at Unit No. 4 and part of Unit No. 5. This is due to the land sloping across the site as well as from the front to the rear.

The issue of the foreshore building line has been discussed previously and it is Council's responsibility to decide if they wish to allow an encroachment for this application

It is agreed that the proposed dwellings are of a different design to that predominating in the street. However, it is only the first two that will be visible from the street. Should these dwellings be provided with a pitched roof, similar to the rest of the street, it is believed that it will help their appearance. A condition is imposed requiring the front two units to be provided with pitched roofs and details will be required to be included with the building application.

iii) Loss of privacy from the windows on the eastern side.

Comment : This proposal has been specifically designed to reduce any overlooking by providing a very limited number of windows on both sides. Also to the mirror-reverse of the proposal will mean that the bedrooms are now located on the eastern side and hence very little loss of privacy will occur.

iv) Loss of sunlight from the townhouses.

Comment : The townhouses are only 7.0 metres high (at the worst point) and even with the addition of a pitched roof, will not have a significant effect on adjoining properties. The site runs north/south, so adjoining premises will at least have morning or afternoon sunlight. Council's code also allows a 9.0 metre height for the front dwellings, so the proposed dwellings comply.

v) Loss of peace and quiet. If approved, the proposal will signal a change in direction for the riverside parts of Lugarno.

Comment : Council's Repealed Residential Development Control Plan and Interim Residential Development Code allowed medium density in this area and thus signalled a change in the type of housing permissible in Lugarno.

vi) Lack of parking and access is too narrow.

Comment : The proposal complies with Council's Interim Residential Development Code in respect of parking. It has been agreed that, if approved, the visitor spaces be split so that at least two (2) are located closer to the street. A condition to this extent has been proposed on the approval.

vii) Increase in traffic due to the street being a dead end.

Comment : The proposal will increase the number of cars using the street, however, it is believed that the street can cope with this increase.

viii) The number of dwellings is excessive.

Comment : The proposal complies with Council's density requirement under the Interim Residential Development Code, even though it was submitted under Council's repealed Residential Development Control Plan.

ix) What are the potential impacts from excavation, water runoff and an increase in a bushfire hazard.

Comment : If approved, a geotechnical report will be required to be submitted with the building application. All water runoff from roof and paved areas is to be drained by gravity to the Georges River. In the event of a bushfire, there is adequate egress from the development.

x) Does the proposal meet the landscaping?

Comment : Yes, it proves 59% landscaping when 55% is required when the landscaping for the whole site is evaluated.

xi) Private open space is not at ground level.

Comment : This is true and has been designed particularly this way to provide a terracing effect down the slope.

Summary

This application has been with Council now for a period of fourteen (14) months. Numerous negotiations have taken place to try to reduce its impact on adjoining dwellings but still achieve a development for the site.

This application is now before Council to firstly decide if the foreshore building line can be encroached and secondly for a determination on the development.

Council's planning recommendation is for approval for both, since the foreshore building line has no reference to the topography of the site and the proposal has been amended to try to reduce its effects on the immediate area.

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .04.04A
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 57-59 WOODLANDS AVENUE, LUGARNO (298/95)
MEDIUM DENSITY DEVELOPMENT - TEN (10) DWELLINGS
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. T. Christy)


. Recommendation 57-59 WOODLANDS AVENUE, LUGARNO (298/95)
MEDIUM DENSITY DEVELOPMENT - TEN (10) DWELLINGS
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. T. Christy)



RECOMMENDATION


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.05 MISCELLANEOUS AND OTHER MATTERS



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.05.01 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS RECEIVED BETWEEN 1 JULY AND 31 AUGUST, 1996


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .05.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS RECEIVED BETWEEN 1 JULY AND 31 AUGUST, 1996

. Recommendation DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS RECEIVED BETWEEN 1 JULY AND 31 AUGUST, 1996


RECOMMENDATION


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.05.02 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .05.02
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY

. Recommendation DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY


RECOMMENDATION


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 96 09 25TH SEPTEMBER, 1996-



06:01 Ward Councillors' Reports

06:02 Building Applications - Hurstville Ward

06:03 Building Applications - Penshurst Ward

06:04 Building Applications - Peakhurst Ward

06:04.01 5 Gentian Place, Lugarno - New Dwelling (Report By Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)

06:04.02 44 Jindabyne Crescent, Peakhurst - Deck And Pergola "Works Executed" (Report By Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)

06:04.03 63 Lloyd Street, Oatley - Proposed Dwelling Additions (Report By Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)

06:04.04 54 Moons Avenue, Lugarno - New Two Storey Dwelling (Report By Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)

06:05 Miscellaneous And Other Matters

06:05.01 Streamwatch - Water Quality Monitoring Program (Report By Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal)

06:05.02 Legal Matter -Appeal Against Demolition Order (Report By Manager - Building Services, Mr G Young)
(See Item No. 05.01 - Report No 2 By Divisional Manager - Development & Health To The Development, Health And Planning Committee)

06:05.03 Waste Management Regions (Report By Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal)

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


06.01 WARD COUNCILLORS' REPORTS

THERE ARE NO WARD COUNCILLORS' REPORTS FOR THIS MEETING.

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.02 BUILDING APPLICATIONS - HURSTVILLE WARD

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

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 5 GENTIAN PLACE, LUGARNO - New Dwelling (Report by Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .04.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 5 GENTIAN PLACE, LUGARNO - New Dwelling (Report by Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)

. Recommendation 5 GENTIAN PLACE, LUGARNO - New Dwelling (Report by Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)


RECOMMENDATION


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.04.02 44 JINDABYNE CRESCENT, PEAKHURST - Deck and Pergola "Works Executed" (Report by Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .04.02
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 44 JINDABYNE CRESCENT, PEAKHURST - Deck and Pergola "Works Executed" (Report by Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)

. Recommendation 44 JINDABYNE CRESCENT, PEAKHURST - Deck and Pergola "Works Executed" (Report by Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)


RECOMMENDATION


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.04.03 63 LLOYD STREET, OATLEY - Proposed Dwelling Additions (Report by Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .04.03
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 63 LLOYD STREET, OATLEY - Proposed Dwelling Additions (Report by Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)

. Recommendation 63 LLOYD STREET, OATLEY - Proposed Dwelling Additions (Report by Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)


RECOMMENDATION


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.04.04 54 MOONS AVENUE, LUGARNO - New Two Storey Dwelling (Report by Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .04.04
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 54 MOONS AVENUE, LUGARNO - New Two Storey Dwelling (Report by Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)

. Recommendation 54 MOONS AVENUE, LUGARNO - New Two Storey Dwelling (Report by Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)


RECOMMENDATION


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 STREAMWATCH - WATER QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAM (Report by Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal)


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .05.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation STREAMWATCH - WATER QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAM (Report by Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal)

. Recommendation STREAMWATCH - WATER QUALITY MONITORING PROGRAM (Report by Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal)


RECOMMENDATION


THAT:-

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.05.02 LEGAL MATTER -APPEAL AGAINST DEMOLITION ORDER (Report by Manager - Building Services, Mr G Young)
(SEE ITEM NO. 05.01 - REPORT NO 2 BY DIVISIONAL MANAGER - DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH TO THE DEVELOPMENT, HEALTH AND PLANNING COMMITTEE)



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.05.03 WASTE MANAGEMENT REGIONS (Report by Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal)


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .05.03
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation WASTE MANAGEMENT REGIONS (Report by Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal)

. Recommendation WASTE MANAGEMENT REGIONS (Report by Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal)


RECOMMENDATION