INDEPENDENT HEARING AND ASSESSMENT PANEL · PDF fileINDEPENDENT HEARING AND ASSESSMENT PANEL 1...

INDEPENDENT HEARING AND ASSESSMENT PANEL 1 AUGUST 2011

Page 1

INDEPENDENT HEARING AND ASSESSMENT PANEL

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM SUBJECT PAGE NO

WEST WARD

1 20 GAREMA CIRCUIT, KINGSGROVE: MODIFICATION TO

HOURS OF OPERATION, INCREASE THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF

ATTENDEES AND PERMIT TWO SPECIAL FEAST DAY EVENTS

PER YEAR OUTSIDE THE REGULAR HOURS OF OPERATION AT A

PLACE OF WORSHIP................................................................................................ 4

2 12 ZUTTION AVENUE, BEVERLY HILLS: DEMOLITION OF

STRUCTURES, CONSTRUCTION OF AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING

MULTI-UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONTAINING 10 DWELLINGS

WITH BASEMENT CARPARKING AND ASSOCIATED STRATA

SUBDIVISION............................................................................................................ 14

3 29-31 RICHLAND STREET, KINGSGROVE: USE OF REAR

SECTION OF AN INDUSTRIAL BUILDING AS A PLACE OF

WORSHIP WITH ASSOCIATED RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION AND

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES................................................................................ 33


Page 2

REPORT SUMMARIES

1 20 GAREMA CIRCUIT, KINGSGROVE: MODIFICATION TO HOURS OF

OPERATION, INCREASE THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF ATTENDEES AND

PERMIT TWO SPECIAL FEAST DAY EVENTS PER YEAR OUTSIDE THE

REGULAR HOURS OF OPERATION AT A PLACE OF WORSHIP

• The application seeks to amend the existing hours of operation and maximum number of attendees at the place of worship. The modification also seeks consent for two special days of worship.

• As the subject proposal constitutes a traffic generating development, the proposal was referred to the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) for comment. The RTA was satisfied with the proposal subject to a Traffic Management Plan being submitted to Council’s Traffic Committee three months prior to each proposed Special Event Day for review. The proposal has also been considered by Council’s Traffic Committee who is satisfied with the proposal subject to the RTA requirement.

• In accordance with the requirement of our Development Control Plan 20 – Car Parking, the applicant has submitted a parking assessment. The data obtained from the parking assessment and the investigation by Council indicate that the on and off-street public parking in the locality could accommodate a maximum attendance at the place of worship of no more than 500 people.

• The proposal has been advertised and notified for a period of 21 days in accordance with our Notification Policy. A total of eight submissions have been received. The issues raised in the submission include concern about traffic and parking impacts, littering around the site, non-compliance with past consents, crime prevention and pedestrian safety, the legal status of the car park at 8 Garema Circuit, and the notification process followed with the initial application. These issues are addressed in detail in the body of this report.

• The Director City Planning has recommended the application be approved subject to conditions.


STRUCTURES, CONSTRUCTION OF AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING MULTI-

UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONTAINING 10 DWELLINGS WITH BASEMENT

CARPARKING AND ASSOCIATED STRATA SUBDIVISION

• A development application has been received for the demolition of existing structures and construction of an affordable housing multi-unit development containing ten dwellings over two levels with an attic, basement car parking and associated strata title subdivision.


Page 3

• The application has been assessed against the relevant provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009, State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) Amendment 2011, State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index) BASIX 2004, the Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance and other relevant codes and policy controls. The proposed development involves non-compliances with the provisions of some of these controls. Issues of non-compliance are discussed in the body of the report.

• In accordance with our Development Control Plan 32 – Notification Policy, all owners and occupiers of adjoining properties were notified of the proposed development. We received a total of 19 submissions, including two petitions signed by approximately 110 households, all objecting to the proposed development. Issues of concern include the proposal being an overdevelopment of the site, being of an excessive height and inappropriate scale to the existing local built environment, traffic and parking issues, overshadowing, loss of privacy, loss of views, loss of property values, increased noise pollution, stormwater and sewer issues, traffic and noise disruption during construction phase, waste collection, limited setbacks, fire safety issues, congestion of ‘housing commission’ accommodation leading to increased crime in the area, and non-compliance of the design with the relevant state policy for affordable housing. These issues are discussed in the body of this report.

• The Director City Planning has recommended that the application be refused.

3 29-31 RICHLAND STREET, KINGSGROVE: USE OF REAR SECTION OF

AN INDUSTRIAL BUILDING AS A PLACE OF WORSHIP WITH

ASSOCIATED RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION AND ADMINISTRATIVE

OFFICES

• It is proposed to fitout and use part of an existing industrial building at the rear of the site as a place of public worship with associated religious instruction and administrative offices.

• The subject site is zoned Light Industrial 4(b) under the provisions of the Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance, where the proposed development, defined as a ‘place of public worship’, is permissible with our development consent.

• The proposed development has been assessed against the provisions of Canterbury Development Control Plans 20 and 29 and found to generally comply with our requirements.

• The proposal was publicly exhibited and all adjoining owners notified in accordance with the requirements of our Development Control Plan 32 – Notification Policy. No submissions were received.

• The Director City Planning has recommended that development application be approved subject to conditions.


Page 4

WEST WARD

1 20 GAREMA CIRCUIT, KINGSGROVE: MODIFICATION TO

HOURS OF OPERATION, INCREASE THE MAXIMUM NUMBER

OF ATTENDEES AND PERMIT TWO SPECIAL FEAST DAY

EVENTS PER YEAR OUTSIDE THE REGULAR HOURS OF

OPERATION AT A PLACE OF WORSHIP

FILE NO: 355/20D PT 3

REPORT BY: DIRECTOR CITY PLANNING

WARD: WEST

PD/A No: DA-722/2007/B

Applicant:

Owner:

Al-Mabarrat Benevolent Society Ltd.

As above

Zoning: Light Industrial 4(b) under the Canterbury Planning Scheme

Ordinance (CPSO)

Application Date: 9 November 2009, additional information received on 23 November

2009, 18 December 2009, 13 April 2010, 3 June 2010, 23 June 2010,

10 September 2010, 10 January 2011, 14 April 2011, and 28 June

2011.

Summary:

• The application seeks to amend the existing hours of operation and maximum number of attendees at the place of worship. The modification also seeks consent for two special days of worship.

• As the subject proposal constitutes a traffic generating development, the proposal was referred to the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) for comment. The RTA was satisfied with the proposal subject to a Traffic Management Plan being submitted to Council’s Traffic Committee three months prior to each proposed Special Event Day for review. The proposal has also been considered by Council’s Traffic Committee who is satisfied with the proposal subject to the RTA requirement.

• In accordance with the requirement of our Development Control Plan 20 – Car Parking, the applicant has submitted a parking assessment. The data obtained from the parking assessment and the investigation by Council indicate that the on and off-street public parking in the locality could accommodate a maximum attendance at the place of worship of no more than 500 people.

• The proposal has been advertised and notified for a period of 21 days in accordance with our Notification Policy. A total of eight submissions have been received. The issues raised in the submission include concern about traffic and parking impacts, littering around the site, non-compliance with past consents, crime prevention and pedestrian safety, the legal status of the car park at 8 Garema Circuit, and the notification process followed with the initial application. These issues are addressed in detail in the body of this report.


20 GAREMA CIRCUIT, KINGSGROVE: MODIFICATION TO HOURS OF OPERATION, INCREASE THE MAXIMUM NUMBER OF ATTENDEES AND PERMIT TWO SPECIAL FEAST DAY EVENTS PER YEAR OUTSIDE THE REGULAR HOURS OF OPERATION AT A PLACE OF WORSHIP (CONT.)

Page 5

• The Director City Planning has recommended the application be approved subject to conditions.

City Plan and Budget Implications:

This report has no implications for the Budget. The assessment of the application supports our City Plan long term goal of Balanced Urban Development.

Report:

Background

Council, at its City Development Committee meeting of 12 June 2008 resolved to approve Development Application 722/2007 for use of an existing industrial building on the site as a place of public worship with ancillary offices and library, subject to conditions, including condition 13 which states: 13. All public worship services to be carried out in accordance with the following details:

Day Time Maximum number

of people

Monday to Wednesday 10.00am- 10.30am 20

Thursday 7.30pm-8.30pm 50

Friday 1.00pm-2.00pm 100

Saturday 7.30pm-8.30pm 120

Sunday 10.00am-10.30am 80

For ten (10) consecutive days during Muharram

8.30pm-10.30pm 200

For thirty (30) consecutive days during Ramadan

7.30p.m-9.30p.m 200

(a) In the event that the council car park located at 8 Garema Circuit either ceases to exist or is closed to the public then the maximum number of persons to be on the premises at any one time is limited to 75 on weekdays between 7.00am and 5.00pm.

(b) No funerals, weddings or other non regular events to take place between 7.00am to 5.00pm on weekdays.

While the subject site did not have adequate parking to cater for the use itself, it was considered that the use was able to rely upon the availability of off-street car parking spaces at 8 Garema Circuit (as confirmed by site surveys). On 23 December 2008 the Development Assessment Panel approved a modification to the approved consent to allow for external building modifications to the approved place of worship. Site Details

The subject site is located on the western side Garema Circuit’s eastern road. The site accommodates a two storey building with car parking in front. The building is used as a place of worship on the ground floor, with an ancillary library and offices on the first floor.



Page 6

In the vicinity of the site, the property at 8 Garema Circuit is used as a part public, part private car park. Of the 239 off-street car parking spaces contained in this car park, 126 are publicly owned. Other properties surrounding the site are occupied by industrial uses.

Above: The subject site and the car park at 8 Garema Circuit

Proposal

The applicant proposes to modify the existing consent to better reflect the operational requirements of the place of worship. The hours and capacity on the original consent for use of the premises were based on the expected future number to attend the place of worship. Since the operation of the place of worship commenced in 2009, it has become apparent to the applicant that the approved hours of operation and capacity do not reflect the operational needs of the use. The proposed modification to the hours of operation, and the request for the inclusion of special days of worship into the Development Consent, are intended to better reflect the actual operational needs of the place of worship based on operations since 2008. It is proposed to modify the regular hours of operation as shown in the following table. All modified details are contained in bold. Day Time Maximum number of people

Monday to Wednesday 10.00am- 1.00p.m 20




Sunday 10.00am-1.00pm 80

For 9 consecutive days 7.30pm-10.30pm 300



Page 7

Day Time Maximum number of people

during Muharram For the last day of

Muharram

7.30pm –11.30pm

300


7.30pm-9.30pm 200

In addition to the modifications outlined above, the application seeks to modify the consent to allow for two special days of worship. These days include the last day of Ramadan and the celebration day of Adha. The date of these events is determined by lunar calendar. The day of the event is subject to change and is not therefore restricted to a particular weekday. It is anticipated that these events may cater for up to 500 people a prayer session, with up to two prayer services being held per day. Given the limited capacity of the building on the site, it is proposed that the car park be used as additional space for attendees. Given the scale of these special events, the applicant has agreed to modify the application to seek the consent of Council’s Traffic Committee three months prior to any special event being held on the site, and to limit the maximum number of people attending the site at any one time to 500. Statutory Considerations

When determining this application, the relevant matters listed in Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 must be considered. In this regard, the following environmental planning instruments, development control plans (DCPs), codes and policies are relevant:

• Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance (CPSO)

• State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

• Development Control Plan 20 – Car Parking (DCP 20)

• Development Control Plan 29 – Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (DCP 29)

• Section 96(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act Assessment

The development application has been assessed under Sections 5A and 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 and the following key issues emerge:

• Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance (CPSO) The site is zoned Light Industrial 4(b) under the Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance and the proposed development is permissible with Council consent.



Page 8

• State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 The proposal was referred to the Roads and Traffic Authority as it met the 200 vehicle threshold to be defined as Traffic Generating development under Schedule 3 of SEPP 2007. The RTA raised no objection to the proposal, subject to a Traffic Management Plan, prepared by a certified practitioner in accordance with the Guide to Traffic and Transport Management for Special Events (Version 3.4), being submitted to Council’s Traffic Committee for review at least three months prior to any special day events being held on the subject site. This is consistent with the findings of Council’s Traffic Committee and will be reflected in any modified conditions.

• Development Control Plan 20 – Car Parking (DCP 20)

The proposed modification will increase the level of vehicle generation for the subject site and demand for parking in the vicinity of the place of worship. While adequate parking is available in the vicinity of the site to cater for regular services and for ten days during Muharram (which service times do not conflict with the typical hours of operation in Garema Circuit), the application proposes all parking provided on the site be closed on the last day of Ramadan and Adha to accommodate the expected number of attendees safely in and around the place of worship. As such, these spaces would not be available to the use on the two Special Day Events. Council records indicate public availability of 126 off-street car parking spaces in the Garema Circuit car park at 8 Garema Circuit, with the car park being substantially underutilised. As part of our consideration of this proposal, the applicant’s Traffic Consultant carried out a parking survey during the last day of Ramadan festival held on Friday 10 September 2010 between 6.00a.m and 7.30a.m. This survey indicated that 96 on-street parking spaces and 202 off-street car parking spaces were used by attendees to the place of worship, a total demand generated of 298 spaces. Fifty of the 298 vehicles carried more than 3 passengers (or 16.8% of the total number of vehicles). Council Officers attended Garema Circuit on the same day and confirmed that parking at and in the vicinity of the place of worship adequately catered for the demand generated. The Campsie Local Area Command also advised in writing that no parking or noise complaints were received on this day. If a vehicle occupancy rate of two occupants per vehicle were applied to calculate the likely number of people to be able to be accommodated by the 222 on and off-street car parking spaces on a weekday morning, the parking capacity around the site could accommodate a maximum of 444 people. However, given that the survey found that 16.8% of the vehicles attending the last day of Ramadan in 2010 carried more than three occupants, and that the special day events generally attract attendees in family groups, it is reasonable to conclude that the vehicles travelling to the place of worship will be able to achieve an average occupancy rate of 2.25 people per vehicle (slightly higher than the general 2 person per vehicle rate). It is therefore considered that the parking spaces likely to be available around the site will be able to accommodate a



Page 9

maximum of 500 patrons on special days of worship, provided that the services are held outside the times of peak vehicle use. The proposed special days are proposed only twice per lunar year. Given the relative rarity of these events, that the special event days may fall on any day of the week, and the variable traffic and parking situation in Garema Circuit throughout the average week, it is appropriate that the operator of the Place of Worship be required to submit a Traffic Management Plan to Council’s Traffic Committee for approval prior to any special days being held on the site. Special day events will also be limited to Adha and the last day of Ramadan. A condition to this effect has been agreed to by the applicant. These conditions will enable the Traffic Committee to consider the special day events on their individual merits, and ensure that appropriate measures are employed to manage the anticipated traffic and parking impacts. With regard to the other proposed modifications, all other services attracting a significant attendance will be held outside regular business hours, and the largest events will be limited to a maximum of 300 attendees between 7.30p.m and 11.30p.m. It is considered that the available public parking at this time is sufficient to cater for the expected demand for car parking.

• Development Control Plan 29 - Crime Prevention Through Environmental

Design (DCP 29)

The original application was considered against the provisions of DCP 29 during its initial assessment (DA 722/2007). While the number of attendees and the hours of operation are to change as a result of this proposal, it is considered that the crime prevention issues are the same as those associated with the original application and the amended proposal will be able to satisfactorily comply with the requirements of the DCP without any further modification to the issued consent. The NSW Police have separately advised that they have no concerns with the proposed modifications subject to potential traffic and parking impacts being suitably managed.

• Section 96(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act

Section 96(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 allows Council to modify development consent if: a) it is satisfied that the proposed modification is of minimal environmental

impact In terms of regular operations, the proposed modification will only modify the manner of operation of the existing place of worship in a minor way. Overall, if the proposed conditions of consent are adhered to, the proposed modification will be of minimal environmental impact.



Page 10

b) it is satisfied that the development to which the consent as modified relates is substantially the same development The proposed modification will remain a place of worship and will remain consistent with the greater part of the proposal as originally approved under DA 722/2007.

c) it has notified the Section 96 application (if required under Council’s DCP 32 –

Notification Policy) and has considered any submissions concerning the proposed modification In accordance with our Notification Policy, the application was advertised and placed on notification for a period of 21 days. Please refer to Notification below.

Other Considerations

• Traffic Committee The proposal was referred to our Traffic Committee who were generally satisfied with the submitted details subject to each proposed special event being considered individually and a Traffic Management Plan being lodged three months prior to each proposed event. The Committee report also indicates that the numbers attending the site be limited to a maximum of 500 people per service on special event days. Conditions will be imposed on any modified consent issued to reflect these findings.

• Community Safety

The proposal was referred to our Crime Prevention Officer who advised that the NSW Police were satisfied with the proposal in general, providing that the modified proposal suitably considers and controls parking and traffic impacts associated with the use. The parking and traffic impact of the proposal are discussed elsewhere in this report.

• Fire Safety The proposal was referred to our Fire Safety Officer to assess the maximum population under the Building Code of Australia of the subject place of worship internally. The assessment indicates that the maximum population for the interior for the place of worship is 397 within the building, with 382 of these being within the prayer hall area of the premises, and the remaining 15 being within the first floor offices and library. This capacity is adequate to accommodate the expected population for all services in a safe manner within the building with the exception of special event days. On special event days, the forecourt parking area of the site will be used to accommodate attendees to the site. The forecourt parking area is at least 400m² in area and could easily accommodate the remainder of the visitors to the site. The overall number of attendees per worship session on the site during special day events will be limited to a maximum of 500 due the traffic and parking constraints in the locality as discussed earlier in the report. The front forecourt will be required to accommodate 118 people when the building population is at capacity.



Page 11

Notification

The development application was advertised and placed on notification for a period of 21 days in accordance with our DCP 32 - Notification Policy. 110 letters were also sent to all property owners in Garema Circuit. Eight submissions were received. The submissions identified concerns about the impact of the proposal on parking, littering in the locality, past breaches of consent, traffic, crime prevention and pedestrian safety, the notification of the initial proposal, the status of the existing condition 13(a) relating to the car park at 8 Garema Circuit, and the availability of the car park at 8 Garema Circuit. These issues are addressed in detail below:

• Parking Comment The parking issues associated with the proposal are discussed under DCP 20 – Car Parking earlier in this report. It should be noted, however, that any vehicles parking across driveways or parking on private property are in breach of the law and in the event that vehicles are identified parking in an illegal manner by Council Rangers or the Police, appropriate action will be taken to correct this behaviour.

• Littering

Comment Concern has been raised about littering around the place of worship. Littering is an offence and penalties exist including on the spot fines for anyone caught littering. It is not considered that any additional measures imposed on the place of worship would add any additional weight to the existing laws. We will, however, write to the applicant separately requesting that they remind their attendees that littering is not acceptable, and to place notices by the exit of the place of worship reminding patrons to dispose of rubbish thoughtfully.

• Past breaches of consent Comment Concern has been raised about past breaches of the existing Development Consent. Where complaints have been received regarding the subject premises action has been taken to liaise directly with the operators of the place of worship to resolve any outstanding issues. The current application seeks to modify the consent to more accurately reflect the operational needs of the place of worship.

• Traffic Comment Concern has been identified about the impact of the proposal on traffic in the vicinity of Garema Circuit, with particular reference to the special events proposed to be held on the site. Given the substantial number of people expected to attend special events on the site, it is acknowledged that there is potential for substantial traffic disruption if the prayer sessions on special event days are poorly timed, or the traffic impacts are not appropriately managed. In order to ensure proper management of these events, a



Page 12

condition will be imposed on any modified consent issued requiring that the applicant seek the approval of Council’s Traffic Committee prior to any special day event outside regular operations being held. This will enable traffic on these days to be suitably managed, and will allow for ongoing monitoring of traffic generation associated with the subject place of worship. The conditions will also limit special day events to Adha and the last day of Ramadan. The recommendations of the Roads and Traffic Authority and Council’s Traffic Committee support these measures.

• Pedestrian safety and crime prevention Comment Concern has been raised about the potential for patrons of the place of worship to be targets of illegitimate activity, and about the pedestrian safety of patrons attending the place of worship. Given the number of attendees to post-sunset services, it is considered that adequate natural surveillance is available around the subject site to discourage illegitimate activity. With regard to pedestrian safety, we will be writing to the applicant to request that they remind their patrons to take care crossing Garema Circuit or other roadways, particularly after sunset.

• Notification of the initial proposal

Comment Concern has been raised about the manner of notification of the initial Development Application for the place of worship. Our records indicate that the initial application was advertised in local papers with a notification period of 21 days provided. A letter drop to property owners in the immediate vicinity of the site was also carried out. This is in accordance with the requirements for type ‘B’ notification under our DCP 32 – Notification Policy. Five submissions were received during that notification period.

• The status of the existing condition 13(a) relating to the car park at 8 Garema,

and the legal status of the off-street parking spaces contained at that address

Comment Concern has been raised about the status of the off-street car parking spaces provided at 8 Garema Circuit. The Garema Circuit car park located at 8 Garema Circuit is a part public, part private off-street car parking facility. Our records indicate that a total 239 off-street car parking spaces are available in the car park. Of these, 113 remain in private ownership, and 126 are available to the public. For the purpose of our assessment we have therefore considered that 126 off-street car parking spaces are publicly available with the remaining 113 spaces being treated as private car parking spaces.



Page 13

Concern has also been raised regarding condition 13 (a) of the consent which limits the number of patrons on the site in the event of the closure of the Garema Circuit car park. Given the use is heavily reliant on the availability of the public off-street car parking spaces at 8 Garema Circuit, it is considered appropriate that this condition be retained on any modified consent. The applicant has not requested removal of this condition, and its removal would not be supported.

Conclusion

The application has been assessed pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C and Section 96(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and all relevant development control plans, codes and policies. It is considered that the amended hours and the associated increase in the number of attendees to the site will not have a substantial impact on adjoining properties through traffic and parking impacts subject to the measures proposed being employed. The proposal satisfactorily meets the objectives of our codes and policies. It is recommended that the modification be approved.

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT Development Consent DA-722/2007 (as modified) be AMENDED to read as follows: 13. All public worship services to be carried out in accordance with the following

details: Day Time Maximum number

of people

Monday to Wednesday 10.00am- 1.00p.m 20




Sunday 10.00am-1.00pm 80

For 9 consecutive days during Muharram For the last day of Muharram

7.30pm-10.30pm 7.30pm –11.30pm

300

300


7.30pm-9.30pm 200

(a) In the event that the council car park located at 8 Garema Circuit either ceases to exist or is closed to the public then the maximum number of persons to be on the premises at any one time is limited to 75 on weekdays between 7.00am and 5.00pm.

(b) No funerals, weddings or other non regular events to take place between 7.00am to 5.00pm on weekdays with the exception of the special event days of Adha and the last day of Ramadan.

(c) A Traffic Management Plan is to be submitted to Council, no later than three months prior to the special event days of Adha and the last day of Ramadan being held at the Place of Worship, for consideration by Council’s Traffic Committee with the Committee’s support being obtained prior to any event being held. The maximum attendance to individual prayer sessions on the Special Event Days being limited to 500.


Page 14


STRUCTURES, CONSTRUCTION OF AN AFFORDABLE

HOUSING MULTI-UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONTAINING 10

DWELLINGS WITH BASEMENT CARPARKING AND

ASSOCIATED STRATA SUBDIVISION

FILE NO: 984/12D


WARD: WEST

D/A No: DA-176/2011

Applicant:

Owner:

Chanine Design Pty Ltd

Top Pacific Development Pty Ltd

(previously owned by E A & L Thompson)

Zoning: Residential 2(a) under the Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance

Application Date: 20 April 2011, further information received on 6 June 2011, 7 June

2011, 14 June 2011 and 12 July 2011

Summary:

• A development application has been received for the demolition of existing structures and construction of an affordable housing multi-unit development containing ten dwellings over two levels with an attic, basement car parking and associated strata title subdivision.

• The application has been assessed against the relevant provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009, State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) Amendment 2011, State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index) BASIX 2004, the Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance and other relevant codes and policy controls. The proposed development involves non-compliances with the provisions of some of these controls. Issues of non-compliance are discussed in the body of the report.

• In accordance with our Development Control Plan 32 – Notification Policy, all owners and occupiers of adjoining properties were notified of the proposed development. We received a total of 19 submissions, including two petitions signed by approximately 110 households, all objecting to the proposed development. Issues of concern include the proposal being an overdevelopment of the site, being of an excessive height and inappropriate scale to the existing local built environment, traffic and parking issues, overshadowing, loss of privacy, loss of views, loss of property values, increased noise pollution, stormwater and sewer issues, traffic and noise disruption during construction phase, waste collection, limited setbacks, fire safety issues, congestion of ‘housing commission’ accommodation leading to increased crime in the area, and non-compliance of the design with the relevant state policy for affordable housing. These issues are discussed in the body of this report.

• The Director City Planning has recommended that the application be refused.


12 ZUTTION AVENUE, BEVERLY HILLS: DEMOLITION OF STRUCTURES, CONSTRUCTION OF AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING MULTI-UNIT DEVELOPMENT CONTAINING 10 DWELLINGS WITH BASEMENT CARPARKING AND ASSOCIATED STRATA SUBDIVISION (CONT.)

Page 15



Report:

Site Details

The subject site is located on the north-western side of Zuttion Avenue approximately 100 metres west of King Georges Road. Zuttion Avenue is a cul-de-sac and the subject site is a wedge shaped lot situated at the head of the cul-de-sac. The site has a frontage of 9.145 metres across the arc where it fronts Zuttion Avenue, and a total site area of 873.52m in area. The subject site has a slight slope from the rear north west to the front south east corner of the site. The subject site is occupied by a single storey brick dwelling, a brick garage building, a carport structure, a metal shed and an inground swimming pool. Each of these structures will be demolished to accommodate the proposed development. Surrounding land uses are predominately low density residential in nature. Adjoining the subject site to the south-west is 10 and 10A Zuttion Avenue which is a two storey attached dual occupancy development, and to the north east is a single storey brick dwelling. Single residential dwellings are located to the west of the site facing Midlothian Avenue.



Page 16

Existing Dwelling on the Subject Site

Proposal

A application has been received for the demolition of existing structures and construction of an affordable housing multi-unit development containing ten dwellings over two levels with an attic, basement car parking and associated strata title subdivision. Units 1, 2, 3 and 4 are located on the ground floor of the proposed building. They each contain a combined living, dining and kitchen area, laundry, bathroom and two bedrooms (one with ensuite). A courtyard area is provided for each of these four units, which is directly accessible from their living areas. Units 5, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10 are located on the first floor with their respective bedrooms (with the exception of Bedroom 2 of Unit 5) and bathroom facilities located on the attic floor, which is accessed via an internal stairwell in each unit. These units are also provided with a combined living, dining and kitchen area, laundry, bathroom and two bedrooms (one with ensuite). A small balcony (two balconies for Unit 9) is provided for each of these six units, which is directly accessible from their living areas. The proposal also provides a basement level car parking area for twelve vehicles which is accessed through a driveway from the front of the site. This basement also provides a waste room, recycle room and stairs and lift to access the upper floors. Statutory Considerations

When determining this application the relevant matters listed in Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 must be listed and in this respect the following environmental planning instruments, development control plans (DCPs), codes and policies are relevant:



Page 17


• State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 and State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) Amendment 2011

• State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index) BASIX 2004

• Development Control Plan 13 – Multiple Unit Development Code (DCP 13)

• Development Control Plan 20 – Car Parking Code (DCP 20)


• Development Control Plan 37 – Energy Smart Homes (DCP 37)

• Development Control Plan 45 – Landscaping (DCP 45)

• Development Control Plan 48 – Waste Management (DCP 48) Assessment

The development application has been assessed under Sections 5A and 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 and the following key issues emerge:


The subject site is zoned Residential 2(a) under the provisions of the Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance. Multiple Unit Housing is a prohibited land use in the Residential 2(a) zone. However, as the proposed development is made pursuant to the provisions of Part 2 Division 1 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 (ARH SEPP), thus permitting the development on the subject site virtue of Clause 11(a) which allows for ‘multi dwelling housing or residential flat buildings’ (where at least 50% of the dwellings in the proposed development will be used for affordable housing) only if residential flat buildings are not permissible on the land otherwise than because of ARH SEPP. A detailed discussion of all the relevant provisions of the ARH SEPP is provided below.

• State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 The application is for an in-fill affordable housing development lodged pursuant to the provisions of ARH SEPP. The ARH SEPP aims to provide new affordable rental housing and retain and mitigate any loss of existing affordable rental housing by providing a consistent planning regime. Specifically, the policy provides for new affordable rental housing by offering incentives such as expanded zoning permissibility, floor space ratio bonuses and minimum development standards. The proposed development compares to the relevant provisions of the ARH SEPP as follows: Clause 10(1) of the ARH SEPP states that in-fill affordable housing development applies within any of the following land use zones or within a land use zone that is equivalent to any of those zones, but only if development for the purposes of dwelling houses, multi-dwelling housing or residential flat buildings is permissible within the zone: (a) Zone R1 General Residential (b) Zone R2 Low Density Residential



Page 18

(c) Zone R3 Medium Density Residential (d) Zone R4 High Density Residential

The subject site is zoned Residential 2(a) under the Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance which would be an equivalent residential zone, and therefore permissible in the zone pursuant to the ARH SEPP. Clause 10(2) of the ARH SEPP requires that in-fill affordable housing developments in the Sydney Region be located within proximity of certain transport nodes, including 800 metres walking distance to the public entrance to a railway station. In this regard, the subject site is located approximately 700 metres from the entrance of the Beverly Hills Railway Station and complies with this control. Clause 11 of the ARH SEPP states that development for the purposes of multi dwelling housing where at least 50 per cent of the dwellings in the proposed development will be used for affordable housing, the development shall not result in a building with a height of more than 8.5 metres. In this regard, 50 per cent of the subject development is proposed to be provided as affordable rental housing for 10 years, and is proposed to have a maximum height of 8.5 metres to comply with the above requirement.

Clause 14 prescribes minimum standards which cannot be used by us to refuse consent. The following table is an assessment of the proposal against the ARH SEPP standards: Control Requirement Proposal Complies

Floor Space Ratio

Not more than 0.75:1 0.87:1 No

Site Area Min. 450 square metres 873.5 square metres Yes

Landscaped Area

Min 30% of the site area (or 262.05 square metres)

Min 30% provided Yes

Deep Soil Zone 15% of the site area, or 131 square metres. Deep soil zone has a minimum dimension of 3 metres. If practical, at least two-thirds of the deep soil zone is to be located at the rear of the site

Min 15% provided towards the rear part of the site (this can be conditioned to reinforce its provision)

Yes

Solar Access Living rooms and private open space areas for a minimum of 70% of the dwellings are to receive a minimum of three hours sunlight between 9.00am and 3.00pm at the Winter Solstice

Living rooms and private open space areas for seven of the dwellings (70%) receive adequate sunlight access

Yes

Car Parking At least 0.5 spaces are to be provided for each dwelling – Total 5 spaces

1 space per dwelling, plus 2 visitor spaces – Total 12 spaces

Yes



Page 19

Control Requirement Proposal Complies

Dwelling Size Each two bedroom dwelling shall have a minimum gross floor area of 70 square metres

All ten units have two bedrooms and have gross floor areas of at least 70 square metres

Yes

As the table above demonstrates, the proposed development has been found to be generally consistent with the Clause 14 provisions, with the exception of Floor Space Ratio. The applicant has calculated the floor space ratio of the proposed development to be 0.74:1, this is contrary to our calculations of 0.87:1. It is noted that we have calculated the floor space ratio based on the total site area of 873.5 square metres, and the definition of gross floor area as found in the Dictionary of the Standard Instrument – Principal Local Environmental Plan, as required under the ARH SEPP. The non-compliant floor space ratio of 0.87:1, can be used in this instance as grounds for refusal by virtue of Clause 14(1)(a)(ii).

Clause 15 of the ARH SEPP states that we must not consent to a development unless it has taken into consideration the provisions of the ‘Seniors Living Policy: Urban Design Guidelines for Infill Development.’ The policy aims to promote a balance between need for greater housing choice and the need to safeguard the character of residential neighbourhoods. The policy is divided into five sections each corresponding to a key consideration when designing infill development. An assessment has been undertaken as follows: Responding to Context The aim of this consideration is to indicate specific areas which need to be considered in order to effectively respond to the local context. The policy uses the method of posing key questions which should be asked in relation to: analysis of neighbourhood character; street layout and hierarchy; block and lots; built environment; trees; policy environment; and site analysis. The subject site is located in Zuttion Avenue in Beverly Hills which is a quiet cul de sac street characterised by low density residential development in the form of single and two storey dwellings and dual occupancy development. The built upon areas of buildings on lots on and around Zuttion Avenue, is towards the front part of the site, with a large private open space area at the rear. Buildings within the locality generally have a consistent scale and massing. The subject site, and indeed the sites located in the surrounding streets, are zoned Residential 2(a) under the Canterbury Scheme Ordinance. This would typically allow for single dwelling or dual occupancy development of one or two storey construction, with a maximum floor space ratio of (generally) 0.5:1.



Page 20

The design of the subject proposal is inconsistent with the existing local built environment as it introduces an essentially three level building covering a large part of the site, which varies from the consistent scale and massing of buildings in the locality. The subject proposal involves a floor space ratio of 0.87:1, which is significantly in excess of what is typically allowed for in the area. Residential development in and around Zuttion Avenue would (typically) have their living areas and private open space areas on the ground floor, therefore minimising any privacy and overlooking issues between neighbouring residents. The proposed design, whereby living areas and associated balconies are located on the first floor is likely to cause adverse privacy impacts onto neighbouring residents, potentially reducing the quality and quantity of time enjoyed in these areas. Site Planning and Design The aim of this consideration is to promote design that optimises internal amenity and minimises impacts to neighbours. It states that in regard to built form, the bulk of the development should be located towards the front part of the site to maximise the number of dwellings with frontage to a public street, further, parts of the development towards the rear of the site should be more modest in scale and limit the impacts of adjoining properties. The proposed development being located on a wedge shaped lot has minimal opportunity to maximise the number of dwellings facing the street. This has necessitated that a large part of the building is located towards the rear part of the site, where the lot is wider and can cater for more functional space. The inability to design a development according to the above principles, suggests that the site is a difficult one to maximise density with this type of development. This consideration also states that a development should provide deep soil zones for absorption of run-off and to sustain vegetation. It is noted that in accordance with the provisions of ARH SEPP, the development does provide for a minimum landscaped area of 30% of the site area, and a minimum deep soil zone area of 15%.

Impacts on Streetscape The aim of this consideration is to respond to desired streetscape character through sympathetic design by locating and designing new development to be sympathetic to existing streetscape patterns including siting, height, separation, driveway locations, pedestrian entries etc, and the provision of a front setback that relates to adjoining development. The siting of the proposed building across a large part of the site, the three level height appearance, and the non-compliant front and side setback distances are evidence that the proposed development has not been designed to sympathetically address existing streetscape patterns.



Page 21

Impacts on Neighbours This consideration nominates that the relationship between buildings and open space should be consistent with the existing patterns in the block and where possible, the existing orientation of dwelling ‘fronts’ and ‘backs’. This issue also states that the second storey should be designed to reduce overlooking into neighbouring properties, for example, by incorporating them within the roof space and providing dormer, and off-setting openings from existing neighbours windows or doors so they do not directly overlooking into rear private open space of adjoining properties. As mentioned earlier, the proposed design, whereby living areas and associated balconies are located on the first floor is likely to cause adverse privacy impacts onto neighbouring residents, potentially reducing the quality and quantity of time enjoyed in these areas. The proposed installation of privacy screens along most of the first floor balconies is not an ideal solution to mitigate the adverse privacy impacts that will result from the proposed development, and is a measure that is symptomatic of poor development design and/or overdevelopment of a site. Internal Site Amenity The aim of this consideration is to provide design guidelines to ensure that the development provides an optimal amenity within the site for future occupants. It states that a proposal should include maximising solar access to living areas and private open spaces, and designing dwelling entries so that they are clear and identifiable from the street, providing a buffer between public/communal space and private dwellings, providing a sense of address for each dwelling and being oriented to not look directly into other dwellings. Further, it states that a development should be designed to provide distinct and separate pedestrian and vehicular circulation on the site, ensure that adequate consideration is given to safety and security, provide sizeable and functional private open space areas and provide communal open space. The proposed development has been assessed against the solar access standards under Clause 14 of the ARH SEPP and found to comply with the requirement that living rooms and private open space areas for a minimum of 70% of the dwellings receive a minimum of three hours sunlight between 9.00am and 3.00pm at the Winter Solstice. One main entry point is provided along the Zuttion Avenue front elevation, which provides access to all ten dwellings. A secondary entry point for residents is provided through the basement car parking area onto the ground floor. The dwellings within the building are oriented to not look directly into other dwellings. Further, the development design provides a distinct and separate pedestrian and vehicular circulation on the site. It is noted that the development does not provide any communal open space areas, rather providing for sizeable and functional courtyards for Units 1-4 on the ground floor, but smaller and much less functional balconies for Units 5-10 on the first floor.



Page 22

Overall, our consideration of the five main issues detailed in the ‘Seniors Living Policy: Urban Design Guidelines for Infill Development’ document, has highlighted that the proposed development is not in keeping with the local character of the area in particular in regard to built form, neighbouring impacts and streetscape presentation.

Clause 17 of the ARH SEPP states the affordable housing dwellings within the development will be used for affordable housing for a period of ten years, managed by a registered community housing provider. Relevant conditions can be imposed to ensure that the proposed development satisfies this clause. Clause 18 of the ARH SEPP states that such development may be subdivided with development consent. The application seeks to subdivide the land under strata title. The proposed subdivision of the building by strata title is acceptable subject to the imposition of conditions on any development consent issued.

• State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) Amendment

2011

On 20 May 2011, the ARH SEPP was amended to remove certain provisions applying to low density residential areas and include certain new provisions and savings provisions. As these amendments came into force after the subject DA was lodged, but prior to its determination, it is identified as an ‘existing application’ and as such is to be assessed against the provisions of the ARH SEPP as they applied prior to the amending legislation. Our assessment of this DA, as discussed in the previous section of this report, has been undertaken against the controls that applied at the time of lodgement. However, pursuant to Clause 16A of the ARH SEPP as amended, we must now also take into consideration whether the design of the development is compatible with the ‘character of the local area’ and this assessment is discussed below. The applicant was provided with the opportunity to address this new clause, and in response, provided us with a Design Character Statement prepared by Planning Principles dated 8 June 2011. The Design Character Statement prepared by Planning Principles, makes the following statements:

− ‘…the proposal is consistent with both the Department of Planning and

Canterbury Council’s strategic objectives for the zone, ensuring that the

provision of housing stock is adequate to meet the varying needs of residents in

the locality and is also considered to satisfy the current and future design

character of Zuttion Avenue and the general locality’.

− ‘The Department of Planning equivalent zone table indicates that the current

Residential 2(a) zone pursuant to Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance

1970 is equivalent to the R3 medium density residential zone. Therefore the

proposal is permissible in the zone’.

− ‘The land and surrounding locality is proposed to be rezoned to R3 Medium

Density, (which) will provide building forms similar in floor space ratio and

bulk and scale, with residential flat buildings being permissible’.



Page 23

− ‘The proximity of the site to public transport and the permissibility of multi

dwelling developments in the zone demonstrate that the site is appropriate for

affordable rental housing pursuant to the ARH SEPP.

In response to the above, Council has not yet adopted any new zoning for the area covered by the subject site. The current Residential 2(a) zone prohibits residential flat buildings. Should Council in the future adopt the R3 Medium Density residential zone, it will permit the same type of development and density currently allowed in the Residential 2(a) zone, and in that regard, residential flat buildings will still be prohibited development. Our informed view is that the proposed development is not consistent with the current nor future design character of Zuttion Avenue, and will not be permissible in the future zone of R3 Medium Density. Further, the subject locality is unlikely to be rezoned to provide building forms similar in floor space ratio, bulk and scale allowing for residential flat buildings. The applicant’s Design Character Statement further provides the following statements:

− ‘…As visualized from the street, single units face Zuttion Avenue, with the

remaining units stepped and located beyond these units, essentially providing a

single building form fronting Zuttion Avenue. The remaining units are to be

located behind the entrance to the basement carpark and landscaped gardens,

and will be relatively unseen from a streetscape perspective’.

− ‘Numerous buildings with considerable streetscape presentation, are evident

within the streetscape and general locality, therefore reinforcing the

developments character within the locality. The development is increasing the

much needed residential density of the area, while maintaining character of the

surroundings, and is in fact less intrusive’.

Assessing the compatibility of a proposed development with the character of the local area is not solely based on the way it presents to the street, as detailed in the discussion above under Clause 15 of ARH SEPP where consideration is required to be given to provisions of the ‘Seniors Living Policy: Urban Design Guidelines for Infill Development …’ which essentially breaks down character into five main heads of consideration, being, ‘responding to context’, ‘site planning and design’, ‘impacts on streetscape’, ‘impacts on neighbours’ and ‘internal site amenity’. The Design Character Statement submitted by the applicant and indeed the overall development design, fails to address and respond to the above considerations.

The Design Character Statement further provides the following statement:

− ‘The buildings setbacks and the location of windows and private open space

areas have been designed to protect privacy, solar access and maintain

general amenity for adjoining properties. To protect and further enhance the

privacy of adjoining properties stackable privacy panels are proposed the full

length of the balconies and integrated in the façade design’.



Page 24

Whilst the above statement provides a consideration of a neighbours’ impact, it is in conflict with our position that providing living room windows and doors, and balconies (albeit with some privacy screens) on a first floor of a building, compromises the visual privacy of affected neighbours, and as such is generally inconsistent with any allowable residential building design on land zoned Residential 2(a) where typically living room window and private open space areas are provided on the ground floor. Overall, our detailed analysis of the Design Character Statement does not demonstrate that the subject proposal for a multi unit development containing ten dwellings, is compatible with the character of the local area.

• State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index) BASIX 2004 BASIX Certificate 371325M, dated 20 April 2011 accompanies this application. The commitments to be shown at DA stage include the provision of low water use vegetation, a central rainwater tank, a 4 star instantaneous gas hot water system, insulation, window and glazing commitments and natural lighting for each of the ten dwellings’ kitchens. The project scores a pass for water, energy and thermal comfort commitments. The DA plans submitted illustrate most of the above mentioned commitments made in the BASIX Certificates, with other commitments being able to be conditioned to ensure compliance. However, three of the ten dwellings have not been provided (and are not capable of being provided) with a kitchen window as specified under ‘natural lighting’ in the BASIX Certificate. As such, the design of the proposed development is inconsistent with some of the commitments made in the submitted BASIX Certificate. In this regard, it is considered that the proposed development fails to satisfy the requirements of SEPP 2004.

• Development Control Plan 13 – Multiple Unit Development Code (DCP 13)

The proposed development has been assessed against the provisions of our Development Control Plan 13 – Multiple Unit Development Code. The subject application has been lodged under the provisions of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 which contains certain controls which override our DCP requirements. However, the ARH SEPP does not provide for certain controls that are contained in our DCP which are relevant to the assessment of the application. The proposal compares to these matters as follows: Control Requirement Proposal Complies

Minimum Frontage 20 metres Frontage along the arc at the front of the site is 9.145 metres

No

Private Open Space >7m2 for each unit Each of the ten units is provided with a private open space area of more than 7m2 either in the form of a ground floor courtyard, or a first floor balcony

Yes



Page 25

Control Requirement Proposal Complies

Front Boundary Setback

7.5 metres for two storey development

Parts of the building is setback at 6.6 metres from the front boundary

No

Side & Rear Boundary Setback

4.3 metres (25% encroachment considered)

Front part of the building (located where the site is at its narrowest) provides a setback distance (at the worst point) of 1.5 metres from north eastern boundary, and 2 metres from the south western boundary

No

Domestic Storage Min 5m2 for each unit, attached to the parking area or in the basement

Domestic storage areas are not provided for any of the ten units

No

As noted in the above table, the proposed development does not comply with the minimum frontage, front boundary setback, side boundary setback, and domestic storage requirements of our DCP 13.

• Development Control Plan 20 – Car Parking Code (DCP 20) The proposed development has been assessed against the requirements of DCP 20 – Car Parking Code. The DCP requires the provision of 10 residential car parking spaces, two common spaces, three visitor spaces and one car wash bay – totalling 16 spaces. The proposed design provides a total of twelve spaces in the basement carparking area. It should be noted that the minimum requirements contained in Clause 14(2)(a)(ii) of the ARH SEPP override our controls and as such, this non-compliance may not be used as a reason to refuse development consent. Under the ARH SEPP, the development is required to provide a minimum of 0.5 spaces per dwelling. A total of ten dwellings are proposed therefore requiring a minimum of five off-street car parking spaces to be provided. As stated above, twelve spaces are provided in the proposed basement carparking area of the development, which meets this requirement.

• Development Control Plan 29 – Crime Prevention Through Environmental

Design (DCP 29)

The proposed development has been assessed in accordance with the requirements of Council’s Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design policy and is considered to achieve the aims and objectives of the policy.

• Development Control Plan 37 – Energy Smart Homes (DCP 37) This DCP applies insofar as it aims to protect and maintain the solar access of immediately adjoining residential properties by ensuring it receives 2 hours sunlight between 9am and 3pm on June 21 to the various scenarios tabled below-



Page 26

Solar Access Requirement Proposed Complies

To at least 50% or 35m2 (which includes a minimum dimension of 2.5m) of the adjoining property’s principal area of ground level private open space (POS), whichever is lesser.

Sunlight is available to at least 50% of the adjoining properties ground level private open space (or 35m whichever is lesser) between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June.

Yes

One living room window (of the adjoining property) is to receive 2 hours sunlight between 9am and 3pm on June 21.

One living room window of the adjoining property will receive at least two hours sunlight between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June.

Yes

Outdoor clothes drying area of the adjoining property is to receive 2 hours sunlight between 9am and 3pm on June 21.

The outdoor clothes drying area of the adjoining property will receive at least two hours sunlight between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June.

Yes

As detailed above, the proposal complies with the solar access requirements of DCP 37.

• Development Control Plan 45 – Landscaping (DCP 45)

The DA has been accompanied by a landscape plan which has been assessed by our Landscape Architect and complies with the requirements of DCP 45. No objections are raised to the proposal subject to appropriate conditions being imposed.

• Development Control Plan 48 – Waste Management (DCP 48) The provisions of Part 2.4 of DCP 48 (and Appendix 4) apply to the subject application as the proposal involves the construction of a multiple unit development. In this regard, the proposed development does not provide a bin presentation area which is located 15 metres from the street kerb for the purpose of bin storage prior to collection. The proposed development does not provide a separate area of a minimum of four square metres to be used for the storage of bulky rubbish (clean up, white goods, mattresses and the like) awaiting collection. As such, the proposal does not comply with the above requirements of DCP 48.



Page 27

Referrals

The development application was referred to various internal sections of Council and a summary of this advice is provided as follows:

• Building The application has been referred to our Building Surveyor who has raised no objections to the proposal subject to appropriate conditions being imposed.

• Development Engineer

The application has been referred to our Development Engineer who has raised no objections to the proposed hydraulic details provided with the application subject to minor amendments being made to the relevant plan and appropriate stormwater and public improvement conditions being imposed.

Notification

In accordance with our Development Control Plan 32 – Notification Policy, all owners and occupiers of adjoining properties were notified of the proposed development. We received a total of 19 submissions, including two petitions signed by approximately 110 households, all objecting to the proposed development. The submissions raised the following issues of concern, which are discussed below:

• Concern that the proposed development is an overdevelopment of this small site,

being of an inappropriate scale in the existing local built environment

Comment Whilst the proposed multi unit development is permissible on the subject site by virtue of Clause 11(a)(ii) of ARH SEPP, it is considered that the scale of the development is excessive. The ARH SEPP provides a floor space ratio standard of 0.75:1 for such developments – however, our calculations have revealed that the proposed building has a floor space ratio of 0.87:1. This translates to an excess floor area of 104.82m2. The gross floor area of the proposed development results in a development that is of an excessive scale and size, that can not be supported due to its likely adverse impacts to the locality and its residents.

• Concern that the proposed development will lead to increased traffic movement,

traffic congestion, demand on on-street parking beyond what is capable of being

accommodated for in the Zuttion Avenue cul-de-sac

Comment The minimum requirements contained in Clause 14(2)(a)(ii) of the ARH SEPP override our car parking controls. Under the ARH SEPP, the development is required to provide a minimum of 0.5 spaces per dwelling. A total of ten dwellings are proposed therefore requiring a minimum of five off-street car parking spaces to be provided. Twelve spaces are provided in the proposed basement carparking area of the development, which meets this requirement.



Page 28

As such, the proposal meets the minimum car parking standard specified in the ARH SEPP, and therefore carparking cannot be used as a reason for refusal. In regard to traffic generation, it is acknowledged that a development of this scale will result in increased traffic movements in and around Zuttion Avenue. However, the increase is not considered to be beyond what is capable of being accommodated in the local road network.

• Concern that the proposed development will lead to adverse shadowing impacts

onto residents of adjoining and surrounding properties

Comment

The proposed development has been assessed against the relevant solar access requirements of our DCP 37 – Energy Smart Homes and has been found to maintain solar access for at least 2 hours between 9am and 3pm on June 21 to at least 50% or 35m2 of the principal area of ground level private open space, one living room window and outdoor clothes drying area of the adjoining property.

• Concern that the proposed development will lead to adverse privacy impacts onto

residents of adjoining and surrounding properties

Comment

The development proposes windows, doors and balconies associated with living areas along the first floor of the building. This is considered to compromise the privacy currently enjoyed by residents in their private yards (and swimming pools).

• Concern that the proposed development will lead to loss of views currently enjoyed

by residents of adjoining and surrounding properties

Comment Some views that neighbouring residents currently enjoy are likely to be minimised by the construction of the proposed development. However, the preservation of current views would ultimately limit development on the subject site to only single storey structures, which is considered to be unreasonable given that two storey dwellings with building heights of up to 7.5 metres would typically be permitted to be developed on the subject site.

• Concern regarding the loss of property value of adjoining properties as a result of

the proposed development

Comment There is no evidence to suggest that a loss of property value would be experienced by neighbouring residents as a result of the proposed development being approved. As such this does not warrant a reason for refusal.



Page 29

• Concern regarding the proposed development would lead to an increase in the

amount of pollution in the area, i.e. polluted drains, streets and pavements, noise

pollution, general rubbish etc

Comment There is no indication that the development will increase the level of pollution in the area, beyond an unreasonable level.

• Concern regarding the increase in stress on local sewer and stormwater

infrastructure as a result of the proposed development

Comment The proposed building will not add significant stress to the local sewer and stormwater infrastructure.. Our Development Engineer has reviewed the proposed stormwater system and is satisfied that subject to conditions, the system is of a satisfactory design and will not result in any adverse impacts to any adjoining lands or infrastructure. Further, should consent be issued for this development, it would be conditional on the applicant/developer obtaining a Section 73 Certificate from Sydney Water which confirms that the development has correctly sized water/sewer mains available for connection.

• Concern regarding the method of bin storage and waste collection given the

narrow frontage of the site

Comment

As discussed above under DCP 48 – Waste Management (DCP 48), the proposed development does not comply with the Part 2.4 of DCP 48 (and Appendix 4) as it does not provide a bin presentation area which is required to be located 15 metres from the street kerb for the purpose of bin storage prior to collection. Further, the proposed development does not provide a separate area of a minimum of four square metres to be used for the storage of bulky rubbish (clean up, white goods, mattresses and the like) awaiting collection.

• Concern regarding the limited setbacks provided between the proposed building

and boundaries of the subject site

Comment As discussed above under DCP 13 – Multiple Unit Development Code (DCP 13), parts of the proposed development do not comply with the front and side boundary setbacks as stipulated under Part 6 of DCP 13.



Page 30

• Concern regarding the traffic and noise disruption that will be experienced by

local residents during the construction phase of this proposed development

Comment Traffic and noise disruption is likely to be experienced by local residents during any periodic construction work of a nearby property. Any consent issued would typically be conditional on ‘all building operations being restricted to the hours of 7.00 a.m. - 5.00 p.m. Monday to Saturday, except that on Saturday no mechanical building equipment can be used after 12.00 noon. No work is allowed on Sundays or Public Holidays’.

• Concern regarding fire safety issues for future occupants residing in the proposed

development

Comment The application has been referred to our Building Surveyor who has raised no objections to the proposal subject to appropriate conditions being imposed, which would include the applicant to fully comply with the fire safety provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

• Concern regarding the potential of future congestion of ‘housing commission’

accommodation in the local area leading to increased crime and incidence of anti-

social behaviour

Comment The proposed development is not a Housing NSW development, rather it is proposed by a private developer under the provisions of ARH SEPP in that 50 per cent of the dwellings in the proposed development will be used for affordable rental housing for 10 years from the date of the issue of the Occupation Certificate. All accommodation that is used for affordable rental housing will be managed by a registered community housing provider. The proposed development, if approved, would add slightly to the existing population of the local area. It is not considered that this small increase in population is likely to lead to incidences of crime and/or anti-social behaviour.

• Concern regarding the design of the proposed development being non-compliant

with the relevant state policy for affordable housing

Comment An assessment of the proposed development against the relevant requirements of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 as amended by State Environmental Planning Policy Amendment (Affordable Rental Housing) 2011, is provided in the body of this report.



Page 31

We received correspondence from the current (and new) owner of the subject site on 8 July 2011, stating that Chanine Design were no longer the applicants, and that all new correspondence/documents should be sent directly to the new owner. Given that we have received no direct advice from Chanine Design confirming this change, we will continue to indicate that Chanine Design is the applicant. In any case, this matter does not influence or affect our assessment of the proposed development. Conclusion

The development application has been assessed pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and all relevant development control plans, codes and policies and has been found to be unsatisfactory and not worthy of support. The design of the proposed development is not compatible with the local character of the area and represents an overdevelopment of the site impacting adversely onto neighbouring residents and the Zuttion Avenue streetscape, and indeed the local built environment. As such, it is recommended that the development application be refused.

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT Development Application DA-176/ 2011 be REFUSED for the following reasons: 1. The proposed development, pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(a)(i) of the

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, is considered to be incompatible with the character of the local area and therefore does not satisfy Clause 16A of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 as amended by State Environmental Planning Policy Amendment (Affordable Rental Housing) 2011.

2. The proposed development, pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(a)(i) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, is not consistent with Clause 14(1)(a)(ii) of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 as it involves a floor space ratio greater than 0.75:1.

3. The proposed development, pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(a)(i) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, is not consistent with State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index) BASIX 2004.

4. The proposed development, pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(a)(i) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, does not comply with the provisions of the Canterbury Development Control Plan No.13 – Multiple Unit Development Code in regard to minimum frontage, front boundary setback, side boundary setback, and domestic storage requirements.

5. The proposed development, pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(a)(i) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, does not comply with the provisions of the Canterbury Development Control Plan No.48 – Waste Management in regard to the provision of a bin presentation area (to be located 15 metres from the street kerb for the purpose of bin storage prior to collection), and in regard to the provision of a separate area of a minimum of four square metres to be used for the storage of bulky rubbish (clean up, white goods, mattresses and the like) awaiting collection.



Page 32

6. The proposed development, pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(a)(i) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, is unsatisfactory as it provides an undesirable and unacceptable impact on the streetscape and surrounding built environment, and on the privacy of neighbouring residents.

7. Having regard to the previous reasons noted above and the number of submissions received by Council against the proposed development, pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(e) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, approval of the development application is not in the public interest.

• Our decision was made after consideration of the matters listed under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and matters listed in Council’s various Codes and Policies.

• If you are not satisfied with this determination, you may: - Apply for a review of a determination under Section 82A of the Environmental

Planning and Assessment Act 1979. A request for review must be made and determined within 12 months of the date of receipt of this Notice of Determination; or

- Appeal to the Land and Environment Court within 12 months after the date on which you receive this Notice of Determination, under Section 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

If you should require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact Rita Nakhle in City Planning, on 9789 9449, Monday to Friday.


Page 33

3 29-31 RICHLAND STREET, KINGSGROVE: USE OF REAR

SECTION OF AN INDUSTRIAL BUILDING AS A PLACE OF

WORSHIP WITH ASSOCIATED RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION AND

ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES

FILE NO: 736/29D PART 3


WARD: WEST

D/A No: DA-70/2011

Applicant:

Owner:

Mr. Mark O’Connor

Mr. Victor Care and Nives R Care

Zoning: Light Industrial 4(b) under the provisions of the Canterbury

planning Scheme Ordinance (CPSO)

Application Date: 22 February 2011 (additional information forwarded on 14 April

2011, 18 May 2011, and 1 July 2011)

Summary:

• It is proposed to fitout and use part of an existing industrial building at the rear of the site as a place of public worship with associated religious instruction and administrative offices.

• The subject site is zoned Light Industrial 4(b) under the provisions of the Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance, where the proposed development, defined as a ‘place of public worship’, is permissible with our development consent.

• The proposed development has been assessed against the provisions of Canterbury Development Control Plans 20 and 29 and found to generally comply with our requirements.

• The proposal was publicly exhibited and all adjoining owners notified in accordance with the requirements of our Development Control Plan 32 – Notification Policy. No submissions were received.

• The Director City Planning has recommended that development application be approved subject to conditions.




29-31 RICHLAND STREET, KINGSGROVE: USE OF REAR SECTION OF AN INDUSTRIAL BUILDING AS A PLACE OF WORSHIP WITH ASSOCIATED RELIGIOUS INSTRUCTION AND ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES (CONT.)

Page 34

Report:

Background

Occupying the site is an existing industrial building that has been used for many years for the warehousing, assembly and distribution of lighting products. A number of development consents have been issued on the property which confirms that the development as exists on site requires 61 off-street car parking spaces, of which 20 are to be provided within the front of the site and the remaining spaces are to be provided in the rear area of the site. Site Details

The subject site is located on the western side of Richland Street, north of its intersection with Omnibus Road at Kingsgrove. The property has a frontage of 74.19 metres, a depth of 186.19 metres and a total site area of 1.38 hectares. The subject site is located within an existing industrial area. To the immediate south is a large industrial complex currently under construction to be occupied as a mail distribution centre for Australia Post. Further south , opposite Omnibus Road, is the Sydney Bus depot. To the immediate north of the site is the Kingsgrove North High School. Opposite the subject site are a variety of industrial uses and a number of residential dwellings.

Proposal

It is proposed to fitout and use part of the rear section of an existing industrial building (previously used as offices for the existing industrial use) as a place of public worship, with associated religious instruction and administrative offices for the Every Nation Church. It is proposed to retain the existing ground floor entry and office and provide seating for the congregation of 80 persons for prayer services and community services sessions. The existing office space will be converted into an area for teaching and education rooms for children’s religious study classes.



Page 35

The existing kitchen will be retained which will be used for the preparation of charity meals for distribution. The hours of operation and the types of activities conducted at these times is provided as follows: Day Use Times Numbers

Tuesday General Prayer Session 7.30pm to 9.00pm 10 to 20 persons

Wednesday Leadership Training 7.30pm to 9.00pm Max. of 10 persons

Thursday Charity Food Distribution 10.00am to 1.00pm Up to 5 persons

Friday Youth School Program 6.30pm to 9.00pm Up to 30 persons

Saturday Leadership Training Community Program

10.00am to 12.30pm 7.30pm to 8.30pm

10 to 20 persons 10 to 15 persons

Sunday Service 10.00am to 1.00pm 6.00pm to 7.30pm

Max. of 80 persons Max. of 20 persons

It should be noted that the premises will also be used for administration purposes between the hours of 9.00am and 5.00pm, Monday to Friday, in addition to the activities noted in the table above. Statutory Considerations

When determining this application the relevant matters listed in Section79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 must be considered and in this respect the following environmental planning instruments, development control plans (DCPs), codes and policies are relevant:


• Development Control Plan 20 – Car Parking Code (DCP 20)


Assessment

The development application has been assessed under Sections 5A and Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the following key issues emerge:


The subject site is zoned Light Industrial 4(b) under the Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance. The proposed development is defined as a ‘place of public worship’ which ‘means a church, chapel or other place of public worship or religious instruction or place used for religious training.’ The proposed development is permissible with our development consent.

• Development Control Plan 20 – Car Parking Code (DCP 20) Development Control Plan 20 aims to ensure that development provides adequate off-street car parking and access arrangements. The DCP provides specific parking rates for various development types and requires, for places of public worship, that car parking be considered following an assessment of similar development. As a guide, the DCP states that one space be provided per 5 people (accommodation capacity) for congregations up to 100 persons. Based on this guideline figure and the maximum



Page 36

congregation size for the use (80 persons), the development would generate the need for 16 off-street car parking spaces. Previous development consents over the subject property require the provision of a total of 61 off-street car parking spaces to be provided on site. Of these spaces, 20 are provided at the front of the site and the remaining spaces contained within the rear area adjacent to the area to be occupied by the subject use. It should be noted that inspections of the property reveal that the required number of car parking spaces are not line marked in the rear area of the property and that there is some doubt that 41 spaces could be accommodated within this space to meet the requirements of the previous development consent. It is also noted that the area at the rear of the site is not heavily utilised for car parking suggesting that the existing industrial use of the land is not highly labour intensive. The applicant has indicated that the congregation currently operate from the Hurstville Civic Centre. The numbers quoted in the application for the various activities proposed are the same as those currently conducted at the Hurstville Civic Centre. Having regard to the statements provided by the applicant which has been confirmed by our own inspections of the site, the rear car parking area is not heavily utilised and more than sufficient area will be available for the parking of vehicles associated with the proposed use during normal business hours. There are other activities that will be conducted outside normal industrial business hours. Of these activities, the major use will be for the Sunday morning service which will attract a congregation size of 80 persons. Survey of the existing operations at the Hurstville Civic Centre suggest that the number of cars generated by the Sunday morning service is approximately 30, with vehicle occupancy rates of between two and four persons, consisting of family groups. Plans forwarded with the development application indicate that the rear area may accommodate up to 30 spaces, which will cater for the numbers of vehicles likely to be generated by the proposed use. Any shortfalls in car parking will be easily catered for by the front car parking area which will not be in use by the principal tenant at these times. The applicant has provided evidence from the property owners to confirm their operations are carried out between 7.30am and 5.30pm, Monday to Friday, that they do operate on weekends and that they permit the church group to use parking spaces on site during these times. Sufficient off-street car parking will therefore be provided on site to cater for all expected demand, including activities conducted both during normal business hours and outside normal business hours. The proposed development therefore satisfies the requirements of our DCP 20.



Page 37

• Development Control Plan 29 – Crime Prevention Through Environmental

Design (DCP 29)

The development application has been assessed against the relevant controls contained within our DCP 29. The policy adopts three main principles to reduce the likelihood of criminal activity, including natural surveillance, access control and ownership. In support of the proposal, the applicant has indicated that they propose to install appropriate floodlighting and CCTV surveillance to the entry of the proposed building. The area at the rear of the subject site is currently vacant and use of this space together with the measures proposed as part of this application will help activate the space, provide improved natural surveillance and access control and on this basis satisfy the requirements of the DCP. The development application was also referred to our Crime Prevention Officer who, in consultation with a representative from the NSW Police, Campsie Local Area Command, raised no objections to the proposal from a crime prevention perspective.

Referrals and Other Considerations

• Disability Access

The development application was referred to our Disability Access Worker for comment who raised no objections to the proposal subject to the inclusion of certain conditions on any development consent issued. Since this assessment, there have been changes in legislation as it affects disabled access and facilities. In this regard, a new standard condition will be included on any development consent requiring the applicant to comply with the Commonwealth Disability (Access to Premises - Buildings) 2010 Standard.

• Building and Fire Safety The development application was referred to our Building Surveyor for comment who has advised that in accordance with Sections 93 and 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000, the premises is required to be upgraded in accordance with the specific conditions or via an alternative solution to be submitted which complies with the performance requirements of the Building Code of Australia. Appropriate conditions need to be included on any development consent issued.

• Traffic Considerations

Traffic and associated car parking adequacy is typically an issue that arises out of the assessment of development applications for places of public worship. Place of worship congregations have very different traffic generation rates and therefore different car parking needs. As a result, the applicant engaged a traffic consultant to undertake a review of their current congregation at their current location to determine the adequacy of the proposed parking arrangements and the potential traffic implications. Specifically, the applicant has provided comments about the likely traffic generated by the proposed development, confirm that sufficient off-street car parking will be provided to meet the demands of the proposed use and the adequacy of the proposed access driveway servicing the rear of the site. In this regard, the applicant’s traffic consultant made the following conclusions about the proposed use of the site:



Page 38

− All activities proposed on site, with the exception of the Charity Food Distribution activity, occur outside the normal business hours of the industrial use of the land.

− Surveys of the numbers of vehicles using the site indicate low traffic generation rates.

− The rear car parking area, which has a capacity of approximately 30 vehicles is not heavily utilised with surveys suggesting that it is typically used by only two to three vehicles during normal business hours.

− The existing driveway servicing the rear of the site where the proposed use will operate will provide acceptable access arrangements given the relatively low number of vehicle movements.

− Pedestrian movement to and from the street will be rare given that most of the congregation will arrive by vehicle.

The development application was referred to our Team Leader – Traffic and Transportation for comment who has raised no objection to the proposed use on traffic or parking grounds. The proposed development is therefore not likely to have an adverse impact on adjoining development or on the movement of traffic in the local road system.

Notification

The development application was publicly exhibited and all adjoining owners were notified in accordance with the requirements of our DCP 32 – Notification Policy. During this period, no submissions were received. Conclusion

The development application has been assessed pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and all relevant development control plans, codes and policies. As demonstrated in the body of this report, the proposed use of part of the site as a place of public worship with associated religious instruction and administration is not expected to result in any unreasonable impacts on adjoining development. Car parking and traffic matters are typically issues of significance in the assessment of such applications. However it is considered that in this instance, sufficient area is available to accommodate the parking demands of the development without impacting adjoining uses. It is therefore recommended that the application be approved subject to conditions, but on a deferred commencement basis to allow the applicant to formalise certain operation matters before the consent becomes operational. Such operational matters include the clarification of all church activities and specific hours of operation, parking and traffic management, control of litter, shuttle bus arrangements and complaints handling. The submission of such details prior to the development consent becoming operational is necessary to confirm all operations on site and to have in place specific procedures to ensure that the use is conducted without impact on neighbouring properties.



Page 39

RECOMMENDATION:

A. THAT development application DA-70/2011 be APPROVED as a DEFERRED

COMMENCEMENT Consent under Section 80(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The consent requires the applicant to provide evidence to Council, within two years, sufficient to satisfy the condition/s listed below before the consent can operate. The deferred commencement condition is:

The applicant shall provide a detailed Plan of Management for the proposed use which shall include the following:

(a) Identification of all church activities and specific hours of operation (b) Identification of the numbers of persons attending each activity with a limit of

80 persons (c) Parking and traffic management issues including:

(i) Provision of a parking supervisor/s for the Sunday Morning Service (ii) Directions by the parking supervisor/s to ensure that vehicles access the

site safely and that parking takes place within line marked spaces (d) Litter Patrols (e) Shuttle Bus Arrangements (f) Complaints Handling, including the name of a contact person (phone numbers and postal address) to enable adjoining occupiers to contact this person should they have any operational concerns about the use B. The following conditions of consent including any other conditions that may arise

from the matters listed above, will be included in the development consent issued by Council after the applicant provides information sufficient to satisfy Council in relation to the conditions of the deferred commencement consent:

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

1. The following must be submitted to either Council or an Accredited Certifier prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate: 1.1. Details of:

• Structural Engineering Plan

• Building Specifications

• Fire Safety Schedule

• Sydney Water Notice of Requirements

• Firewall Separation

• Mechanical Ventilation

• Compliance with the requirements of the Commonwealth Disability (Access to Premises - Buildings) 2010 Standard. 1.2. Payment of the Long Service Leave Levy to the Long Service Leave

Corporation or to Council. 1.3. Payment to Council of:

Kerb and Gutter Damage Deposit $2928.00 Certificate Registration Fee $30.00



Page 40

1.4. If you appoint Council as your Principal Certifying Authority, the following fees are payable: Construction Certificate Application Fee $475.00 Inspection Fee $479.00 Occupation Certificate Fee $141.00

Note 1: Long Service Leave is payable where the value is $25,000 or more under Part 5 Section 36 of the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986.

Note 2: If you appoint a Principal Certifying Authority other than Council, the fees shown in the fee quote attachment do not apply, however other fees will apply. Note 3: When the items in this condition are provided and have been assessed as satisfactory, your Construction Certificate will be posted to you. Note 4: All fees referred to above are subject to change. You need to refer to our website or contact our Customer Service Centre for a current schedule of fees prior to payment.

BEFORE COMMENCING THE DEVELOPMENT

2. Before the erection of any building in accordance with this Development Consent; 2.1. detailed plans and specifications of the building must be endorsed with a

Construction Certificate by the Council or an Accredited Certifier, and 2.2. you must appoint a Principal Certifying Authority (either Canterbury City

Council, or an Accredited Certifier) and notify the Council of the appointment (see Attachment – Notice of Commencement copy), and

2.3. you must give the Council at least 2 days notice of your intention to commence erection of the building (see Attachment – Notice of Commencement copy).

2.4. In the case of work which includes residential development, you must inform us in writing before the commencement of work of the following: 2.4.1. The name and contractor or licence number of the licensee who has

contracted to do or intends to do the work; or 2.4.2. The name and permit number of the owner-builder who intends to do

the work. INSURANCE

3. If it is intended to engage a builder or licensed contractor to do the work where it is valued over $12,000 and is not a multi storey building then this person must take out home building insurance with a private insurer. The builder or person doing the work must also satisfy Council that they have taken out an insurance policy by producing evidence of the insurance certificate or other documentation. Further information on insurance requirements is available from the Department of Fair Trading (NSW Consumer Protection Agency) on 1800 802 055.

SITE SIGNAGE

4. A sign shall be erected at all times on your building site in a prominent position stating the following: 4.1. The name, address and telephone number(s) of the principal certifying

authority for the work, and 4.2. The name of the person in charge of the work site and a telephone number at

which that person may be contacted during and outside working hours, and 4.3. That unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited.



Page 41

DEMOLITION

5. Demolition must be carried out in accordance with the following: (a) Demolition of the building is to be carried out in accordance with applicable

provisions of Australian Standard AS 2601-2001: The Demolition of Structures and the Construction Safety Act Regulations.

(b) The demolition of a structure or building involving the removal of dangerous or hazardous materials, including asbestos or materials containing asbestos must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Workcover Authority of New South Wales.

(c) Demolition being carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation 2001.

(d) A hoarding or fence must be erected between the building or site of the building and the public place, if the public place or pedestrian or vehicular traffic is likely to be obstructed or rendered inconvenient because of the carrying out of the demolition work.

(e) Demolition of buildings is only permitted during the following hours: 7.00 a.m. – 5.00 p.m. Mondays to Fridays 7.00 a.m. – 12.00 noon Saturdays No demolition is to be carried out on Sundays or Public Holidays.

(f) Burning of demolished building materials is prohibited. (g) Adequate care is to be taken during demolition to ensure that no damage is

caused to adjoining properties. (h) Soil and water management facilities must be installed and maintained during

demolition in accordance with Council's Stormwater Management Manual. If you do not provide adequate erosion and sediment control measures and/or soil or other debris from the site enters Council's street gutter or road you may receive a $1500 on-the-spot fine.

(i) Council’s Soil and Water Management warning sign must be displayed on the most prominent point on the demolition site, visible to both the street and site workers. The sign must be displayed throughout demolition.

(j) The capacity and effectiveness of soil and water management devices must be maintained at all times.

(k) During the demolition or erection of a building, a sign must be provided in a prominent position stating that unauthorised entry to the premises is prohibited and contain all relevant details of the responsible person/company including a contact number outside working hours.

(l) A sign is not required where work is being carried out inside, or where the premises are occupied during the works (both during and outside working hours).

(m) Toilet facilities must be provided to the work site in accordance with WorkCover’s NSW “CODE OF PRACTICE” for Amenities for construction work and any relevant requirements of the BCA.

(n) Removal, cleaning and disposal of lead-based paint conforming to the current NSW Environment Protection Authority's guidelines. Demolition of materials incorporating lead being conducted in strict accordance with sections 1.5, 1.6, 1.7, 3.1 and 3.9 of Australian Standard AS2601-2001: Demolition of Structure. Note: For further advice you may wish to contact the Global Lead Advice and Support Service on 9716 0132 or 1800 626 086 (freecall) or at



Page 42

www.lead.org.au. (o) Hazardous dust not being allowed to escape from the site. The use of fine

mesh dust proof screens or other measures are recommended. (p) Any existing accumulations of dust (eg. ceiling voids and wall cavities) must

be removed by the use of an industrial vacuum fitted with a high efficiency particulate air (HEPA) filter. All dusty surfaces and dust created from work is to be suppressed by a fine water spray. Water must not be allowed to enter the street and stormwater systems. Demolition is not to be performed during adverse winds, which may cause dust to spread beyond the site boundaries.

GENERAL

6. The development being carried out in accordance with the plans, specifications, details and Statement of Environmental Effects prepared by Pre-build Design dated April 2011 as received by Council on 14 April 2011, except where modified by the conditions of this consent.

7. The development shall operate strictly in accordance with the approved Plan of Management and there shall be no alterations to the operations on site without the prior consent of Council.

8. The hours of operation shall be confined to the times and types of activities as listed in the following table:

Day Use Times Numbers

Monday to Friday

Administration 7.30am to 5.30pm Max. 3 persons

Tuesday General Prayer Session

7.30pm to 9.00pm 10 to 20 persons

Wednesday Leadership Training 7.30pm to 9.00pm Max. of 10 persons

Thursday Charity Food Distribution

10.00am to 1.00pm Up to 5 persons

Friday Youth School Program

6.30pm to 9.00pm Up to 30 persons

Saturday Leadership Training Community Program

10.00am to 12.30pm 7.30pm to 8.30pm

10 to 20 persons 10 to 15 persons

Sunday Service 10.00am to 1.00pm 6.00pm to 7.30pm

Max. of 80 persons Max. of 20 persons

9. The maximum congregation size for the place of public worship shall be eighty (80) persons.

10. Thirty (30) off-street parking spaces being provided in accordance within the rear forecourt of the property for use by the proposed use. Such spaces to be sealed, linemarked and made freely available at all times. Details shall be provided with the application for the Construction Certificate.

11. The use being confined to the rear part of the premises as shown on the plan submitted.

12. All materials must be stored wholly within the property boundaries and must not be placed on the footway or roadway.



Page 43

13. All building operations for the erection or alteration of new buildings must be restricted to the hours of 7.00a.m.-5.00p.m. Monday to Saturday, except that on Saturday no mechanical building equipment can be used after 12.00 noon. No work is allowed on Sundays or Public Holidays.

14. Council’s warning sign for Soil and Water Management must be displayed on the most prominent point on the building site, visible to both the street and site workers. The sign must be displayed throughout construction.

15. All building construction work must comply with the Building Code of Australia. 16. The Management shall ensure that the behaviour of patrons entering and leaving the

premises does not detrimentally affect the amenity of the neighbourhood. The Management shall be responsible for the control of noise and litter generated by patrons of the premises and shall ensure that patrons leave the vicinity of the premises in an orderly manner to the satisfaction of Council.

FOOD PREMISES 17. The kitchen to be constructed and fitted out strictly in accordance with the Australian

New Zealand Food Standards Code, Councils Code for Construction of Food Premises.

18. The premises shall not be used to store, prepare or sell food for profit without first obtaining written consent of Council.

FIRE SAFETY

19. In accordance with Section 93 & 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000, the premises is required to be upgraded in accordance with the following conditions (17 to 22) or an alternative solution be submitted which complies with the performance requirements of the Building Code of Australia Volume-1, 2008.

20. The openings in the external walls being protected in accordance with BCA Clause C3.2. Protection may be by means of: 20.1 Doorways – internal or external wall-wetting sprinklers as appropriate used

with doors that are self-closing, or automatic closing, or -/60/30 fire doors (self-closing or automatic closing).

20.2 Windows – internal or external wall wetting sprinklers as appropriate used with windows that are automatic or permanently fixed in the closed position, -/60/- fire windows (automatic or permanently fixed in the closed position) or -/60/- automatic fire shutters.

20.3 Other openings – internal or external wall wetting sprinklers as appropriate or construction having a FRL not less than -/60/-.

21. Install portable fire extinguishers selected, located and distributed to BCA Clause E1.6/Table E1.6 and AS 2444. This item is an essential fire or other safety measure.

22. Emergency lighting complying with AS/NZS 2293.1 being installed throughout the building where required under BCA Clause E4.2. This item is an essential fire or other safety measure.

23. Exit signs being provided in accordance with BCA Clause E4.5. This item is an essential fire or other safety measure.

24. Mechanical ventilation being provided to the building or part where required by BCA Clause F4.5. This item is an essential fire or other safety measure if serving a life safety function.

25. Compliance with D1.6 & D1.10 of the Building Code of Australia



Page 44

26. A Fire Safety Audit shall be performed on all required fire safety measures installed within the building and such remedial works shall be undertaken to ensure that those required measures are capable of operating/performing to at least the standard for which the measure was originally designed and implemented. The required measures are specified in the attached fire safety schedule pursuant to Clause 168 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000.

CRIME PREVENTION

27. The applicant shall install adequate floodlighting (to AS 1158.3.1:1999 standards) being provided and maintained within the rear car parking area. Details shall be provided with the application for the Construction Certificate.

28. The applicant shall install CCTV facilities to the entrance to the church building and to monitor the use of the rear car parking area. Details shall be provided with the application for the Construction Certificate.

SYDNEY WATER REQUIREMENTS

29. A Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be obtained. Application must be made through an authorised Water Servicing Co-ordinator. Please refer to “Your Business” section of Sydney Water’s web site at www.sydneywater.com.au then the “e-developer” icon or telephone 13 20 92. Following application, a “Notice of Requirements” will be forwarded detailing water and sewage extensions to be built and charges to be paid. Please make early contact with the Co-ordinator, since building of water/sewer extensions can be time consuming and may impact on other services and building, driveway or landscape design. The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to occupation of the development/release of the final plan of subdivision. A copy of Sydney Water’s Notice of Requirements must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the Construction Certificate being issued.

30. The approved plans shall be submitted to the appropriate Sydney Water Quick Check agent or Customer Centre to determine whether the development will affect Sydney Water’s sewer and water mains, stormwater drains and/or easements, and if further requirements need to be met. Plans will be appropriately stamped. For Quick Check agent details please refer to the web site www.sydneywater.com.au, see Your Business, then Building & Developing, then Building & Renovating, or telephone 13 20 92.

CRITICAL INSPECTIONS

31. Class 5, 6, 7, 8 or 9 Buildings The following critical stage inspections must be carried out by the Principal Certifying Authority (either Council or the Accredited Certifier): 31.1. at the commencement of the building work, and 31.2. after the building work has been completed and prior to any occupation

certificate being issued in relation to the building. 32. Section 81(A) of the EP&A Act 1979 requires that a person having the benefit of a

development consent, if not carrying out the work as an owner-builder, must notify

the principal contractor for the building work of any critical stage inspections

and other inspections that are to be carried out in respect of the building work, as nominated in this development consent. To arrange an inspection by Council please phone 9789-9300 during normal office hours.



Page 45

COMPLETION OF DEVELOPMENT

33. Obtain an Occupation Certificate/Interim Occupation Certificate from the Principal Certifying Authority before partial/entire occupation of the development.

WE ALSO ADVISE 34. This application has been assessed in accordance with the Building Code of Australia. 35. Where Council is appointed as the Principal Certifying Authority, you will be required

to submit Compliance Certificates in respect of the following:

• Glazing

• Mechanical Ventilation

• Commonwealth Disability Access to Premises - Buildings) 2010 Standard.

• Final Fire Safety Certificate 36. Any works to be carried out by Council at the applicant’s cost need to be applied for in

advance. 37. Before you dig, call “Dial before you Dig” on 1100 (listen to the prompts) or facsimile

1300 652 077 (with your street no./name, side of street and distance from the nearest cross street) for underground utility services information for any excavation areas.

38. Compliance with the Building Code of Australia does not guarantee protection from prosecution under “The Disability Discrimination Act”. Further information is available from the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission on 1800 021 199.

39. Our decision was made after consideration of the matters listed under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and matters listed in Council’s various Codes and Policies.

40. If you are not satisfied with this determination, you may: 40.1 Apply for a review of a determination under Section 82A of the Environmental

Planning and Assessment Act 1979. A request for review must be made and determined within 12 months of the date of receipt of this Notice of Determination; or

40.2 Appeal to the Land and Environment Court within 12 months after the date on which you receive this Notice of Determination, under Section 97 or Section 97AA of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

If you should require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact Stephen Pratt in City Planning, on 9789 9350 between 9.00am and 11.00am Monday to Friday.

Date post:	03-Mar-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	dangtruc
View:	216 times
Download:	3 times

INDEPENDENT HEARING AND ASSESSMENT PANEL · PDF fileINDEPENDENT HEARING AND ASSESSMENT PANEL 1...

Documents