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 12 11TH DECEMBER, 1996-


05:01 Ward Councillors' Reports
05:01.01 57 The Avenue, Hurstville (13/95) Section 102 Modification To Three Storey Residential Building (Report By Town Planner, Ms. L. Yousif)

05:02 Development Applications - Hurstville Ward
05:02.01 46-48 Gloucester Road, Hurstville (274/96) Residential Flat Building
(Report By Town Planner, Mr. T. Moody)
05:02.02 136 Forest Road, Hurstville (248/96) Brothel
(Report By Town Planners, Hassell Pty. Ltd.)

05:03 Development Applications - Penshurst Ward
05:03.01 45 Inverness Avenue, Penshurst (453/94) Section 102 Modification - Dual Dwellings (Report By Town Planner, Mr. N. Harrison)
05:03.02 1A-1B Berrille Road, Narwee (261/96) Residential Flat Building
(Report By Town Planners, Hassell Pty. Ltd.)
05:03.03 13-15 Bryant Street, Narwee (252/96) Residential Flat Building
(Report By Town Planners, Hassell Pty. Ltd.)

05:04 Development Applications - Peakhurst Ward
05:04.01 19 Douglas Haig Street, Oatley (332/95) Detached Dual Dwellings
(Report By Town Planner, Ms. L. Yousif)
05:04.02 Legal Matter (See Item 05.01 - Divisional Manager's
No. 2 Report To Development, Health And Planning Committee)

05:05 Miscellaneous And Other Matters
05:05.01 Development Applications Received Between 2 October And 2 December, 1996
05:05.02 Development Applications Determined Under Delegated Authority
05:05.03 32 Chamberlain Street, Narwee ((230/96) Appeal Against Council's Refusal Of D.A. 230/96 For Extension Of 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 96 12 11TH DECEMBER, 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 57 THE AVENUE, HURSTVILLE (13/95)
SECTION 102 MODIFICATION TO THREE STOREY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. L. Yousif)




Applicant : Rhodes Developments Pty. Ltd.
Proposal : THREE STOREY RESIDENTIAL
BUILDING
Zoning : Zone No. 2 - Residential
Residential Development
Control Plan 1994 : Development Area "D"
Owners : Mr. G. Barber
Existing Development : Two (2) Semi-detached Dwellings
Cost of Development : $720,000

PRECIS OF REPORT

1. Section 102 Modification.

2. Six (6) objections have been received raising concern over design, loss of amenity and privacy.

3. Recommendation - approval.



Council at its Meeting held on 20 November, 1996, considered the application and resolved that the matter be referred for an inspection and report by the Hurstville Ward Councillors and appropriate officers.

An amended elevation plan has since been lodged by the applicant which shows the relationship of the proposed building height to the design previously approved by Council.

To reacquaint Councillors with the various aspects of the application the report to the said Meeting is reproduced below :


History

Council at a Meeting held on 23 August, 1995, approved an application for the construction of a three (3) storey residential building containing 5 x 2 bedroom units and 1 x 2 bedroom townhouse. A Section 102 Modification was issued for this approval on 15 May, 1996. This altered the development to allow six (6) three bedroom units to be built on the site.

Current Section 102 Modification

A further Section 102 Modification has been submitted for the proposal. The modifications sought are as follows :

i) Reduction in the amount of excavation on site to take advantage of the site's natural topography and to allow for improved potential for landscaping on site.

ii) Increase resultant height of building by 2.05 metres.

iii) Relocation of driveway area to the north western boundary.

iv) Redesign garage area.

v) Provision of balcony at south-western side of building.

Assessment of Modifications

The reduction in the amount of excavation will result in an RL 23.95 to ridge. (Previously RL 21.90) representing an increase of 2.05 metres.

This height increase is not considered to be significant in this instance, particularly due to the scale of residential development surrounding the site proposal. The reduction in excavation and resultant area for landscaping as submitted by the applicant will enhance the existing streetscape and opportunity for landscaping adjoining property boundaries further reduces potential privacy concerns highlighted in submissions to Council.

Further, shadow diagrams submitted by the applicant have been assessed and are considered to be acceptable. It is acknowledged that reduction in sunlight during the winter months to 55 The Avenue will occur, but not to a significant extent beyond that originally approved.

The remaining amendments, i.e., relocation of driveway, redesign of garage area and provision of balcony at the south-western portion of the building are considered to be satisfactory changes and do not represent a significant change to the building. It should be noted the reduction in excavation will allow for an improved potential for landscaping on the site.

Public Notification and Comment

Adjoining residents were notified by letter of the amended proposal and given twenty-one (21) days in which to view the plans and submit any comments on the proposal. Six (6) submissions were registered and their concerns are outlined below :

i) The amended excavation is clearly a cost cutting exercise. The increased height will cause significant overshadowing resulting in loss of sunshine and light, particularly during winter.

Comment : The reduction in excavation will result in the rear dwellings of the proposal not being cut in to the site, increased landscaping opportunity and a reduction in privacy issues along property boundaries.

Increasing the height will cause some reduction in sunshine and light. This, however, is expected to occur after 11.00 am based on the shadow diagrams supplied.

ii) Further loss of amenity and privacy.

Comment : The amended proposal in effect will reduce loss of privacy and amenity as the proposal is a reduction in the number of units, increased landscaping and screening will result through reduced excavation and the amenity of the locality will be enhanced.

iii) Increased height and exposed bulk of the building is unreasonable and is not in harmony.

Comment : The proposal is of a comparable height, scale to other developments within close proximity and the general locality. The design is comparable in architectural merit and will be sympathetic with the streetscape.

Summary

After considering all of the issues submitted by residents, the nature of the amendments and the general amenity of the locality, it is considered that the proposal is a satisfactory amendment to the original proposal DA 13/95. On this basis the amendment is considered reasonable and approval is recommended.



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .01.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 57 THE AVENUE, HURSTVILLE (13/95)
SECTION 102 MODIFICATION TO THREE STOREY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. L. Yousif)


. Recommendation 57 THE AVENUE, HURSTVILLE (13/95)
SECTION 102 MODIFICATION TO THREE STOREY RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. L. Yousif)



RECOMMENDATION


THAT Council as the consent authority grant development consent for a Section 102 Modification to Development Application No. 13/95 for 6 x 3 bedroom home units at 57 The Avenue, Hurstville, subject to the following conditions :

1. Compliance generally with amended plans submitted with the application datyed 26 August, 1996, prepared by Rhodes Developments Pty. Ltd., and the conditions of consent for Development Application 13/95 issued on 30 August, 1995.

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 46-48 GLOUCESTER ROAD, HURSTVILLE (274/96)
RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING
(Report by Town Planner, Mr. T. Moody)




Applicant : Pacific Allied
Proposal : RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING
Zoning : Zone No. 2 - Residential
Residential Development
Control Plan 1994 : Development Area "D"
Owners : Various
Existing Development : Single Storey Residence and
Part Two Storey Nursing Home
Cost of Development : $1,200,000

PRECIS OF REPORT

1. Proposal to construct a three (3) storey residential flat building consisting of 7x 3 and 6 x 2 bedroom units with basement parking

2. Variation is supported to a number of requirements under Council's Interim Residential Development Control Plan.

3. No objection is raised by Council's Engineers and Building Surveyors.

4. Two (2) submissions, including one letter of objection were received.

5. Recommendation - Approval.


Existing and Surrounding Development

The site comprises two lots, being Lots 1 and 2 DP 983713, Nos. 46 - 48 Gloucester Road, Hurstville. The site has frontage to both Gloucester Road and Pearl Street and lies at the north-eastern intersection of these two streets. The site has a total area of 1316.3 square metres and with a slope down from the southern boundary (Gloucester Road) to the northern boundary.

There is an existing part two storey nursing home on No. 48 and an existing residence on No. 46. Both these structures are proposed to be demolished as part of the current proposal.

The adjoining locality has a mixture of land uses. Immediately to the east is a three storey flat building. To the south, on the opposite side of Gloucester Road area mixture of single storey residences and flat buildings. A mixture of dwellings and flat buildings are in the locality.

Proposed Development

The applicant proposes to demolish the existing nursing home and residence and construct a three storey residential flat development consisting of thirteen (13) units with basement parking. The development has the following features :

* 7 x 3 and 6 x 2 bedroom units in a "U" shaped building.

* A basement carpark level over two levels.

* Vehicular access to the site is via both Pearl Street (approximately 30 metres from the intersection with Gloucester Road) and Gloucester Road (approximately 27 metres from the intersection with Pearl Street)

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 Interim Residential Development Code and its relevant amendments.

The following comments are provided in respect of those areas of non-compliance with the Interim Residential Development Code.


Tabled Information

Proposed
Draft
DCP
Complies
Site Area
1316 m2
1365 m2
No
See Comment
Density
13
12.53
No
See Comment
Development Area "D"
Frontage
33.2 m (Gloucester
39.6 m
(Pearl)
24 m
Yes
Storeys
3
3
Yes
Building Height
11.5 m
12.0 m
Yes
Upper Level Open Space
12 m2 - 2.5m
minimum
dimension
12m2
Yes
Ground Level Open Space
Units 1 and 5 do not comply
50-60 m2
No
See Comment
Landscaped Area
45%
45%
Yes
Building Setbacks: Front
6 m
6 m
Yes
Side
4 - 7 m
4 - 7 m
Yes
Rear
6 m
6 m
Yes
Building Envelope
1.5m and 45o
1.5m and 45o
Yes
Privacy Distance
9 m
7 m
No
See Comment
Residential Parking
15
20
Yes
See Comment


Comment:

Density - Based on Council's IRDC, the site area accommodates 12.53 units or twelve (12) units. The applicant proposes thirteen (13) units. Variation of Council's IRDC is supported on the following grounds.

* the site area is only 46 square metres below the Code requirement for thirteen (13) units which is a very small deficiency.

* the development fits satisfactorily on the site particularly in relation setbacks from boundaries and building envelope.

Ground Level Private Open Space - Four of the units have been provided with courtyards when only balconies are required by Council's IRDC. Unit 1 has a private open space of only 40.8 square metres when 60 square metres is required. Unit 5 has a courtyard of 48 square metres when 50 square metres is required. Variation is recommended given that each courtyard is well in excess of the equivalent balcony requirement for home units. Further, the courtyards to Units 1 and 6 are readily accessible off each unit and, in the case of Unit 1, has a northern orientation.

Privacy Separation - Council's IRDC requires habitable room windows of a new development with a direct outlook of an adjacent dwelling must be set back 9 metres or be offset or screened from the adjacent window. The south eastern wall of the proposed development is to be setback 4 metres to 7.48 metres from the common boundary with the adjoining flat development at No. 44. Whilst the main wall of the flat building at No. 44 would be set back 9 metres from the eastern wall of the proposed development, there are balconies on No. 44 which would encroach within the 9 metre setback requirement to the proposed development. Variation of the 9 metre setback requirement is considered reasonable for the following reasons :

* the side setbacks of the proposed development comply with Council's Code.

* there will be existing and proposed landscaping which will provide screening between the proposed development and the balconies on No. 44.

* the main living rooms of the existing flats on No. 44 will be in excess of the required 9 metre setback from the wall of the proposed development.

In view of the above comments, variation is supported to the above requirements of the IRDC.

Other Section 90 Issues

The proposed development is considered satisfactory in terms of bulk, scale and design.

Whilst the proposed development will create impacts on adjoining properties and the locality, including overshadowing and increased traffic, the level of impact is reasonable given that the site is zoned to permit home units.

It is noted that the proposed development provides five (5) resident parking spaces in excess of Council's Code.

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. One letter did not raise objection but raised concern regarding possible damage to a garage on an adjoining property when construction is undertaken for the home unit development (if Council approves the application). The responsibility to ensure no impact on adjoining structures rests with the applicant/builder of the proposed development.

The letter of objection raised the following concerns :

i) Impact on Gloucester Road

Comment : The proposal is unlikely to have an adverse impact on the local road. Further, the two proposed access crossings are located a satisfactory distance from the nearby intersection of Pearl Street and Gloucester Road.

ii) Development will create an "eyesore"

Comment : The development will no doubt alter the existing low-scale residential development. However, the site is zoned to permit home units and the proposal, subject to modifications is considered a reasonable design.

iii) More Pollution and Shadow Impact

The proposal is likely to lead to more cars and pollution in the district but such an increase will only be very minor compared to existing levels of motor vehicles. Shadows will be cast by the proposed development but the extent of shadow will not be unreasonable.

iv) Water Restrictions

The proposed development will not worsen existing water restrictions

Summary

The proposal is a satisfactory form of development and complies with the Interim Residential Development Code with the exception of minor non-compliances. Variations of Council's requirements are considered reasonable in the circumstances and approval is recommended. Conditions for engineering and building requirements have been included in the consent.


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .02.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 46-48 GLOUCESTER ROAD, HURSTVILLE (274/96)
RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING
(Report by Town Planner, Mr. T. Moody)


. Recommendation 46-48 GLOUCESTER ROAD, HURSTVILLE (274/96)
RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING
(Report by Town Planner, Mr. T. Moody)



RECOMMENDATION


THAT Council as the consent authority grant development consent for establishment of a residential flat building containing 13 residential units and an associated basement carpark at 46-48 Gloucester Road, Hurstville, subject to the following conditions :

1. Compliance generally with Drawing No 97 A1000-8 sheets dated 7 July, 1996 and 97 A1001 - 1 sheet dated 22 November, 1996 tables and documentation prepared by Quick Plan Drafting Service and submitted with DA 274/96, except where amended by the conditions of consent.

2. The approved plans shall be amended in the following manner and such amendments shall be incorporated in the building application for Council's consideration :

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

ii) Each proposed double garage shall have a minimum clear door jamb width of 5.4 metres. Details are to be submitted with the building application.

iii) The northern courtyard fence for Unit 5 shall be relocated so as to be north of the loungeroom of Unit 5.

iv) A minimum of fifteen (15) resident parking and four (4) visitor spaces are to be provided.

v) The driveway area adjacent to proposed garages 9/10 shall be extended 1.0 metre towards Pearl Street in order to ensure sufficient turning area into and out of proposed garages 9/10.

vi) The driveway area adjacent to proposed garage 5 shall be extended 1.0 metre towards Gloucester Road in order to ensure sufficient turning area into and out of proposed garage 5.

vii) A garbage bay area capable of storing and screening a sufficient number of bulk garbage bins plus recycling crates to suit the size of the development shall be provided at the Pearl Street frontage adjacent to the vehicular entry. Details of the enclosure indicating location, size and construction shall be included with the Building Application for the further consideration and approval by Council.

viii) The grade of the driveway off Pearl Street shall be reduced to a 1:5 grade with 2 metre transition sections of 1:8 grade at the top and the bottom of the driveway.

ix) Compliance with the Building Code of Australia shall be demonstrated and in particular the Building Application shall indicate the following:

a) Fire separation of the ascending and descending sections of the stairwell.

b) Travel distances from units to stairwells shall not exceed 6 metres.

c) External windows to units shall be fire separated from egress passageways.

d) Two means of egress shall be provided from the lower level parking area.

x) The landscape area shall be maintained at 592m2 after providing for garbage bay, driveway grades and exit stairs as set out above and 40% of this area shall be capable of accepting deep soil landscaping.

3. 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.

4. 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.

5. The building being constructed in brick and tile to Council's satisfaction.

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. 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.

9. All stormwater to drain by gravity to the kerb and gutter in Pearl Street and all water from the underground garage areas shall be pumped to the same kerb and gutter

10. In accordance with the submitted plans the topmost point shall not exceed an overall height of 12 metres above natural ground level at any point.

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

17. The dedication to Council of a 3m x 3m splay to Pearl Street and Gloucester Road for the purpose of road widening. The dedication shall be registered prior to the issue of a Certificate of Classification/Building Certificate. The required dedication shall be at no cost to Council.

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 written 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. 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 all site 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. 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. 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.

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

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

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/Building Certificate.

29. 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 and shall include a width suitable for two way traffic at the Pearl Street entry to the site.

30. 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.

31. Applicant to pay Council to :
a) Construct two (2) of 150 mm thick concrete crossings reinforced with F72 mesh
b) Replace redundant layback with kerb and gutter
c) Replace the damaged old concrete footpaving in Pearl Street with a 1.52 metre wide by 80mm thick concrete path for the full depth of the site.
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.

32. The private courtyards and/or balconies to each proposed unit shall be screened from view by appropriate fencing to the satisfaction of Council. Details of the proposed screening shall be provided in conjunction with the building application.

33. Walls separating a bathroom, sanitary compartment, laundry or kitchen in one sole occupancy unit from a habitable room in an adjoining unit must have an STC of not less than 50. Details are to be submitted with the building application.

34. The courtyard fencing fronting the adjoining public streets must have openings which marked it not less than 50% transparent. Details of the required fencing shall be submitted with the building application.

35. 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 $42,804 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

36. 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 $4,772 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.02.02 136 FOREST ROAD, HURSTVILLE (248/96)
BROTHEL
(Report by Town Planners, Hassell Pty. Ltd.)




Applicant: Ms T Dixon
Proposal: BROTHEL
Zoning: Zone 3(B)-City Centre Business
Owner: Michael Doong
Existing Development: Residential/Commercial Use (Unauthorised Brothel)


Precis of Report

1. The proposal is to formalise the existing use of the premises as a brothel.

2. The matter has been assessed pursuant to Section 90 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.

3. There are no engineering conditions required, however objection has been raised by Council’s Health and Building Department.

4. In excess of 600 signatures have been obtained objecting to the proposal via petition. In addition there have been 20 submissions received.

5. Recommendation refusal


Existing and Surrounding Development

The subject site is located on the north-western side of Forest Road between The Avenue and Hudson Street, Hurstville. The site is currently occupied by a single storey building of masonry, brick and metal roof construction, with no side boundary setback and nil building line to Forest Road. At the rear of the premises is a garage of masonry and fibro construction with access via a right of way to Hudson Street.

The site is in close proximity to the transport and services of Hurstville business centre. It is on the fringe of the business centre and is therefore in close proximity to other fringe uses, such as the church on the corner of The Avenue and Forest Road, and the medium density residential uses, particularly in Hudson Street.


Proposed Development

The applicant is seeking Council consent to formalise the use of the premises as a brothel. It appears that the premises has been operating according to the applicant, since 1978.

Council’s files indicate that an application for a Yoga and Meditation Centre involving a floor layout similar to that which exists in the premises now, was refused by Council in August, 1977. At that time, it was considered that the conversion of the premises to a commercial use of this size was an overdevelopment of the site and that there were concerns over the provision of off-street parking relating to the use. The application involved the conversion of the premises from purely residential to a mixed use shop and residence.

This application includes 4 bedrooms, a lounge, a store, reception/waiting and kitchen facilities for use as a brothel. A bathroom has been provided in the premises and each bedroom contains a separate shower receptacle. Access to the site can be via either Forest Road or Hudson Street. The existing garage allows potential parking for only 1 vehicle.

The number of employees associated with the continued use was stated as being 4. This is described as being a permanent manageress and 3 casual receptionists. Little has been provided in the way of staff parking.


Statutory Requirements

The subject site is zoned 3(b)-City Centre Business under Hurstville Local Environmental Plan, 1994. As a commercial operation the use is permissible, with the consent of Council but with recent amendments to legislation brothels are now a particularly described development. This Council is currently exhibiting for public comment, an amendment to the Hurstville Local Environmental Pla to make brothels permissible, with Council consent, in commercial and industrial areas. Thus Council has not yet made a final decision on a development policy for brothels.


Assessment

It appears from Council’s file that the conversion of the premises from a residential use to a commercial use was carried out without consent. On this basis, it is reasonable that Council does not consider the use of the premises over the last 18 years as a benchmark for assessing this application. It is felt that lack of objections in the past does not equate to condoning an illegal use. Matters assssed under planning requirements are as follows :

i) Parking

ii) Hours of Usage

iii) Section 90


Public Notification and CommentThe proposal was notified to adjoining owners and fourteen (14) days allowed in which to view the plans and submit any comments. A total of 20 submissions were received from nearby residents and the community generally in addition to a petition containing 600+ signatures. The main issue in the submissions and in the petition have been summarised below.

i) Residential Amenity

Comment : There is concern that the proposed use will impact on the amenity of the multi-storey residential development in close proximity to the site. There is the potential for patrons to impact upon the amenity of the surrounding residential property, given the extent of trading hours and the promotion of access to the premises via Hudson Street, which contains a significant amount of residential development. A number of complaints were received regarding the patrons, both leaving and entering the site, and their behaviour in so doing.

ii) Land Use Compatibility

Comment : A number of submissions are concerned about the compatibility or otherwise of the brothel with nearby activities, particularly church activities. These activities range from pre-school centre uses, youth fellowship, mothers club, prayer meetings and bible study groups. A number of other uses are also mentioned in the submissions.

iii) Traffic

Comment : Concern has been raised over parking and traffic. Access and parking are both particular areas of concern with the application and there is no detailed assessment of the traffic generation that may be expected from such a use. A traffic and car parking assessment should be considered prior to any support for the proposal.


SummaryAfter considering all the aspects of the development and the heads of consideration in section 90 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, it is believed that the proposal is not satisfactory. It is clear that there is an overwhelming amount of public opposition to the proposal.

Opposition is based on its proximity to uses such as St Georges Anglican Church, the residential uses of Hudson Street and several schools, including Hurstville Public School, in the immediate vicinity. Whilst these issues are often particularly emotive and raise the difficult question as to whether or not the brothel is morally acceptable, there are a number of issues raised such as the impact on the amenity of the area in terms of the inadequate parking which are quite legitimate planning grounds.

It is clear from the submissions that the present use of the premises does impact on the amenity of the neighbourhood and that there is insufficient parking provided on the premises for staff, and no consideration for providing parking for customers. While changes to the legislation have set up a framework where such institutions can be approved by Councils, it appears that this location does not comply with latest laws as it is too near to a church and a residential area. The application does not provide sufficient details in an area where there are particularly relevant issues, and on this basis, it cannot be supported.



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .02.02
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 136 FOREST ROAD, HURSTVILLE (248/96)
BROTHEL
(Report by Town Planners, Hassell Pty. Ltd.)


. Recommendation 136 FOREST ROAD, HURSTVILLE (248/96)
BROTHEL
(Report by Town Planners, Hassell Pty. Ltd.)



RECOMMENDATION


THAT Council as the consent authority, refuse development consent, for the use of the premises 136 Forest Road, Hurstville, as a brothel for the following reasons:

1. The proposal is inadequate in terms of on-site parking for both staff and customers.

2. The proposal has in the past, had an impact on the residential amenity of the area and is considered likely to in the future.

3. There has been significant public interest in the proposal, resulting in an overwhelming number of submissions, requesting the application be rejected.

4. The circumstances of the case and the public interest.


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 45 INVERNESS AVENUE, PENSHURST (453/94)
SECTION 102 MODIFICATION - DUAL DWELLINGS
(Report by Town Planner, Mr. N. Harrison)




Applicant : Mr. B. Juric
Proposal : SECTION 102 MODIFICATION -
DUAL DWELLINGS
Zoning : Zone No. 2 - Residential
Residential Development
Control Plan 1994 : Development Area "B"
Owners : Mr. B. Juric
Existing Development : Single Dwelling House
Cost of Development : $90,000

PRECIS OF REPORT

1. Proposed modification of approved development is substantially the same as DA 453/94.

2. Modified design creates additional storeroom space through excavation.

3. No advertising required as impact from the modifications to surrounding properties is negligible. One (1) submission only to original application received.

4. Recommendation - Approval.


Background

On 9 November, 1994, Council approved the development of a second dwelling with an attic master bedroom. The proposed dwelling will have frontage to Hawk Street being set back 3.5 metres from the new front boundary. The attic space will have its windows facing the western and southern elevations away from the adjoining property.

The modifications were submitted by the applicant on 7 November, 1996 with new plans under Section 102 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. These plans are the subject of this report.

The Section 102 Modifications are to be forwarded to Council for approval without notifying neighbours due to the minor nature of the proposal and the act that there is no change to the building height or elevations.

Existing and Surrounding Development

The area is a mixture of single and multiple dwellings.

Section 90

The site has been inspected and the proposed modifications are in accordance with the provisions of Section 90 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.

Statutory Requirements

The subject site is zoned No. 2 - Residential under the Hurstville Development Control Plan 1994 with the Section 102 amendment being permissible with Council's consent. The proposal has been assessed against the provisions of the (now repealed) Residential Development Control Plan 1994, because DA 453/94 was lodged at a time when that plan was still in force.

Proposed Amendments

The Section 102 amendment for this application is to excavate a proposed cellar and storeroom to a depth of 2.0 metres below the existing floor level on the right hand portion of the dwelling as viewed from the southern/Hawk Street elevation.

The storeroom area is to be utilised by the applicant for the storage of work related tools/equipment etc., and is to be conditioned accordingly.

Manager, Building Services

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 a building application being submitted and advisory notes.

Manager, Development Advice

No objection is made subject to the original conditions.

Public Notification and Comment

The Section 102 amendment for this application was not notified due to the nature of the works no increase in building height and bulk and the original application having one (1) only submission registering concerns to the proposed attic space, attic windows and the removal of certain trees.

This modification has no effect on these issues.





HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .03.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 45 INVERNESS AVENUE, PENSHURST (453/94)
SECTION 102 MODIFICATION - DUAL DWELLINGS
(Report by Town Planner, Mr. N. Harrison)


. Recommendation 45 INVERNESS AVENUE, PENSHURST (453/94)
SECTION 102 MODIFICATION - DUAL DWELLINGS
(Report by Town Planner, Mr. N. Harrison)



RECOMMENDATION


THAT Council as the consent authority grant development consent to the Section 102 Modification of DA 453/94 for excavation of the cellar/storeroom in the dual occupancy at No. 45 Inverness Avenue, cnr. Hawk Street, Penshurst, subject to the consent conditions being modified as follows :

1. Compliance generally with Drawing presented by La Croid Design tables and documentation dated August, 1994 and amended plans dated 15 October, 1996 and submitted with DA 453/94, except where amended by the conditions of consent.

27. The storeroom shall not be used for habitable purposes, i.e., living room, bedroom or the like.

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.03.02 1A-1B BERRILLE ROAD, NARWEE (261/96)
RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING
(Report by Town Planners, Hassell Pty. Ltd.)



PSP9314.2791.202


Applicant : Gus Fares
Proposal : RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING
Zoning : Zone No. 2 - Residential
Residential Development
Control Plan 1994 : Development Area "D"
Owners : P. Catlin & W. Curry
Existing Development : Two (2) Single Storey Dwellings
Cost of Development : $700,000

PRECIS OF REPORT

1. The proposal is to construct 8 x 3 and 2x2 bedroom dwellings with ancillary car parking.

2. The proposal is not in compliance with the criteria of Council's policy.

3. No objection is raised by Council's Engineers and Building Surveyors.

4. Seven (7) letters of objection have been received from nearby and surrounding residents.

5. Recommendation - Approval.


Proposed Development

The applicant proposes to demolish the existing dwellings on the site and replace them with a residential flat building containing three floors of units with car parking under. The proposed development is located between Berrille Road and Bryant Street with frontage to Berrille Road.

The parking level is generally below ground and will be accessed along the south western boundary of the site. Development on-site is constrained to some extent, as the property is of triangular shape.

Statutory Requirement

The subject site is Zoned No. 2 - Residential, under the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 1994. The proposal is permissible with the consent of Council.

Compliance with Interim Residential Development Code Requirements

The proposal has been assessed against Councils Interim Residential Development Code and there are several key areas where the development is in non-compliance. These are discussed in greater detail later in the report.

The following table summarises the proposals compliance with the provisions of the Interim Residential Development Code. Further comment is provided where appropriate.

ProposedCompliesInterim DCP
Site Area1137m2Yes1050m2
Density10Yes10
Building Height10.14mYes12m
Private Open Spacesee commentsee commentsee comment
Building Setbacks
Front
Rear
6m (see comment)
No rear setback
Yes
-
6m
-
Residential Parking14Yes12
Visitor Parking3Yes3
Building Setbacks
Nth Side
Sth Side
see comment
see comment
No
No
4m - 7m
4m - 7m
Frontage27.5mYes24m

Comment :

Building Design - this proposal has been designed to fit on an irregular shaped allotment which has frontage to Berrille Road. Not only is the property of irregular shape but also its location on the bend in Berrille Road adds to the unusual arrangement. The design that results from the angled boundary has a stepped facade and has significant amounts of articulation. Arguably the building design is much better than what may result from a straight sided proposal on a regular shaped allotment.

Setbacks - due to the irregular shape of the allotment there have been several areas of non-compliance with Council’s requirements for building setbacks. Whilst Councils DCP attempts to cover most scenarios there will always be allotments or development where there are exceptional circumstances.

As mentioned in the building design comment, this proposal has staggered facades that significantly add to the appearance of the development. In creating these steps there has been minor intrusions of the corners of the building to the setback, particularly to the northern boundary. The building does comply the minimum setback requirement of 4m, however has an average setback of 4.75. On the second floor plan this setback is increased to 6.2m with an average setback of 7m. The strict compliance would result in a straight wall which would then conflict with the performance criteria for design in Council’s policy. There are also intrusions by balconies into this setback which are excessive but which can be dealt with by conditions on any development consent. This may involve either reducing the size of the balconies or their deletion.

The proposal does not comply with the setback requirement to the south western boundary. Whilst the development has maintained the minimum setback requirement of 4m for the ground and first floor, the minimum setback of 7m has not been achieved for the second floor. Units 201 and 202 which are of generous proportions, each containing three bedrooms could be reduced in size. It is considered that the 7m setback on the southern western boundary should be adhered to and that the additional balconies provided off the lounge/dining areas of these two units should be reduced so as to have a minimum setback from the boundary of 6m.

There are a number of balconies, particularly on the second floor plan, which encroach significantly inside the setback requirements. In particular the balconies to both master bedrooms of units 201 and 202 should be reduced so as to comply with Council’s setback requirements or deleted. There will be non compliance with the setback requirement for balconies fronting Berrille Road, however it is considered that the generous road reserve at this point provides a significant buffer to the development and the provision of these balconies enhances the amenity of the proposal.

Council is also considering a proposal for the development adjoining the north eastern boundary. As a result, there is the potential for loss of privacy for balconies that encroach within the setback. On this basis any consent should be conditional upon the balconies on the northern elevation complying with Council’s policy. It is envisaged that a condition of consent can be imposed to seek compliance and that on the first floor plan, this may result in the deletion of bedrooms for units 103 and 104. Notwithstanding, private use of open space should be provided for in accordance with Council’s code and balconies should not encroach inside these setbacks.

Loss of privacy - as mentioned there is a potential for loss of privacy resulting from the development as submitted by the applicant. It is considered that with the above suggested changes these concerns would be largely overcome.

Other Section 90 Issues

Potential for Overshadowing : As this development has an existing residential flat building along the south western boundary there is a potential for overshadowing. It is on this basis that compliance of the 7m setback of the second floor is sought. There also appears to be no basis for a variation along this boundary.

Manager, Building Services

No objection has been raised to the proposed development subject to a number of conditions which have been incorporated in the recommendation.

Engineers Comment

No objection has been raised to the proposed development subject to a number of conditions. This includes the obtaining of an easement to drain water to Bryant Street and Council stormwater as distinct from draining to Berrille Road.

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 21 days in which to view the plan and submit any comments on the proposal. A total of seven submissions were received from nearby residents during the advertising period. Of these submissions four are a proforma letter used by the residents of 1C Berrille Road which is an adjoining block of units. The submissions raised a number of concerns ranging from loss of property values to access, construction noise, garbage collection, the number of people that will result in the development, overshadowing and loss of privacy. The proforma letter raised the same issues with additional matters such as increased noise, vandalism, fumes, pollution and the increased density of the development that is taking place in the area.

There are two distinct issues that come through in the submissions. The first being whether or not it is right to allow multi unit development in the area and the second is more specific impacts that may result from such a development. Obviously the decision to allow multi development has been made and the applicant is perfectly within their rights to lodge an application to achieve allowable densities. This represents a change in development style in the area and with the proposed development of 13-15 Bryant Street taking place it indicates Narwee is experiencing some growth.

Specific issues such as loss of privacy and overshadowing are of more concern although it is considered that they have been dealt with earlier in the report. Appropriate conditions attached to any development consent seeking compliance with setback requirements for balconies and seeking compliance to the setback requirements for that part of the building that will cause overshadowing are appropriate.

Concern has also been raised over potential traffic impacts. No concerns have been raised by Council’s engineering department in respect to traffic matters and it is believed that the development will not result in significant traffic generation.

Summary

The proposal has resulted in a good design on an irregular shaped allotment. As a result there are minor areas of non compliance which appear to be justified.

There are also two key areas relating to the setbacks on the south western boundary and the provision of balconies within Council setback requirements which should not be supported. As these matters appear to be easily overcome by appropriate conditions of consent the proposal does not warrant refusal.

Having taken into account the above, including matters pursuant to Section 90 of the Environment and Planning Act, approval of the application subject to conditions is warranted.


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .03.02
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 1A-1B BERRILLE ROAD, NARWEE (261/96)
RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING
(Report by Town Planners, Hassell Pty. Ltd.)


. Recommendation 1A-1B BERRILLE ROAD, NARWEE (261/96)
RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING
(Report by Town Planners, Hassell Pty. Ltd.)



RECOMMENDATION


THAT Council, as the consent authority grant consent to the establishment of 8 x 3 bedroom and 2 x 2 bedroom dwellings with basement car parking at 1A - 1B Berrille Road, Narwee, subject to the following conditions:

1. Compliance generally with Drawing No DA01 to DA07, Issue B as amended and received by Council on 11 September, 1996, tables and documentation prepared by Ghassan Fares dated July, 1996 and submitted with DA 261/96, 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. The balconies facing the northern boundary complying with the requirement of Council’s policy.

5. Mirrors or similar devices are to be provided on the driveway to facilitate two way vehicular movement to the satisfaction of the Council’s Engineer.

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.
Note: The engineer must also detail the method of subsoil drainage, including disposal of stormwater from the basement level.

7. Submission to Council of a report prepared by a qualified Geotechincal Engineer practising in the field of geotechnical investigations detailing the stability of the site and specifying any design constraints to be placed on the foundations, earthworks and excavations for the proposed building.

8. Structural details being submitted with the building application detailing the proposed method of supporting/retaining the excavation until the basement slab is constructed to stabilise basement walls.

9. During excavation and construction of the proposed development, adequate environmental controls must be undertaken as outlined in Council’s “Guidelines on Sediment and Silt Control” to ensure there are no sediments, spillages or contaminated water which leaves the building site. Details of sediment and silt control measures must be submitted with the building application.

10. Maximum noise levels from any mechanical ventilation system or equipment must not exceed the background noise level when measured at the boundary or within any adjoining residential premises. An accoustical engineers report must be submitted prior to the installation of any mechanical ventilation system or equipment. Details of the ventilation system’s discharge point must also be submitted with the building application.

11. A closet pan and wash basin in a compartment or room at ground level and accessible to employees without entering a sole occupancy unit must be provided (Note access to sewer may not be possible at basement level).

12. The garbage bay area must be capable of storing 10 x 120 litre garbage carts and 4 recycling crates and is to be located adjacent to the street frontage.

13. The setback of the second floor of the units on the south western boundary complying with Council requirements of 7m with the exception that balconies may extend to within 6m of that boundary.


14. 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 $32,210 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

15. 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 $3,592 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

16. 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 $2,012 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

17. All stormwater to drain by gravity to Council’s pipeline/location in 13 Bryant (via a registered 1.0 metre wide basement).

18. Applicant to pay Council to :
a) Replace the existing concrete crossings with K&G and grass;
b) Construct a 150 metre thick concrete crossing reinforced with F72 mesh;
c) Construct a 1.52 metre wide by 80 metre thick concrete path for full width of the site.
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.

19. In accordance with the survey plan and levels submitted by W. Buxton Pty. Ltd., the proposed dwelling/s shall not exceed 10.41 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. Finished RL's to be submitted with the building application plans.

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 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.

22. 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.

23. 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.

24. 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.

25. 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.

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

27. 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.

28. 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.

29. 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.

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

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

32. 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.

33. 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.

ADVISORY NOTES REGARDING THE SUBMISSION OF A BUILDING APPLICATION

A) A minimum of two exits must be provided from the basement car park in accordance with clause D1.2 of the Building Code of Australia.

B) The travel distance from the entrance doorway of sole occupancy unit 104 must not be more than 6 metres to the required exit in accordance with clause D 1.4 of the Building Code of Australia.

C) Ventilation to the basement car park must be provided in accordance with clause F 4.11 of the Building Code of Australia. Should a system of mechanical ventilation be proposed, details prepared by a suitably qualified mechanical engineer must be submitted to Council complying with AS 1668.

D) A 1.0 metre wide path leading to the road or open space must be provided from the proposed exit stairs at the rear of the basement.

E) Hydrants and hose reels must be provided in accordance with Part E1 of the Building Code of Australia. Details prepared by a suitably qualified hydraulic engineer must be submitted to Council, complying with AS 2419 & 2441 respectively.

F) Details of the internal sanitary mechanical ventilation system complying with AS 1668.2 must be submitted for approval. Consideration must also be given to maintaining the required noise transmission ratings and five separation between adjoining units.

G) The building must be provided with a system of Smoke Hazard Management in accordance with Part E2 of the Building Code of Australia. Details prepared by a suitably qualified person to be submitted for approval.

H) Emergency lighting and exit signs must be installed in the building in accordance with Part E4 of the Building Code of Australia. Details complying with AS 2293.1 must be submitted to Council.

I) Noise transmission and insulation between walls of adjoining units must comply with Part F5 of the Building Code of Australia. Details of the wall construction between habitable and non-habitable rooms must be submitted for approval.
J) All doors which form part of a required exit, except the entrance door of each sole occupancy unit, must swing in the direction of egress.




HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.03.03 13-15 BRYANT STREET, NARWEE (252/96)
RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING
(Report by Town Planners, Hassell Pty. Ltd.)





Applicant : Mr. P. Paradisis
Proposal : RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING
Zoning : Zone No. 2 - Residential
Residential Development
Control Plan 1994 : Development Area "D"
Owners : A. Smeal and V & M Lam
Existing Development : Two (2) Single Storey Dwellings
Cost of Development : $950,000

PRECIS OF REPORT

1. The proposal is to construct 8x3 bed and 1x4 bedroom residential flats with ancillary car parking.

2. The proposal is not in compliance with the requirements of Council’s Policy.

3. No objection is raised by Council’s engineers and building surveyors.

4. Two (2) submissions have been received raising concern over traffic, design, loss of privacy and overshadowing.

5. Recommendation - Refusal.

Existing and Surrounding Development

The site comprises two existing allotments each currently occupied by detached single storey weatherboard residences. Existing dwellings are in a reasonable state of repair but have not been maintained, presumably on the expectation of redevelopment. The site is almost level.

The predominant form of development in the locality is detached dwellings mostly of a single storey nature. There are a scattering of two storey developments which appear to be more recent. There is also a scattering of three storey residential flat buildings although none appear to have been constructed in recent times.

Two of these three storey developments are in close proximity to the site one being immediately to the east and sharing a common boundary and the other being to the south west. Whilst the former of these is relatively bland in terms of articulation and design the latter has varied setbacks by virtue of its staggered elevation.

Proposed Development

The applicant proposes to demolish the existing dwellings on the site and replace them with a residential flat building. The new development will contain 8x3 bedroom dwellings and 1x4 bedroom dwelling. Below this will be basement car parking for the development.

Access to the site is via Bryant Street to the basement car parking. The parking level is generally below ground. The development site is constrained by an easement that traverses the front of the property. This has had an impact on the location of the building within the site.

Statutory Requirements

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

Compliance with Interim Residential Development Code Requirement

The proposal has been assessed against Council’s Interim Residential Development Code (IRDC) and there are several key areas of non-compliance. These are discussed in greater detail later in the report.

The following table summarises the proposal’s compliance with the provisions of the IRDC. Further comment is provided where appropriate:


ProposedCompliesInterim DCP
Site Area930m2No945m2
Density9No8
Building Height11.7m maxYes12 m max
Private Open Spacesee commentsee commentsee comment
Building Setbacks
Front
Rear
6.2m

see comment
Yes

No
6m

6m
Residential Parking11Yes11
Visitor Parking3Yes3
Building Setbacks
Nth Side
Sth Side
See comment
See comment
Yes
Yes
4m/7m
4m/7m
Frontage30.48mYes24m
No of storeys4No3

Comment :

Building Design - this proposal is a product of an irregular shaped allotment which fronts Bryant Street. Not only is the property of irregular shape it also is traversed by a significant easement resulting in a front setback that varies from 6.2m to up 11m. This produces a number of constraints on the site.

The applicant has stated that in order to overcome these site constraints yet still have a viable development there has been a need to seek a variation to Council’s policy in several areas. The most obvious of these is that the development contains four storeys as distinct from Councils requirement of only three. Discussions with Council officers has been on the basis that the proposal must comply with the building envelope controls and that the fourth storey is substantially designed as attic space. The result is that whilst the development does not comply with the three storey limit, its overall shape and therefore its potential impact is much the same as a three storey proposal.

This has not been achieved because of the amount of space required in the attic. The building front and rear facades include walls at the fourth storey. The presentation of this development to Bryant Street is of a 4 storey development.

The roof space has been used to provide bedrooms for three of the units in a townhouse style arrangement. In order to add design features and provide additional light dormer windows have been provided to these rooms. Whilst these result in a minor encroachment of the building envelope their removal would have a negative effect on the design and amenity of the bedrooms. If the use of the attic by having a fourth storey had not been proposed, there would be total compliance.

Setbacks - Council has a requirement of a minimum setback of 4m on the first and second storeys and a setback which increases to 7m on the third storey. This is to control a number of aspects including privacy, bulk and appearance and potential overshadowing. The development does not comply with these requirements in that there is an intrusion at the lower levels particularly on the eastern elevation.

Stormwater easement across the northern section of the site has meant the development has been pushed into the southern section. The result has been that the car park at basement level extends to both side boundaries and its egress points are within the 4m setback.

The main entrance to the building and the stairwell leading up out of the basement car park are located within the 4m setback on the eastern boundary. This intrusion is limited to a single storey, but represents one more intrusion into the setbacks.

At the upper levels, there is also some non-compliance with side setbacks. In this regard the building on the eastern elevation encroaches at its closes point to 6.3m and on the western elevation to 6.4 metres. It should be stated however that these encroachments are only for small parts of the building.

The applicant has not addressed the non-compliance with the side boundary setbacks except to say that the site has particular constraints because of its shape. There are a number of impacts which result from the non-compliance which also have not been adequately addressed.

Private Open Space - Balcony Sizes - there is a non-compliance with three of the balcony sizes being for units 2, 5 and 8. In addition, some of the balconies intrude into the side boundary setback requirements. An argument has been put forward that the balconies add to the design by giving articulation but in this regard it is considered that this articulation should be provided but not at the expense of side boundary setbacks where the potential to increase loss of privacy is enhanced.

Loss of Privacy - as mentioned, there is a potential for loss of privacy where balconies encroach greater than they should on side boundary setbacks. It brings these areas closer to the adjoining development at 9 Bryant Street, and will potentially impact on development that may take place at 17 Bryant Street. In order to overcome some of these concerns the applicant reorientated one of the balconies away from the rear (southern) boundary to the western one.

Other Section 90 Issues

Potential for overshadowing : As this development is on the southern side of Bryant Street it shares a common boundary along its southern side with a proposed development at Berrille Road. Given the properties orientation combined with the increased setback from Bryant Street (resulting from the stormwater easement) the development is as close as possible to the southern boundary. The flow on effect is that there will be overshadowing of the proposed residential flat building at No. 1A and 1B Berrille Road. This is arguably increased by the additional storey.

Manager, Building Services

No objection has been raised to the proposal subject to a number of conditions which have been incorporated in the recommendation.

Manager, Development Advice

No objection has been raised to the proposal subject to a number of conditions which have been incorporated in the recommendation.

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. A total of two submissions were received from nearby residents during the advertising period. The issues raised in these submissions have been summarised and addressed as follows.

One of the submissions was from the existing block of units at No. 9 Bryant Street and was concerned with loss of privacy and loss of amenity through overshadowing. In addition concern was raised over working hours during the construction process.

There are balconies proposed off units 2,5 and 8 which face the eastern boundary. In particular, the balcony on the upper floor which is off unit 9 is only 4.2 metres from the boundary.

A further submission was received from an adjoining property raising concern over the construction of residential flat buildings and noise that may be generated from the underground garages.

Summary

The proposal has a number of areas of non compliance with Councils IRDC as well as exceeding the density requirements by a minor amount. It is difficult to justify the number of areas of non compliance and even harder to support a variation to density requirements when the site has so many constraints.

The development erodes the integrity of Council’s policy by seeking conditions without sound basis. The appearance is seeking an increased density but at the expense of other properties and without providing other attributes to negate impacts.

If Council Policy is to be varied, then the applicant has to demonstrate the benefits derived. This is difficult when the variations result in loss of amenity, loss of privacy, additional bulk in the streetscape and an undermining of the integrity of Council Policy.

There have been objections relating to impacts which will result from non compliance with the Council’s requirements. This adds weight to the decision to refuse the application. Variation to Council Policy should not be at the expense of the adjoining properties.


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .03.03
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 13-15 BRYANT STREET, NARWEE (252/96)
RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING
(Report by Town Planners, Hassell Pty. Ltd.)


. Recommendation 13-15 BRYANT STREET, NARWEE (252/96)
RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDING
(Report by Town Planners, Hassell Pty. Ltd.)



RECOMMENDATION


THAT the matter be deferred for an inspection and further report by the Ward Councillors and appropriate officers to consider if site constraints warrant a code variation AND THAT delegated authority be granted to the General Manager to approve the application if so recommended by the Ward Councillors.


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 19 DOUGLAS HAIG STREET, OATLEY (332/95)
DETACHED DUAL DWELLINGS
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. L. Yousif)




Applicant : Mr. Joseph Mazza
Proposal : DETACHED DUAL DWELLINGS
Zoning : Zone No. 2 - Residential
Residential Development
Control Plan 1994 : Development Area "A"
Owners : Mr. Joseph Mazza
Existing Development : Single Dwelling
Cost of Development : $150,000

PRECIS OF REPORT

1. Consideration of amended plan.

2. Amended proposal exhibited. Nine (9) letters of objection received and one (1) petition. Nineteen (19) letters of support submitted by adjoining residents, seven (7) in Douglas Haig Street.

3. Amended proposal considered reasonable.

4. Recommendation - "Deferred Commencement" approval.



Background

Council at its meeting held on 27 March, 1996, considered an application for the construction of a second dwelling on the subject site. A copy of this report is reproduced below in order to allow Councillors to reacquaint themselves with same.



Existing and Surrounding Development

The site is located in Development Area "A", in Oatley. It is a narrow site, with a frontage and general width of 13.715 metres, however, it has a total area of 627 square metres.

The existing dwelling is located at the rear of the site as it is much flatter in that portion. The front section has a fall away from the street of approximately 3.6 metres in 25 metres. This front portion is currently left in its natural state with rocky outcrops and five (5) substantial trees. A pedestrian path winds its way to the existing house, however, there is no off-street parking for that dwelling.

Stormwater currently discharges into a pit at the rear of the house and then seeps into the ground.

The surrounding houses are generally a mixture of one and two storey due to the slope of the land. A variety of materials have been used in the area, however, the predominant form is brick. The houses in the street are largely single detached dwellings.

History


12/7/95Application lodged with Council officers for a detached dual occupancy.
11/9/95Applicant advised that additional information is required to assess the application.
18/9/95Meeting held between Council officers and applicant to discuss problems with the proposal and possible amendments.
11/10/95Applicant advised Council officers that they were still negotiating a possible stormwater easement.
12/12/95Meeting with Council officers and applicant re. the amendments and stormwater.
5/1/96Amended plans received.
19/1/96-
2/2/96
Adjoining owners notified of amended plans.


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 Council's Interim Residential Development Code 1995.

Proposed Development

The proposal is to establish a second dwelling on the subject site, detached from the existing single storey dwelling. It will be located at the front of the site, and due to the slope of the land, will be a two-storey split level design. From the street, it will appear as a two-storey dwelling.

The design incorporates a round roof, with construction of timber weatherboards for the main walls and concrete blocks for the lower storey. The roof will be constructed of corrugated metal roof.

The entry foyer, garage and study are at street level, with a split level down at the rear to accommodate laundry and living room. Bedrooms are located above the entry level with a bridge connecting the east side to the west. A void area exists above the foyer with glass louvres allowing view to the street. The kitchen, dining and family rooms are located above the laundry and living room at the rear of the dwelling.

The amended proposal was decreased in height and re-designed internally to ensure that a large Eucalypt and Angophora could be maintained. These trees will be located adjacent to the study and upper bedroom, and to ensure their roofs are not affected; that part of the dwelling will be constructed on piers instead of on a solid wall.

The applicant has tried to maintain the existing rocky outcrops by building above them, instead of excavating into them. The proposal still complies with Council's height requirements and now provides a private open space courtyard area which is maintained in its natural state. This is located partially under the living room (with a head clearance ranging from 1.8 metres to 2.4 metres); and to the eastern side of the living room, thus achieving adequate sunlight. A deck area extends from the living room, which has a total of approximately 17 square metres and is included as part of the private open space area. This needs to be increased by 3 metres to comply with Council's repealed code, however it forms an adequate useable portion of the private open space.

Vehicle access will be provided to the rear dwelling by constructing a ramp down the eastern side boundary and providing a return bay, adjacent to the proposed deck. The ramp will be elevated (a maximum of 1.8 metres near the street) so as to achieve appropriate grades. The resulting grade is 1:5 with transient grades located at each end. A car space will be provided to the eastern side of the existing bedroom 1, adjacent to the eastern side boundary. This ramp is 2.5 metres wide to ensure the two trees are maintained. It is suggested that this be widened to 2.7 metres alongside the private open space area, once it is clear of the two trees.

The applicant has argued that the proposed dwelling cannot be lowered any more due to the natural constraints of the site. If it were to be lowered it would result in a floor plan that is impractical, due to the amount of stairs and levels, rooms below the driveway ramp and loss of the natural rocky outcrops.


Tabled Information



Proposed
Repealed
DCP
Compl iance
Draft
DCP
Rep
Dft
Site Area
627m2
-
Yes
No
630m2
Density
2 dwellings
-
Yes
Yes
1.99 dwellings
Development Area " A"
Building Height - front

- rear
9.2m

5.5m
9.5m

9.5m
Yes

Yes
No

Yes
9m - See
Comment
6m
Private Open Space: - front
- rear
95m2
104m2
70m2
60m2
Yes
Yes
No
Yes
100m2
80m2
Landscaped Area
348m2
55%
(344.8m2)
Yes
No
55%
(344.8m2)
See
Comment
Building Setbacks: Front
3.8m
3.5m
(min.)
Yes
No
4.5m
Side/rear
0-0.9m/
7.6m
0-0.9m/
0.9m
Yes/
Yes
No/
Yes
2m/3m
Residential Parking
3
3
Yes
Yes
3
Visitor Parking
-
N/A
-
-
N/A
Building Envelope - Front
3.5m/
45o
3.5m/
45o
No
No
3.5m/
45o
See
Comment
- rear
3.5m/
45o
3.5m/
45o
Yes
No
1.5m/
45o
See
Comment
Frontage
13.715m2
-
Yes
No
15m

Comment:

The proposal complies with the requirements of Council's repealed code, under which it was lodged; with the exception of the building envelope for the front dwelling projected from the western side boundary.

Building Envelope

Due to the narrowness of the site and particularly the slope of the land, it is extremely difficult to design a dwelling to comply with the 3.5 metres/45 degree building envelope. It is only from the western side boundary that the building protrudes the envelope, and since the building is situated in line with the western adjoining dwelling, it should not pose any problems to that dwelling. The adjoining dwelling is two-storey with a side setback varying from 0.9 metre to 2.4 metres from the common side boundary. No windows are located on the walls that face each other. The only concern might be the terrace of the adjoining property and possible loss of privacy. However, that terrace is located at a higher level than the proposed living room and terrace of the subject site. So if any loss of privacy were to occur, it would be to the subject premises.

Non-Compliance Under the Interim Code
(Please note: This proposal was lodged under the repealed code and complies with the requirements of that code.)

Site DensityThe subject site is 3 metres short of the required 630 square metres and has a frontage 1.28 metres short of the required 15 metres.
Building HeightThe proposal exceeds the 9 metres height limit by 0.2 metre at the worst case.
Private Open SpaceThe proposed landscaped area provides 78 square metres at ground level with an additional 17 square metres for the decking. The interim code requires 100 square metres at ground level.
LandscapingThe proposal provides 55% landscaping, however, 17 square metres is made up of the terrace which cannot be included under the interim code. Therefore 53% is provided under the requirements of the interim code.

Stormwater Disposal

The applicant approached the neighbours to the rear of the site for a stormwater easement. This was valued at between $3,000 and $4,000, which the applicant advised the appropriate neighbours in writing. Both neighbours refused.

Therefore, the applicant will be draining the roof waters of the proposed dwelling by gravity to the street. The stormwater from the driveway and existing dwelling will be pumped to Douglas Haig Street.

It is suggested that a "Deferred Commencement" consent be granted until these hydraulic plans are submitted.

Manager, Building Services

The proposal was referred to the appropriate building inspector who raised the following concerns:-

* western boundary setbacks;
* access ramp is less than 3 metres wide;
* front building line encroachment; and
* size of double garage is less than 5.5 metres wide

The first three issues have been discussed previously in this report. The size of the garage will be conditioned to a minimum of 5.5 metres and details to be shown with the Building Application.

It was also stated that should approval be granted, stormwater drainage plans are to be submitted to Council for approval and the existing mature trees should be preserved as far as practicable.

Manager, Development Advice

The proposal was referred to the Manager of Development Advice who raised no concerns with the proposal provided drainage amplification was paid and two concrete crossings are provided.

Initially, all stormwater was to drain by gravity to the kerb and gutter in Macken Crescent via a 1 metre wide easement. However, the appropriate neighbours refused to allow an easement, so the applicant has agreed to drain the stormwater from the front house to Douglas Haig Street via gravity. The new driveway and roof waters of the existing house will be pumped to the kerb and gutter of Douglas Haig Street. At present, the existing house simply drains to a pit on the site and seeps into the land. The proposed pump-out will alleviate this problem.

Tree Preservation Officer

After a site inspection it was found that the site contains four (4) Angophora costata (Sydney Red Gum) and one (1) Eucalyptus haemastoma (Scribbly Gum).

It is ultimately desired that no trees are to be removed from this site and that it be retained in its natural state. However, it would be impossible to design a second dwelling and driveway access to the rear which accommodates this.

Therefore, with reference to the construction of any buildings near trees to be retained, no excavation is to be conducted closer than 2 metres to the tree trunks and all construction work is to be carried out with the protection of the trees in mind.

The Eucalypt and Angophora next to it, MUST be retained, with absolutely no interference to the trees or tree roots.

The Angophora on the western side boundary fence and the small (4 metre high) one located near the western side boundary in line with the proposed decking, can be removed if construction demands it.

Council's tree inspectors would like to see the Angophora located towards the front of the site, where the proposed double garage is to be retained as it is "healthy and stable". However, as mentioned previously, the retention of this tree would make it extremely difficult for any second dwelling to be built. It is believed that the applicant's redesign of the building to ensure the Eucalypt and adjoining Angophora are maintained, is considered an appropriate compromise for the site, and therefore approval should be granted for the removal of the Angophora near the street.

Public Notification and Comment

Adjoining residents were notified by letter and invited to view the amended plans and submit comments on the proposal within fourteen (14) days. Nine (9) submissions were registered, their concerns are outlined below:

(Please note: the original application generated thirteen (13) letters from ten different households and two (2) petitions)

1. Excessive height - the proposed dwelling towers above adjoining dwellings.

Comment: The proposed dwelling complies with Council's height restrictions under the repealed code and only encroaches by 200mm under the interim code. The applicant provided gutter levels of the two adjoining dwellings and the proposed dwelling's roof exceeds the gutter of No.21 Douglas Haig Street by approximately 3.6 metres at the rear and 4 metres at the front of the site. Obviously, the distance between the two roofs will be much less. At the closest point, the roof of the proposed dwelling is 3.89 metres above the roof of No. 17 Douglas Haig Street. It is higher due to No. 17 being located further down the slope as it is further from the street.

2. Loss of privacy, particularly from the living rooms.

Comment: The proposed living room deck is approximately 1.2 metres lower than the existing deck of No. 21, so any loss of privacy will occur to the proposed dwelling. The western side of this terrace can be screened. With reference to No. 17 Douglas Haig Street, although the living room and family room windows face east, toward No. 17, they are located 12 metres away from windows at the closest point. This is considered an adequate separation, particularly since the majority of No. 17's living area is at the rear of the house, where they too have a large balcony

3. Overshadowing of No. 17 in the afternoon and the terrace of No.21 in the morning.

Comment: Morning overshadowing will not occur on the terrace of No. 21 in summer, however, it will occur in winter. Unfortunately, No. 17 will experience afternoon overshadowing on the front entry porch in summer and across the dwelling in winter.

4. Drainage problems appear to be present.

Comment: Drainage details have been discussed elsewhere in this report.

5. The proposal is out of character with the street due to its height, medium density and building materials. Most houses are single storey from the street. It should not be compared with dwellings in other streets, such as Marine Drive.

Comment: The height is permissible and is not excessive. The choice of building materials will provide variety in the street and some uniqueness to the building. They are more modern and the applicant should not be criticised for choosing a different style Medium density in this form is permissible under Council's LEP requirements.

6. The proposal could not comply with the total landscaping required and what about the number of trees being removed?

Comment: The proposal provides 55% total landscaping in accordance with Council's repealed RDCP. The issue of the trees has been discussed previously in this report.

7. The proposal does not comply with Council's Interim Residential Development Code.

Comment: Council at its meeting on 17th July 1995, resolved the following:
"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 Residential Development Control Plan - 1995 on display."

This application falls into that category, complies with the repealed code (apart from building envelope) and only has minor variations to the interim code.

8. The proposed dwelling will be located too close to the Eucalypt and will probably kill it.

Comment: The dwelling has been re-designed around the tree and construction details changed in order to comply with the requirements of Council's Tree Preservation Officer.

9. The location and construction of the pit for the pump, as it will be noisy and attract mosquitos, to which an adjoining neighbour is allergic.

Comment: The details of the pit and pump will be required with the hydraulic plans, however, it will definitely need to be enclosed and appropriately encased.

10. The proposal will cause a loss of value due to increased density.

Comment: This has not been substantiated with facts and some people argue that the increase in density actually increases the value of land due to development potential.

In Summary

The proposal before Council for a second detached dwelling is on a site which has constraints, largely by the fall of the land and its natural topography.

The applicant has designed a dwelling and its construction overcomes the problems of the natural topography without disturbing the site too much.

It is believed the use of different materials and the rounded roof will provide a variation in the street, but will not look out of place. It is only two storey and is simply a more modern approach to building.

Due to the problems of stormwater disposal and not achieving an easement, it is believed that a "Deferred Commencement" consent be granted for three (3) months, to enable the applicant to provide the sufficient hydraulic details. Therefore, this is the recommendation.



THAT Council as the consent authority grant a "Deferred Commencement" consent for the construction of a detached dual occupancy at No. 19 Douglas Haig Street, Oatley subject to the following conditions:

A. The submission to Council of full hydraulic plans prepared by a qualified practising hydraulics engineer. The layout of the proposed drainage system including pipe sizes, type, grade, length, invert levels, etc; dimensions and types of drainage pits; and details re: the pump(s) and its associated pipes are to be shown. The roof works of the front dwelling are to drain to the kerb and gutter in Douglas Haig Street via gravity. All surface water from driveway and rear dwelling is to be pumped to the kerb and gutter in Douglas Haig Street.

This is to be submitted within three (3) months from the date of the "Deferred Commencement" consent. This requirement must be satisfied before the formal consent can operate from the following conditions:

1. Compliance in all respects with amended drawings, plans dated 29/6/95 and received by Council 5/1/96, Drawing No DA.01a, submitted with DA 332/95, 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. 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 $1,110.- and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

7. In accordance with the survey plan and levels submitted by ,the proposed dwelling/s shall not exceed RL106.2 for the front portion and RL105.8 for the rear portion at the main ridge line as measured vertically from any nominated point from natural ground level to the roof line directly above that point.

8. 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.

9. 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.

10. Natural colours such as browns and greens are to be used for the exterior roof and walls. 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.

11. 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.

12. 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.

13. Applicant to pay Council to construct two (2) 100mm thick concrete crossings.
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.

14. 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. This is to be done in accordance with Council's Tree Preservation Officers.

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.

15. Reports prepared by the applicant's landscape architect and design structural engineer are to be submitted with the required building application. The reports are to detail:

(a) the effect of the root system of the retained trees on the footings of the proposed villas

(b) the required villa footing design to overcome any damage to the villas as a result of the retention of the trees

(c) the effect of the root system of the trees on the driveway pavement

(d) the design of the driveway pavement having regard to the root system of the retained trees.

The landscape plan shall have particular regard for the detailed report outlined above. All trees nominated for retention or removal shall be shown. No trees are to be removed or lopped without Council approval.

16. The developer and his agents shall take all measures to prevent damage to trees and root systems during site works and construction. No excavation is to be conducted closer than 2 metres to the tree trunk of the trees to be retained.

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

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

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

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. The proposed double garage is to be a minimum of 5.5 metre wide internally. Details are to be shown with the Building Application.

25. The proposed living room deck is to be a minimum of 20 square metres and the proposed family room deck is to be deleted. Details are to be shown with the Building Application.

26. The driveway ramp is to be widened to 2.7 metres alongside the house and alongside the Private Open Space, once it is away from the tree trunk in accordance with Council's Tree Preservation Officers. Details are to be shown with the Building Application.

27. A return bay with a minimum width of 2.7 metres and a minimum length of 6.7 metres from the eastern side boundary is to be provided adjacent to the proposed living room deck for the rear car. Details are to be shown with the Building Application.



It should be noted that the recommendation in the report was for a "Deferred Commencement" approval, however, Council resolved as follows :

"THAT the application be deferred and returned to the applicant for a redesign to address criteria as follows :

1. Proposal is out of character with the local streetscape.

2. Encroachment upon the building line.

3. Excessive height of the building.

4. Overshadowing and privacy concerns for the rear dwelling.

5. Privacy concerns for decking overlooking the property adjacent known as No. 17.

6. Landscaping inadequate as landscaping areas under and on the structure are unacceptable.

7. The effect on the adjacent property caused by the height of the driveway to the rear dwelling."

The applicant has submitted amended plans in response to the above Council resolution. These plans are the subject of this report. The applicant has submitted the following details in response to each of the items raised in Council's resolution.

"Pursuant to Council's correspondence dated 1 April, 1996, please find accompany this letter an amended design with regard to the Development Application for the abovementioned project; including :

A Three (3) copies, one (1) coloured, of architectural drawing DA01B and DA02B.

B One (1) copy each of architectural drawings DA03A and DA04A showing shadow projections for the prescribed dates;

C A photographic study of existing building located along Douglas Haig Street; and,

D Two (2) x A4 colour photocopies from an article in the June, 1966 issue of Steel Profile magazine, which describes a home (of similar architecture to the proposal) designed by Lippmann Associates and located in the suburb of Mosman.

For the record, the Development Application was originally submitted under the now repealed Development Control Plan (DCP) of 13 May, 1994.

The amended proposal addresses the seven (7) objections as follows :

1. Proposal is out of character with the local streetscape.

The Douglas Haig streetscape retains no significant character. In fact, each existing building is out of character with its immediate neighbours and other buildings in the street. The accompanying photographs clearly indicate that Douglas Haig Street is diverse in architectural styles, from the uniquely proportioned, unattractive garage at No. 17 (Plate 20) to the more classical and modern two (2) storey residence at No. 9 (Plate 12); with a myriad of weatherboard, cape-cod project and red-textured brick homes (devoid of place in the architectural scheme of things) in between.

The Land and Environment Court is littered with failed attempts by Councils arguing the streetscape issue, as architects like Harry Seidler are only too familiar with.

It should be accepted that the previously proposed building and more so, the currently amended design, are not only approvable under Council's repealed DCP but appropriate to the on-going processes of development of the built environment (of which Lippmann Associates' design is an example).

2. Encroachment upon the building line

The amended proposal has been set 300mm further back, from the western side boundary, than the previously proposed building. However , in view of Council's concerns with regard to the existing Eucalyptus Haemastoma, the front boundary setback is reduced from 3.8 metres, as previously proposed, to a 3.5 metres; the minimum allowed under Council's repealed DCP.

3. Excessive height of the building

The amended proposal is 860mm lower than the previously proposed building.

As can be seen from viewing the drawings, the proposal now sits well within the 9.5 metre Building Envelope. However, there is no doubt tat an issue existed in locating the side/rear 45 degree height envelope with regard to the previous proposal; which if taken (and extended along the side boundaries ) from footpath level, provided for a building in compliance with Council's repealed DCP. This was/is exacerbated by the sloping nature of a site which falls approximately 5.75 metres from front footpath to back corner.

4. Overshadowing and privacy concerns for the rear dwelling.

Neither the previous or amended proposal overshadow the existing dwelling located at the rear of the site. The minimum four (4) hour requirement for solar access was/is satisfied.

With regard to the issue or privacy, the impact will always be less than the loss of privacy created by the recently constructed balcony at No. 21 which is located further down the site and at a higher level than first floor room and balcony of the currently proposed building. It is a pity that the civic mindedness expressed, under this heading, was not accorded to me when Mr. Thompson's application went before Council.

Clearly, the situation with regard to privacy is typical of the urban context in which residential development exists. Nonetheless, as the amended proposal is shorter in length, located closer to the front boundary and lower than the previous proposal, the perceived impacts are greatly reduced.

5. Privacy concerns for decking overlooking the property adjacent known as No. 17.

It is difficult to understand this concern in the context of existing and proposed conditions. It would appear that the (previously mentioned) deck at No. 21 creates a greater opportunity for overlooking than any element proposed at No. 19. While the south-western corner of the two (2) storey building at No. 17 virtually cuts out any view of its deck from the proposed development, the deck at No. 21 (which is located further down the site and at a higher level than first floor rooms and balcony of the currently proposed building) has a direct and unobstructed view over the deck at No. 17.

Furthermore, it is a pity that the civic mindedness expressed, under this heading, was not accorded to me when Mr. Stevens application (for a deck at No. 17) went before Council. This deck has a clear view into the second bedroom, bathroom and the rear yard area of the existing dwelling at No. 19.

In addition, the retention of existing trees and proposed planting further eliminates the possibility of any overview from No. 19 Douglas Haig Street.

6. Landscaping is inadequate as landscaping areas under and on the structure are unacceptable.

While this issue could be argued by a previous compliance based upon allowances as published in Council's repealed DCP, it is sufficient to say that removal of the previously proposed driveway now creates more than enough landscaped area to satisfy Council's requirements.

7. The effect on the adjacent property caused by the height of the driveway to the rear dwelling.

While there is sufficient precedence, in Douglas Haig Street (refer previously submitted Plates 6 and 7) of driveways tot he rear of existing allotments, it is sufficient to say that removal of the previously proposed driveway makes this concern redundant.

Despite Council's recommendation for approval of the previous proposal, I have elected to amend and redesign rather than take the matter to the Land and Environment Court. I am committed to having this matter resolved in the interest of all parties concerned."

Amended Proposal

The amended proposal varies from the original application in the following respects :

1. Alteration to the design of the roof.

The previous design incorporated a round roof to be constructed of corrugated metal. The current design has incorporated a flat roof of corrugated metal. It should be noted that the roof design has been amended in order to reduce the height of the roof by .860mm. The purpose is to meet the concerns of objectors and point 3 of Council's resolution.

2. Mirror reversal of the front portion of the building and driveway at ground level.

Deletion of the second garage, driveway ramp and relocation of the carspace for the rear dwelling to the front of the site.

This amendment has resulted from the need to meet point 7 of Council's resolution in respect of the effect of the driveway height on the adjacent property. The deletion of the driveway has removed this concern and allowed for increased landscaping on the site. It is noted that this amendment has resulted in the proposed removal of the existing red gum tree at the front of the site. It should be further noted that it would be desirable to retain all the trees on the site, however, this is not a feasible option if a second dwelling is to be constructed on the site. It is considered that the amended design has greater benefits to the funtionalism of the proposed dwelling than the retention of the existing tree to the front of the site.

3. The alteration of the building alignment from 3.8 metres to 3.5 metres.

Council's repealed DCP requires a minimum building alignment of 3.5 metres. This has been done to alleviate Council's concerns in respect to the existing Eucalyptus Haemastoma tree to the eastern property boundary which is to be retained.

Council's draft DCP requires a building alignment of 4.5 metres. In this regard, as the original application was lodged prior to 13 July, 1995 Council must take into consideration Section 90 matters and heads of consideration with the plan in force when submitted i.e., the repealed DCP and the draft Multi-Residential Control Plan, 1995.

The applicant has indicated as detailed in his submission that he is prepared to provide an increased setback to the front of the site, resulting in the loss of the tree in question.

4. The increase to the western side setback by 300mm.

This increase to the setback is noted and is more desirable.

5. The removal of the existing Angophora located adjacent to the existing Eucalyptus Haemastoma.

Council's previous report detailed the trees to be removed and retained and in respect to the subject Angophora, it was required that an amendment to the design of the building be carried out in order to retain same. The applicant has not met this requirement in the redesigned proposal and it is considered feasible that this tree be retained and the applicant requested to redesign the proposal to achieve same. This will be addressed as a condition of the development approval.

6. Reduction in the amount of carspaces on the site from three (3) to two (2).

Further to the points raised in point (2) above, the applicant, by the deletion of the driveway to the rear carspace, has allowed for improved and increased landscaping area to the site which is highly desirable. It is not considered feasible in this regard to require a third carspace and therefore the deletion in the carparking requirement from three (3) spaces to two (2) spaces is supported in this instance.

7. Alteration to the building design.

The amended design to the facade of the building as proposed is considered unattractive. It is appropriate that a requirement be made in order to improve the architectural treatment of the front facade of the proposed building. This may be achieved by the redesign of the type and size of the windows. An appropriate condition will be imposed requiring same.


Tabled Information

Proposed
Repealed
DCP
Com
pliance
Draft
DCP
Rep
Dft
Site Area
627 m2
-
Yes
No
630 m2
Density
2 dwgs
-
Yes
Yes
1.99 dwgs
Development Area "A"
Building Height - Front
- Rear
8.6 m
5.5 m
9.5 m
9.5 m
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
9.0 m
6.0 m
Private Open Space: Front
Rear
110.46 m2
105.6 m2
70 m2
60 m2
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
100 m2
80 m2
Landscaped Area
383 m2
55% or
345 m2
Yes
Yes
55% or
345m2
Building Setbacks: Front
3.5 m
3.5 m
Yes
No
4.5 m
Side/rear
1.2 m
0-0.9/0.9 m
Yes
No
2.0/3.0 m
Residential Parking
2
3
No
No
3
Building Envelope - Front
3.5m/45o
3.5m/45o
Yes
Yes
3.5m/45o
- rear
3.5m/45o
3.5m/45o
Yes
Yes
1.5m/45o
Frontage
13.715 m
-
Yes
No
15.0 m

Public Notification and Comment

Adjoining residents were notified by letter and invited to view the amended plans and submit comments on the proposal within fourteen (14) days. Nineteen (19) letters of support to the proposal submitted, seven (7) of these from residents in Douglas Haig Street. Nine (9) submissions in the form of letters of objection and one (1) petition containing eleven signatures and representing seven (7) households were received.

Their concerns are outlined below :

i) Proposed dwelling is out of character with the area in respect to design and choice of building materials.

Comment : The choice of building materials in this instance is timber with a flat iron roof. This is considered an acceptance proposal subject to certain amendments being made to the increase of the size of the windows on the front elevation in order to provide an improved building facade, as discussed previously in this report. It is considered that the proposed design will provide a variety in the street and some uniqueness to the building, as stated in Council's previous report.

ii) The drainage is inadequate for the proposal.

Comment : As detailed in the previous Council report, after failed negotiations in order to secure easement rights for stormwater disposal with the neighbours to the rear of the site, the applicant must drain the roof waters of the proposed dwelling by gravity to the street. Hydraulic plans are required which detail the proposed method of achieving this. Again, it is suggested that a "Deferred Commencement" consent be granted until such time as those hydraulic plans are submitted, should Council resolve to grant approval to the application.

iii) The amended building facade to the street is worse in design than the original proposal.

Comment : This point of objection is considered reasonable and a requirement will be made for the improvement of the architectural treatment at the front facade as mentioned previously in this report.

iv) The proposal will result in the destruction of mature trees on the site.

Comment : As mentioned previously in this report ideally it would be desirable to retain all the existing trees on the site. However, this is not feasible if a second dwelling is to be built on the site. An investigation of the existing trees on the site has identified trees that should be retained and trees that may be removed and this has been discussed previously in this report.

v) The proposal encroaches into the building alignment stipulated by the draft DCP.

Comment : This point of objection has been discussed previously in this report.

vi) The height of the proposal is excessive.

Comment : The proposed height complies with Council's height requirements.

vii) Overshadowing and privacy concerns for the existing dwelling at the rear.

Comment : The proposed dwelling does not overshadow the existing dwelling located at the rear of the site. The minimum four (4) hour requirement for solar access has been satisfied. Attempts have been to minimise loss of privacy to the rear dwelling as much as possible with the design of the proposed building.

viii) Privacy concerns for No. 17 Douglas Haig Street.

Comment : It is considered that adequate separation exists between the proposed dwelling and No. 17 Douglas Haig Street to enable minimal loss of privacy. The existing and proposed landscaping treatment of the site will allow further potential for reduction in loss of privacy to No. 17.

ix) Landscaping on the site is inadequate.

Comment : The amount of landscaping to be provided is more than the required 55% in accordance with Council's repealed DCP and draft DCP.

x) The choice of building materials, i.e., timber and corrugated metal is not in keeping with the remainder of the street.

Comment : The choice of building materials is considered acceptable with the remainder of the street.

Summary

It is reiterated that the subject site has physical constraints largely by the fall of the land and its natural topography. The applicant has designed a second dwelling on the site which aims to minimise any disruption to the natural topography as much as possible. It is noted that the proposed design and type of building materials to be used is different to what currently exists in the area, but it should be considered as a variation in the existing design and style. The applicant in the amended design has attempted to alleviate the concern of the objectors and concerns of Council. There has been an improvement to the architectural treatment at the front of the site and the proposed building at the rear has been redesigned in order to retain the existing as identified in this report. Due to the problems of stormwater disposal and not achieving an easement, it is recommended that a "Deferred Commencement" consent be granted for three (3) months to enable the applicants to provide sufficient hydraulic details.


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .04.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 19 DOUGLAS HAIG STREET, OATLEY (332/95)
DETACHED DUAL DWELLINGS
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. L. Yousif)


. Recommendation 19 DOUGLAS HAIG STREET, OATLEY (332/95)
DETACHED DUAL DWELLINGS
(Report by Town Planner, Ms. L. Yousif)



RECOMMENDATION


THAT Council as the consent authority grant a "Deferred Commencement" consent for the construction of a detached dual occupancy at No. 19 Douglas Haig Street, Oatley subject to the following conditions:

A. The submission to Council of full hydraulic plans prepared by a qualified practising hydraulics engineer. The layout of the proposed drainage system including pipe sizes, type, grade, length, invert levels, etc; dimensions and types of drainage pits; and details re: the pump(s) and its associated pipes are to be shown. The roof works of the front dwelling are to drain to the kerb and gutter in Douglas Haig Street via gravity. All surface water from driveway and rear dwelling is to be pumped to the kerb and gutter in Douglas Haig Street.

This is to be submitted within three (3) months from the date of the "Deferred Commencement" consent. This requirement must be satisfied before the formal consent can operate from the following conditions:

1. Compliance in all respects with amended drawings DA016 and 026, plans dated 23 July, 1996 , submitted with DA 332/95, 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. 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 $1,110.- and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

7. In accordance with the survey plan and levels submitted by ,the proposed dwelling/s shall not exceed RL105.34 for the front portion and RL103.84 for the rear portion at the main ridge line as measured vertically from any nominated point from natural ground level to the roof line directly above that point.

8. 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.

9. 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.

10. Natural colours such as browns and greens are to be used for the exterior roof and walls. 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.

11. 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.

12. 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.

13. Applicant to pay Council to construct two (2) 100mm thick concrete crossings.
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.

14. 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. This is to be done in accordance with Council's Tree Preservation Officers.

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.

15. Reports prepared by the applicant's landscape architect and design structural engineer are to be submitted with the required building application. The reports are to detail:

(a) the effect of the root system of the retained trees on the footings of the proposed villas

(b) the required villa footing design to overcome any damage to the villas as a result of the retention of the trees

(c) the effect of the root system of the trees on the driveway pavement

(d) the design of the driveway pavement having regard to the root system of the retained trees.

The landscape plan shall have particular regard for the detailed report outlined above. All trees nominated for retention or removal shall be shown. No trees are to be removed or lopped without Council approval.

16. The developer and his agents shall take all measures to prevent damage to trees and root systems during site works and construction. No excavation is to be conducted closer than 2 metres to the tree trunk of the trees to be retained.

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

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

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

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. Amended plans shall be submitted with the Building Aplication detailing improvement to the architecture of the front facade of the building. Consultation shall be held with Council officers prior to amended design being submitted with the Building Application.

25. The Angophora species tree near the proposed sitting room shall be retained and the amendments to the building layout to save this tree shall be included with the Building Application.






HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.04.02 LEGAL MATTER (SEE ITEM 05.01 - DIVISIONAL MANAGER'S
NO. 2 REPORT TO DEVELOPMENT, HEALTH AND PLANNING COMMITTEE)




In accordance with the provisions of Section 10(2) of the Local Government Act, 1993 IT IS RECOMMENDED that the Committee resolve under the terms of Section 10(2) of the Local Government Act, 1993 that for the reason that the matter relates to a legal matter where Council's interests may be prejudiced by publicity, the press and the public be excluded from that part of the Development, Health and Planning Committee Meeting at which this matter is considered. That in accordance with the provisions of Section 11(2) of the Local Government Act, 1993 the reports and correspondence relating to this matter be withheld from the press and the public.
IT IS FURTHER RECOMMENDED that the matter be referred to the Council for consideration in Committee of the Whole.

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 2 OCTOBER AND 2 DECEMBER, 1996



The Development Applications as set out in the attached schedules have been received between 2 October and 2 December, 1996.

DA
NO
PROPERTY
APPLICANT
DESCRIPTIONS
VALUE
233/95
34 Martin Place
Mortdale
R MatarResidential Flat Building
18 x 2 Bedroom
(Sect. 102)
$1.575 mill
342/96
536 King Georges Road
Beverly Hills
Miss M PirisiBeauty School and Salon
Use
344/96
12/53-55 Lorraine Street
Peakhurst
N SykalosFactory Fitout
Use
345/96
10 Cross Street
Hurstville
Australian Home LoansOffice Space
Use
346/96
30 Park Street
Peakhurst
C & S RistesloAttached 2 Storey Dual Occupancy
$180,000
348/96
5 Macquarie Place
Mortdale
J. Klepac3 Storey Unit Block with Basement Parking - 4x2 and 4x3 Bedroom
$680,000
349/96
10 Park Road
Hurstville
S TangCommercial Sign
Sign
350/96
227 Forest Road
Hurstville
Ippon SushiRestaurant Fitout
$80,000
351/96
322 Forest Road
Hurstville
S TangCommrcial Sign
Sign
352/96
10 Clarendon Road
Riverwood
C Y Cao1x4 Bedroom Townhouse
2x3 Bedroom Villas
$250,000
353/96
12 Taronga Street
Hurstville
C K Nguyen3x3 Bedroom Townhouses
$240,000
354/96
20 The Avenue
Hurstville
McFadyen AnlezarkDetached Church Hall
$200,000
355/96
41 Dora Street
Hurstville
A WilliamsTwo Storey Addition to rear of Heritage Building
$49,300
357/96
329 Belmore Road
Riverwood
J SamraniShop Fitout
Use
358/96
13/63 Norman Street
Peakhurst
K & A KarcevskiChange of Use
Use
360/96
15 Gordon Street
Hurstville
R Moss3 Storey Unit Block with Basement Parking 2x2 & 7x3 Bedrooms
$810,000
361/96
35 Mountview Avenue
Beverly Hills
Westminster Developments5 x 3 Bedroom Villas
$425,000
362/96
1/1A Pritchard Place
Peakhurst
S AliPanel Beating Shop
Use
363/96
2/1 Rose Street
Hurstville
S HoMartial Arts Tudio
Use
368/96
130 Moons Avenue
Lugarno
G FardonSliprails for Boat Launch
Use
369/96
48 Queens Road
Hurstville
Chinese Aust. Services SocietyAlterations & Additions to Existing Child Care Centre
$20,000
370/96
52 Anderson Road
Mortdale
T WalmsleyDivide One Factory into Two
$3,000
371/96
34/17-37 Lorraine Street
Peakhurst
B M ManufacturingCommercial Sign
Sign
372/96
34 Blackshaw Avenue
Mortdale
E Nasr2x3 Bedroom Townhouses & 1x2 Bedroom Villa
$250,000
374/96
22 Woodville Street
Hurstville
G Zogheb & D MaysonCoffee Shop /Refreshment Room
Use
375/96
15 Jersey Avenue
Mortdale
K & S Bradvica2/3 Storey Dual Occupancy
$150,000
376/96
3 Cross Street
Hurstville
Westfield DesignCarwash in Carpark
Use
379/96
49A Anderson Road
Mortdale
Relocation of One Car Space
Use
380/96
1 Pitt Street
Mortdale
Caldis Cook GroupAddition of Poker Machine Lounge
$84,000
381/96
100 Roberts Avenue
Mortdale
Hurstville City CouncilFirst Floor Addition to Works Depot
$35,000
383/96
113 Boundary Road
Peakhurst
Mrs L WaterfieldBathroom Equipment
Use
386/96
91 Baumans Road
Peakhurst
R Nash1x3, 3x2 Bedroom Villas
$350,000
388/96
55C Penshurst Street
Penshurst
G M BurnsAdditions to Detached Dual Occupancy
$60,000
389/96
330 Forest Road
Hurstville
KidmintBrothel
Use
390/96
900 Forest Road
Hurstville
Sabton & Son4 x 3 Bedroom Villas
$550,000
391/96
165 Penshurst Street
Beverly Hills
AirfirmRelocation to Unit 3
$70,000
392/96
186 Belmore Road
Riverwood
C K NguyenBargain Storey
Use
394/96
5 Beatty Street
Mortdale
A & D WilliamsDetached Dual Occupancy
$90,000
396/96
21 Toronga Terrace
Beverly Hills
S K VengFruit Shop
$50,000
398/96
124 Forest Road
Hurstville
AdherettesCommercial Sign
Sign
401/96
43 Norman Street
Peakhurst
C PentecostBathroom Spas
Use
403/96
227 Forest Road
Hurstville
Ippon SushiCommercial Sign
Sign
405/96
472 King Georges Road
Beverly Hills
S C SiuCommercial Sign
Sign
406/96
4 Penshurst Street
Penshurst
R BougiourasCharcoal Chicken
Use
407/96
113 Boundary Road
Peakhurst
E HughesCommercial Sign
Sign
409/96
3 Cross Street
Hurstville
S IrwinHairdresser
Use
410/96
493 Forest Road
Penshurst
G TaniosCommercial Sign
Sign


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .05.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS RECEIVED BETWEEN 2 OCTOBER AND 2 DECEMBER, 1996

. Recommendation DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS RECEIVED BETWEEN 2 OCTOBER AND 2 DECEMBER, 1996


RECOMMENDATION


THAT the information be received and noted.

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.05.02 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS DETERMINED UNDER DELEGATED AUTHORITY



The Development Applications as set out in the attached schedules have been Approved (Part A) or Refused (Part B) or Withdrawn (Part C) under delegated authority from 2 October to 2 December, 1996.

Part A

DA No
PROPERTY
APPLICANT
DESCRIPTION
RESULT
DATE
108/94
17 Beatrice Street
Hurstville
Mr G DaviesDetached Dual Occupancy
(Sect 102 Amend)
17/10/96
622/94
184 Penshurst Street
Penshurst
Kayman DevelopmentsAttached Dual Occupancy (Sect 102 Amend)
10/10/96
91/95
5A Apsley Street
Penshurst
Touchstone DevelopmentsResidential Flat Building
(Sect 102 Amend)
18/10/96
213/95
10 Hardwicke Street
Riverwod
B Pinchbeck9x3 Bedroom Villas
(Sect 102 Amend)
30/10/96
290/95
67A Gloucester Road
Hurstville
M Abdullah2x3 Townhouses & 1x3 Villa (Sect 102 Amend)
21/10/96
83/96
54 Arcadia Street
Penshurst
G & T Samardzioski2x3 Bedroom Villas (Sect 102 Amend)
21/11/96)
92/96
87 Waratah Street
Oatley
Literary Productions4x3 Bedroom Villas
6/11/96
211/96
235 Forest Road
Hurstville
N DelucaExtension of Offices
10/10/96
229/96
1036 Forest Road
Lugarno
P Agnew2x4 Bedroom townhouses & 1x4 Bedroom Villa
6/11/96
240/96
300 Forest Road
Hurstville
S BurcherRenovations to Retail and Office Space
10/10/96
255/96
155 Dora Street
Hurstville
Sydney Day Nursery & Nursery SchoolLong Day Care Centre
3/10/96
271/96
10 Park Road
Hurstville
S TangSign
21/11/96
273/96
6 Marine Drive
Oatley
Riviera PontoonsJetty, Ramp Pontoon & Sliprails
6/11/96
290/96
127 Forest Road
Hurstville
Hurstville Asian SupermarketExtension to Supermarket
4/10/96
303/96
247 Belmore Road
Riverwood
Z DarwicheChange of Use
17/10/96
305/96
147/25-35A Park Road
Hurstville
G AmmarInternational Call Centre
10/10/96
312/96
3 Cross Street
Hurstville
S VogtChange of Use
10/10/96
319/96
113 Boundary Road
Peakhurst
J HughesWarehouse
25/11/96
323/96
763 Forest Road
Peakhurst
W MooreSolarium Rooms
11/10/96
326/96
763 Forest Road
Peakhurst
D D'AgostinoAwning & Glass Door Front
21/11/96
328/96
1 Isaac Street
Peakhurst
P LogiudiceHome Occupation
24/10/96
332/96
471 King Georges Road
Beverly Hills
Allied SignsAwning Sign
1/11/96
335/96
115 Mulga Road
Oatley
N ClausShop Fitout
25/11/96
336/96
47 Lorraine Street
Peakhurst
HTH EnterprisesManufacture & Wholesale Distribution of Noodles
20/11/96
340/96
1 Commercial Road
Kingsgrove
Dollar Growth CentreCommercial Offices
26/11/96
341/96
23 Hearne Street
Mortdale
United Towing ServicesTowing Business - Increase in hours of operation
25/11/96
342/96
536 King Georges Road
Beverly Hills
Miss M PirisiBeauty School & Salon
13/11/96
344/96
12/53-55 Lorraine Street
Peakhurst
N SykalosFactory Fitout
29/10/96
345/96
10 Cross Street
Hurstville
Australian Home LoansOffice Space
31/10/96
349/96
10 Park Road
Hurstville
S TangCommercial Sign
21/11/96
350/96
227 Forest Road
Hurstville
Ippon sushiRestaurant Fitout
1/11/96
351/96
322 Forest Road
Hurstville
S TangCommercial Sign
21/11/96
358/96
13/63 Norman Street
Peakhurst
K & A KarcevskiChange of Use
14/11/96
363/96
2/1 Rose Street
Hurstville
S HoMartial Arts Studio
25/11/96
371/96
34/17-37 Lorraine Street
Peakhurst
B M ManufacturingCommercial Sign
21/11/96

Part B

DA NO
PROPERTY
APPLICANT
DESCRIPTION
RESULT
DATE
263/96
2/9 Stanley Street
Peakhurst
Thiess Environmental ServicesShed for Parking Waste Collection Vehicle
17/10/96

Part C

DA NO
PROPERTY
APPLICANT
DESCRIPTION
RESULT DATE
309/96
34 Mavis Avenue
Peakhurst
M BalloutDetached Dual Occupancy
8/11/96
311/96
14 Depot Road
Peakhurst
S AliPanel Beater
4/10/96


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


THAT the information be received and noted.


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.05.03 32 CHAMBERLAIN STREET, NARWEE ((230/96)
APPEAL AGAINST COUNCIL'S REFUSAL OF D.A. 230/96 FOR
EXTENSION OF CHILD CARE CENTRE




Notice is the above Appeal was served upon Council on 14 November, 1996. The Appeal has been set down for callover before the Registrar of the Land and Environment Court on 5th December, 1996.

Council's solicitors, Deacon, Graham and James, have been advised of the receipt of the Appeal and in concurrence with usual practice have been instructed to represent Council and defend refusal of the consent.

The subject proposal involved the extension of an existing Child Care Centre on a church site so that it replaced the church at the front of the site. The application was determined by council at the Meeting held on 6 November, 1996 by refusal of the application due to issues of parking, zoning and impact on adjoining properties.



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .05.03
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 32 CHAMBERLAIN STREET, NARWEE ((230/96)
APPEAL AGAINST COUNCIL'S REFUSAL OF D.A. 230/96 FOR
EXTENSION OF CHILD CARE CENTRE


. Recommendation 32 CHAMBERLAIN STREET, NARWEE ((230/96)
APPEAL AGAINST COUNCIL'S REFUSAL OF D.A. 230/96 FOR
EXTENSION OF CHILD CARE CENTRE



RECOMMENDATION


THAT the action taken to instruct Council's solicitors to represent Council in the Land and Environment Court and oppose the Appeal be confirmed.

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.05.04A PROPOSED VODAFONE TELECOMMUNICATIONS BASE STATION ATOP WATER TOWER
67B LUGARNO PARADE, LUGARNO (File No. T/00594)




Further to Council's decision at the Meeting held on 6 November, 1996, to advise the Federal Environment Protection Agency that Council requires any such tower to be 300 metres from any residence, school, etc., a letter has now been received from the Agency (renamed Environment Australia) advising that they have approved the base station.

A copy of their letter to Council, their letter to the applicant, Vodafone and a copy of Council's letter to the Agency are attached to this report for Council's information.

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .05.04A
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation PROPOSED VODAFONE TELECOMMUNICATIONS BASE STATION ATOP WATER TOWER
67B LUGARNO PARADE, LUGARNO (File No. T/00594)


. Recommendation PROPOSED VODAFONE TELECOMMUNICATIONS BASE STATION ATOP WATER TOWER
67B LUGARNO PARADE, LUGARNO (File No. T/00594)



RECOMMENDATION


THAT the information be noted.

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 12 11TH DECEMBER, 1996-


06:01 Ward Councillors' Reports

06:02 Building Applications - Hurstville Ward

06:02.01 43 Smiths Avenue, Hurstville - Spa And Lattice Screen "Works Executed" (Report By Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)

06:03 Building Applications - Penshurst Ward

06:04 Building Applications - Peakhurst Ward

06:04.01 86 Moons Avenue, Lugarno - New Dwelling (Report By Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)

06:04.02 5A Llewellyn Street, Oatley - New Dwelling (Report By Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)

06:05 Miscellaneous And Other Matters

06:05.01 18 Gloucester Road, Hurstville - Alternative Drainage System (Report By Manager - Building Services, Mr G Young)

06:05.02 Spring Green Waste Promotion (Report By Waste Minimisation Education Officer, Ms Melanie Halliday)

06:05.03 Reduction In Price For Recycled Glass (File W/00011)

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 43 SMITHS AVENUE, HURSTVILLE - Spa and Lattice Screen "Works Executed" (Report by Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .02.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 43 SMITHS AVENUE, HURSTVILLE - Spa and Lattice Screen "Works Executed" (Report by Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)

. Recommendation 43 SMITHS AVENUE, HURSTVILLE - Spa and Lattice Screen "Works Executed" (Report by Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)


RECOMMENDATION


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.03 BUILDING APPLICATIONS - PENSHURST WARD

THERE ARE NO BUILDING APPLICATIONS IN RESPECT OF 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 86 MOONS AVENUE, LUGARNO - New Dwelling (Report by Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .04.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 86 MOONS AVENUE, LUGARNO - New Dwelling (Report by Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)

. Recommendation 86 MOONS AVENUE, LUGARNO - New Dwelling (Report by Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)


RECOMMENDATION


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.04.02 5A LLEWELLYN STREET, OATLEY - New Dwelling (Report by Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .04.02
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 5A LLEWELLYN STREET, OATLEY - New Dwelling (Report by Environmental Building Surveyor, Mr M Yeung)

. Recommendation 5A LLEWELLYN STREET, OATLEY - New 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 18 GLOUCESTER ROAD, HURSTVILLE - Alternative Drainage System (Report by Manager - Building Services, Mr G Young)



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .05.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 18 GLOUCESTER ROAD, HURSTVILLE - Alternative Drainage System (Report by Manager - Building Services, Mr G Young)


. Recommendation 18 GLOUCESTER ROAD, HURSTVILLE - Alternative Drainage System (Report by Manager - Building Services, Mr G Young)



RECOMMENDATION


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.05.02 SPRING GREEN WASTE PROMOTION (Report by Waste Minimisation Education Officer, Ms Melanie Halliday)



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .05.02
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation SPRING GREEN WASTE PROMOTION (Report by Waste Minimisation Education Officer, Ms Melanie Halliday)

. Recommendation SPRING GREEN WASTE PROMOTION (Report by Waste Minimisation Education Officer, Ms Melanie Halliday)


RECOMMENDATION


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.05.03 REDUCTION IN PRICE FOR RECYCLED GLASS (File W/00011)


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .05.03
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation REDUCTION IN PRICE FOR RECYCLED GLASS (File W/00011)

. Recommendation REDUCTION IN PRICE FOR RECYCLED GLASS (File W/00011)


RECOMMENDATION