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 97 06 11TH JUNE, 1997-



05:01 Ward Councillors' Reports

05:02 Development Applications - Hurstville Ward
05:02.01 346 Stoney Creek Road, Kingsgrove (D.A. 41/97) 2 Level Extension To
Arkana College Plus Internal Refurbishment
05:02.02 23-27 Macmahon Street, Hurstville (D.A. 438/94)
Section 102 Amendment To Development Consent No. 438/94 To Delete The
Pedestrian Access To Adjoining Property Being Nos. 10-12 Woodville Street,
Hurstville

05:03 Development Applications - Penshurst Ward
05:03.01 19-21 Hampden Street, Beverly Hills (45/97)
Erection Of 10 Unit Residential Building

05:04 Development Applications - Peakhurst Ward
05:04.01 10 Clarendon Road, Riverwood (D.A. 352/96)
Erection Of 1 X 2 Storey And 2 X 1 Storey Dwellings

05:05 Miscellaneous And Other Matters

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH
DIVISIONAL MANAGER - DEVELOPMENT AND HEALTH - SECTION ONE
REPORT NO 01 TO THE DEVELOPMENT, HEALTH & PLANNING COMMITTEE
TO BE HELD ON 97 06 11TH JUNE, 1997-


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 & Planning Committee:-


05.01 WARD COUNCILLORS' REPORTS



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.02 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS - HURSTVILLE WARD



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.02.01 346 STONEY CREEK ROAD, KINGSGROVE (D.A. 41/97) 2 LEVEL EXTENSION TO ARKANA COLLEGE PLUS INTERNAL REFURBISHMENT (Report by Manager, Development Services, Ms. G. Vereker)



Applicant : Charles Glanville (Architects) Pty Ltd
Proposal : 2 LEVEL EXTENSION TO THE REAR OF
THE EXISTING ARKANA COLLEGE
PLUS INTERNAL REFURBISHMENT
OF EXISTING PREMISES
Zoning : Zone No 2 - Residential
Residential Development
Control Plan 1994 : Development Area 'B'
Owners : Arkana College Ltd
Existing Development : Single storey primary school
Cost of Development : $350,000

PRECIS OF REPORT

1. The proposal is to construct a 2 level extension to the existing single storey primary school, known as Arkana College and to carry out internal refurbishment of the existing premises.

2. Although the proposal does not constitute residential development, an assessment of the application in respect to the provisions of Council's IRDC is considered relevant due to its situation amongst existing residential development.

3. The proposal is inconsistent with the requirements of Council's IRDC with respect to the 2 levels proposed for the rear of the site, side boundary setbacks and building envelopes.

4. No objections have been raised to the development by either the Manager, Building Services or Manager, Development Advice.

5. Four objections to the development were received during the notification period.

6. It is recommended that the Development Application be approved subject to appropriate conditions.

Existing and Surrounding Development.

The existing site accommodates a single storey building containing 5 classrooms. In
addition 2 demountable buildings are located in the rear yard which provide
additional classroom accommodation. The existing school building is set back a
substantial distance from Stoney Creek Road and is somewhat screened by existing
vegetation. The area between the school building and the front boundary is
presently used as recreation area, as is the area to the rear of the school building
which is now proposed for development. No parking exists on the site.

Adjoining and adjacent development is residential in nature consisting of a mixture
of single storey detached dwellings, villas and townhouses.

Section 90 Heads of Consideration.

The site has been inspected and the proposal examined in accordance with the
Heads of Consideration in Section 90 of the Environmental Planning and
Assessment Act 1979, and the following comments are made.

Statutory Requirements.

The subject site is zoned No 2 Residential under Hurstville Local Environmental
Plan 1994. The activity being carried out on the site is defined as an "educational
establishment" which is permissible with Council consent. It is considered
appropriate that the proposal be assessed in respect to relevant provisions of
Council's IRDC taking into account its proximity to existing residential
development. This consideration is provided in a later section of the report.

Application History

DATE
ACTION
13/3/97Application lodged with Council
26-27/3/97Preliminary assessment of application
15/4-6/5/97Notification undertaken
4 letters of objection received, 3 from adjoining residents
20/5/97Meeting held with applicant to discuss issues raised during assessment and notification
26/5/97Shadow diagrams and additional written justification for areas of non-compliance submitted

Proposed Development

The development now proposed for Arkana College incorporates the following:-

* Removal of the demountable buildings at the rear of the site

* Construction of a new building adjoining the rear of the existing school
building. The new building is to be constructed as a second storey, with the
area underneath at ground level being retained for under cover recreation
activities.

* Refurbishment of the existing school building to provide two classrooms
and upgraded toilet facilities.

Compliance with IRDC

Although the proposed development is not residential in nature, it is considered
appropriate to assess the proposal in respect of certain provisions of Council's IRDC for the reason that the site is located in the midst of residential development.


IRDC Requirement
Proposed
Compliance
Density
Not Applicable
Landscaped Open Space
50%
58.5%
Yes
Private Open Space
Not Applicable
Front Site Height Maximum
9m
5.27m
Yes
Rear Site Height Maximum
6m
9.0m
No
Front Site Maximum Storeys
2
1
Yes
Rear Site Maximum Storeys
1
2
No
Front Boundary Setback
4.5m
18.5m
Yes
Side Boundary Setback
-Front Site
-Rear Site
1.35m
1.3m for Single Storey
1.3m
1.3m - (Two Storey)
No
No
Minimum Site Frontage
15m
15m
Yes
Building Envelopes
3.5m/
45o
No

AREAS OF NON-COMPLIANCE

Height and Number of Storeys

Council's IRDC requires that residential development at the rear of an Area 'B'
site be single storey with a maximum height of 6.0 metres. The proposed development, although not residential in nature, does not comply with this restriction in proposing an upper floor with a height of 9.0 metres.

Boundary Setbacks

The development fails to meet the provisions of Council's IRDC with respect to
boundary setbacks along the western boundary, where the upper floor is proposed.
Even if the site were located within Area 'C' where two storey development is
permitted in the rear, the proposed boundary setback would still be substantially
less than that required.

Building Envelopes.

Due to the fact that the development comprises two levels at the rear of an Area
B' site, building envelopes also exceed those normally considered acceptable by
Council.

While it may be argued that the subject development is not formally required to meet the provisions of the IRDC, the cumulative effect of the above-listed departures will result in some adverse impact on adjoining properties, which is reflected in the objections received, as discussed later in this report. In addition the fact that the development currently provides no on-site parking and makes no provision for parking in association with the proposed extensions is of concern.

Division Referrals

* Manager Building Services - No objections to the proposed extensions, however the openings facing the western boundary will be required to
be fire rated.

* Manager Development Advice - No objections to the proposed development. Standard Conditions regarding stormwater disposal and on-site detention
to be imposed if the development is approved.

Public Notification and Comment

Adjoining residents were notified by letter and a notice was placed in the newspaper, advising of a notification period of 21 days from 15 April to 6 May, 1997. Four objections were received in response to the notification. Concerns raised are summarised as follows:-

* Impact on sunlight and ventilation
* Impact on privacy
* Increased noise
* Site not appropriate for a school as insufficient play area is provided
* Two storey development should not be permitted in the rear yard
* Traffic and impact on street parking
* Inadequate emergency access for students
* Potential increase in number of students
* Inadequate setback from western boundary
* Unsafe pedestrian access from on street parking to the school
* Extension should be located at the front of the site

Discussion of Issues

Before discussing the issues of concern to both Council and adjoining residents, it is considered relevant that the submission presented by the applicant be reproduced for Council's information:-

"1. LOCATION OF THE PROPOSED EXTENSION

There were a number of considerations considered prior to the conclusion that the most suitable place to provide the extension was at the rear of the property and not at the front. After balancing all considerations affecting the location of the new classrooms on this site, it was concluded that the proposal as submitted represents the minimal impact in that precinct.

The following considerations were made with respect to the front of the property:

* It is recognised that conceptually it would generally be preferred for two-storey extensions to be located at the front of properties and not at the rear. In this instance due to the nature of awkward site factors, the 'bulk' of the proposed extension would be of a different scale to the residential scale of the neighbourhood and significantly alter the streetscape.

* Recognising that the nature of the facilities to be provided are classroom spaces which require openable windows for ventilation, in this instance classrooms on the Stoney Creek frontage would be acoustically untenable.

* After allowing for Council's statutory setbacks, there were severe physical restrictions to building at the front.

* An examination of the existing planning reveals that the school still has very limited administrative space which can only reasonably be provided at the front of the property. Therefore in master planning, consideration had to be given for a possible future extension at the front for appropriate administrative facilities.

In examining the pros and cons of a two-storey extension at the rear of the property the following points were considered:

* Activities within classroom spaces are not noise producing and first floor classrooms at the rear would not have any acoustic impact on adjoining properties.

* It is considered that by building over the existing rear yard, which is currently used as a playground facility by students, the acoustic interference on adjoining properties from the playground would actually be reduced by building over the rear yard as an undercroft.

* As opposed to residential extensions which require a number of windows which can be looked out of, the nature of the teaching spaces as designed can have highlight windows on the northern and western elevations so that there will be no visual connection between the proposed extension and affected neighbours to the north and the west. In this regard, we would accept a condition of approval which requires window sills to the first floor on the northern and western sides of the proposed extension to have a minimum sill height of 1500mm above floor level.

* The overshadowing effect of the proposed extension to the existing properties to the west was considered. Attached drawings show existing and future shadows at winter and summer Solstices. In the worst instance, at the winter solstice, the overshadowing of adjoining properties to the west during the early morning period will not be worsened by the proposed extension. By midday during the winter solstice there is a slight increase in the impact on the adjoining courtyards, after which the shadowing impact on the adjoining properties is nil due to the positioning of the sun. It is considered that the impact during the winter solstice does not have any detrimental effect on the use of the courtyards. It should also be noted that the winter solstice is the worst circumstance during the year and that at other times, the shadowing impact is minimal again without detrimentally effecting the amenity and use of the courtyards. Another point to be considered is that within the adjoining courtyards there are two relatively high trees which cast their own significant shadows within the courtyards and which will occur whether or not any building takes place on the adjoining property.

2. STUDENT NUMBERS

Arkana College is registered by the Commonwealth Government as a Primary School from Kindergarten to Year 6, Single Stream (one room per year group). The student population cannot exceed 120 students. It was noted in the application to Council that this proposal will not result in any increase in the current use of the site. This point is reinforced by the fact that the school cannot operate without Commonwealth assistance. In approving student numbers, the Commonwealth Government also approves the payment of recurrent funding per student each year. Without that recurrent funding it is impossible for non-Government schools to operate. Therefore, the school cannot increase its student numbers without an increase in recurrent funding from the Commonwealth.

It is recognised by everyone that this school operates on a tight site. However, it has been established on this site for a very long time. Therefore, Commonwealth Authorities in approving the upgrade for the classroom facilities, have emphasised that the facilities are only approved for current student numbers and that an increase in the educational capacity of this site cannot be contemplated."

Planning Comments

1) Parking

The existing development provides no on-site parking and the proposed extensions include no parking provision as part of the proposal. Taking into account the school is licensed to operate with up to 120 students, this total lack of parking is of some concern. It is considered however that Council may accept a continuation of the existing situation on the following basis:

* the existing Arkana College has operated for 32 years without previously being required to provide parking,

* no vehicular access presently exists to the site and the provision of vehicular access to Stoney Creek Road may not be favoured due to the potential traffic and safety concerns,

* the applicant's advice that the existing school is licensed for 120 students and that the extension will not permit an increase in this number means that the demand for parking and traffic impact of the operation will not change.

2) Location of the Extension at the Rear of the Site

In general the objections received relate to the impact on neighbours which is created by the extension being situated at the rear of the property. The applicant's submission deals in detail with the reasons why the extension was not located at the front of the existing school. It is agreed with the applicant that, were the extension to be built at the front of the property, there would be an adverse impact on the streetscape. The existing single storey building is set well back from the street and is generally screened by the existing vegetation. Erection of a 2 level building in this location would project this 2 level bulk onto the street and potentially require the removal of the screen trees.

3) Non-Compliance with IRDC

Objectors have argued that the proposed extensions will adversely affect their privacy and sunshine and the level of noise will be increased. In terms of the impact on privacy, the proposed second level building will create the potential for overlooking of courtyards and backyards. The applicant's offer to accept a condition of consent which ensures the sill height of windows in not below 1500 mm will effectively limit this potential.

In respect to overshadowing, the applicant has provided shadow diagrams which indicate that although the adjoining property to the west will suffer from some degree of shadow, it is already impacted upon due to the location of existing trees and the demountable buildings to be removed. On this basis it is considered that the shadow impact will not be to a degree that it is unacceptable.

In terms of noise, it would expected that a primary school would generate some level of noise and possibly nuisance. However, it is considered unlikely that the proposed development will increase noise levels as no additional students are proposed and the noisy activities would be expected to occur within the playground (which is existing) rather than within the classrooms.

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .02.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 346 STONEY CREEK ROAD, KINGSGROVE (D.A. 41/97) 2 LEVEL EXTENSION TO ARKANA COLLEGE PLUS INTERNAL REFURBISHMENT (Report by Manager, Development Services, Ms. G. Vereker)

. Recommendation 346 STONEY CREEK ROAD, KINGSGROVE (D.A. 41/97) 2 LEVEL EXTENSION TO ARKANA COLLEGE PLUS INTERNAL REFURBISHMENT (Report by Manager, Development Services, Ms. G. Vereker)


RECOMMENDATION


THAT Council as the consent authority approve Development Application DA 41/97 for a two level extension and refurbishment of the existing school building at Arkana College, situated at No 346 Stoney Creek Road, Kingsgrove, subject to the following conditions:-GENERAL

1. Compliance generally with Drawing No 94.13-01/02/03/04 - Issue B; prepared by Charles Glanville, Architects dated 6 March, 1997 and submitted with DA41/97 , except where amended by the conditions of consent.

STORMWATER MANAGEMENT

2. 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.

4. All stormwater must drain by gravity to the kerb and gutter in Stoney Creek Road.

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

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

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

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

BUILDING REQUIREMENTS

5. 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.

6. Details of all existing and proposed essential services, such as exit and directional signs, fire extinguishers and emergency lighting, must be submitted to Council with the Building Application.

7. The openings to the western boundary must be fire rated in accordance with Part C of the Building Code of Australia. In this regard the developer should note that the Sprinkler Code AS2118 does not permit the fire protection of openable windows with drenchers or sprinklers.

8. 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.

9. 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.

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

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

12. Arrangements are to be made for the collection, storage and disposal of all waste materials in an approved container, to the satisfaction of the Divisional Manager, Development and Health.

13. The development shall be constructed to a standard of construction which will result in noise levels within habitable rooms from external noise sources not exceeding 50 dB(A) with the windows and doors shut. A report from a qualified and practising Acoustical Engineer and the recommended construction details to comply with the above shall be submitted with the Building Application.

TREE PROTECTION

14. The existing trees on the site must be retained and be protected during the period of demolition, excavation, site preparation and construction, by the erection of a suitable barrier around the perimeter of each tree. The barrier must be such to prevent damage to the trees and their root system by the movement of vehicles, handling or storage of building materials, excavation, filling or the like. Details of the means of protection must be submitted to Council with the Building Application, and be erected prior to any works commencing on-site.

15. No excavation, filling or compaction, no buildings or structures, and no services may be placed within the area defined by the canopy of each tree.

RESTRICTIONS ON USE

16. The approved use being conducted only between the normal shool hours of Monday to Friday.

17. 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.

18. Windows to the first floor on the northern and western sides of the extension must have a minimum sill height of 1500mm above the floor level.

19. In accordance with the registration of Arkana College from the Commonwealth Government, maximum student numbers must not exceed 120.


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.02.02 23-27 MACMAHON STREET, HURSTVILLE (D.A. 438/94)
SECTION 102 AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT CONSENT NO. 438/94 TO DELETE THE PEDESTRIAN
ACCESS TO ADJOINING PROPERTY BEING NOS. 10-12 WOODVILLE STREET, HURSTVILLE




Applicant : Benchmark Developments
Proposal : SECTION 102 AMENDMENTS TO
DEVELOPMENT CONSENT
DA 438/94 TO DELETE PEDESTRIAN
ACCESS TO ADJOINING PROPERTY
BEING NOS. 10-12 WOODVILLE
STREET, HURSTVILLE
Zoning : Zone 3 (b) City Centre Business
Owners : Benchmark Developments
Existing Development : Development presently under construction.

PRECIS OF REPORT

1. Development Application DA 438/94 was approved by Council in October 1994.

2. The application consisted of a mixed commercial, residential and restaurant development of 13 levels over basement parking.

3. The development plans incorporated a pedestrian link from MacMahon Street through to Woodville Street as was required in the existing Development Control Plan No. 4.

4. In response to an objection submitted by the adjoining property, Nos 10-12 Woodville Street, a condition of Development Consent was that the pedestrian link between the subject land and the adjoining property, Nos 10-12 Woodville Street be maintained.

5. The developer has now lodged a request for an amendment to the Development Consent, that the requirement for a pedestrian link to the adjoining property be deleted. The pedestrian link from MacMahon Street through to Woodville Street will remain.

6. It is recommended that Council approve the Section 102 amendment as requested.

Background

Council's Development Control Plan No. 4 required that a pedestrian link be provided to facilitate access from MacMahon Street through to Woodville Street. At the time of consideration of the development of Nos 10-12 Woodville Street, Council required the proposal make provision for pedestrian access through to the rear of the property which could eventually join up with a future pedestrian access via an adjacent development in MacMahon Street. In 1994 Council approved Development Application DA438/94 which consisted of a major commercial/residential building on land encompassing 14-16 Woodville Street and 23-27 MacMahon Street. In accordance with Development Control Plan No. 4, the plans incorporated a pedestrian arcade through from MacMahon Street to Woodville Street. Public notification of the Development Application resulted in the submission of an objection from 10-12 Woodville Street, which argued that the new development should incorporate a pedestrian link which would join up with the rear of their building to form an additional through link. Council's response to this objection was the inclusion of the following condition on the Development Consent for 23-27 MacMahon Street.

"The proposed walkway link between MacMahon Street and Woodville Street and the adjoining property, 10-12 Woodville Street is to be maintained and have regard to disabled access and any approved use of the Fire Station. Details and levels are to be submitted with the Building Application."

Proposal

The Building Application for the development now known as MacMahon Plaza has been submitted in three stages as follows:

1. Demolition, Site works and excavation
2. Basement, Construction up to ground level
3. Construction of remainder of the development

When submitted, building plans for Stage 3 of the development indicated the pedestrian arcade from MacMahon Street to Woodville Street but showed that the pedestrian link required to join Nos. 10-12 Woodville Street had been deleted. Discussions with the developer led to the submission of the Section 102 amendment presently before Council. A submission lodged by the developer arguing for the deletion of the requirement to provide this link is reproduced for Council's information:-

"1. We believe that the right of way was originally created over the adjoining property 10-12 Woodville Street in order to comply with Hurstville City Council's Development Control Plan No. 4 and furthermore, that the proposed major pedestrian arcade linking MacMahon and Woodville Streets currently detailed on the development at 23-27 MacMahon Street and 14-16 Woodville Streets now satisfies these requirements for a through site link and therefore supersedes any previous requirements. We believe the proposed arcade will provide sufficient pedestrian access between MacMahon and Woodville Streets without needing to link to the adjoining right-of-way as well.

2. The combined factors of the existing level difference between the two properties at this point (approx 1m) and Council's requirement that this link be designed having regard to disabled access, would result in a ramp in excess of 15m in length being provided. We note that with the currently designed building levels that have been approved in the Stage 1 Building Application, it would not be possible to incorporate this ramp within the above mentioned property (14-16 Woodville Street). This would therefore mean the incorporation of the ramp within the right of way to the adjoining property (10-12 Woodville Street), which upon very preliminary investigations, would appear very difficult.

3. The provision of an additional minor link from the main arcade to the adjoining right of way will have a detrimental effect on the amenity of the main arcade and will create additional security risks.

4. We believe that the provision of this additional minor link will have no civic, commercial or social benefit.

The current form and layout of the existing arcade has been designed to encourage not only easy but uninterrupted pedestrian access from MacMahon Street through to Woodville Street. It has provided a significant opportunity to create both a quick and strong direct visual link between MacMahon & Woodville Streets.

The deletion of an additional minor deviation from this main pedestrian thoroughfare will help to emphasise the main directional flow of pedestrian traffic and prevent any pedestrian confusion, as well as emphasising the strong visual link. Security surveillance of the public arcade will also be made more manageable with the deletion of the additional corridor connection perpendicular to the main arcade.

By creating one single, wide and uninterrupted space a lively and easily identifiable public thoroughfare can be created to link these two important public streets.

We therefore further request that Council modify Condition 13 of the Development Consent of 28 November, 1994 to delete the walkway link to the adjoining property 10-12 Woodville Street."

Divisional Comment

Divisional Manager - Policy, Planning and Environment

No objection to requested amendment.

Manager Building Services

No objection to requested amendment.

Public Notification and Comment

A substantial number of adjoining properties were notified by letter of the request for amended consent and given twenty one (21) days in which to respond. One objection was received from one of the proprietors of a unit within Nos. 10-12 Woodville Street. The substance of the objection is reproduced here for Council's information:-

"We understand that the legal access now on the title from MacMahon Street through to Woodville Street via Nos. 10-12, our property is under consideration by Council to discontinue such easement.

At the time of the original approval, this was the only point of value benefiting our property, after all the sun has been removed from our courtyards.

The original approval did show such access and we still demand it to be retained, because our development was restricted in the past in its design as it had to give clear passageway under law.

By removing or not demanding the easement be implemented, you penalise us, not the builder nor the project under construction.

You, the Council have already penalised us by removing the parking facilities in front of our property and making it a Construction zone, we have lost customers who were unable to find parking as before, and, the builder by discharging mud and water into our gutters has done nothing to improve the street-scape.

The B class hoarding in front of the construction site in Woodville Street does not comply to the strict regulations under Workcover, the advertising sign on same hoarding does not seem structurally adequate, and does not comply with your own regulations. All seem to indicate that you bend the rules for certain developers and are hard with others.

We therefore recommend to the Council that the status-quo be retained and what was approved initially must be kept, and not deleted to the whim of the developer."

Planning Comments

It is apparent that the original requirement by Council for the MacMahon Plaza development to provide pedestrian access joining up with the neighbouring development, 10 - 12 Woodville Street, was a response to the objection received, and a concern to enable completion of the originally envisaged through link. However, as argued by the applicant, the reason for the requirement to provide access, as outlined in DCP No.4 is to facilitate and encourage pedestrian access from MacMahon Street to Woodville Street and vice versa. The MacMahon Plaza development as now proposed satisfies this requirement, and although the provision of an additional link through 10 - 12 Woodville Street would be advantageous, it is not a necessity, by virtue of the fact that DCP No. 4 only requires provision of a single pedestrian link. On the basis that a link to 10 - 12 Woodville Street may be physically difficult to construct taking into account the requirement of the existing condition of consent to provide disabled access, it is considered that Council should approve the requested Section 102 amendment.

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .02.02
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 23-27 MACMAHON STREET, HURSTVILLE (D.A. 438/94)
SECTION 102 AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT CONSENT NO. 438/94 TO DELETE THE PEDESTRIAN
ACCESS TO ADJOINING PROPERTY BEING NOS. 10-12 WOODVILLE STREET, HURSTVILLE


. Recommendation 23-27 MACMAHON STREET, HURSTVILLE (D.A. 438/94)
SECTION 102 AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT CONSENT NO. 438/94 TO DELETE THE PEDESTRIAN
ACCESS TO ADJOINING PROPERTY BEING NOS. 10-12 WOODVILLE STREET, HURSTVILLE



RECOMMENDATION


THAT Council as consent authority approve the Section 102 modification to DA 438/94 for No's. 23 - 27 MacMahon Street and 14 - 16 Woodville Street, Hurstville, subject to the following conditions:

1. Compliance in all respects with Drawing No 94066/A/01/DA-09/DA, Statement of Environment Effects and supporting tables prepared by Phillip Cox, Richardson, Taylor and Partners, Architects and Planners dated August, 1994 and Amended Drawing Nos 94066/A/05/DA/B, 94066/A/06/DA/B, 94066/A/07/DA/B and 94066/A/08/DA/B dated October 1994 and submitted with DA 438/94 , 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 applicant to provide an on site detention (OSD) facility designed by a professional hydrological/hydraulic engineer, showing computations of the inlet and outlet hydrographs and stage/storage relationships of the proposed OSD using the following design parameters:

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

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

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

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 $260,224 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 $29,025 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 traffic management facilities within the Hurstville CBD.

The contribution is based on the following criteria as a direct consequence of the proposed development.

* The increased traffic volume, raise the potentiality of conditions accelerating the deterioration of road pavement and/or traffic system operational conditions.

* Where provision of the scheduled facilities is essential to the traffic system operation due to the proposed development.

* Where the provision of a facility is a direct requirement as a result of the proposed development.

The contribution rate for Residential/Retail is $1.40/$22.80 per square metre respectively of nett increase in floor space. The amount is $34,201 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

7. Payment to Council for the full cost of reconstruction/ construction of the footpath, kerb and gutter, the implementation of street tree planting and grates, at the front of the subject site where deemed necessary by Council. Should the applicant elect to construct the work, it is to be carried out in accordance with Council's conditions and specifications together with a payment of Council's administration fee. The amount is to be paid prior to the issue of Certificate of Classification. The materials of construction shall be determined by the Divisional Manager, Engineering.

8. A separate development application will be required for any advertising signs and/or structures including temporary advertisements within the Hurstville Town Centre, that are proposed to be erected or placed on any property.

9. All building materials shall be compatible in colour and texture throughout the whole project as indicated by the Artist's impression and the external finishes board dated August, 1994.

10. The applicant is to retain the character of the Fire Station and ensure protection of the building during construction. The external bi-fold doors, all original internal fixtures and fittings to the Fire Station including pressed metal ceilings and timber joinery are to retained.

11. The applicant is to have regard to and implement the "Conservation and Re-use Plan" for the Hurstville Fire Station proposed by Schwager Brooks and Partners Pty. Ltd.

12. The applicant is to comply with and implement the recommendations produced by Vipac (Report No. 24356 Rev.1) dated September, 1994. Details of those recommendations within the plans will be submitted with the building application.

13. The proposed walkway link between MacMahon Street and Woodville Street is to be maintained and have regard to disabled access any approved use of the Fire Station. Details and levels are to be submitted with the building application.

14. The finished height of any building structure on the subject site, inclusive of all vents, chimneys, aerials, TV antennae and construction cranes etc., will not exceed a height of 104 metres above Australian Height Datum (AHD). Any amendments in height greater than 104 metres are to be directed to the Federal Airports Corporation for approval.

15. The applicant is to redesign the garbage disposal area and to permit appropriate vehicles to service this area. Details and levels are to be submitted with the building application to comply with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia and satisfy Council of the availability of vehicular access.

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

17. Maximum noise level from plant and equipment used on the site shall not exceed the background noise level by more than 5dB(A) for the approved hours of the use, when measured at the boundary of the nearest residential premises.

18. The applicant is to make provision for future connection to underground power supply in any building/rebuilding or alterations to the front elevation of the building on the subject property. The applicant shall confer with Sydney Electricity to ensure that tits requirements have been met in this regard. Such written advice is to be submitted to Council prior to the issue of a Certificate of Classification.

19. The dwelling to be demolished, No. 23 MacMahon Street, is currently identified in the City of Hurstville Heritage Study, 1988. The applicant is to provide at no cost to Council, a full recording of the building for historical purposes which is to be done prior to demolition. This is to involve photographs of the exteriors and interiors of the building, floor plans, elevations, and any other architectural details which contribute to the character and historical significance of the building. This historical recording is to be carried out by a person with demonstrated experience in this field and is to be submitted to Council prior to any demolition work on the building being carried out.

20. 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.

21. 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.

22. 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.

23. The submission of a detailed report prepared by a suitably qualified authority establishing the reflectivity value and impact of glazing proposed to be used on all elevations of the building. The report will be at the developer's expense.

24. The provision of one hundred and fifty-three (153) car spaces in accordance with the submitted plans. Such spaces, manoeuvring areas, driveways and vehicular crossings are to be suitably constructed, sealed to provide a surface of concrete or bitumen, signposted, clearly linemarked, and drained to Council's specifications. Footpath and crossing levels are to be obtained from the Engineer's Department at a fee set by Council.

25. The car spaces will be allocated as such:

Residential: 1 space min. each unit - total No. 78 spaces.
Visitors: 14 spaces
Commercial: 1 space per 50 square metres gross floor area of each unit.

26. That all carparking spaces designated on the approved plans as being reserved for the use of the residents of the development shall not be used for any purpose other than for the carparking of the motor vehicles of the residents of the residential units in the development.

27. That all carparking spaces designated on the approved plans as being reserved for the use of the tenants of the commercial units in the development shall not be used for any purpose other than for the parking of the motor vehicles of the tenants of the units and/or their employees and/or their customers.

28. That all carparking spaces designated on the approved plans as being reserved for the use of visitors to the development shall not be used for any purpose other than visitor parking.

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

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. For one-way/two-way straight and circular ramps the minimum dimensions shall be in accordance with the Traffic Authority of NSW "Policies, Guidelines and Procedures for Traffic Generating Developments" Part A - Section 3 - Design Guidelines.
32. Applicant to pay Council to construct a new 150mm thick reinforced concrete vehicular crossing in Woodville Street. 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.

33. All stormwater is to drain to the kerb and gutter in Woodville Street.


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 97 06 11TH JUNE, 1997-


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:-


05.02.03A 13-19 MACMAHON STREET, HURSTVILLE (D.A. 430/96)
MULTI STOREY COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
(Report by Manager, Development Services, Ms. G. Vereker)



A D D E N D U M


Applicant : Caporale Designs Ltd
Proposal : MULTI STOREY COMMERCIAL
AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
Zoning : Zone No. 3(b) - City Centre Business
Owners :
Existing Development : Friendly Society Pharmacy Building,
Residence and Doctors' Surgery
Cost of Development : $6.5 million

PRECIS OF REPORT

1. In October 1995 Caporale Designs lodged a Development Application DA 495/95 for the erection of a multi storey commercial/residential development over three (3) allotments of land in MacMahon Street, Hurstville

2. The application was considered unacceptable in several respects in particular height and floor space.

3. Revised plans were submitted in February, 1996.

4. In June 1996 Council formally considered the Development Application and refused the proposal on the basis of inadequate information submitted and the non-compliance of the proposal with Development Control Plan No. 4.

5. Intrinsic to Council's refusal was its concern to protect the heritage integrity of the Friendly Societies Dispensary.

6. In December, 1996 a new Development application was submitted, DA 430/96.

7. The applicant's revised the development proposal in April, 1997 requesting Council consider a staged development whereby Stage 1 would achieve approval of the basic parameters of the development, including building envelope, height and floor space.

8. On 15 April, 1997 the applicant lodged an appeal to the Land and Environment Court on the basis of Council's deemed refusal of the application.

9. It is recommended that Council grant approval to the staged development of the site in accordance with Council's preferred building envelope.

Background

In October, 1995, Corporate Designs submitted a Development Application for a multi-storey commercial/residential development over three allotments of land in MacMahon Street, Hurstville. The proposal entailed construction of a twelve (12) storey tower, with a floor space ratio of 3.58:1. Only the facade of the Friendly Societies Dispensary was to be retained. Council commenced negotiations with the applicant with a view to achieving a development more sympathetic to the significant MacMahon Street site. The major issues of concern to Council were as follows :

1) Treatment and conservation of the Friendly Society Dispensary.

2) Compliance with DCP No. 4 in fact and intent.

3) Submission of adequate supporting information including model, wind study, traffic study, reflectivity study.

4) Concern that the development be appropriate in its civic, city-centre context.

Following extensive consultation between Council officers, the applicant and the applicant's consultants, revised plans were submitted in February, 1996. These plans consisted of the erection of three buildings and retention of part of the Friendly Societies Dispensary. Two (2) four storey buildings were proposed to front MacMahon Street on either side of the dispensary. A twelve (12) storey building was proposed for the rear of the site. It was intended the development comprise a mixture of uses incorporating commercial, residential, restaurant and serviced apartments.

The revised Development Application was formally considered by Council in June, 1996. Council resolved to refuse the application for the following reasons :

1. The proposal does not meet the urban design objectives of the DCP No. 4 (in terms of scale, enhancement of the precinct, impact on adjacent development) and an over development of the site.

2. The proposal is contrary to Development Control Plan NO. 4 - Hurstville Town Centre (amended 13/3/96) which prohibits medium and high density residential development within the core retail and core commercial areas of Hurstville CBD.

3. The application together with supporting documentation and plans is inadequate for Council to give an accurate and objective assessment against the provisions of Council's Development Control Plan NO. 4 - Hurstville Town Centre and the Building Code of Australia.

Following issue of the refusal, discussions between the applicant and Council officers continued, with Council outlining issues which would need to be addressed by any subsequent Development Application :

* the development would need to define a spatial system, rather than creating an "object" building;

* the development should ensure appropriate privacy for the dispensary and buildings to the rear;

* the design should ensure appropriate privacy for the dispensary and buildings to the rear;

* the height of the development should be reduced to a level appropriate to surrounding development.

It was stressed to the applicant that satisfying the above issues would be integral to meeting the objectives of Council's DCP No. 4.

Current Development Application

The Development Application now before Council for determination, DA 430/96 was lodged on 13 December, 1996.

When lodged, the development proposed consisted of

* retaining the dispensary

* erection of an eight storey building on the north-eastern side of the dispensary;

* the design should ensure appropriate privacy for the dispensary and buildings to the rear;

* the height of the development should be reduced to a level appropriate to surrounding development.

It was stressed to the applicant that satisfying the above issues would be integral to meeting the objectives of Council's DCP No. 4.

Current Development Application

The Development Application now before Council for determination, DA 430/96 was lodged on 13 December, 1996.

When lodged, the development proposed consisted of :

* retaining the dispensary;

* erection of an eight storey building on the north-eastern side of the dispensary;

* erection of an eleven storey building on the south-western side of the dispensary;

* provision of an open courtyard separating the dispensary from the tower buildings;

* provision of basement parking beneath the entire site (with the exception of below the dispensary).

Existing and Surrounding Development

The subject site presently houses the Friendly Societies Dispensary, a doctors' surgery and one dwelling.

To the south-east of the site there is a six storey curtain wall commercial building and a three storey brick building housing professional offices.

On the site to the south-west a development application for a twelve storey residential building has been approved behind the old fire station which is being retained.

To the west of the site across MacMahon Street is the Civic Precinct, MacMahon Galleries and the car park.

On the north-east side of the site there are dwellings.

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. 3(b) - City Centre Business 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 Development Control Plan No. 4 - Hurstville Town Centre.

The objectives of the Development Control Plan for development in the Town Centre are as follows :

Land Use Strategy

(a) To reinforce and promote the Town Centre's role and function as a major multi-functional sub-regional commercial centre, providing space for retailing, commercial offices, administrative, community services, recreation, entertainment and residential uses.

(b) To ensure that land uses are located to comply with vehicular and pedestrian access objectives and particularly to encourage a strong central office, retail and service core close to public transport facilities and with convenient pedestrian access to open space areas, parking areas and other major focal paints within the Town Centre.

(c) To encourage mixed forms of development such as ground floor retail with offices above, and including a residential component where this will assist in the achievement of the objectives of this Plan.

(d) To assist in the protection and enhancement of the central portion of Forest Road as a traditional shopping street.

(e) To assist in developing a Town Centre which continues to have life and which functions safely and attractively outside of normal business hours.

In accordance with the provisions of the DCP, the design emphasis and building form required is a built form which reinforces a human scale and produces a Hurstville character. Variety is purposely sought to avoid any appearance of a "project" look or super-block. However, continuity between each building and its neighbours is essential to provide a visual coherence to the city. The complexity and interest normally associated with older and more established urban neighbourhoods is the desired outcome particularly in Forest Road and the Civic Precinct where the nucleus of this still exists.

The built form profile is medium rise high density block edge development. For this building form to be successful, it needs to adhere to the following principles :

* The buildings are to be organised on a "block edge" principle - facing the street and near or on the front site in a manner which provides a coherent definition of the urban space along the street and relative to other buildings.

* The architecture is to draw clues from the existing buildings in terms of plans, elevations and the traditional vertical structural modulation evidence in Hurstville.

* The buildings must be appropriately modulated and articulated in their facade in order to provide well proportioned elevations and human scale, shadow lines etc when viewed along the street.

* The design must consider its street context.

13-19 MacMahon Street is a site which is confined by the following :

* it has only one street frontage;
* it has a building of heritage value;
* the buildings on the sites to the rear and to the south of the site are close to their rear and side boundaries.

Under DCP No. 4, the maximum floor space allowable is 3:1 that is providing the urban design objectives are met. These objectives are :

"To control building form to assist in the achievement of urban design, heritage and environmental objectives, particularly :

i. The retention and enhancement of a human scale and consistent character.

ii. The introduction of points of interest within the street environment which relate the building form to the pedestrian environment.

iii. The protection of pedestrians using streets and other open spaces from adverse environmental impacts, namely overshadowing, reflectivity, wind, rain, noise and traffic fumes.

iv. The protection and enhancement of items and precincts of the environmental heritage, or of landmark or landscape significance.

v. The protection of the environment of adjoining residential areas.

vi. The provision of an appropriate level of well distributed, well designed and furnished open space.

vii. To assist in the creation of a desirable image for the centre."

Despite improvements in the overall concept of the development, an assessment of the proposal in respect to the above listed objectives from DCP No. 4 revealed the proposal to still exceed Council's requirements. Council officers considered the buildings still exceeded that which was appropriate for the site in terms of height, bulk and floor space ratio. On 18 March, 1997 Council issued a formal notice to the applicant confirming the required building envelope parameters for the development as follows :

* four storeys on the northern side with a 2.0 metre setback from the street and three storeys at the street;

* on the southern side three storeys at the street and eleven storeys at the rear;

* a 4.0 metre setback for the Elm tree was required on the southern block.

Request for Staged Consent

In April, 1997, Council received a request from the applicant that consideration be given to the issue of a Staged Development Consent for the site. The applicant's submission is reproduced below as follows :

"The timing of the approval process has become critical, through no fault of Council or its staff. Our client, Caporale Designs, has had considerable discussions with Council staff resulting in the agreed position set out in the letter of 18 March 1997 of Council's Divisional Manager, Policy, Planning and Environment. The need to execute contracts has become pressing and, to meet both the client and Council concerns, we suggest a staged development consent under s91AB of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Ace would be appropriate.

For comfort in its impending transactions, our client needs to know the height, envelope and accommodation that Council would permit on the site. The design itself, though important, is not critical to the development potential of the project or the price to be paid for land. Accordingly a first stage development consent, which defines height, footprints, setbacks from MacMahon Street, relationship to the old pharmacy and accommodation (floor areas, unit sizes and numbers) would be enough for the comfort of our client at this crucial stage.

For the Council, such a consent would seal the agreement of the applicant to the heights and other controls sought by Council. For our clients, a first stage development consent would define all of the issues critical to the success of the development in financial terms. Our client would then be at leisure to complete the design of the project without undue haste and in consultation with Council's officers prior to lodging a second stage development application for the project."

Concept of Staged Consent

The concept of Staged Development permits Council to grant individual Development Consents for specific parts of a development which would generally take place as stages, in chronological order. The benefit of Staged Development lies in the area of major and complex developments where the developer usually requires Council's support for the "concept" of the proposal in order to obtain finance. The provisions of Staged Development allow Council to issue Development Consent for the first stage which may comprise a master plan in the instance of a large subdivision or a concept plan establishing floor space ratio and building envelope in the case of a major residential/commercial development. Stage 2 would take the form of a separate Development Application with detailed lot layouts or floor plans and elevations, dependent upon the type of development proposed. In each case the issue of the stage 1 consent permits a developer to obtain finance to proceed with the development and provides both Council and the developer with a degree of certainty with regard to the parameters of the project.

In respect of the current Development Application it was agreed with the applicant that Council could legally consider a staged Development Consent for the subject land and may be willing to approve the staged development of the land subject to the submission of :

* revised plans indicating a building envelope as required by Council on 18 March, 1997;

* elevations indicating height

* shadow diagrams;

* heritage assessment.

It was also agreed that Council could arrange public notification of the staged development concept, on the understanding that the above-listed information would be submitted prior to commencement of the notification period.

A series of three different building envelopes for the site have been submitted and each envelope has received a response from Council's Divisional Manager, Policy, Planning and Environment. At the time of finalising this report the information submitted by the applicant is finally correct in terms of building envelope and height, elevations and shadow diagrams and heritage study.

Earlier submissions by the applicant includes a list of the number of units proposed (52 in total) and the amount of retail/commercial floorspace (550 square metres). Council should in no way be prepared to approve a particular number of units when the applicant has yet to demonstrate that this number can be accommodated within the envelope.

Appeal to the Land and Environment Court

Despite on-going negotiations taking place between the applicant and Council officers, the applicant lodged an appeal with the Land and Environment Court on 15 April on the basis of Council's deemed refusal of the application. The appeal has been submitted in relation to the original plans lodged with Development Application 430/96 rather than the application for staged consent, now before Council. The appeal is set down to be heard on 13 June, 1997.

Public Notification

Development Application DA 430/96 has been notified twice, once in respect of the plans submitted in December, 1996 and again in April, 1997 when the initial staged development building envelope plan was lodged. This plan was not in accordance with the building envelope required by Council and advised to the applicant in March, 1997.

In response to the two periods of public notification submissions were received from the National Trust and the Presbyterian Church. Concerns outlined in the submissions were as follows :

National Trust Submission

The concerns of the National Trust related specifically to the development in its relationship to the dispensary. A portion of the Trust's letter is reproduced for Council's information :

"As previously indicated to Council, the Trust has under consideration the Classification and Listing on its Register the Hurstville an District United Friendly Society's Dispensary and this item is now on the Trust's Interim List.

While the architectural qualities of the Dispensary and its vital contribution to the MacMahon Street civic precinct are clearly evident, this building may well be unique in terms of its intact historic interiors, particularly the upstairs meeting room/hall and the dispensary at the rear of the ground floor chemist.

This building and its interiors illustrate evocatively the early years of Hurstville's twentieth century growth from a village to a major metropolitan growth centre. The Dispensary was a focal point of the Southern Sydney health system for over four decades.

The proposed development is excessive in scale in terms of the streetscape of MacMahon Street which is predominantly single storey with the notable exception of the complimentary Fire Station and Dispensary two storey Edwardian period buildings.

Examination of the Development Application indicates that the developers of this site are seeking maximum development with minimal retention of heritage fabric. With the loss of the Hurstville Mecca/Savoy Theatre and a number of other key heritage buildings in recent years, the opportunities to conserve key components of the City's heritage within the Central Business District are now becoming rare."

Submission from the Presbyterian Church

A summary of the issues raised by the Church include :

* impact on wind effects within MacMahon Street;

* Reflectivity onto Park Road and danger for motorists;

* Traffic impact and implications, combined with the inadequacy and inaccuracy of the traffic study.

Conclusion

Consideration of the Development Application for 13-19 MacMahon Street has involved extensive assessment, consultation and negotiation during the past three years. The proposal now before Council, for approval of a staged development appears to finally present the basis for a development in accordance with the objectives of DCP No. 4. In addition, approval of a staged development provides certainty to both Council and the applicant with respect to the form, bulk, height and extent of the buildings and will ensure the development, when completed will be appropriate within the civic precinct.

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .02.03A
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 13-19 MACMAHON STREET, HURSTVILLE (D.A. 430/96)
MULTI STOREY COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
(Report by Manager, Development Services, Ms. G. Vereker)


. Recommendation 13-19 MACMAHON STREET, HURSTVILLE (D.A. 430/96)
MULTI STOREY COMMERCIAL AND RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
(Report by Manager, Development Services, Ms. G. Vereker)



RECOMMENDATION


THAT Council as the consent authority grant approval to a staged multi-storey commercial/residential development at Nos. 13-19 MacMahon Street, Hurstville, subject to the following conditions :

Stage 1 of Development

1. The building envelope must be satisfactory to Council as follows :

i) four storeys on the northern side with a 2.0 metre setback from the street and three storeys at the street;

ii) on the southern side three storeys at the street and eleven storeys at the rear.

2. The building envelope must show a minimum setback of 4.0 metres from MacMqhon Street to accommodate the envelope.

3. The maximum floor space ratio for the entire envelope must be no greater than 3.0:1.

Stage 2 of Development

4. The Stage 2 Development must be in accordance with the building envelopes approved in Stage 1.

5. A separate Development Application must be submitted for Stage 2, incorporating

* floor plans of each level showing levels of floors and carparking ramps;

* elevations and use;

* materials;

* landscape plan;

* shadow diagrams;

* wind and reflectivity studies;

* traffic impact study;

* response to the heritage requirements.

6. The information submitted with the Stage 2 Development Application must be to a detail to enable Council's full assessment of the proposal under the Heads of Consideration in Section 90 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.



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 19-21 HAMPDEN STREET, BEVERLY HILLS (45/97)
ERECTION OF 10 UNIT RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
(Report by Town Planner, Mr. J. Brannan)




Applicant : Mr S Sharpe
Proposal : Erection of 10 Unit Residential Building
Zoning : Zone No. 2 - Residential
Residential Development
Control Plan 1994 : Development Area D
Owners : Mr S Saade
Existing Development : Two Single Storey Residence
Cost of Development : $800,000
Planner: Jeff Brannan

PRECIS OF REPORT

1. Proposal to construct a three storey residential flat building containing 10 x 3 bedroom units with basement carparking.

2. No objection is raised by Council's Building Surveyors or Engineers.

3. Six (6) submissions received from public notification.

4. Recommendation: Approval


Existing and Surrounding Development

The site is currently two separate allotments each currently occupied by a single storey residence, the existing dwellings are dated from 1940's. The predominant form of development in the locality is detached dwellings, the site is located in an area which is moving away from a strictly low density form of development towards medium density development characterised by residential flat buildings. There are a number of three storey residential flat buildings of recent construction in the vicinity of the site, including some still under construction. A three storey residential flat building adjoins the property to the east with single storey dwellings to the southern boundary accessed from Melvin Street.

History

DATE ACTION
18/3/97Application Lodged
22/4/97 - 13/5/97Public Notification

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 Interim Residential Development Code and its relevant amendments.

Proposed Development

The applicant proposes to demolish the two existing residential premises on the site and construct a residential flat building consisting of a basement level of car parking with three levels above containing ten (10) three bedroom units. Each unit contains the usual amenities with the two top floor units larger in size in comparison to the rest of the units within the proposal. Driveway access from Hampden Street to the basement is provided with adequate turning and manoeuvrability for vehicles. Availability of eighteen (18) parking places has been provided with the proposal made up of fifteen places for residents and three for visitors. The proposal has accommodated adequate landscaping for the site of 527m2 in area with each unit provided with a balcony of 12m2 to 20m2. The proposal complies with Council's IRDC, 1995 and provides provisions in excess of the code in order to obtain a more favourable design such as parking requirements and landscaping of the site.

IRDC Requirement
Proposed
Compliance
Site Area1114.44m2Yes
Density 105m21114.44m210 DWESYes
Development Area A
Building Height12m10.5mYes
Private Open Space Balcony12m212m2-20m2Yes
Landscaped Area501.5m2527m2Yes
Building Setbacks: Front6m6mYes
Side/Rear4m-7m4.5m-7mYes
Residential Parking12.515Yes
Visitor Parking2.53Yes
Building Envelope - front1.5m/45o1.5m/45oYes
-rear1.5m/45o1.5m/45oYes
Frontage24m24.39mYes

COMMENT:

Compliance with the IRDC, 1995.

The development proposal has accommodated the areas specified within council's code and has provided additional parking and design criteria in order to obtain a more architectural favourable design. The building fits within Council's Building Envelope with the above table outlining areas as specified.

Balconies

The proposal has provided additional balconies for units within the proposal of the east and western boundaries facing dwellings and units along Hampden Street. These additional balconies are not within the minimum dimension size under Council's IRDC, 1995 the only advantage they provide to the development is from an architectural perspective. It is recommended that these balconies protruding outside of the main wall of the unit building be deleted.

Car Parking

The proposal has provided additional parking within the unit complex made up of double garages for the slightly larger units and singles for smaller. Three parking places have been provided for visitors.

Bulk and Scale

The proposal is of a similar bulk and scale to eight home unit developments already constructed (or under construction) in Hampden Street. The proposed design, which blends with the existing units constructed with the street also complies with the criteria of Council's IRDC, 1995.

Setbacks

Compliance has been met with setback provisions as defined in Council's IRDC, 1995 with the side setback for the ground floor providing a four (4) metre side setback, increased to seven (7) metres for the top floor in order to fit within the building envelope. Balcony intrusions into the setback are allowable within the minimum setback of up to one (1) metre. Front and rear setbacks have been met with six (6) metres from the street for the front and building envelope control for the rear.

DIVISIONAL REFERRALS

Manager Building Services

A referral to Council's Building Surveyor was made for comment in relation to the proposal and any related building concerns. No objection was made to the development subject to standard building conditions and subsequent advisory notes applicable at building stage.

Manager Development Advice

Referral to Council's Engineer was made in relation to stormwater dispersal and any related engineering concerns. No objection was made in relation to the development subject to stormwater dispersal to the street and basement pumped to the kerb and gutter in Hampden Street, provision of on-site detention and replacement and construction of kerb and guttering.

Tree Inspector

Referral was made to Council's Tree Inspector in relation to the landscape plan submitted and the removal of trees on site due to the development proposal. No objection was raised subject to the preservation of a seven (7) metre brushbox to be retained at the rear of the property.

Public Notification and Comment

The proposal was advertised in the Leader and adjoining residents were notified by letter, inviting them to view the plans and submit comments on the proposal within twenty one (21) days. Six (6) submissions were registered, their concerns are outlined below.

1. Overlooking/Privacy/Balconies:

Concern has been raised by residents of Melvin Street that the development will overlook the rear yard of their properties. It should be noted that the building balconies fronting onto Melvin Lane are set back six(6) to five(5) metres from the rear boundary and Melvin Lane is six (6) metres in width hence the new building will be some ten (10) to twelve (12)metres from the rear premises in Melvin Street of which most have garages built on the laneway.

Some overlooking is to be expected with the scale of development permitted within "D" areas. The Melvin Street properties are sufficiently removed from the subject land so that overlooking is reduced.

2. Over Shadowing:

Concern was raised in relation to the shadow cast upon properties along the southern boundary onto Melvin Street with the cast of shadow at its worst case from 9.00am the 22nd June. This is to be expected, but with the distance between the unit proposal and the properties in Melvin Street this would be reduced as shadow decreases as the day progresses.

3. Noise:

Comment was made in relation to vehicle movement to and from the site using the vehicle ramp accessing the basement with the amount of noise to be generated. Provision of a brick fence along the boundary could reduce this noise for adjoining properties. Council's IRDC, 1995 indicates that the provision of fencing of properties is to be of colour bond or timber paling in accordance with Council's fencing code. Noise generated by the proposal will remain at the level to be expected within area "D" of Council's IRDC, 1995.

4. Trees/Landscaping:

Concern was raised in relation to landscaping of the site and the provision of substantial tree planting along the southern boundary. The landscape plan submitted was referred to Council's Tree Inspector for comment in relation to tree removal and new planting of trees on site with the new development proposal. No objection was raised from Council's Tree Inspector subject to retaining the seven (7) metre brushbox in the rear of the property.

Summary

The applicant has endeavoured to provide a development proposal for a residential flat building that is within an acceptable design and criteria to the satisfaction of Council's IRDC, 1995. The proposal indicates compliance with all provisions of the code and has provided additional parking and architectural features to the proposal in order to make it a more favourable marketable building. With these areas taken into consideration approval of this application is recommended.


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .03.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 19-21 HAMPDEN STREET, BEVERLY HILLS (45/97)
ERECTION OF 10 UNIT RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
(Report by Town Planner, Mr. J. Brannan)


. Recommendation 19-21 HAMPDEN STREET, BEVERLY HILLS (45/97)
ERECTION OF 10 UNIT RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
(Report by Town Planner, Mr. J. Brannan)



RECOMMENDATION


THAT Council as the consent authority grant development consent to the establishment of a three storey residential flat building consisting of 10 x 3 bedroom units with basement car parking at 19-21 Hampden Street, Beverly Hills, subject to the following conditions.

GENERAL

1. Compliance generally with Drawing No 1-3 prepared by TS Wun dated 12 March, 1997 and submitted with DA 45/97, except where amended by the conditions of consent.


BUILDING REQUIREMENTS

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. Details relating to the disposal of and recycling/re use of the building materials associated with the demolition of the existing structures must be submitted to Council with the building application and/or demolition application.
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. In accordance with the survey plan and levels submitted by ,the proposed dwelling/s shall not exceed 10.5 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 are to be provided at building application stage.

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. 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 pay for the erection of the fence and to ascertain which type of fence is preferred by the adjoining property owners.

9. The top floor balconies on the east and western elevations are to be deleted and the area applicable is to be incorporated into the bedrooms attached to the balconies.

10. 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.

11. 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.

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

13. 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.

STORMWATER MANAGEMENT

14. 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.

15. All stormwater to drain by gravity to the kerb and guttering in Hampden Street and the underground garage area to pump to the same kerb and guttering.

16. 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.


PARKING AND VEHICULAR ACCESS

17. 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.

18. 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.

19. All car spaces shall have minimum dimensions of 2.5m X 5.5m.

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

21. 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.

22. All existing vehicular crossings adjacent to the subject property that have become redundant are to be reinstated with kerb and guttering at the applicant's expense prior to issue of Certificate of Classification.

23. Applicant to pay Council to :
a) Replace redundant crossings with kerb and guttering
b) Condstruct a 150mm thick concrete crossing reinforced with F72 mesh
c) Construct a 1.52m wise by 80mm thick concrete path in Hampden Street or full width of site.
d) Pour 80mm thick concrete in lane at rear between back of kerb and rear fence for full width of 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.

SECTION 94 CONTRIBUTIONS

24. 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 $33,906 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

25. 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 $3,782 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

LANDSCAPING

26. The existing tree located at the rear of the property (Brushbox) must be retained. In this regard the tree must be protected during the construction period by the erection of a suitable barrier between the driveway and the tree. This barrier must prevent damage to the tree and its root system from the movement of vehicles, handling or storage of building materials, filling, excacation or the like. Details of the barrier proposed must be submitted with the Building Application for the approval of the Tree Inspection Officer, and the barrier must be erected prior to any works commencing on site.

27. The submission of a detailed landscape plan to the satisfaction of the Manager, Development 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, Development Services in accordance with the approved plan prior to occupation of the building. All landscaping shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Manager, Development 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.


28. Perimeter planting along "southern" 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.

29. The developer and his agents shall take all measures to prevent damage to trees and root systems during site works and construction.
ADVISORY NOTES REGARDING THE SUBMISSION
OF A BUILDING APPLICATION

a) Ventilation to the basement carpark must be carried out in accordance with Clause F4.11 of the BCA. A system of mechanical ventilation is to be provided. Details prepared by a suitably qualified mechanical engineer must be submitted to Council complying with AS1668. Note: Exhaust gas discharge shall be carried up a brick riser above roof level.

b) Hydrants and hose reels must be provided in accordance with Part E1 of the BCA. Details prepared by a suitably qualified hydraulic engineer must be submitted to Council complying with AS2419 and 2441 respectively.

c) Details of the internal sanitary mechanical ventilation system complying with AS1668.2 must be submitted for approval. Consideration must also be given to maintaining the required noise transmission setting and fire separation between adjoining units.

d) The building must be provided with a system of Smoke Hazard Management in accordance with Point E2 of the BCA. Details prepared by a suitably qualified person to be submitted for approval.

e) Emergency lighting and exit signs must be installed in the building in accordance with Point E4 of the BCA. Details complying with AS2293.1 must be submitted to Council.

f) Noise transmission and insulation between walls of adjoining units must comply with Point F5 of the BCA. Details of the wall construction between habitable and non habitable rooms must be submitted for approval.

g) Openings in the external wall of the building if situated less than 3.0m from the side boundary must be protected in accordance with C3.4 of the BCA. Details to be submitted to Council.

h) Full details of the entry, foyer and travel distance to stairway from sole occupancy unit doors shall be submitted with the Building Application.

i) Full shoring shall be provided to support the adjoining lands and fences prior to commencement of excavation for the basement.

j) A minimum head room of 2000 shall be provided to stairway within unit 8.

k) The development shall be constructed to a standard of construction which will result in noise levels within habitable rooms from external noise sources not exceeding 50 dB(A) with the windows and doors shut. A report from a qualified and practising Acoustical Engineer and the recommended construction details to comply with the above shall be submitted with the Building Application.

Note:- Details required by the above advisory notes must be submitted to Council with the Building Application for approval.






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 10 CLARENDON ROAD, RIVERWOOD (D.A. 352/96) ERECTION OF ONE X TWO STOREY AND TWO X ONE STOREY DWELLINGS (Report by Town Planner, Wai Man Wong)



Applicant: Mr. Chun Yue Cao
Proposal: 1 x 4 Bedroom Townhouse and
2 x 3 Bedroom Villas
Zoning: Zone No. 2 - Residential
Residential Development
Control Plan 1994: Development Area "C"
Owners: Chun Yue Cao, Daqing Liu and Yin Zhong
Existing Development: A vinyl clad residence and a fibro shed at the back
Cost of Development: $391,155


PRECIS OF REPORT

1. The proposal is to demolish the existing residential fibro house on site and construct one four bedroom townhouse and two three bedroom villas.

2. The proposal is not in compliance with the Residential "C" area where 24m frontage is required.

3. Recommendation - Approval with conditions

EXISTING AND SURROUNDING DEVELOPMENT

The subject site has an area of approximately 1134m2 (20.115m x 56.38m) and a frontage to Clarendon Road of approximately 20.115m. It is not level and it slopes down in the middle towards the north and rises again in level towards the rear.

A single storey vinyl clad residence, a fibro shed and a Galvanised Iron shed exist on site. An open creek cuts diagonally across the front corner. There are a number of trees on site but most of them are not significant.

The site is located north of Clarendon Road which is off Belmore Road. The site is approximately 600m from the main retail area of Riverwood. The surrounding development is predominantly residential with one/two storey homes.

To the east of the site is No. 8 Clarendon Road where a proposal for 3 x 3 bedroom villas was rejected. One of the reasons for this refusal was that the proposal failed to meet the minimum frontage requirement of 24.0m for Development Area C and did not comply with the other requirements of the Interim Residential Development Code (IRDC).

HISTORY

16/10/96 Development Application submitted to Council.

18/11/96-9/12/96 Notification to the adjacent owners.

26/11/96 Meeting held with the applicant to inform him that the proposal did not comply with IRDC on frontage which required a 24m frontage area.

4/2/97 Applicant resubmitted plans and justification for non-compliance.

13/2/97 Preliminary assessment was completed. Applicant was informed by letter that proposals should provide details of landscape component of 50% and 1.35m setback requirement in accordance with IRDC.

5/3/97 Applicant submitted justifications for non-compliance.

7/3/97 Assessment was made and found that compliance with the IRDC can be achieved through re-design of the dwellings. Meeting was held to discuss the re-design of the proposal including the maintaining of 50% landscape area and the required setbacks. At the meeting, the applicant was advised that there is no guarantee on the frontage issue since it has not been determined by Council. Applicant agreed to resubmit the plans with a view to achieving a better design and landscaping area.

20/3/97 Applicant submitted amended plans.

10/4/97 Assessment was made and letter was sent to applicant advising him to amend the plans including landscape calculation, side setback, building envelope etc to accord with IRDC.

14/4/97 Applicant submitted amended plans.

30/4/97 - 14/5/97 Notification to the adjacent owners.

13/5/97 Applicant was informed of the requirements from Building Section including site levels and floor levels etc.

15/5/97 Applicant submitted 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 Interim Residential Development Code (IRDC) and its relevant amendments, for Development Area "C".


PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

The applicant proposes to demolish the existing single storey vinyl clad residence and shed structures on site. He wants to develop a 2-storey 4-bedroom townhouse at the front and two 1-storey 3-bedroom villas at the rear.

The 2-storey dwelling at the front provides a double garage, family, combined dining and living rooms, laundry at the ground floor and three bedrooms plus a study on the first floor. The rear dwellings provide single garage, living, family, dining rooms, laundry and 3 bedrooms on the ground floor.

A driveway of 3m in width is proposed on the eastern side of the site to serve the development. The rest of the area will be landscaped and 3 existing trees are proposed to be retained on site.

Each dwelling will have its own private open space, being 67m2 for Unit 1, 85m2 for Unit 2 and 102m2 for Unit 3.

Drainage Disposal

Due to the presence of the open creek, the applicant is to consult with Council regarding the piping of the open creek which cuts diagonally across the front corner of the lot.


Tabled Information
IRDC
PROPOSED
COMPLIANCE
Site Area
315m2 /Dwelling
1134.08m2
Yes
Density
3.6 dwgs
3 dwgs
Yes
Building Height
Front Dwg (Unit 1)
Rear Dwg (Unit 2)
Rear Dwg (Unit 3)
9m
9m
9m
7.5m
4.8m
4.8m
Yes
Yes
Yes
Number of Storeys
Front Dwg (Unit 1)
Rear Dwg (Unit 2)

Rear Dwg (Unit 3)
2
2 (2nd Storey must be an attic)
2 (2nd Storey must be an attic)
2
1

1
Yes
Yes

Yes
Private Open Space
(more than 3 bedrooms)
Unit 1
Unit 2
Unit 3
60m2
60m2
60m2
67m2
85m2
102m2
Yes
Yes
Yes
Landscaped Open Space
50%
50%
Yes
Building Setbacks
Front Boundary
Rear Boundary

Side Boundary
Front Dwg
Rear Dwg
4.5m
Within Bldg Envelope

2m
1.35m
4.5m
1.35m


2.215m
1.35m
Yes
Yes


Yes
Yes
Carparking Provision
3.75
4
Yes
Building Envelope
(front & rear)
Yes
Street Frontage
24m
20.115m
No


Comment:

Minimum Frontage - The subject site is located in Development Area "C" and as such requires a minimum street frontage and general width of 24.0m. The property has a frontage of only 20.114m.

Amalgamation of site with No. 8 Clarendon Road, Riverwood has been suggested to the applicant. However, the applicant has advised that due to the different timetable of construction, it was extremely inconvenient to develop by amalgamating the two blocks of land.

MANAGER, BUILDING SERVICES

The proposal was referred to the appropriate Building Surveyor who raised no objection. However concern was mentioned as to the piping of the open creek and drainage easement.

MANAGER, DEVELOPMENT ADVICE

Applicant is to consult with Council regarding the piping of the open creek which cuts diagonally across the front corner of the lot. All stormwater is to drain by gravity to this section of pipeline, when laid.

The standard condition regarding drainage amplification will be required.

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION AND COMMENT

Adjoining residents were notified twice by letter and given fourteen (14) days in which to view the original plans and amended plans and submit any comments on the proposal.

During the first period of notification for the original plans, one (1) submission was registered and during the public notification of the amended plans, another objection was received from the same objector and the concerns are outlined below:

a) Street Frontage

The proposal does not meet Council's requirement of 24m street frontage.

Comment: This statement is true under the intentions of Council's Development Area "C", whereby a minimum street frontage of 24m is required.

b) Proposed pipe for the open creek

The proposed round concrete pipe to enclose the creek on site will not join with the box culvert as proposed at No. 8 Clarendon Road. Concerns are expressed whether the size of the concrete pipe and box culvert for two separate developments would be consistent and adequate.

Comment: The concern is noted. However, if the development for No. 10 Clarendon
Road is approved, conditions would be imposed for the piping of the open creek according to Council's standards. Similar conditions will also apply if proposal for No. 8 Clarendon Road is to be assessed and approved.

c) Setback

The front setback is too close to the street and is not in keeping with the other houses along Clarendon Road.

Comment: The front setback for the proposal is 4.5m from the boundary which is in
accordance with the IRDC.

d) Development Intensity

The applicant should not expect to turn the suburbs' wide open spaces into crowded housing slums as the Australian 'dream home' is not one crowded onto a too narrow block of land with 2 other homes.

Comment: The size of the land which is 1134m2 will allow 3 dwellings to be built on site under the requirement of the IRDC which is 315m2 per dwelling. As such, the density of development does not exceed the intention for Development Area "C", and is clearly in accordance with the government's policy to encourage urban consolidation.

e) Amalgamation with No. 8 Clarendon Road

The applicant's argument that although his land and No. 8 Clarendon, both fall short of Council's minimum width for development, should be allowed to be developed separately, and Council could consider this one development in 2 stages is unsound. If this is allowed, Council must insist on identical design and layout. Wouldn't this then be considered co-development between the owners of No. 8 and No. 10 Clarendon Road? But they cannot even agree to co-develop in an identical manner. If these 2 blocks of land were not adjoining, then the owners would not have an argument on this point.

Comment: Since the amalgamation of the adjoining lot has not be successful, the present development application will be considered as an independent application on its own merits.

f) Stormwater, drainage and landfill

There is no information on the landfill, the arrangement on the stormwater and the existing open creek.

Comment: Conditions regarding the submission of details of filling of land and excavation, stormwater and piping of the open creek will be imposed upon approval of the application.

g) Benefit of the development to the Hurstville City Council

The argument that the development will help Hurstville, the suburb and the year 2000 is irrelevant and emotive.

Comment: The development will improve the site and assist the housing demand in
the area.


APPLICANT'S SUBMISSION

The following is a summary which has been submitted by the applicant in support of his Application.

"The proposal is considered to comply with all of the development control standards specified in Hurstville City Council's Interim Residential Development Code 1995".

"This development proposal has taken every effort to ensure that a residential development of high quality is achieved, in order to maintain the high standard of residential living which has been created within the Hurstville Local Government Area".

"The subject property is located in a well established residential community, having access to a wide range of goods and services".

"A very good example, the similar multi-unit development on the site of No. 71 Shenstone Road, Riverwood has proved that the goal of this proposal will be achieved".

SUMMARY

Approval is recommended and further points to be considered in favour of Council varying the Code requirement on frontage are as follows :

* Although the frontage of the lot does not satisfy the IRDC requirement which is 24m, it is only approximately 4m short and the proposal in general complies with all other requirements under the IRDC.

* There may be a possibility to amalgamate the site with No. 8 Clarendon Road to fulfil the frontage requirement. However, the applicant has tried to negotiate with the owner of No. 8 Clarendon Road but they failed to agree on the amalgamation.

* If the two sites were amalgamated, 7 units would be permissible on the site whereas separate development of each site will result in only 3 units on each lot. This means that allowing separate development of each lot will result in a lesser density.

* The existing dwelling on site requires renovation and the site needs to be tidied up. In particular, the open creek needs to be improved and during rainy seasons, the creek may be subject to flooding. Approval of this Application would help improve the existing situations on site and assist the housing demand in the area.

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .04.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 10 CLARENDON ROAD, RIVERWOOD (D.A. 352/96) ERECTION OF ONE X TWO STOREY AND TWO X ONE STOREY DWELLINGS (Report by Town Planner, Wai Man Wong)

. Recommendation 10 CLARENDON ROAD, RIVERWOOD (D.A. 352/96) ERECTION OF ONE X TWO STOREY AND TWO X ONE STOREY DWELLINGS (Report by Town Planner, Wai Man Wong)


RECOMMENDATION


THAT Council as the consent authority, grant consent for the erection of one (1) two-storey dwelling and two (2) single storey dwellings on Lot 264, DP 2179, No. 10 Clarendon Road, Riverwood, subject to the following conditions:

General

1. Compliance generally with Amended plans, tables and documentation prepared by Chun Yue Cao dated 15 May 1997, 14 April 1997 and 4 February 1997 and submitted with DA No. 352/96, except where amended by the conditions of consent.

Building Code of Australia

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 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.

4. 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.

5. Sedimentation and silt controls being applied during excavation of the site and construction of the dwellings. Details to be submitted with the building application.

6. 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.

7. 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, from natural ground level, 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 pay for the construction of the fence and to ascertain which type of fence is preferred by the adjoining property owners.

8. 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.

9. The applicant is to provide amended plans with the building application drawn to scale and the scale shall match the actual measurements quoted on the plans.

Restriction on Use

10. 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.

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

12. 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.

13. In accordance with the survey plan and levels submitted by Chun Yue Cao, the proposed dwellings shall not exceed RL 107.8 for Unit 1, RL 105.45 for Unit 2 and RL 106.6 for Unit 3 at the main ridge line as measured vertically from any nominated point from natural ground level to the roof line directly above that point.

Car Parking

14. The vehicular driveway and car parking spaces for each dwelling are to be constructed to Council's specifications in an approved manner. Footpath and crossing levels are to be obtained from the Engineers Department at a fee set by Council.

15. Each proposed single garage shall have a minimum clear door jamb width of 2.7 metres and each double garage shall have a minimum clear door jamb width of 5.4m. Details shall be submitted with the building application.

16. The turning areas into and out of the proposed garages for the 3 dwellings shall be increased in accordance with the turning paths of the RTA guidelines. Such amendments should be incorporated in the Building Application plans for Council's consideration and approval.

Drainage

17. 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.

18. Applicant to consult with Council regarding the piping of the open creek which cuts diagonally across the front corner of the lot and all stormwater to drain by gravity to this new section of pipeline, when laid.

19. Applicant to pay Council to:
(i) replace redundant layback with kerb and gutter.
(ii) construct a 150mm thick concrete crossing reinforced with F75 mesh.
(iii) construct a 1.52m wide by 80mm thick concrete path for the full width of 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.

20. Applicant to create and register a 4.6m wide drainage easement over the proposed new section of pipeline in favour of Council.

Section 94 Contribution

21. 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 $ 7,629 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

22. 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 $ 851 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

23. 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 $ 2,007 and payable prior to the release of the approved building plans.

Landscaping

24. The submission of a detailed landscape plan, with at least 50% of the site to be landscaped and three large indigenous canopy trees be incorporated, to the satisfaction of the Manager, Development 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, Development Services in accordance with the approved plan prior to occupation of the building. All landscaping shall be maintained to the satisfaction of the Manager, Development 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.

25. The trees proposed to be retained including two Melaleuca Stypheloides and one Eucalyptus resinifera as shown on amended plans prepared by Chun Yue Cao dated 15 May 1997 must not be removed.

26. The trees to be retained must be protected during the period of demolition, excavation, site preparation and construction, by the erection of a suitable barrier around the perimeter of each tree. The barrier must be such to prevent damage to the trees and their root system by the movement of vehicles, handling or storage of building materials, excavation, filling or the like. Details of the means of protection must be submitted to Council with the Building Application for the approval of the Tree Inspection Officer, and the barrier must be erected prior to any works commencing on site.

27. No excavation, filling or compaction, no building or structures, and no services may be placed within the area defined by the canopy of each tree.

28. Perimeter planting along 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.

Public Utility

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

30. Compliance with the requirements of the Sydney Water. Written advice from the Board in this regard shall be submitted with the Building Application.


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


05.05 MISCELLANEOUS AND OTHER MATTERS



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 97 06 11TH JUNE, 1997-


06:01 Ward Councillors' Reports

06:02 Building Applications - Hurstville Ward

06:02.01 133 Vanessa Street, Kingsgrove - Re-Development Of Warehouse (Report By Senior Environmental Health & Building Surveyor, Mr G Deehan)

06:03 Building Applications - Penshurst Ward

06:04 Building Applications - Peakhurst Ward

06:05 Miscellaneous And Other Matters

06:05.01 Building And Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986 (Report By Manager - Divisional Administration, Mr B Daintry) (File B/00008)

06:05.02 1997/98 Waste Management Charges (Report By Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal) (File W/00005)

06:05.03 Salt Pan Creek Stormwater Quality Management Strategy (File R/00584) (Report By Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal)

06:05.04 Staff Matter (Refer Item 05.01 - Divisional Manager - Development & Health's Report No. 2 To The Development, Health & Planning Committee)

06:05.05 Georges River Catchment Management Committee - Minutes Of Meeting Held 24Th April, 1997 (Report By Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal)

06:05.06 Cooks River Catchment Management Committee (Report By Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal) (File R/00580)

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


06.01 WARD COUNCILLORS' REPORTS

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

HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.02 BUILDING APPLICATIONS - HURSTVILLE WARD



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.02.01 133 VANESSA STREET, KINGSGROVE - Re-development of Warehouse (Report by Senior Environmental Health & Building Surveyor, Mr G Deehan)


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .02.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 133 VANESSA STREET, KINGSGROVE - Re-development of Warehouse (Report by Senior Environmental Health & Building Surveyor, Mr G Deehan)

. Recommendation 133 VANESSA STREET, KINGSGROVE - Re-development of Warehouse (Report by Senior Environmental Health & Building Surveyor, Mr G Deehan)


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

THERE ARE NO BUILDING APPLICATIONS IN RESPECT OF PEAKHURST WARD FOR THIS MEETING.

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 BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LONG SERVICE PAYMENTS ACT 1986 (Report by Manager - Divisional Administration, Mr B Daintry) (File B/00008)


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .05.01
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LONG SERVICE PAYMENTS ACT 1986 (Report by Manager - Divisional Administration, Mr B Daintry)

. Recommendation BUILDING AND CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LONG SERVICE PAYMENTS ACT 1986 (Report by Manager - Divisional Administration, Mr B Daintry)


RECOMMENDATION



HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.05.02 1997/98 WASTE MANAGEMENT CHARGES (Report by Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal) (File W/00005)


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .05.02
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation 1997/98 WASTE MANAGEMENT CHARGES (Report by Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal)

. Recommendation 1997/98 WASTE MANAGEMENT CHARGES (Report by Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal)


RECOMMENDATION


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.05.03 SALT PAN CREEK STORMWATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY (File R/00584) (Report by Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal)


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .05.03
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation SALT PAN CREEK STORMWATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY (File R/00584) (Report by Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal)

. Recommendation SALT PAN CREEK STORMWATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT STRATEGY (File R/00584) (Report by Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal)


RECOMMENDATION


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.05.04 STAFF MATTER (REFER ITEM 05.01 - DIVISIONAL MANAGER - DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH'S REPORT NO. 2 TO THE DEVELOPMENT, HEALTH & PLANNING COMMITTEE)


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.05.05 GEORGES RIVER CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE - MINUTES OF MEETING HELD 24TH APRIL, 1997 (Report by Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal)


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .05.05
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation GEORGES RIVER CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE - MINUTES OF MEETING HELD 24TH APRIL, 1997 (Report by Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal)

. Recommendation GEORGES RIVER CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE - MINUTES OF MEETING HELD 24TH APRIL, 1997 (Report by Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal)


RECOMMENDATION


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
REPORT ITEM NO: .
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH


06.05.06 COOKS RIVER CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE (Report by Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal) (File R/00580)


HURSTVILLE CITY COUNCIL
RECOMMENDATION NO: .05.06
DEVELOPMENT & HEALTH

HEADING: Recommendation COOKS RIVER CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE (Report by Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal) (File R/00580)

. Recommendation COOKS RIVER CATCHMENT MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE (Report by Manager - Environmental Services, Mr P Chrystal) (File R/00580)


RECOMMENDATION