CANTERBURY CITY COUNCIL · The Greek Orthodox Parish and Community of Belmore and District Zoning: Residential 2(a) - Canterbury Local Environmental Plan 178 - Belmore/Lakemba Precinct

CANTERBURY CITY

COUNCIL

INDEPENDENT HEARING &

ASSESSMENT PANEL

29 JUNE 2009

INDEPENDENT HEARING & ASSESSMENT PANEL 29 JUNE 2009

Page 1

INDEPENDENT HEARING & ASSESSMENT PANEL

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM SUBJECT PAGE NO

CENTRAL WARD

1 13-17 CECILIA STREET, 32-34 ETELA STREET & 31-33 ISABEL

STREET, BELMORE: USE OF CLASSROOMS FOR

KINDERGARTEN CLASSES, CONSOLIDATION OF 31-33 ISABEL

& 32-34 ETELA STREETS INTO ONE LOT, USE OF NORTHERN

PART OF LOT AS PLAYGROUND AND USE FOR OVERFLOW

CARPARK DURING NON-SCHOOL HOURS, AND ALTERATIONS

/ ADDITIONS TO THE CHURCH BUILDING........................................................4

EAST WARD

2 161-163 BEAMISH STREET, CAMPSIE (ALSO KNOWN AS 109

CLISSOLD PARADE): ALTERATIONS TO BUILDING AND USE

AS 'MEN'S SHED' WITH ASSOCIATED PARKING...........................................33

WEST WARD

3 748 PUNCHBOWL ROAD, PUNCHBOWL: CONSOLIDATION OF

SIX LAND PARCELS AND RE-SUBDIVISION INTO TWO LOTS

FOR FORMER PUNCHBOWL BABY HEALTH AND LONG DAY

CHILD CARE CENTRES .........................................................................................46

4 98 MOOREFIELDS ROAD, KINGSGROVE: ALTERATIONS TO

CHURCH SITE INCLUDING REFURBISHMENT OF MAIN

CHAPEL / CHURCH HALL, CONSTRUCTION OF NEW

SANITARY FACILITIES AND SECOND CHAPEL / CHURCH

HALL ABOVE ENLARGED CAR PARKING AREA AND

ASSOCIATED LANDSCAPING ..............................................................................53


Page 2

REPORT SUMMARIES

1 13-17 CECILIA STREET, 32-34 ETELA STREET & 31-33 ISABEL

STREET, BELMORE: USE OF CLASSROOMS FOR

KINDERGARTEN CLASSES, CONSOLIDATION OF 31-33 ISABEL

& 32-34 ETELA STREETS INTO ONE LOT, USE OF NORTHERN

PART OF LOT AS PLAYGROUND AND USE FOR OVERFLOW

CARPARK DURING NON-SCHOOL HOURS, AND ALTERATIONS

/ ADDITIONS TO THE CHURCH BUILDING

• It is proposed to use the existing classrooms in the main school building at 13-17 Cecilia Street for Kindergarten Classes, consolidate 31-33 Isabel Street and 32-34 Etela Street into one lot, use the northern part of the lot as a playground with an acoustic screen, associated landscaping and fencing, and use for overflow carpark during non-school hours, and carry out alterations and additions to the Church building including the construction of an external amenities building attached to the rear wall of the Church building, new rear entry to the Church hall, disabled access lift, new fire door, storage areas, and an external kitchen.

• The proposal was notified on three separate occasions due to varying changes in the proposed development design throughout the assessment process. A large number of submissions were received, including one petition containing 58 signatures and large volumes of pro forma letters. The majority of objectors/petitioners reside within close proximity to the development site. The issues raised in the submissions and our responses to those issues are provided in the body of this report.

• The development application has been assessed against the requirements of the Canterbury Local Environmental Plan 178 – Belmore/Lakemba Precinct and our relevant development control plans and policies and found to be worthy of support.

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


CLISSOLD PARADE): ALTERATIONS TO BUILDING AND USE

AS 'MEN'S SHED' WITH ASSOCIATED PARKING

• The application seeks to undertake alterations to an existing single storey building and use this building as a men’s shed and for parking associated with the City of Canterbury Community Centre.

• The subject site is zoned General Business 3(a) under the provisions of the Canterbury Local Environmental Plan 148 – Campsie Precinct. The proposed development is permissible subject to Council’s consent.

• The proposal has been assessed against our relevant codes and policies and found to generally comply with our requirements.

• The proposal was notified in accordance with our Notification Policy and no submissions were received.



Page 3

3 748 PUNCHBOWL ROAD, PUNCHBOWL: CONSOLIDATION OF

SIX LAND PARCELS AND RE-SUBDIVISION INTO TWO LOTS

FOR FORMER PUNCHBOWL BABY HEALTH AND LONG DAY

CHILD CARE CENTRES

• It is proposed to consolidate the six existing land parcels and re-subdivide the land to create two lots for the former Punchbowl Baby Health Centre and Punchbowl Long Day Child Care Centre.

• The development application has been assessed against the requirements of the Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance and our relevant development control plans and policies. The proposal complies with the requirements of these controls.

• The development application does not require notification under the relevant provisions of our Development Control Plan No. 32 – Notification Policy.


4 98 MOOREFIELDS ROAD, KINGSGROVE: ALTERATIONS TO

CHURCH SITE INCLUDING REFURBISHMENT OF MAIN




ASSOCIATED LANDSCAPING

• It is proposed to carry out alterations and additions to the existing church building, including a refurbishment of the existing chapel/church hall, the construction of new sanitary facilities and of a second chapel/church hall above an enlarged car parking area and associated landscaping.

• The subject site is zoned Residential 2(a) under the provisions of the Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance. The proposed development is a permissible use with our development consent.

• Clause 44 of the CPSO restricts the floor space of non-residential developments in a Residential 2(a) zone to a maximum of 0.4:1. This development proposes a floor space ration of 0.63:1. In this regard, the applicant has submitted an objection pursuant to the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 to vary the floor space ratio control allowable under the Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance to permit the proposed development.

• The proposed development has been assessed against the provisions of our relevant DCPs and policies, and with the exception of some minor non-compliances, the proposal satisfies our controls. The non-compliances have been discussed in the body of the report.

• The application has been advertised and adjoining owners notified in accordance with our Development Control Plan No. 32 - Notification Policy for a period of 21 days on two separate occasions. A total of thirteen submissions were received opposing the proposed development, including one petition containing thirty two signatures.



Page 4

CENTRAL WARD

1 13-17 CECILIA STREET, 32-34 ETELA STREET & 31-33

ISABEL STREET, BELMORE: USE OF CLASSROOMS FOR

KINDERGARTEN CLASSES, CONSOLIDATION OF 31-33

ISABEL & 32-34 ETELA STREETS INTO ONE LOT, USE OF

NORTHERN PART OF LOT AS PLAYGROUND AND USE FOR

OVERFLOW CARPARK DURING NON-SCHOOL HOURS,

AND ALTERATIONS / ADDITIONS TO THE CHURCH

BUILDING

FILE NO: 296/32D PTS 2 & 3

REPORT BY: DIRECTOR CITY PLANNING

Ward: CENTRAL

D/A No: DA-727/2008

Applicant:

Owner:

All Saints Limited

C/– Candalepas Associates

The Greek Orthodox Parish and Community of

Belmore and District

Zoning: Residential 2(a) - Canterbury Local Environmental

Plan 178 - Belmore/Lakemba Precinct

Application Date: 17 December 2008, further information received on

4 March 2009, 8 May 2009, 15 May 2009, 29 May

2009, 2 June 2009, 12 June 2009, 16 June 2009 and

17 June 2009

Disclosure of political donation

and gifts

Two disclosures have been made in regard to this

application.

Political donations or gifts are not relevant to the

determination of any development application or

planning matters, and the making of political

donations or gifts does not provide grounds for

challenging the determination of a development

application or planning decision.


13-17 CECILIA STREET, 32-34 ETELA STREET & 31-33 ISABEL STREET, BELMORE: USE OF CLASSROOMS FOR KINDERGARTEN CLASSES, CONSOLIDATION OF 31-33 ISABEL & 32-34 ETELA STREETS INTO ONE LOT, USE OF NORTHERN PART OF LOT AS PLAYGROUND AND USE FOR OVERFLOW CARPARK DURING NON-SCHOOL HOURS, AND ALTERATIONS / ADDITIONS TO THE CHURCH BUILDING (CONT.)

Page 5

Summary:

• It is proposed to use the existing classrooms in the main school building at 13-17 Cecilia Street for Kindergarten Classes, consolidate 31-33 Isabel Street and 32-34 Etela Street into one lot, use the northern part of the lot as a playground with an acoustic screen, associated landscaping and fencing, and use for overflow carpark during non-school hours, and carry out alterations and additions to the Church building including the construction of an external amenities building attached to the rear wall of the Church building, new rear entry to the Church hall, disabled access lift, new fire door, storage areas, and an external kitchen.

• The proposal was notified on three separate occasions due to varying changes in the proposed development design throughout the assessment process. A large number of submissions were received, including one petition containing 58 signatures and large volumes of pro forma letters. The majority of objectors/petitioners reside within close proximity to the development site. The issues raised in the submissions and our responses to those issues are provided in the body of this report.

• The development application has been assessed against the requirements of the Canterbury Local Environmental Plan 178 – Belmore/Lakemba Precinct and our relevant development control plans and policies and found to be worthy of support.


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 Sustainable Urban Development.

Report:

Background

• DA Consent 947/2005 (as modified) approved the construction of a primary school on the eastern side of Cecilia Street, on the properties now known as 13-17 Cecelia Street, Belmore. The primary school has recently been constructed and is three stories in height and includes a basement car park. The primary school building is approved on the basis that it will accommodate students between Year 1 and Year 6, with six teachers and four administrative staff.

• Part of this approval incorporated a kindergarten to be located at 32 Etela Street, which is situated on the south-western corner of Etela and Cecilia Streets. The approved kindergarten is of two storey construction, with the lower level excavated into the ground. The upper level includes a conference room and office room at the rear of the site to be used for the administration of the parish. The kindergarten would be attended by a maximum of 60 children and four staff (two teachers and two administration staff).

• On 9 May 2008, Development Consent DA-214/2008 was issued for the ‘demolition of existing structures’ at 32 Etela Street, Belmore.

• On 9 May 2008, Development Consent DA-215/2008 was issued for the ‘demolition of existing structures’ at 34 Etela Street, Belmore.



Page 6

Site Details

The subject site includes properties identified as 32 and 34 Etela Street, 31 and 33 Isabel Street and 13-17 Cecilia Street in Belmore. The properties at 32 and 34 Etela Street are vacant with the exception of a detached single story garage building at the rear of 34 Etela Street and some detached outbuildings at the rear of 32 Etela Street. Located at 31-33 Isabel Street is the All Saints Greek Orthodox Church, on the north-western corner of Isabel and Cecilia Streets. The site known as 13-17 Cecilia Street contains the recently constructed All Saints Primary School. It is three stories in height and includes a basement carpark. With regard to the immediate locality, development along Etela Street, Cecilia Street and Isabel Street is typically characterised by modest single storey dwelling houses of brick construction. However there are a number of larger two storey developments consisting of a two storey residential flat building in the locality.

The subject site shown within the white boundary lines



Page 7

The Church Building at 31-33 Isabel Street, Belmore

The School Building at 13-17 Cecilia Street, Belmore

The vacant site at the rear of the Church building at 32-34 Etela Street, Belmore

Proposal

The proposal involves the following components:

• Using the existing classrooms in the main school building at 13-17 Cecilia Street for Kindergarten Classes;

• Consolidating 31-33 Isabel Street and 32-34 Etela Street into one lot;

• Using the northern part of the lot as a playground with an acoustic screen, associated landscaping and fencing;

• Using this playground area as an overflow carpark during non-school hours;

• Carrying out of alterations and additions to the Church building including the construction of an external amenities building attached to the rear wall of the Church building, new rear entry to the Church hall, disabled access lift, new fire door, storage areas, and an external kitchen.

Relocating Kindergarten

Previous development consent was based on the whole School site, which is made up of three separate properties (being 35 Isabel Street, 32 Etela Street and 13-17 Cecilia Street) having a total student number of 450 – a total of 360 students between Year 1 and Year 6, 60 students in Kindergarten and 30 students at pre-school (at 35 Isabel Street).



Page 8

This number of students does not change with the subject proposal, but the physical distribution of students does with all the primary School classes (Kindergarten to Year 6) now taking place at the main School building at 13-17 Cecilia Street. No development consent is required to be sought for this change in the physical distribution across the School site. In this regard, the applicant provides the following information:

“…the NSW Board of Independent Studies has currently approved the Larger part

(13-17 Cecilia Street) of the Development Site to accommodate 420 students, and

whilst this is the case Government Funding is contingent on the NSW Board of

Independent Studies determination of capacity and it is vital that the number of

students approved to attend the school is maintained, although as we have

previously advised current and projected enrolment at the school is well below

maximum figure.

Moreover, should this application be approved, the ameliorative issues of the

proposal as presently put for traffic/noise/overshadowing/intensification of use of

the Larger part (13-17 Cecilia Street) of the Development Site remain as approved

and built.”

Playground Use

The Statement of Environmental Effects submitted in support of the development application states that:

“…students currently utilise two play areas on the adjacent School site on the

upper and lower ground floor levels. The new playground will be used by Years 5

and 6, with Years K to Years 4 utilising the existing play areas within the School.

The playground will therefore distribute students over a larger area and will assist

in reducing the overall acoustic impact of current ‘playtime’ operations of the

School.” The playground is proposed to be used in conjunction with school activities, primarily during the school hours of between 8am and 3pm. However, there will be some pre-school and after school activities which will also take place in the playground between the hours of 7am and 7pm on weekdays. Overflow Carpark

The proposal involves using this playground area as an overflow carpark between the hours of 7am and 6pm on Saturdays, and between the hours of 8am and 6pm on Sundays and Public Holidays. Vehicular entry to the overflow carpark is from Etela Street, and exit is from Cecilia Street. The overflow carpark provides for the parking of 27 vehicles.



Page 9

It is stated in the Statement of Environmental Effects that: “…as the site will be used as a playground…the car spaces cannot be linemarked

on the site. It is for this reason that the Church will employ/appoint a person to

manage the carpark when in use. This person would marshal the vehicles to park

in the spaces as shown in the plan (which could be arranged by witches hats or

similar), to avoid any potential conflict. This is not an uncommon situation and

operates successfully when parks or other grounds are used as spillover car

parking areas….”

Acoustic Screen

The acoustic screen is 6 metres in height and is proposed to be of translucent material. It is proposed to be located 5 metres from the boundary adjoining 36 Etela Street. It aims to provide an acoustic barrier between the proposed outdoor school playground and the adjoining property at 36 Etela Street. External Kitchen

The applicant states that: “…the proposed kitchen is to be used to provide lunchtime food to students using

the playground. The kitchen will also be used as a secondary kitchen associated

with larger scale functions accommodated in the Church hall….”

Alterations to the Church

The proposed development further involves the carrying out of alterations and additions to the Church building including the construction of an external amenities building attached to the rear wall of the Church building, new rear entry to the Church hall, new fire door, and construction of storage areas. A new disabled access lift is also proposed to be installed which is required to upgrade disabled access to the Church in accordance with the Building Code of Australia. The various components of the proposal are shown in the following diagrams:



Page 10

Carpark Configuration



Page 11

Statutory Considerations

When determining this application the relevant matters listed in Section 79C 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:

• Canterbury Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 178 – Belmore/Lakemba Precinct

• State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) 1

• Development Control Plan 9 – Non-Residential Buildings Adjoining Residential Zones

• Development Control Plan 20 – Carparking Code

• Development Control Plan 29 – Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design 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 Local Environmental Plan 178 – Belmore/Lakemba Precinct The site is zoned Residential 2(a) under the Canterbury Local Environmental Plan 178 – Belmore/Lakemba Precinct (CLEP 178). The proposed development is associated with both a school use (‘educational establishment’) and a church use (‘place of worship’), both being permissible developments in the Residential 2(a) zone under CLEP 178. As such, the proposed development is permissible with the consent of Council. Clause 14(1) of CLEP 178 restricts the floor space ratio of non-residential developments in a Residential 2(a) zone to a maximum of 0.5:1. The proposed development (on 31-33 Isabel Street and 32-34 Etela Street) being associated with a school and church is a non-residential development. It involves a total floor area of 1467m2, on a consolidated lot area of 2491m2. As such, the proposed development has a floor space ratio of 0.59:1, which exceeds the CLEP 178 requirement. In this regard, the applicant has submitted an objection under State Environmental Planning Policy 1 – Development Standards which is discussed in the next section of the report. Clause 25 Development in the Vicinity of heritage items of CLEP 178 states that:

‘The Council must not grant consent to an application for a consent to carry out development on land in the vicinity of a heritage item unless it has made an assessment of the effect the carrying out of that development will have on the heritage significance of the item and its setting’.

Part of the subject development site adjoins the property located at 35 Isabel Street which, along with the properties at 37 and 39 Isabel, is identified within Canterbury Local Environmental Plan 178 – Belmore/Lakemba precinct as being a heritage item.



Page 12

The development application was supported by a Heritage Impact Statement prepared by GSA Planning. The Statement provides the following comments in regard to the impact of the proposal onto the heritage items:

“Although visible from the rear yard area of No.35 Isabel Street the works

to the church, the playground and associated structures will have no

adverse impacts upon its heritage significance. The proposed works are

visually and physically separate from and do not interfere with the

cartilage or appearance of the item.

With regard to the heritage items at No.’s 37 and 39 Isabel Street, the

proposed playground, structures and additions are sufficiently setback as

not to interfere or impact upon the significance of these items.

Accordingly, it is considered that the separation of the proposed works

from the heritage items is sufficient to ensure that they are not visible from

Isabel Street and will have no impact upon the appearance of the items

within the streetscape of Isabel Street.”

Our Consultant Heritage Adviser has reviewed the proposal and the Heritage Impact Statement and has advised that he is satisfied with the design of the proposed development and that the significance of adjoining heritage items will not be detrimentally impacted on.

• State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) 1 Clause 14 (1) of Canterbury Local Environmental Plan 178 – Belmore/Lakemba Precinct restricts the floor space ratio of non-residential development in a residential 2(a) zone to a maximum of 0.5:1. The proposed development has a floor space ratio of 0.59:1. The applicant has submitted an objection under State Environmental Planning Policy 1 – Development Standards and has submitted the following points in support of the proposal: - The sites at 31-33 Isabel and 32-34 Etela Street, Belmore had an FSR of

0.76:1 prior to the demolition of the two dwelling houses at 32 & 34 Etela Street. The demolition of the dwellings and the proposed works to the church represent a reduction in the overall gross floor area of 417m2;

- The subject site has an area of 2491m2 and the proposal provides for a gross floor area of 1467m2 resulting in an FSR of 0.59:1, which exceeds Council’s requirements;

- Although the proposal represents a non-compliance with the FSR control, it should be noted that this application seeks a reduction in overall floor space for the site and a considerable portion of the existing floor space is located below ground level;



Page 13

- The proposal is unlikely to adversely affect the surrounding properties in terms of loss of privacy, amenity or access to natural light. In the circumstances of the particular case, the SEPP 1 Objection for the floor space control is considered to be well founded. The proposal is considered to be consistent with the Residential 2(a) objectives and the assumed objectives for the FSR control;

- Compliance with Council’s development standard for FSR is considered to be unreasonable and unnecessary given that the existing density of the subject site exceeds Council’s FSR controls and this application seeks an overall reduction in gross floor area. Furthermore, the area of non-compliance is below ground level. The proposal will provide a well designed and appropriate entrance to the Church facility;

- Despite the non-compliance with the FSR control, it is unlikely to create a significant impact on the streetscape in terms of bulk and scale and is unlikely to result in any adverse impact on surrounding properties in terms of overshadowing or loss of privacy; and

- The non-compliance with the FSR standard is considered unlikely to have any significant adverse effect on adjoining or surrounding properties. Strict compliance with the standard would unnecessarily complicate orderly and economic development of the land in accordance with the intentions of the zoning and the objectives of the Act.

In giving consideration to the applicant’s SEPP 1 Objection guidance is taken from the judgement handed down from Lloyd J in Winten v North Sydney [2001] NSW LEC 46 (6 April 2001). This case set out a five step test for assessing SEPP 1 Objections, these being: 1. Is the planning control in question a development standard? 2. What is the underlying object or purpose of the standard?

3. Is compliance with the development standard consistent with the aims of the policy (ie. CLEP 178) and in particular, does compliance with development standard tend to hinder the attainment of the objects specified in Section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (EPAA)?

4. Is compliance with the development standard unreasonable or unnecessary? 5. Is the objection well founded?

In answering these five questions, the following information is provided: 1. The control in question (found under Clause 14(2) of CLEP 178 – Floor

space ratios for non-residential development in a residential zone) is a development standard.

2. CLEP 178 does not provide specific objectives for this development

standard, but it is assumed that the underlying objective is to control the density of a development. There is an overall objective of the Residential 2(a) zone in CLEP 178 which is to achieve development that does not detrimentally affect the residential character or amenity of the area.



Page 14

3. It is considered that the proposal is consistent with the aims of CLEP 178. It is also considered that the proposal meets the objectives of Section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the EPAA, which relate to promoting the proper management of land and the orderly and economic use of land. The proposal represents an appropriate use of the site which already partly operates as a place of worship, with another part of the site having approval for a kindergarten school (which is now proposed to be relocated as part of the subject proposal). The proposal also represents orderly and economic use of the land. It is considered that the use will be orderly, with the playground use providing additional play areas for school students, and on days where it will be used as an overflow carpark, it will provide much needed off street car parking spaces for persons attending Church services. The proposal has been assessed against the requirements of Development Control Plan 9 - Non Residential Buildings Adjoining Residential Zones and has been found to be compliant in terms of building height planes (except for a minor variation of an existing garage building), landscaping and overshadowing, thereby achieving the assumed objective of the CLEP 178 control.

4. It is considered that strict compliance with this development standard is

unreasonable and unnecessary as the total floor space has in fact been reduced from the previous situation whereby the subject consolidated lot (previously being 4 separate lots) accommodated for two dwelling houses, and the Church. Where previously the combined FSR was 0.76:1, it is now proposed to be reduced to 0.59:1.

5. The reason for the objection to permit a variation to the floor space ratio is

well founded. It is considered that the proposed development achieves the assumed objectives of the development standard.

Given the above, we support the applicant’s SEPP 1 Objection and the proposed variation to our floor space ratio control.

• Development Control Plan 9 – Non-Residential Buildings Adjoining

Residential Zones

DCP 9 applies to non-residential developments that adjoin residential zones and aims to minimise the impacts which non-residential buildings have on adjoining residential properties. The DCP sets out three design requirements which are relevant to this proposal, namely: - The proposed development is contained within the Building Height Plane,

which is a plane projected at a 45º angle measured, extending from 1.8 metres above natural ground level at the boundary of any adjoining residential zone.;

- The site be landscaped to Councils satisfaction; and - Adequate solar access to adjoining sites is maintained.



Page 15

In regard to the above: 1. The applicant has demonstrated that the proposed acoustic screen complies

with the Building Height Plane control when applied along the side boundary which adjoins the property at 36 Etela Street. It is noted however, that the eaves of the existing garage building (which is proposed to be converted to an external kitchen) are slightly in breach of the building height plane control. This breach is considered acceptable given that it is an existing building and that the breach is only approximately 200mm.

2. The proposed landscape plan is satisfactory. Our Landscape Architect has

reviewed the details provided with the application and has no objection subject to the imposition of certain conditions.

3. No significant shadowing impacts from the proposed translucent acoustic

screen. Solar access is adequately maintained for adjoining sites. The proposal therefore satisfies the design requirements of DCP 9.

• Development Control Plan 20 – Car Parking Code The proposed development is not designed to increase the capacity of people to be accommodated in the Church, nor for students to be accommodated in the School. Currently, the main School building is provided with a basement carpark and provides a total of 14 off street car parking spaces as approved under Development Consent DA-947/2005 (as modified). The main component of the proposed development, being to incorporate a playground area to the north of the Church building, does not generate the need to provide any additional off street car parking. The new playground aims to distribute students over a larger area with students from Year 5 and Year 6 using the new playground, and students from Year K to Year 4 using the existing play areas within the School. The proposal involves using the playground area as an overflow carpark between the hours of 7am and 6pm on Saturdays, and between the hours of 8am and 6pm on Sundays and Public Holidays. Vehicular entry to the overflow carpark is from Etela Street, and exit is from Cecilia Street. The overflow carpark accommodates for the parking of a total of 27 vehicles. Overall it is considered that the proposal is satisfactory from a parking perspective as it does not generate the need for additional parking demand. The overflow carpark will provide 27 off street car parking spaces and will hence reduce the need to rely on street parking within the local area.



Page 16

• Development Control Plan 29 – Crime Prevention Through Environmental

Design

A proposal is required to have regard to the provisions contained within DCP 29 ensuring that the design of the development promotes community safety and security whilst discouraging the incidence or introduction of anti-social behaviour. Having regard to the Crime Prevention through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles contained in DCP 29, namely natural surveillance, access control and ownership the following comments are offered by the applicant: - Transparent metal louvred fencing provided along the Cecilia Street

frontage; - The Etela Street fencing is fully transparent and is setback from the street; - The School overlooks the playground and provides natural surveillance of

the surrounds; - Permanent low level night illumination will be provided to the site, this will

be complimented with security flood lights triggered by motion detectors; - Low level landscaping along Etela Street frontage; - Security screens, gates and locks will be installed where required; - All rendered walls will be coated with Cromnelin barricade removable

graffiti barrier. Graffiti removal will form part of the ongoing maintenance program for the church, playground and the school;

- The playground faces onto Cecilia Street and be easily viewed from the street; and

- Pathways within the site are well defined and follow pedestrian desired lines.

In line with the principles of CPTED, the applicant has demonstrated that the proposed development will provide adequate natural surveillance, good access control measures and physical ways to express ownership. It is therefore considered that the proposal satisfies the relevant provisions contained within DCP 29.

Other Consideration

• Acoustics Part of the proposal incorporates the construction of a 6 metre high acoustic screen made of translucent material. It is proposed to be located 5 metres from the boundary adjoining 36 Etela Street. It aims to provide an acoustic barrier between the proposed outdoor school playground and the adjoining property at 36 Etela Street. The applicant’s acoustic consultant, Noise and Sound Services, provides the following statement in regard to the proposed acoustic screen:



Page 17

“We confirm that this proposed acoustic barrier, in conjunction with the

proposed 5 metre setback will provide sufficient acoustic separation to the

neighbour to the west (36 Etela Street) to meet the noise requirements of

the NSW Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 (POEO Act)

and the NSW Government’s Industrial Noise Policy.”

Our Environmental Health Officer has reviewed the development application and supporting documentation and raises no concern in regard to the potential noise impacts of the proposal.

• Disability Access Committee

Our Disability Access Committee has reviewed the proposed development and advised they have no objection to the development, provided a number of conditions are implemented to ensure that adequate facilities and access is maintained throughout the site. The recommendation contains conditions to this effect, should consent be granted.

• Heritage

As stated in the report above, part of the subject development site adjoins the property located at 35 Isabel Street which, along with the properties at 37 and 39 Isabel, is identified within Canterbury Local Environmental Plan 178 – Belmore/Lakemba precinct as being a heritage item. Accordingly, the development application was supported by a Heritage Impact Statement. Our Consultant Heritage Adviser has reviewed the proposal and the Heritage Impact Statement and has advised that is satisfied with the design of the proposed development and that the significance of adjoining heritage items will not be detrimentally impacted on.

• Traffic Our Traffic Engineer has reviewed the overall proposal and all supporting documentation and is satisfied with the proposed driveway locations off Cecilia Street and Etela Street, and is further satisfied that the proposed development will not be of significant impact to the local road network.

• Landscaping Our Landscape Architect has assessed the Landscape Plans and is generally satisfied with the landscaping proposal, and has recommended relevant landscaping conditions to be imposed on any development consent issued.

Notification

The proposal was notified on three separate occasions due to varying changes in the proposed development design throughout the assessment process.



Page 18

In response to the first notification period which involved a proposal which differed from the subject proposal by having an awning on part of the proposed playground, and an amenities block adjacent to the boundary adjoining the property at 36 Etela Street, we received a petition signed by 58 households, two individual letters, one of which is from the Belmore Residents Action Group, and 21 pro-forma letters. All submissions received objected to the proposed development. In response to the second notification period which involved a proposal which differed from the subject proposal by having a fabric shade structure over the playground and no acoustic treatment, we received one individual letter from the Belmore Residents Action Group and 25 pro-forma letters objecting to the proposal. In response to the third and last notification period which involved the subject proposal as it is, we received three individual letters, one of which is from the Belmore Residents Action Group, and 28 pro-forma letters objecting to the proposal. The issues raised in the submissions and our responses to those issues are provided below. It is noted that some issues raised in submissions in response to the first and second notification are no longer relevant and are not discussed below (such as the bulky design of the awning and the proximity of amenities block to the residents of 36 Etela Street).

• The school is in need of a soft landscaped playground, not an asphalted

concrete of hard terrain

Comment: The proposed playground is proposed to be constructed of concrete and bitumen. There are no specific requirements to enforce that it is to be grassed. The applicant states that grass and other forms of soft landscape are a not a suitable surface for the proposed use, as soft landscaping would quickly deteriorate under heavy foot traffic. Further, as this playground area is proposed to be used as an overflow carpark, it would be unsuitable to have it grassed.

• This area will be used as a future carpark and event area for the Church and

their members

Comment: The proposed playground area is proposed to be used as an overflow carpark to accommodate the parking of 27 vehicles, between the hours of 7am and 6pm on Saturdays, and between the hours of 8am and 6pm on Sundays and Public Holidays. Vehicular entry to the overflow carpark is from Etela Street, and exit is from Cecilia Street. If this application is approved, a condition should be imposed to restrict the carpark hours to those stated above. A further condition should be imposed to ensure that the site is not to be used for any other purpose than a children’s playground or for car parking.



Page 19

• The development proposal does not provide for adequate strategies to control

noise

Comment: As previously stated, part of the proposal incorporates the construction of a 6 metre high acoustic screen made of translucent material. It is proposed to be located 5 metres from the boundary adjoining 36 Etela Street. It aims to provide an acoustic barrier between the proposed outdoor school playground and the adjoining property at 36 Etela Street. The applicant provides an Acoustical Assessment in support of the proposal which has been reviewed by our Environmental Health Officer. The proposal is considered satisfactory from an acoustic perspective with no concern raised in regard to the potential noise impacts of the proposal.

• The setback and height of the Etela Street front fencing is not suitable and not

compatible with fencing of neighbouring properties

Comment: It is proposed to use transparent metal louvers/mesh fencing along Etela Street. However, we prefer that it is changed to palisade style fencing as it is more visually appealing and is more suited to the proposed use of the site. In this regard, we recommend that should development consent be issued, then a condition be imposed to require fencing along Etela Street frontage to be of palisade style. This fencing will vary in height from 1.8-3 metres, and is setback 3.7 metres from the front boundary of the subject site.

• The landscaping treatment proposed for the subject site is inadequate. Comment: The landscaping proposal includes the planting of 23 Water Gums street trees (with a mature height of 5 metres) along Cecilia Street. It is also proposed to retain two existing street trees along Etela Street, and plant six Trident Maple trees (with a 6 metre mature height) on the subject site, along the Etela Street frontage. Four Chinese elm trees (with a mature height of 20 metres) are proposed to be planted adjacent to the boundary fence adjoining 36 Etela Street. Additional smaller shrub species such as Gardenia and Snowball Trees are proposed on the subject site. Further, the proposal involves the removal of two Vonifer Hedges, a Loquat and a New Zealnd Xmas Tree from the subject site. Our Landscape Architect has assessed the Landscape Plans and is generally satisfied with the landscaping proposal, and has recommended relevant landscaping conditions to be imposed on any development consent issued.



Page 20

• Concern in regard to converting a domestic garage into a commercial kitchen.

Clause 9.3 of Council’s Code does not allow kitchen facilities in Class 10A

buildings.

Comment: Our Building Officer has assessed the proposal against the relevant requirements of the Building Code of Australia and has found it to be satisfactory subject to the imposition of certain conditions. It is noted that as this structure would no longer be associated with a dwelling house, it would no longer be classified as a Class 10A building. The construction and outfitting of the external kitchen is required to be in accordance with the Australian New Zealand Food Standards Code and Council's Food Premises Code (wherever any articles of food or drink are to be sold). A condition of consent to this effect should be imposed.

• Concern in regard to the proposed hours of operation of carpark and

playground? What steps are proposed to ensure no car hooning in carpark

late at night and on weekends? The parking layout should include landscaped

gardens in such a way that antisocial driving and parking is prevented.

Comment: The playground is proposed to be used in conjunction with school activities, primarily during the school hours of between 8am and 3pm. However, there will be some pre-school and after school activities which will also take place in the playground between the hours of 7am and 7pm on weekdays.

The overflow carpark is proposed to be used between the hours of 7am and 6pm on Saturdays, and between the hours of 8am and 6pm on Sundays and Public Holidays. Any physical measures (such as landscaped gardens) put in place to address potential anti social driving and parking would interfere with the use of the site as a playground by students on school days. It is recommended that a condition of consent should be imposed requiring the closure of entry gates outside the above hours to secure the site from any anti social uses.

• Concern that an application to close Cecilia Street will soon follow. This is

our road and any attempt to take it over, sell it, or give it away will be resisted

fiercely

Comment: This development application does not involve the closure of Cecilia Street. There is no application for such proposal.



Page 21

• Concern in regard to lighting in the playground area at night

Comment: It is recommended that the following condition be imposed in regard to the issue of lighting: Any lighting on the site shall be designed so as not to cause nuisance to other residences in the area or to motorists on nearby roads and to ensure no adverse impact on the amenity of the surrounding area by light overspill. All lighting shall comply with the Australian Standard 4282-1997 Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting.

• Clarification is sought on the process of consolidation (has the applicant

applied for consolidations? must the process be completed before DA can

proceed?)

Comment: The proposal involves the consolidation of 31-33 Isabel Street, and 32-34 Etela Street into one lot. The proposed lot is 2491m2 in area. If this application is approved, a condition of consent is to be imposed requiring the applicant to lodge a plan of consolidation with the Land and Property Information NSW prior to the release of the Occupation Certificate or occupation of the building.

• Clarification is sought on how the floor space ratio calculated? Comment: The floor space ratio is calculated by using the total floor area of the Church building (as proposed) and the total floor area of the structures forming part of this application. The total floor area is measured to be 1467m2. This is then used against the total site area of the proposed consolidated lot, being 2491m2. This results in the total floor space of the proposed development on the newly consolidated lot to be 0.59:1.

• We disagree with the statements in the SEE that parts of the proposal are the

direct result of community consultation (in Part 3.1) and that the overflow

carpark is supported by the local community (in Part 5.4.2)

Comment: The statement made in the SEE has no influence on the assessment carried out on this development application. The development application has been assessed on its merits.



Page 22

• The existing primary school is approved to accommodate 360 students and a

building at a separate site (32 Etela Street) is approved to accommodate 60

kindergarten children. This building has not been built. Why are

kindergarten children currently occupying the school building without

approval. How is the school capacity increased to 420?

Comment: As stated earlier in the report, the previous development consent was based on the whole School site, which is made up of three separate properties (being 35 Isabel Street, 32 Etela Street and 13-17 Cecilia Street) having a total student number of 450 – a total of 360 students between Year 1 and Year 6, 60 students in Kindergarten and 30 students at pre-school (at 35 Isabel Street). This number of students does not change with the subject proposal, but the physical distribution of students does with all the primary School classes (Kindergarten to Year 6) now taking place at the main School building at 13-17 Cecilia Street. No development consent is required to be sought for this change in the physical distribution across the School site.

• What are the details of the fencing along the side which adjoins 36 Etela

Street?

Comment: A 1.8 metre concrete fence is proposed to be constructed along the side boundary adjoining 36 Etela Street. All holes and gaps within the fence will be acoustically treated. This fence will run across the whole length of the boundary, except for the front 3.7 metres.

• The SEE prepared by GSA states that the school has recognised a need for

additional recreational facilities within the school’s boundaries. The proposed

playground is proposed to be located on the properties at 32 and 34 Etela

Street which are not within the school boundaries.

Comment: As previously stated in this report, the whole School site, is currently made up of three separate properties. The proposed playground is considered to be located on the School site. It aims to provide the school with additional play areas for students, thereby improving the overall facilities provided for the students.

• How will the Council propose to ensure that the Church will employ/appoint a

person to manage the carpark when in use (as proposed by the applicant in

Part 3.2.4 of SEE)

Comment: If this application is approved, the following condition of consent should be imposed:



Page 23

- The Church to employ/appoint a person to manage the carpark area when in use. This person must marshal the vehicles to park in the spaces as shown in the approved plan.

• Absence of declaration of political donations – no Disclosure Statement has

been submitted from either the architect or developer despite several

thousand dollars of reportable political donations being made by them to

political parties.

Comment: We have received two Political Donations and Gifts Disclosure Statements.

• Why is there a need for additional toilets? There are already toilets inside the

Church hall that the children can use.

Comment: The proposed toilets are provided as additional facilities on the subject site.

• The proposed 6 metre acoustic screen is too high. It should be no more than 4

metres in height and should commence level with adjoining building line.

Comment: The proposed design and location of the translucent acoustic screen is considered to be satisfactory given that it is designed to act as a sound barrier for neighbouring residential properties. This height has been confirmed by the acoustic engineer as being appropriate to control any noise impacts.

• The zincalume awning is too high and covers a great area. Concern is raised

that this covered area will be used for barbeques where large numbers of

people can gather, increasing the amount of noise and disturbance.

Comment: The proposed zincalume awning is proposed to mainly cover the amenities block and store area. As such, the issue of concern that the area below would be used for the congregation of people is unfounded. If this application is approved, the following condition of consent should be imposed to ensure that the site is used for its intended purposes: - The site is not to be used for any other purpose than a children’s

playground or for a carpark.

• The Cecilia Street ‘mesh’ fencing is unattractive and why the resistance to

palisade style fencing which surrounds every other school. Is it because the

developer intends to attempt to alienate adjoining public land and take it over

for exclusive use?



Page 24

Comment: We prefer that the fencing material be changed, and as such, we recommend that should development consent be issued, then a condition is to be imposed requiring the fencing along Cecilia Street boundary to be of palisade style. Further, as previously stated, this development application does not involve the closure of Cecilia Street. There is no application for such proposal.

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 the report demonstrates, the proposal involves a variation to our FSR development standard within Clause 14(1) of CLEP 178. The applicant provides a SEPP 1 Objection in regard to this variation, which has been considered and accepted to be worthy of support. The proposal involves the provision of a playground for use by school students, which improves the overall recreational facilities provided for the student community. It is further proposed to use this area as an overflow carpark associated with the Church use. This will be an improvement on the current situation and will reduce the need to rely on street parking within the local area. Accordingly it is recommended that the application be approved.

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT Development Application DA-727/2008 for the consolidation of 31-33 Isabel Street and 32-34 Etela Street into one lot, using the northern part of the lot as a playground with an acoustic screen, associated landscaping and fencing, using this area as an overflow carpark during non-school hours, and carrying out of alterations and additions to the Church building including the construction of an external amenities building attached to the rear wall of the Church building, new rear entry to the Church hall, disabled access lift, new fire door, storage areas, and an external kitchen, be APPROVED subject to the following conditions: 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:

• Consolidation of the Lots

• Protection from Termites

• Structural Engineering Plan

• Building Specifications

• Fire Safety Schedule (Existing and Proposed)

• Details of natural ventilation to the new amenities block and kitchen in accordance with Part F4.5 or F4.6 of BCA

• Mechanical Ventilation 1.2. Payment of the Long Service Leave Levy to the Long Service Leave

Corporation or to Council.



Page 25

1.3. Payment to Council of: Kerb and Gutter Damage Deposit $1100.00 Certificate Registration Fee $30.00 Long Service Levy $700.00

1.4. If you appoint Council as your Principal Certifying Authority, the following fees are payable: Construction Certificate Application Fee $817.50 Inspection Fee $450.00 Occupation Certificate Fee $85.00

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: When the items in this condition are provided and have been assessed as satisfactory, your Construction Certificate will be posted to you. Note 3: If you appoint a Principal Certifying Authority other than Council, the fees shown in this item do not apply, however other fees will apply. Note 4: All fees referred to above are subject to change. You need to refer to our website or contact our Customer Services 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).

SITE SIGNAGE

3. A sign shall be erected at all times on your building site in a prominent position stating the following: 3.1. The name, address and telephone number(s) of the principal certifying

authority for the work, and 3.2. 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

3.3. That unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited. DEMOLITION

4. 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 (Ph. 9370 5099 – Asbestos Hotline).

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



Page 26

(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 NSW Community LEAD Advisory Service on 9716 0132 or 1800 626086 (freecall)

(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.



Page 27

GENERAL

5. The development being carried out in accordance with the plans, specifications and details set out in the table below except where amended by the conditions specified in this Notice: Drawing No. Drawing Title Prepared by Received by

Council on

DA-1101 Issue C Floor & Roof Plans Candalepas Associates 29 May 2009

DA-1102 Issue C Carpark Plan Candalepas Associates 29 May 2009

DA-1201 Issue C Sections Candalepas Associates 29 May 2009

DA-1301 Issue C Street Elevations Candalepas Associates 29 May 2009

DA-1801 Kitchen Detail Plan Candalepas Associates 8 May 2009

6. The fencing along Cecilia Street and Etela Street frontages is to be of palisade style, in the same locations and of the same height shown on the relevant architectural plans.

7. The playground is to be used only in conjunction with school activities, between the hours of 7am and 7pm on weekdays.

8. The overflow carpark is to be used between the hours of 7am and 6pm on Saturdays, and between the hours of 8am and 6pm on Sundays and Public Holidays.

9. Entry gates into the playground/carpark area should be closed outside the above hours of use.

10. The Church to employ/appoint a person to manage the carpark area when in use. This person must marshal the vehicles to park in the spaces as shown in the approved plan

11. The finishes of all structures and buildings are to be maintained at all times, with any graffiti or vandalism immediately removed/repaired.

12. The playground site is not to be used for any other purpose than for a children’s playground or for car parking in accordance with the terms of this consent.

13. The maximum number of children permitted to use the playground at any one time is limited to 120.

14. Any lighting on the site shall be designed so as not to cause nuisance to other residences in the area or to motorists on nearby roads and to ensure no adverse impact on the amenity of the surrounding area by light overspill. All lighting shall comply with the Australian Standard 4282-1997 Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting.

15. Signs must be painted on stormwater drains indicating that they are not to take liquid or solid waste.

16. Construction/outfitting of the premises in accordance with the Australian New Zealand Food Standards Code and Council's Food Premises Code wherever any articles of food or drink are to be sold. A construction certificate is required for this work prior to construction.

17. All putrescible waste must be stored in approved, lidded, flyproof containers. Proper arrangements such as waste paper bales and stands are to be provided for any waste paper or cardboard.

18. A sufficient number of approved garbage receptacles must be provided on the premises for the storage of garbage and trade waste. Such receptacles are to be fitted with close fitting and flyproof lids.

19. Renewal or provision of fencing, attributable to the proposed development shall be the responsibility of the developer.



Page 28

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

21. All building operations for the erection or alteration of new buildings must be 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.

22. The Development Consent hereby granted will automatically lapse and become void two years after the consent date pursuant to Section 95(2) of the Act unless the development has physically commenced within that time.

23. All building construction work must comply with the Building Code of Australia. 24. 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.

25. The capacity and effectiveness of erosion and sediment control devices must be maintained at all times.

26. The construction site must have soil and water management controls implemented as described in Specifications S1 and S2 of Council’s Stormwater Management Manual.

27. Concrete pumping contractors must not allow the discharge of waste concrete to the stormwater system. Waste concrete must be collected and disposed of on-site.

28. Drains, gutters, roadways and accessways must be maintained free of soil, clay and sediment. Where required, gutters and roadways must be swept regularly to maintain them free from sediment. Do not hose down.

29. 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. 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).

30. Toilet facilities shall 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.

ACOUSTICS

31. A full acoustic compliance check is to be undertaken within 60 days after the completion of works on site. The acoustic compliance is to be undertaken by a suitably qualified acoustic consultant who has not been previously involved with the proposal.

32. Mechanical plant associated with the proposed kitchen and toilet facilities are not to operate between the hours of 10pm and 7am Monday to Saturday and 10pm to 8am Sundays and public Holidays.

33. The proposed use of the premises and/or machinery equipment installed, must not create noise so as to interfere with the amenity of the neighbourhood. If a noise nuisance occurs, the person in control of the premises must arrange for an acoustic investigation to be carried out (by an accredited Acoustic Engineer), obtain Principal Certifying Authority concurrence for the recommendations of the Consultant, and implement those recommendations so as to reduce the noise levels to the ambient noise level.



Page 29

LANDSCAPING

34. Landscaping must be completed according to the submitted landscape plan (drawn by Taylor Brammer Landscape Architects, and received by Council on 12th June 2009) and with AUS-SPEC Specification 0257-Landscape-Roadways and Street Trees, except where amended by the conditions of consent. The landscaping is to be maintained at all times to Council’s satisfaction.

DISABILITY ACCESS

35. Access is to be provided to the amenities building for people with disabilities. Any step, lip or significant level change should be addressed by provision of a ramp that complies with AS 1428.1 Clause 7 for width and gradient.

36. Accessible toilet facilities provided for the development must comply with the requirements of AS1428.1 Clause 10 for available circulation space within the cubicle. Grabrails should be provided and positioned in accordance with this standard. There should be a clearance of at least 1000mm between the WC pan and washbasin to ensure ease of use for a person who uses a wheelchair.

HYDRAULICS

37. That the stormwater system be constructed in accordance with the plans, specifications and details received by Council on 17th December 2008; hydraulic plan number HDA301/ P1 & HDA302/ P1, dated Nov 2008 prepared Whipps – Wood Consulting.

38. All downpipes, pits and drainage pipes shall be installed to ensure that stormwater is conveyed from the site and into Council’s stormwater system in accordance with AUS-SPEC Specification D5 “Stormwater Drainage Design”, AS/NZS3500.3 and Council’s Stormwater Management Manual - Specification 9 “A Guide for Stormwater Drainage Design”.

39. A Works-as-Executed plan must be submitted at the completion of the work to the Principal Certifying Authority PCA and Canterbury City Council, if Council is not the PCA, indicating all the site drainage and the OSD system. The plan shall be prepared by a registered surveyor or an engineer. The plan shall record all the relevant design levels and dimensions of the OSD system. Certification from an accredited engineer must be provided to certify that all work has been carried out in accordance with the approved plans and relevant codes and standards.

40. An appropriate instrument must be registered on the title of the property, concerning the presence and ongoing operation of the OSD system as specified in appendix 7.5 of Council’s Stormwater Management Manual – Specification 9.

41. A full width heavy duty vehicular crossing shall be provided at each vehicular entrance to the site, with a maximum width of 4 metres at the boundary line. This work to be carried out by Council or an approved contractor, at the applicant’s cost. The work is to be carried out in accordance with Council’s “Specification for the Construction by Private Contractors of: a) Vehicle Crossings, b) Concrete Footpath, c) Concrete Kerb & Gutter”.

42. The applicant to arrange with the relevant public utility authority the alteration or removal of any affected services in connection with the development. Any such work being carried out at the applicant’s cost.

43. The levels of the street alignment are to be obtained by payment of the appropriate fee to Council. These levels are to be incorporated into the designs of the internal pavements, carparks, landscaping and stormwater drainage. Evidence must be provided that these levels have been adopted in the design. As a site inspection



Page 30

and survey by Council is required to obtain the necessary information, payment is required at least 14 days prior to the levels being required.

44. Driveways, parking and service areas are to be constructed or repaired in accordance with the appropriate AUS-SPEC #1 Specifications: C242-Flexible Pavements; C245-Asphaltic Concrete; C247-Mass Concrete Subbase; C248-Plain or Reinforced Concrete Base; C254-Segmental Paving; C255-Bituminous Microsurfacing.

45. A qualified practicing Civil Engineer shall design the pavements and certify that all driveways, parking and service areas have been constructed in accordance with the approved specifications. Design to be carried out in accordance with AUS-SPEC #1 Specification D2-Pavement Design. Construction is to be carried out in accordance with appropriate AUS-SPEC #1 Specifications: C242-Flexible Pavements; C245-Asphaltic Concrete; C247-Mass Concrete Subbase; C248-Plain or Reinforced Concrete Base; C254-Segmental Paving; C255-Bituminous Microsurfacing.

46. Full width grated drains being provided across each vehicular entrance/exit to the site where internal areas drain towards the street, and be connected to the street drainage system in accordance with Clause 4 of Council’s Stormwater Management Manual - Specification 9 “A Guide for Stormwater Drainage Design”.

47. All redundant vehicular crossings shall be replaced with kerb and the footpath reserve made good by Council or an approved contractor, at the applicant’s cost. The work is to be carried out in accordance with Council’s “Specification for the Construction by Private Contractors of: a) Vehicle Crossings, b) Concrete Footpath, c) Concrete Kerb & Gutter”.

48. The reconstruction of the kerb and gutter along areas of the site fronting Etela Street & Cecilia Street is required. Work to be carried out by Council or an approved contractor, at the applicant’s cost. The work is to be carried out in accordance with Council’s “Specification for the Construction by Private Contractors of: a) Vehicle Crossings, b) Concrete Footpath, c) Concrete Kerb & Gutter”.

49. The reconstruction of concrete footpath paving and associated works along areas of the site fronting Etela Street & Cecilia Street is required. Work being carried out by Council or an approved contractor, at the applicant’s cost. The work is to be carried out in accordance with Council’s “Specification for the Construction by Private Contractors of: a) Vehicle Crossings, b) Concrete Footpath, c) Concrete Kerb & Gutter”.

SYDNEY WATER REQUIREMENTS

50. 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.



Page 31

A copy of Sydney Water’s Notice of Requirements must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the Construction Certificate being issued.

51. 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.

CONSOLIDATION

52. The sites of 31-33 Isabel Street and 32-34 Etela Street Belmore, being consolidated into one allotment. The plan of consolidation being lodged and registered with the Land and Property Information NSW prior to the release of the Occupation Certificate or occupation of the building.

CRITICAL INSPECTIONS

53. 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): 53.1. at the commencement of the building work, and 53.2. prior to covering any stormwater drainage connections, and 53.3. after the building work has been completed and prior to any occupation

certificate being issued in relation to the building. ADDITIONAL INSPECTIONS

54. 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.

COMPLETION OF DEVELOPMENT

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

WE ALSO ADVISE: 56. This application has been assessed in accordance with the Building Code of

Australia. 57. Where Council is appointed as the Principal Certifying Authority, you will be

required to submit Compliance Certificates in respect of the following:

• Structural Engineering Work

• Air Handling Systems

• Protection from Termites

• Schedule of Essential Fire Safety Services 58. Your attention is directed to the following construction requirements of the

Building Code of Australia: 58.1. Exit doorways (except for any class 9 building/portion) being a minimum

clear width of 750mm and height of 1980mm. Exit doors shall swing in the direction of egress unless subject to a concession under BCA Clause D2.20. Any sliding exit doors must be able to be opened manually under a force of



Page 32

not more than 110 Newton, and power operated doors must comply with BCA Clause D2.19. Where necessary, bollards or other barriers shall be installed outside of exit doors to prevent obstruction by vehicles/goods or the like; paths of travel between exits leading to open space and the roadway must have unobstructed widths throughout not less than either the minimum width of the required exit or 1 metre, whichever is the greater; and where an exit discharging to open space is at a different level than the public road to which it is connected, the path of travel to the road must comply with BCA Clause D1.10.

59. The relevant Council Manuals and AUS-SPEC specifications referred to are available from Council for a fee.

60. Private contractors shall submit an application and pay an inspection fee to Council seven days prior to commencement of any works on the footpath or roadway. No work shall be carried out without Council approval.

61. The applicant is to ensure that landscaping and hydraulic plans are co-ordinated. Hydraulic details such as pits, stormwater lines, detention tanks and retaining walls are to be shown on the Landscape Plan as these can affect layout of garden beds and plantings.

62. Any works to be carried out by Council at the applicant’s cost need to be applied for in advance.

63. 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.

64. In granting this approval, we have considered the statutory requirements, design, materials and architectural features of the building. No variation to the approved design and external appearance of the building (including colour of materials) will be permitted without our approval.

65. 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.

66. If you are not satisfied with this determination, you may: 66.1. 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 within 12 months of the date of this Notice of Determination and be accompanied by the relevant fee; or

66.2. Appeal to the Land and Environment Court within 12 months after the date on which you receive this Notice of Determination, under Section 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. (Section 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 does not apply to the determination of a development application for State significant development or local designated development that has been the subject of a Commission of Inquiry.)

If you need more information, please contact Rita Nakhle, in City Planning on 9789-9449 between 9.00am and 11.00am, Monday to Friday.


Page 33

EAST WARD


CLISSOLD PARADE): ALTERATIONS TO BUILDING AND

USE AS 'MEN'S SHED' WITH ASSOCIATED PARKING

FILE NO: 73/161D


Ward: EAST

D/A No: DA-227/2009

Applicant:

Owner:

Canterbury City Community Centre

Canterbury City Council

Zoning: General Business 3(a) - Canterbury Local

Environmental Plan 148 – Campsie Precinct

Application Date: 14 May 2009

Summary:

• The application seeks to undertake alterations to an existing single storey building and use this building as a men’s shed and for parking associated with the City of Canterbury Community Centre.

• The subject site is zoned General Business 3(a) under the provisions of the Canterbury Local Environmental Plan 148 – Campsie Precinct. The proposed development is permissible subject to Council’s consent.

• The proposal has been assessed against our relevant codes and policies and found to generally comply with our requirements.

• The proposal was notified in accordance with our Notification Policy and no submissions were received.



This report has no implication for the Budget. The assessment of the application supports our City Plan long term goal of a strong community.

Report:

Background

• On 13 April 1984 we issued Development Consent 1427/1984 for the use of the outbuilding located at the rear of the shop fronting Clissold Parade for undertaking gas bath and heater renovation and gas lamp fabrication operations.

• On 15 May 1986 we issued Development Consent 2598/1986 for the use of the subject building at the site for the wholesale and retail sale of live and frozen marine products.


161-163 BEAMISH STREET, CAMPSIE (ALSO KNOWN AS 109 CLISSOLD PARADE): ALTERATIONS TO BUILDING AND USE AS ‘MEN’S SHED’ WITH ASSOCIATED PARKING (CONT.)

Page 34

• On 29 May 1986 we issued Development Consent 2638/1986 for the use of the ground floor of the building fronting Beamish Street as a furniture showroom and associated storage of furniture in the buildings behind the building fronting Beamish Street. The first floor of the building fronting Beamish Street continued being used as a residence. Condition 8 of this consent which related to the hours of operation was later modified on 2 July 1986 under application number 2638/1986/A.

• On 20 November 1986 we issued Development Consent 2929/1986 for the use of the ground floor of the building fronting Beamish Street as a restaurant.

• On 13 August 1987 we issued Development Consent 3239/1987 for the use of the building behind the restaurant for newspaper publishing and a travel agency.

• On 8 June 1989 Council recommended that the Canterbury Theatre Guild use the subject building for the storage of theatre props.

Site Analysis

The site is located on the eastern side of Beamish Street between Campsie Street and Clissold Parade. The site is an irregular L-shaped lot and subsequently has two frontages, a frontage to Beamish Street and a frontage to Clissold Parade, which is located between the properties commonly known as 107 Clissold Parade to the east and 113 Clissold Parade to the west (refer to Figure 1). The two storey building which has a frontage to Beamish Street is currently used as a restaurant at ground level and a residence at first floor level. The single storey building located directly to the rear of this building is used for newspaper publishing. The subject building is single storey and has a frontage to Clissold Parade and is currently vacant. The address of the subject building is commonly referred to as 109 Clissold Parade, Campsie, and will be referred to as such throughout this report. It is noted that this is however not the legal address of this building. Surrounding development includes a mixture of commercial and residential uses.



Page 35

Figure 1

Proposal

The subject Development Application seeks consent to undertake alterations to the existing single storey building that fronts Clissold Parade, use the building as a men’s shed and use the proposed parking area within the building for the overnight parking of two vehicles associated with the City of Canterbury Community Centre. The alterations proposed for the building fronting Clissold Parade include the installation of disabled toilet facilities, a kitchen, the removal of a roller shutter on the southern elevation and the creation of a new doorway, the replacement of the existing ‘garage’ roller shutter on the southern elevation with a new roller door, the replacement of all windows along the western and northern elevation with fire-rated glass blocks, the replacement of the buildings roof with metal and polycarbonate roof sheeting, the replacement of the rear awning with a new metal roof and the replacement of three air vents located on the roof of the building. The proposed development does not involve any increase in floor space. The intention of the men’s shed is to provide a venue to allow for men to meet and conduct woodwork activities. The men’s shed will operate between 10:00am and 3:30pm Monday to Friday. It is noted that on occasion the men’s shed will operate on Saturdays for open days. It is anticipated that a total of 10 men will meet at the site on a daily basis. One employee will also work at the site during operating hours.

Location of subject building

Subject site



Page 36

In addition, it is proposed that two vehicles will be parked within the building between the hours of approximately 3:00pm and 8:00am on a daily basis. These vehicles are utility vehicles associated with the City of Canterbury Community Centre’s garden care services. 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 Local Environmental Plan 148 – Campsie Precinct

• Development Control Plan 15 – Business/Retail Development

• Development Control Plan 20 – Car Parking

• Development Control Plan 29 – Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design

• Development Control Plan 48 – Waste Management Assessment


• Canterbury Local Environmental Plan 148 – Campsie Precinct The site is zoned General Business 3(a) under the Canterbury Local Environmental Plan 148 – Campsie Precinct. The proposal is for the use of the premises as a community facility which is a permissible use subject to Council consent. The objective of the 3(a) zone is to achieve a hierarchy of shopping centres containing a range of retail, office and related uses, which contribute to employment and economic growth of the area. The proposal is considered to be consistent with the objectives of the zone.

• Development Control Plan 15 – Business/Retail Development The site is located within the main retail area. The provisions of this code mainly apply to new development, however there are a number of requirements which still remain relevant given the scope of the proposed works. Clause 11 of DCP 15 prohibits external solid roller shutters. The proposal involves the replacement of the existing solid roller shutter located on the buildings southern elevation with a new doorway which is consistent with this requirement. It is noted that the proposal also seeks to replace an existing solid garage shutter door with a new solid roller shutter, which although is not consistent with DCP 15 it is considered acceptable given that this opening is to allow vehicles to enter the building and is not a doorway entrance. To improve the streetscape appearance of this building it is recommended that the new door to be located along the buildings southern elevation be a glazed door rather than a solid door. The proposal is considered to satisfy the requirements of this policy.



Page 37

• Development Control Plan 20 – Car Parking Code The proposed use is a community facility, and as such requires a parking assessment of similar types of development to be provided. The information provided stated that a similar operation is currently being undertaken at Canterbury Boys High School. Based upon a sample of attendees of the men’s shed at Canterbury Boys High School the coordinator picks up and returns three men, three men currently car pool to the shed and two attendees walk to the shed. As mentioned in the ‘Background’ section of this report, the subject building was previously used for warehouse and retail purposes. The proposal involves the provision of four additional car spaces at the site, two being located within the building and two car spaces at the rear of the subject building. However, the two car spaces proposed for the rear of the building will restrict access to the existing off-street parking provided at the site, which would affect compliance with previous consents issued for other uses on the site. As such, a condition will be included requiring the proposed parking arrangement to be altered so that only one car space will be located at the rear of the building under the awning structure. This will require changes to the support structures of this awning. Given that the proposed development does not seek to increase the floor area, the use proposed will not be significantly more intensive than previous uses approved for the site, and the site is located within close proximity to public transport as well as a Council car park, it is considered that the three off-street car spaces that will be available to persons attending the workshop is satisfactory. With regards to deliveries to the site, a condition will be included requiring deliveries to occur within the property and for them to be made by a truck no larger than 1 tonne in size during operating hours.

� Development Control Plan 29 – Crime Prevention Through Environmental

Design

The proposal involves the active use of the currently vacant building at the site and should not contribute to creating opportunities for additional criminal activity. The proposal is therefore consistent with the principles contained within this code relating to natural surveillance and access control. The application was reviewed by our Community Safety Officer who raised no objections to the proposed development.

� Development Control Plan 48 – Waste Management

A waste management plan was not submitted as part of the Development Application. It is considered that waste generated from the site will be minimal. Conditions relating to waste management have been recommended in this report and it is considered that the proposal satisfies the requirements of DCP 48.



Page 38

Others Consideration

• Disability Access Committee Our Disability Access Committee has reviewed the proposal and raised no objections. A number of recommendations were made with regards to disabled access throughout the premises. Suitable conditions of consent to accommodate these requirements have been recommended.

• Fire safety Our Fire Safety Officer has reviewed the proposal in accordance with Clause 93 & 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 and raises no objection. The subject building requires fire upgrades to be undertaken. Conditions relating to fire safety have been recommended.

• Stormwater The application was reviewed by our Development Engineer and was found to be satisfactory with regards to stormwater management. Conditions relating to stormwater management have been recommended.

• Acoustic Report The acoustic report received on 13 May 2009 was assessed by our Environmental Health Officers and was found to satisfy the requirements of the NSW Industrial Noise Policy 2000. Conditions regarding noise attenuation will be imposed.

Notification

The development application was placed on notification for 14 days as required by our DCP 32 Notification Policy. 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. The proposal is permissible in the zone with consent and is generally compliant with the applicable Environmental Planning Instruments, codes and development controls. It is recommended that the application be approved subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT Development Application 227/2009 be APPROVED subject to the following conditions: PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE


• Protection from termites



• Fire Safety Schedule

• Soil and Waste Management Plan

• Mechanical ventilation



Page 39

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 $1800.00 Long Service Leave Levy $94.85 Certificate Registration Fee $30.00


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: When the items in this condition are provided and have been assessed as satisfactory, your Construction Certificate will be posted to you. Note 3: If you appoint a Principal Certifying Authority other than Council, the fees shown in this item do not apply, however other fees will apply. 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.






SITE SIGNAGE




3.3. That unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited. GENERAL

4. The development being carried out in accordance with the plans, specifications and details prepared by Canterbury City Council, dated 12 May 2009, marked Drawing Plan No. 01, 02 & 03, as received by Council on 13 May 2008, except where modified by conditions specified in this Notice, and the following conditions: 4.1. The Construction Certificate Plans are to show the rear awning redesigned

to allow for the removal of the support structure proposed for the western elevation. The removal of this structure is required in order to provide adequate space to park one vehicle at the rear of the subject building.



Page 40

4.2. The Construction Certificate Plans are to show the new door proposed for the southern elevation being a glazed door rather than a solid door to improve the streetscape appearance of the building.

4.3. Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate a Schedule of Materials and Finishes for the façade of the building is to be referred to Council’s Director City Planning for comment. A response from the Director City Planning is required prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

5. The hours of operation for the men’s shed being from 10:00 am to 3:30pm, Mondays to Saturdays.

6. The two vehicles to be parked at the site overnight are not to be parked within the premises during the operating hours of the men’s shed. The two car spaces located within the men’s shed are to be made available for attendee’s of the men’s shed for parking and loading during operating hours.

7. The number of persons working at the premises being limited to eleven (11). 8. All deliveries to the premises are to occur during operating hours. 9. All loading and unloading in conjunction with the use being carried out within the

building and at the rear of the site. 10. Delivery vehicles being limited in size to a 1 tonne small rigid vehicle. 11. Three (3) off-street car spaces being provided at the site. Two of these car spaces

are to be located within the building and one car spaces are to be located at the rear of the subject building, as indicated in red on the plans. All car spaces are to be sealed and linemarked to meet the requirements of Development Control Plan 20 - Car Parking.


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.


15. No goods being stored or displayed on Council’s footpath without the prior written consent of Council.

16. Provide suitable site storage, handling and disposal of waste material arising upon the premises. Waste bins are not to affect the amenity of the adjoining units, or be located within the car park. Disposal options may include recycling, removal by private contractor, or by Council Trade Waste Services. Further information on our services is available on 9789-9300.

17. Sufficient waste services are to be provided to cater for garbage disposal from the site. This may require commercial waste services to be engaged.

18. All building construction work must comply with the Building Code of Australia. 19. Submission of a Soil and Water Management Plan, including details of:

(a) property details (location, applicant, drawn by, date, scale) (b) accurate property description (property boundary) (c) contours (d) access point and access control measures (e) location and type of all sediment control measures (f) location of existing vegetation to be retained and undisturbed ground (g) any existing watercourse or drainage



Page 41

(h) material stockpile areas and storage and control methods (i) location of new drainage features (stormwater inlet pits) (j) revegetation proposals, including specifications on materials used and methods of application (NOTE: For guidance on the preparation of the Plan refer to the Soil and Water Management for Urban Development guidelines produced by the Southern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils.)



22. Materials must not be deposited on Council’s roadways as a result of vehicles leaving the building site.


24. A copy of the Soil and Water Management Plan must be kept on site at all times and made available to Council officers on request.


26. The proposed brickwork matching, as closely as possible, the existing external walls of the building.

27. Structural Engineer’s details being approved by the Principal Certifying Authority for all concrete footings, slabs, retaining walls and structural steel prior to building work reaching each respective stage. The details must be prepared by a suitably qualified (eg. Bachelor of Engineering) practising structural engineer who has/is eligible for membership of the Institution of Engineers Australia, and be accompanied by a completed Structural Design Certificate (SC1101a copy attached).

28. The proposed structure being erected so as to stand wholly within the boundaries of the allotment.

PUBLIC IMPROVEMENT

29. The redundant vehicular crossing located in front of the proposed doorway on Clissold Parade shall be replaced with kerb and the footpath reserve made good by Council or an approved contractor, at the applicant’s cost. The work is to be carried out in accordance with Council’s “Specification for the Construction by Private Contractors of: a) Vehicle Crossings, b) Concrete Footpath, c) Concrete Kerb & Gutter”.

FIRE SAFETY

30. In accordance with Section 93 and 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000, the premises is required to be upgraded in accordance with the Building Code of Australia or an alternative solution be submitted which complies with the performance requirements of the Building Code of Australia 2008, Volume One.

31. The openings in the external walls being protected in accordance with BCA Clause C3.2. Protection may be by means of:



Page 42

(i) 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).

(ii) 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.

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

32. 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.

33. The electrical metre board is to be smoke enclosed in accordance with Part D 2.7 of the Building Code of Australia

34. Door 1 is required to be a fire rated door -/60/30. DISABILITY ACCESS

35. Provision for access by persons with disabilities is to be made at the rear of the building. Any step, lip or significant level change is to be addressed by provision of a ramp that complies with Australian Standard 1428.1 Clause 5.

36. A clear and accessible path of travel is to be provided from the Clissold Parade frontage to the rear of the subject building. There is to be no significant change in the level of this path of travel that will hinder the passage of a person who uses a wheelchair. This pathway is to have a firm level surface and is to be composed of a material that will ensure it can be safely negotiated by people with disabilities during wet weather.

37. The doorway at the accessible point of entry is to have a minimum width of 800mm to accommodate a person who uses a wheelchair.

38. A continuous accessible path of travel must be provided within the men’s shed allowing unimpeded access for persons with disabilities to all common areas.

39. Floor surfaces are to have a slip-resistant surface in accordance with AS1428.1 Clause 12.

40. The accessible toilet must comply with AS1428.1 Clause 10 for circulation space within the facility. A clearance of at least 1000mm is to be provided between the WC Pan and the washbasin. Grabrails must be positioned in accordance with AS1428.1 Clause 10.

41. Lighting levels must be uniform within the men’s shed to assist people with low vision.

42. Signage must be legible and at a height an font size suitable for a person with low vision. Signage must provide sufficient contrast. Black on a white background or white on a clack background is preferred to assist persons who have low vision.

ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH

43. The recommendations detailed in Section 6.1 in the Noise Assessment Report (Reference No. nss21287) as received on 13 May 2009 shall be incorporated in the development.

44. All windows are to remain closed when power tools are operating and the workshop is in use.

45. The western boundary fence between the driveway and 113 Clissold Parade must be repaired or replaced to ensure it contains no acoustically untreated holes or gaps, including at the base. The fence can be constructed from any impervious material such as Colorbond or timber to a height of 1.8 metres.



Page 43

46. All activity being conducted so that it causes no interference to the existing and future amenity of the adjoining occupations and the neighbourhood in general by the emission of noise, smoke, dust, fumes, grit, vibration, smell, vapour, steam, soot, ash, waste water, waste products, oil, electrical interference or otherwise.

47. The proposed use of the premises and/or machinery equipment installed, must not create noise so as to interfere with the amenity of the neighbourhood. If a noise nuisance occurs, the person in control of the premises must arrange for an acoustic investigation to be carried out (by an accredited Acoustic Engineer), obtain Principal Certifying Authority concurrence for the recommendations of the Consultant, and implement those recommendations so as to reduce the noise levels to the ambient noise level.

ENGINEERING

48. All downpipes, pits and drainage pipes shall be installed to ensure that stormwater is conveyed from the site and into Council’s stormwater system in accordance with AUS-SPEC Specification D5 “Stormwater Drainage Design”, AS/NZS3500.3 and Council’s Stormwater Management Manual – Specification 9 “A Guide for Stormwater Drainage Design”.

49. The applicant is to arrange with the relevant public utility authority the alteration or removal of any affected services in connection with the development. Any such work being carried out at the applicant’s cost.





certificate being issued in relation to the building. 52. 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








Page 44

WE ALSO ADVISE 54. This application has been assessed in accordance with the Building Code of



• Structural Engineering work

• Air handling systems


• Fire Safety Certificate 56. Your attention is directed to the following construction requirements of the

Building Code of Australia: 56.1. Glazing materials shall be selected and installed in accordance with the

relevant provisions of BCA Section B1.4 Clause B1.3 and Australian Standard 1288 and 2047.

56.2. Termite risk management complying with BCA Clause B1.4 (1); and comprise termite resistant materials, or alternatively: (a) protect primary building elements (structural elements) from attack

by subterranean termites (compliance with AS 3660 Part 1) (b) furnish evidence from an accredited applicator/qualified pest

controller of the methods to be used to achieve this before commencement of construction.

(c) permanently affix a durable notice to the building in a prominent location (such as a meter box or the like), indicating: (i) the method of protection; (ii) the date of installation of the system; (iii) where a chemical barrier is used, its life expectancy as listed

on the National Registration Authority Label; (iv) the installer's or manufacturer's recommendations for the

scope and frequency of future inspections. (d) furnish a certificate from an accredited applicator/qualified pest

controller upon completion of the building confirming that the system has been installed to comply with this condition.

56.3. Exit doorways/doors and thresholds complying with BCA Clauses D2.19 and D2.15 respectively.

56.4. Each exit door must swing in the direction of egress (unless it serves a building or part with a floor area not more than 200m², it is the only required exit from the building or part and is fitted with device for holding it in the open position) to BCA Clause D2.20.

56.5. Exit doors in a required exit, forming part of a required exit or in the path of travel to a required exit must be readily openable: (a) without a key to a person seeking egress, and (b) by a single hand downward action or pushing action on a single device, and (c) located between 900mm and 1200mm from the floor, to BCA Clause D2.21.

56.6. Waterproofing of wet areas to BCA Clause F1.7 and Australian Standard 3740.



Page 45

56.7. The building being either naturally ventilated in accordance with BCA Clause F4.5 or mechanically ventilated or air-conditioned in accordance with Clause F4.6. Details and specifications being submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority with the application for a Construction Certificate. This item is an essential fire or other safety measure if serving a life safety function.

57. A separate Development Consent may be required for proposed advertising signs, although some signs do not require approval. For further information see the Advertising Sign Development Control Plan (DCP 24) and application form which are available from City Planning Division.




61. 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.



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


If you should require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact Kate Mirow in City Planning on 9789 9512.


Page 46

WEST WARD

3 748 PUNCHBOWL ROAD, PUNCHBOWL: CONSOLIDATION

OF SIX LAND PARCELS AND RE-SUBDIVISION INTO TWO

LOTS FOR FORMER PUNCHBOWL BABY HEALTH AND

LONG DAY CHILD CARE CENTRES

FILE NO: 716/748 PT2


Ward: WEST

D/A No: DA-28/2009

Applicant:

Owner:

Canterbury City Council

As above

Zoning: Special Uses 5(a) – Public Buildings under the

Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance

Application Date: 29 January 2009 (additional information submitted

on 21 May 2009)

Summary:

• It is proposed to consolidate the six existing land parcels and re-subdivide the land to create two lots for the former Punchbowl Baby Health Centre and Punchbowl Long Day Child Care Centre.

• The development application has been assessed against the requirements of the Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance and our relevant development control plans and policies. The proposal complies with the requirements of these controls.

• The development application does not require notification under the relevant provisions of our Development Control Plan No. 32 – Notification Policy.





748 PUNCHBOWL ROAD, PUNCHBOWL: CONSOLIDATION OF SIX LAND PARCELS AND RE-SUBDIVISION INTO TWO LOTS FOR FORMER PUNCHBOWL BABY HEALTH AND LONG DAY CHILD CARE CENTRES (CONT.)

Page 47

Report:

Background

At its meeting of 9 November 2006, the City Development Committee requested a report on the possibility of the former Punchbowl Early Childhood Health Centre building being renovated for a commercial leasing purpose, including estimated cost and viability. This resolution followed consideration of a report recommending that Council discontinue action on a draft LEP (that would, had it proceeded, facilitated the building’s demolition) and to take action to sell the property, after the property was made the subject of a suitable Conservation Management Plan. Council at its meeting of 25 October 2007, resolved to adopt a strategy for the proposed sale of the former Punchbowl Baby Health Centre by preparation and submission of a subdivision plan (including necessary easements) for development approval, preparation of a Conservation Management Plan for the building, to identify steps and actions necessary to repair, restore and conserve the building, amend the CPSO to reclassify the land containing the building from Community to Operational land, in order that the property can be offered for sale to the public and also amend the CPSO to rezone the land containing the building from Special Uses – Public Building to General Business 3(a1). The development application was lodged on 29 January 2009. Initial assessment of the proposal indicated that the proposed lot boundaries did not address particular heritage considerations concerning the curtilage of the building and were not consistent with previous resolutions of Council on lot layout. Amended plans were provided and are the subject of this report. Site Details

The subject site is located on the corner of Punchbowl Road and Urunga Parade at Punchbowl. The property currently contains the former Punchbowl Baby Health Centre and the Punchbowl Long day Care Centre.



Page 48

Proposal

It is proposed to consolidate the existing land holdings and re-subdivide the land into two allotments. The proposed boundaries generally reflect the existing layout of the two buildings currently on site, namely the former Punchbowl Baby Health Centre and the Punchbowl Long day Care Centre. Proposed Lot 1, which contains the former Punchbowl Baby Health Centre building, has a frontage of 28.05 metres to Punchbowl Road, 17.37 metres to the closed section of Urunga Parade and a total land area of 553.4 square metres. Proposed Lot 2, which contains the Punchbowl Long Day Care Centre, is an L-shaped allotment that wraps around proposed Lot 1 and has a frontage of 21.66 metres to Punchbowl Road, 31.08 metres to the closed section of Urunga Parade, 49.22 metres to Urunga Parade and a total land area of 2470 square metres. Various easements for drainage, electricity services and maintenance are also proposed as part of this application.


When determining this application the relevant matters listed in Section 79C 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:

• Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance (CPSO)

Assessment




Page 49

• Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance The subject site is zoned Special Uses 5(a) – Public Buildings under the provisions of the Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance, where the proposed subdivision is permissible with our development consent. It should be noted that the former Punchbowl Baby Health Centre building is identified in Schedule 9 of the CPSO as a heritage item. Under Clause 38A of the CPSO, a person may not (amongst other matters) subdivide land on which a heritage item is located without our consent. This clause also requires us to take into consideration the extent to which the carrying out of development would have on the heritage significance of a heritage item and any features of its setting. Further, we may require that a Conservation Management Plan accompany a development application to fully consider the heritage significance of the item and the impact of the proposed development on the heritage significance of the item and its setting. A Conservation Management Plan is currently being prepared for the building on behalf of Council following its resolution of 25 October 2007 noted in the background of this report. The Conservation Management Plan is currently in draft form before consideration by Council. In this regard, we initially referred the subject application to the consultant who prepared the Conservation Management Plan for the heritage item for their comments. The consultant advised that the preferred option for the subdivision boundary would be to provide a boundary between the former baby health centre and child care centre building which extends from the Urunga Parade road reserve across to the eastern side boundary. The consultant acknowledges that from a practical sense, this option may not be achievable (given the location of play equipment and associated structure for the child care centre) and as such, the proposed boundary as now provided would be a reasonable compromise under the circumstances. The development application was also referred to our own Heritage Advisor for comment. From a heritage point of view the proposal is satisfactory as it addresses the visual curtilage issue by properly addressing the corner location. However, the Heritage Advisor raised concerns about the future viability of the building. In this regard, our Heritage Advisor indicates that the proposed subdivision boundary precludes any opportunity for on-street car parking to be provided on site, therefore limits its commercial attractiveness which may have a direct impact on the funds available for its conservation and long term future. These are issues that relate to planning (parking) and commercial issues, and while they may be of concern and may have an indirect impact on an outcome, they are matters to be considered by Council as the land owner and consent authority. It is not unusual that commercial buildings exist without provision for off-street car parking. While a building that has access to such facilities may be more attractive from a commercial sense, the additional land required to accommodate this parking provision will affect the ultimate purchase price of the land which equally may affect the funds available for its conservation and long term future. The other issue with providing additional land to the former Baby Health Centre allotment is that this car parking provision will need to be accessed from Punchbowl Road and there



Page 50

is a real likelihood that the Roads and Traffic Authority would not permit any further access points onto this, a Regional Road. Alternatively, parking may also be capable of being provided which is accessed from the rear of the site in Urunga Parade. However, it should be noted that street parking is available in Urunga Parade within easy walking distance of the building and any additional off-street car parking (in what is essentially a public park) would be a lesser solution and not warranted under the circumstances. It is considered that the proposed lot boundary provides a reasonable compromise between the preferred option and what was initially proposed. The principal issue with the proposed boundary is to ensure that the building properly addresses its corner location and the proposed boundary allows the heritage item to do this. It is considered that the future viability of the building is not compromised by the fact that the site provides no off-street car parking for the heritage item. Under these circumstances, and having regard to the comments of the consultant who is preparing the Conservation Management Plan for the building, the proposed boundary is acceptable and addresses the provisions of Clause 38A of the CPSO.

• Building Considerations The proposed subdivision will involve the creation of a boundary between the Punchbowl Baby Health Centre and Punchbowl Long Day Child Care Centre. The proposed boundary between the buildings will result in existing window openings of the former Baby Health Centre being within 3.0 metres of a property boundary and therefore requiring upgrade. The proposed boundary will also require the relocation of existing building elements, such as a shade cloth structure associated with the Punchbowl Long Day Child Care Centre. Our Fire Safety Officer has reviewed the proposal and indicated that in accordance with Clause 93 and 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000, the premises will need to be upgraded to meet the deemed to satisfy provisions of the BCA, or an alternative solution be submitted which complies with the performance requirements of the BCA. In this regard, any development consent will need to include specific conditions that address these matters.

Notification

The proposed subdivision does not require notification in accordance with Clause 3.1 of our Development Control Plan No. 32 – Notification Policy. 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 the development application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.



Page 51

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT Development Application 28/2009 for the consolidation of six existing land parcels and re-subdivision creating two lots for the former Punchbowl Baby Health Centre and the Punchbowl Long Day Child Care Centre be APPROVED subject to the following conditions: GENERAL

1. The development being carried out substantially in accordance with Plans No. 14360B, Revision 01 (dated 21/4/2009) dated 12 December 2008 and drawn by Bee and Lethbridge Pty Limited except where amended by the conditions of consent.

2. The submission of one final plan of subdivision and five copies. 3. An easement for drainage and easement for services be created in favour of Lot 1

and burdening Lot 2 of the development. Documents relative to the creation of the easement are to be lodged with the Land and Property Information NSW.

4. A reciprocal easement for right of access, maintenance and repair be created over Lots 1 and 2. Documents relative to the creation of the easement are to be lodged with the Land and Property Information NSW.

5. An easement for electricity services be created in favour of Lot 2 and burdening Lot 1 of the development. Documents relative to the creation of the easement are to be lodged with the Land and Property Information NSW.

6. 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 the release of the final plan of subdivision.

BUILDING CODE OF AUSTRALIA

7. Prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate, the applicant shall provide a building compliance report, prepared by a suitably qualified consultant, which details the necessary work required to upgrade the former Punchbowl Baby Health Centre and Punchbowl Long Day Child Care Centre buildings in accordance with Clause 93 and 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000 and to ensure compliance with the Building Code of Australia. The former Punchbowl Baby Health Centre building shall not be occupied until such time as any works that are identified in the building compliance report are completed in accordance with requirements of an approved Construction Certificate.

8. The existing shade cloth structure associated with the Punchbowl Long Day Child Care Centre which traverses the proposed boundary shall be relocated so that it is located entirely on proposed Lot 2 and complies with the relevant provisions of the Building Code of Australia prior to the issue of a Subdivision Certificate.



Page 52

WE ALSO ADVICE 9. Any works identified in the building compliance report required by Condition 7

above will be the subject of an application for a Construction Certificate. 10. 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.

11. If you are not satisfied with this determination, you may: 11.1 Apply for a review of a determination under Section 82A of the


11.2 Appeal to the Land and Environment Court within 12 months after the date on which you receive this Notice of Determination, under Section 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. (Section 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 does not apply to the determination of a development application for State significant development or local designated development that has been the subject of a Commission of Inquiry.)

If you need more information, please contact Stephen Pratt in City Planning on 9789-9350, Monday to Friday.


Page 53

4 98 MOOREFIELDS ROAD, KINGSGROVE: ALTERATIONS

TO CHURCH SITE INCLUDING REFURBISHMENT OF MAIN




ASSOCIATED LANDSCAPING

FILE NO: 616/98D


Ward: WEST

D/A No: DA-37/2007

Applicant:

Owner:

Michael Elmasry

Arabic Gospel Chapel

Zoning: Residential 2(a) under Canterbury Planning

Scheme Ordinance

Application Date: 1 February 2007. Further information provided 19

September 2007, 20 December 2007, 7 April 2008,

26 May 2008, 18 June 2008, 13 November 2008 and

19 May 2009

Summary:

• It is proposed to carry out alterations and additions to the existing church building, including a refurbishment of the existing chapel/church hall, the construction of new sanitary facilities and of a second chapel/church hall above an enlarged car parking area and associated landscaping.

• The subject site is zoned Residential 2(a) under the provisions of the Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance. The proposed development is a permissible use with our development consent.

• Clause 44 of the CPSO restricts the floor space of non-residential developments in a Residential 2(a) zone to a maximum of 0.4:1. This development proposes a floor space ration of 0.63:1. In this regard, the applicant has submitted an objection pursuant to the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 to vary the floor space ratio control allowable under the Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance to permit the proposed development.

• The proposed development has been assessed against the provisions of our relevant DCPs and policies, and with the exception of some minor non-compliances, the proposal satisfies our controls. The non-compliances have been discussed in the body of the report.


98 MOOREFIELDS ROAD, KINGSGROVE: ALTERATIONS TO CHURCH SITE INCLUDING REFURBISHMENT OF MAIN CHAPEL / CHURCH HALL, CONSTRUCTION OF NEW SANITARY FACILITIES AND SECOND CHAPEL / CHURCH HALL ABOVE ENLARGED CAR PARKING AREA AND ASSOCIATED LANDSCAPING (CONT.)

Page 54

• The application has been advertised and adjoining owners notified in accordance with our Development Control Plan No. 32 - Notification Policy for a period of 21 days on two separate occasions. A total of thirteen submissions were received opposing the proposed development, including one petition containing thirty two signatures.




Report:

Background

Our records indicate that in 1851 a Wesleyan Chapel was opened on the site. In 1862, Moorefields Public School (predecessor of Belmore South Public School) commenced. In 1967 the original church building was demolished as it was considered to be beyond repair. The chapel was rebuilt and continued to operate as a Uniting Church until 1990. In 1992 the site was purchased by Kingsgrove Gospel Chapel, who used the premise to conduct services in both English and Arabic in the existing buildings. Proposal

It is proposed to:

• Carry out alterations and additions to the existing chapel, involving the demolition of an internal wall to increase the floor area of the existing main chapel and construct associated facilities including a kitchen, male and female toilets. The capacity of the chapel is to be a maximum of 144 people.

• Demolish an existing weatherboard building, which is currently used to conduct Sunday school classes.

• Construct a car park for 19 vehicles in place of the weatherboard building.

• Construct a first floor hall over the existing car parking area with an associated lift, office and vestry. The capacity of the hall is to be a maximum of 72 people.

• Church services are to be carried out on Friday evenings between 8.00pm and 9.30pm and Sunday between 10.30am and 1.30pm.

The proposed development will allow for the both the English and Arabic services to be carried out at the same time without causing any disruptions to the other service. Site Analysis

The subject site is located on the southern side of Moorefields Road, between Wirega Avenue and Glamis Street. The site has a frontage of 40.785 metres to Moorefields Road and an area of 1202 square metres. The subject site is located within a predominantly residential area, however the site is adjoined to the south by Moorefields Cemetery, which is identified as a heritage item. The site, consisting of two separate buildings is currently used as a church/chapel for up to 210 people at any one time.



Page 55


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

• State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) 1

• Development Control Plan 9 – Non Residential Buildings Adjoining Residential Zones

• Development Control Plan 20 – Car Parking

• Development Control Plan 29 – Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design

• Development Control Plan 45 – Landscape

• Stormwater Management Manual Specification 9 – “A Guide to Stormwater Drainage Design”

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 Residential 2(a) under the Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance and the proposed refurbishments, alterations and additions to the existing place of worship are permissible with the consent of Council. However, Clause 44 of the CPSO restricts the floor space of non residential developments within this zone to a maximum of 0.4:1. The proposed development increases the floor space ratio to 0.63:1. Although the proposed development does



Page 56

not comply with this numerical requirement, there is scope for this non compliance to be approved, provided the applicant submits an objection under State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) No. 1 – Development Standards and can demonstrate that there is merit to the departure. The applicant has submitted an objection under SEPP 1 and this will is discussed in the following section of this report.

• State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) 1 – Development Standards

The proposed development does not comply with Clause 44 (2) of the CPSO, which states that the maximum floor space ratio of non-residential development in a Residential 2(a) zone is 0.4:1. The proposed development provides a total floor area which results in a floor space ratio of 0.63:1. In this regard, the applicant has submitted an objection pursuant to the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 to permit the proposed development. The arguments put forward are outlined below. In giving consideration to the SEPP 1 Objection guidance is taken from the judgement handed down from Lloyd J in Winten v North Sydney [2001] NSW LEC 46 (6 April 2001). This case set out a five step test for assessing SEPP 1 Objections, these being: 1. Is the planning control in question a development standard? 2. What is the underlying object or purpose of the standard?

3. Is compliance with the development standard consistent with the aims of the policy (ie. the CPSO) and in particular, does compliance with development standard tend to hinder the attainment of the objects specified in Section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (EPAA)?

4. Is compliance with the development standard unreasonable or unnecessary? 5. Is the objection well founded?

In answering these five questions, the following information is provided: 1. The control in question (Clause 44(2) of the CPSO – (floor space ratios) is a

development standard. 2. The CPSO has no objectives as a whole or specifically relating to the

zoning of the land or the issue of floor space. The applicant has assumed that the general objective pertaining to the controls specified in Clause 44 of the CPSO is to ensure that development is of a bulk and scale to minimise visual and amenity impacts on the surrounding area. Generally no objection is made to the applicant’s assumption in this regard. It is acknowledged that the CPSO was gazetted in 1970 and that many factors, which were considerations at the time of gazettal have changed over time. This is reflected through our more recent Precinct Local Environmental Plans which do not contain any development standards pertaining to floor space ratios as we have acknowledged that there are varying ways of achieving compliance with objectives.



Page 57

3. The proposal is deemed to meet the objectives of Section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of

the EPAA. These two objectives promote the proper management of land and the promotion of orderly and economic use of land. The proposal represents an appropriate use of the site which already operates as a place of worship. The proposal also represents orderly and economic use of the land. It is considered that the use will be orderly, as the applicant has made provision for additional onsite parking, which ensures that all vehicles will enter and leave the site in a forward direction. The proposal has been designed to substantially comply with our Development Control Plan 9 - Non Residential Buildings Adjoining Residential Zones and our DCP 37 - Energy Smart Homes Policy in terms of height planes and overshadowing, thereby achieving the assumed objective of the CPSO control.

4. It is considered that the strict compliance with this development standard is

unreasonable and unnecessary in this instance as the proposed development only increases the existing floor space ratio by 0.05:1 and is therefore considered to be minor. It should also be noted that the proposed development will result in an improved provision of car parking facilities than currently exist on the site.

5. The reason for the objection to permit a variation to the floor space ratio is

well founded as the proposed variation is considered relatively minor (61 square metres) and that the proposed development has achieved the assumed objectives of the Ordinance by other means.

The SEPP 1 Objection is considered well founded and given the appropriate design response and compliance with the other relevant standards, a variation to our floor space ratio control is reasonable in this instance to permit the proposed development.

• Development Control Plan 9 – Non Residential Buildings Adjoining

Residential Zones

DCP 9 applies to non-residential developments that adjoin residential zones and aims to minimise the impacts which non-residential buildings have on adjoining residential properties. The DCP sets out a number of design requirements which include: - The non residential component of buildings that adjoin residential zones

should comply with the Building Height Plane. - Any area between the building and the property boundary should be

landscaped. - Shadow diagrams must accompany the application and indicate the effect

of overshadowing.



Page 58

The applicant has demonstrated that the building is adequately setback from all property boundaries. There is a small portion of overhang from the roof, which does protrude into the height plane. However, the proposal achieves the objective of the Code in that no overshadowing impact will result on the adjoining residential properties. The applicant has submitted shadow diagrams which indicate that all residential properties will continue to achieve in excess of 2 hours solar access between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June. A landscape plan, prepared by Manor House Design, was submitted with the development application. Our Landscape Architect has assessed the plan and found it to satisfy the requirements of our Landscaping Code (DCP 45). Where relevant, appropriate conditions of consent have been attached, should the application be approved regarding the protection of existing trees.

• Development Control Plan 20 – Car Parking Code Development Control Plan No. 20 aims to ensure that development provides adequate off-street car parking and access arrangements. The DCP provides specific parking rates for a range of development types. For a Place of Public Worship, the DCP states that car parking will be considered following an assessment of similar developments, but as a ‘guide’ requires one space be provided per five people (accommodation capacity) for the first 100 people and one space per three people thereafter. The proposed place of public worship has a maximum congregation size of 216 persons, which if the parking guideline above was applied, would generate the need for 59 off-street car parking spaces. Plans submitted with the development application show provision for 19 off-street car parking spaces which does not comply with our guideline control. However, in assessing this application it is also necessary to establish the likely actual demand for car parking based on actual survey information of the existing congregation. In this regard, the applicant provided us with traffic/parking data based on an average Sunday morning attendance. The survey concluded that the existing development generated 39 vehicles, of which 13 parked on site, 15 parked in Moorefields Road and 11 parked in Glamis Street. The above figures, from our experience, suggests a relatively high vehicle occupancy rate for a congregation of this size when compared to other congregations. However, this may reflect that a high number of families that attend the Sunday Service (therefore increasing the vehicle occupancy rate) and/or a large number of the congregation live within walking distance of the church. The proposed development only seeks to increase the size of the existing congregation by six persons and will provide improved facilities for this congregation. As noted, the site currently only accommodates 14 of-street car parking spaces, while the proposal will increase the number of off-street car parking spaces to 19. Given these circumstances and the traffic/car parking data provided by the applicant, the proposed off-street car parking arrangements are considered acceptable.



Page 59

� Development Control Plan 29 – Crime Prevention Through Environmental

Design

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

� Development Control Plan 45 – Landscape

A landscape plan, prepared by Manor House Design, was submitted with the development application. Our Landscape Architect has assessed the plan and found it to satisfy the requirements of our Landscaping Code (DCP 45). Where relevant, appropriate conditions of consent have been attached, should the application be approved regarding the protection of existing trees.

� Stormwater Management Manual Specification 9 – “A Guide to Stormwater

Drainage Design”

Our Development Engineer has examined the stormwater drainage plan submitted with the application and raised no objection subject to conditions of consent being attached to any consent granted.

Referrals

• Disability Access Committee The proposal has been referred to our Disability Access Committee, who have examined the proposal and advised that the development is generally acceptable in terms of disabled access facilities. The committee have requested that should the application be approved, that conditions be implemented in relation to accessible toilets, markings of disabled car spaces, maintaining a clear and uninterrupted path of travel, width of doorways, circulation space within the place of worship.

• Traffic

The proposed development has been assessed by our Team Leader Traffic and Transportation in regard to traffic concerns, access and parking. In terms of access and traffic concerns, it is considered that the proposal is acceptable provided all vehicles using the car parking area enter and leave the site in a forward direction. The design of the proposed car park enables this to take place and has also been re-enforced as a condition of consent should the application be approved. In regard to car parking, it was noted that the proposal does not satisfy the provisions of DCP 20 for available on site parking and that this would be a matter to be considered on planning grounds. The adequacy of car parking facilities and compliance of the proposal with DCP 20 has been considered in the relevant section of this report.



Page 60

• Roads & Traffic Authority

The Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) have viewed the proposed development and advised that the property is located on a Regional Arterial Road and therefore does not require consent from the RTA under Section 138 of the Roads Act.

Notification

The application has been advertised and all adjoining owners notified in accordance with DCP 32 – Notification Policy on two separate occasions. We received eight submissions, including one petition with thirty two signatures to the initial proposal. The plans were subsequently amended, which required re-notification/advertising, where we received a total of five submissions. The following issues were raised through both notifications:

• Accommodation component Comment: Concern has been raised that the proposal included a residential accommodation component. The applicant has since amended the proposal and deleted the residential component of the development.

• Height Comment: Concern has been raised that the proposed development will exceed 7.2 metres in height, which any of the adjoining neighbours would be required to comply with if they were to redevelop. The height restriction of 7.2 metres referred to by the objectors is a requirement of our residential housing codes, namely our Dual Occupancy Code (DCP 14) and our Single Dwelling Code. This specific requirement does not directly apply to the proposed development, as there is no residential component proposed. Rather the proposal is required to comply with the height plane requirements of our Non Residential Buildings Adjoining Residential Zones Code (DCP 9), which as indicated earlier in this report, except for a small roof overhang, complies with these controls.

• Permissibility Comment: Concern has been raised as to whether the proposed development is permissible within the Residential 2(a) zone under Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance. The proposed development is defined as a ‘place of public worship’ which is a permissible use within the Residential 2(a) zone under Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance.



Page 61

• Streetscape

Comment: Concern has been raised that the proposed design of the development does not match the residential streetscape along Moorefields Road, in particular the metal roof, metal balustrades and overhangs of the roof design. It is acknowledged that the proposed design differs significantly from other residential buildings within the vicinity. However, there is no common streetscape established in the immediate vicinity of the site, as adjoining dwelling are a mixture of face brick, clad or rendered with varying roof designs. The existing chapel roof also adds variation to the streetscape. The proposed roof, although will be unique, is complimentary to the existing Chapel roof to be maintained and is therefore considered to be acceptable. Further, the metal balustrades are not uncommon in residential developments and are also considered to be acceptable.

• Overshadowing

Comment: Concern has been raised regarding the amount of overshadowing the proposed development causes to the adjoining properties. The applicant has submitted shadow diagrams which indicate that the proposed development does not increase the level of overshadowing on June 21 to any residential property adjoining the site. There will be some overshadowing of the adjoining cemetery at 3.00pm on 21 June, however, this is considered to be acceptable.

• Parking Comment: Concern has been raised in regard to the amount of parking being proposed and that the lack of parking will result in additional cars being parked on Moorefields Road and Glamis Street. The proposed development accommodates a total of 19 car parking spaces, which is an improvement to the existing car parking arrangements. As part of our assessment, we requested that the applicant provide a survey of existing traffic and parking which established that the current congregation generated (on average) 39 vehicles for a Sunday Service. While some on-street car parking will result from the use of the site, these numbers of vehicles are not expected to be significant to result in unreasonable impacts on the amenity of neighbouring residential development. The proposed development will only increase the size of the existing congregation by six persons and will provide improved facilities for this congregation. Off-street car parking spaces will be increased as a result of the proposed development and having regard to these circumstances, the proposed off-street car parking arrangements are considered acceptable.



Page 62

• Amenity Impacts – Noise & Privacy

Comment: Concern has been raised that the proposed development will impact on the amenity of the area and adjoining dwellings by increasing noise and reducing privacy. It is considered unlikely that the proposed development will significantly increase noise levels, as the number of worshippers who may attend the premise will only increase by six people at any one time. In regard to the reduction of privacy, the development has been designed to minimise overlooking adjoining residential properties. Additionally, we have attached a condition of consent requiring that all windows along the southern elevation of the development being translucent glazing.

• Traffic Comment: Concern has been raised that the proposed redevelopment of the site will lead to increased traffic. The proposed redevelopment increases the accommodation capacity of the existing Church by only six worshippers, which is considered unlikely to create any significant increases in the traffic being generated from the site above the level that may currently exist. However, the application was referred to our Team Leader Traffic and Transportation, who has advised that the proposal is acceptable in terms of traffic generation and access, provided all vehicles enter and leave the site in a forward direction, which the design of the car park allows for and has been re-enforced as a condition of consent.

• Intensity of Use Comment: Concern has been raised that the proposed redevelopment will lead to an increased intensity in the use of the site and that this will impact on the amenity of the area. The existing Church provides for a maximum of 210 worshippers at any one time. The proposed development will increase the capacity to 216 worshippers, which is considered to be a minor increase and is offset by the provision of additional car parking, which will reduce the impact on adjoining residents by requiring less on street parking.

• Accuracy of Statement of Environmental Effects Comment: Concern was raised during the initial notification period that the Statement of Environmental Effects was inaccurate in regard to a number of issues. In assessing the application, we have carried out our own assessments against the relevant Codes and Policies, taking into consideration all matters required under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.



Page 63

It should be noted that as a result of our assessments, the applicant has been required to significantly amend the Statement of Environmental Effects and the plans that were originally submitted. In any event, we are satisfied that we have sufficient information to make a proper and thorough assessment of this application. It should be noted that provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 allow us to request additional information from an applicant prior to determination of a development application.

• Access to Moorefields Cemetery

Comment: Concern has been raised that the proposed development does not maintain any pedestrian access to Moorefields Cemetery, which is located at rear of the subject site. Our records indicate that the subject site and Moorefields Cemetery were subdivided in the early 1970’s. The subdivision did not provide any right of way through the church site to provide access to the cemetery, rather access to the cemetery was available from Maramba Close. On this basis it would be unreasonable to request that pedestrian access be provided through the subject site.

• Floor Space Ratio

Comment: Concern has been raised that the proposed development will exceed the floor space ratio specified in the Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance. It is acknowledged that the proposed development does exceed the floor space ratio specified with the Canterbury Planning Scheme Ordinance. However, under the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 (SEPP 1) – Development Standards, we may consider a variation to this standard. An assessment under SEPP 1 was has been carried out (outlined in the relevant section of this report) and the proposed variation is considered to be acceptable.

• Times of Usage Comment: Concern has been raised that the existing premises is not only used for church services on Sundays, but also on week nights. It is generally acknowledged that places of public worship may carry out mid week services and activities, but such services would attract a far smaller congregation than the weekend services. It is considered that these mid week operations will not impact significantly upon the amenity of the area, which is supported in that up until the time that the subject Development Application was notified, we have no records of any complaints being received regarding the operation of the Church mid week.

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. The proposed development is generally compliant with our relevant controls.



Page 64

The proposal does require a variation to the FSR controls contained within Clause 44 of the CPSO and the applicant has lodged an objection pursuant to SEPP 1 to permit the proposed development. The proposal will result in a minor increase in floor area to that of the existing development and under the circumstances, a variation to the control is reasonable in this instance. The proposed development will increase the size of the existing congregation by six persons and will provide improved facilities for this congregation. The development will increase the number of off-street car parking spaces from 14 to 19. While there is some reliance on street parking by the development, it is not significant and the proposed development should improve this existing situation. It is recommended that the development application be approved subject to conditions.

RECOMMENDATION:

THAT Development Application 37/2007 be APPROVED subject to the following: PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE





• Fire Safety Schedule – Existing & Proposed

• Landscape Plan

• Hydraulic Plan

• Sydney Water Notice of Requirements 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 $1800.00 Certificate Registration Fee $30.00 Long Service Levy $1400.00


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



Page 65

website or contact our Customer Service Centre for a current schedule of fees prior to payment.






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




4.3. That unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited. 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 (Ph. 9370 5099 – Asbestos Hotline).

(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.



Page 66

(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 BCA2005.

(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 NSW Community LEAD Advisory Service on 9716 0132 or 1800 626086 (freecall)

(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 and details set out in the table below except where amended by the conditions specified in this Notice: Plan Number Dated Prepared by Received by Council on

LP01 –A, Job No:0413 June 2006 Manor House Design 1 February 2007

828-S1/2 revision D 19/11/2007 John Romanous & Associates Pty Ltd

20 December 2007

828-S2/2 revision D 29/11/2007 John Romanous & Associates Pty Ltd

20 December 2007



Page 67

Plan Number Dated Prepared by Received by Council on

Schedule of External Finishes

Manor House Design 1 February 2007

DA01 –E, Job No.0413 June 2006 Manor House Design 19 May 2009

DA02 –B, Job No.0413 June 2006 Manor House Design 19 September 2007

DA03 –B, Job No.0413 June 2006 Manor House Design 19 September 2007

DA04 –C, Job No.0413 June 2006 Manor House Design 19 May 2009

DA05 –C, Job No.0413 June 2006 Manor House Design 19 May 2009


8. 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.


10. Nineteen (19) off-street car spaces being provided in accordance with the submitted plan and being sealed and linemarked. The car spaces meeting the requirements of Council's Carparking Code (DCP20).

11. All open carparking spaces having a clear width of 2.6m, a depth of 5.4m and a clear head height of 2.3m and in accordance with Australian Standard 2809.1.

12. One (1) car space closest to the building being 3.2m wide, designated for disability access and being signposted.

13. The hours of operation of the premise are to be confined to between 8.00pm to 9.30pm on Fridays and 10.30am to 1.30pm on Sundays.

14. All activity being conducted so that it causes no interference to the existing and future amenity of the adjoining occupations and the neighbourhood in general.

15. The windows on the southern elevation of the development being translucent glass. 16. Renewal or provision of fencing, attributable to the proposed development being

the responsibility of the developer. 17. 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.

18. All building construction work must comply with the Building Code of Australia. 19. Submission of a Soil and Water Management Plan, including details of:

(a) property details (location, applicant, drawn by, date, scale) (b) accurate property description (property boundary) (c) contours (d) access point and access control measures (e) location and type of all sediment control measures (f) location of existing vegetation to be retained and undisturbed ground (g) any existing watercourse or drainage (h) material stockpile areas and storage and control methods (i) location of new drainage features (stormwater inlet pits) (j) revegetation proposals, including specifications on materials used and methods of application (NOTE: For guidance on the preparation of the Plan refer to the Soil and Water



Page 68

Management for Urban Development guidelines produced by the Southern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils.)


21. A copy of the Soil and Water Management Plan must be kept on site at all times and made available to Council officers on request.



24. Materials must not be deposited on Council’s roadways as a result of vehicles leaving the building site.


26. All vehicles are to enter and leave the site in a forward direction. 27. Landscaping of the site is to comply with the approved plan and AUS-SPEC #1

Specification C273-Landscaping. 28. The existing street tree, Melaleuca quinquenervia, commonly known as a

Broadleafed Paperbark, growing on the nature strip in front of the above property be retained and protected during construction. A suitable 1 x 1 metre protective barrier be erected around the tree’s trunk prior to demolition and maintained during building construction.

29. The existing property trees, 2 x Cinnamomum camphora, commonly known as a Camphor Laurel, growing at the front of the property be retained and protected during construction. A suitable 1 x 1 metre protective barrier be erected around the trees trunks prior to demolition and maintained during building construction.

30. There is to be no excavation work within 8m of the Ulmus parvifolia (Chinese Elm) that is located in the neighbouring cemetery. The long term survival and stability of this healthy and mature tree will be assisted by the limitation of any construction works within the radius of its Critical Root Zone (8m).

31. A separate application is to be made to the Council’s Tree Preservation Officer regarding the pruning of any trees that may be overhanging onto the development site. Work may only be undertaken if written approval has been granted.

32. The lift is to comply with Australian Standard 1735.12 regarding width and circulation space and height of buttons.

33. Braille and tactual information is to be provided either on, above or immediately to the left of both the external and internal call buttons of the lift.

34. Access throughout the site is to be available in accordance with Australian Standard 1428.1, including addressing any significant level change with a ramp.

35. A Works-as-Executed plan must be submitted at the completion of the work to the Principal Certifying Authority and Canterbury City Council, if Council is not the Principal Certifying Authority, indicating all the site drainage and the OSD system. The plan shall be prepared by a registered surveyor or an engineer. The plan shall record all the relevant design levels and dimensions of the OSD system.



Page 69

Certification from an accredited engineer must be provided to certify that all work has been carried out in accordance with the approved plans and relevant codes and standards. An appropriate instrument must be registered on the title of the property, concerning the presence and ongoing operation of the OSD system as specified in appendix 7.5 of Council’s Stormwater Management Manual – Specification 9.

36. A full width heavy duty vehicular crossing shall be provided at the vehicular entrance to the site, with a maximum width of 6.0 metres at the boundary line. This work to be carried out by Council or an approved contractor, at the applicant’s cost. The work is to be carried out in accordance with Council’s “Specification for the Construction by Private Contractors of: a) Vehicle Crossings, b) Concrete Footpath, c) Concrete Kerb & Gutter”.

37. The applicant to arrange with the relevant public utility authority the alteration or removal of any affected services in connection with the development. Any such work being carried out at the applicant’s cost.

38. The levels of the street alignment are to be obtained by payment of the appropriate fee to Council. These levels are to be incorporated into the designs of the internal pavements, carparks, landscaping and stormwater drainage. Evidence must be provided that these levels have been adopted in the design. As a site inspection and survey by Council is required to obtain the necessary information, payment is required at least 14 days prior to the levels being required.

39. A qualified practising Civil Engineer shall design the pavements and certify that all driveways, parking and service areas have been constructed in accordance with the approved specifications. Design to be carried out in accordance with AUS-SPEC #1 Specification D2-Pavement Design. Construction is to be carried out in accordance with appropriate AUS-SPEC #1 Specifications: C242-Flexible Pavements; C245-Asphaltic Concrete; C247-Mass Concrete Subbase; C248-Plain or Reinforced Concrete Base; C254-Segmental Paving; C255-Bituminous Microsurfacing.

40. All redundant vehicular crossings shall be replaced with kerb and the footpath reserve made good by Council or an approved contractor, at the applicant’s cost. The work is to be carried out in accordance with Council’s “Specification for the Construction by Private Contractors of: a) Vehicle Crossings, b) Concrete Footpath, c) Concrete Kerb & Gutter”.

41. The reconstruction of cracked and damaged sections of the kerb and gutter along areas of the site fronting Moorefields Road is required. Work to be carried out by Council or an approved contractor, at the applicant’s cost. The work is to be carried out in accordance with Council’s “Specification for the Construction by Private Contractors of: a) Vehicle Crossings, b) Concrete Footpath, c) Concrete Kerb & Gutter”.

42. The reconstruction of any cracked or damaged sections of the concrete footpath paving and associated works along areas of the site fronting Moorefields Road is required. Work being carried out by Council or an approved contractor, at the applicant’s cost. The work is to be carried out in accordance with Council’s “Specification for the Construction by Private Contractors of: a) Vehicle Crossings, b) Concrete Footpath, c) Concrete Kerb & Gutter”.



Page 70


43. 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.




certificate being issued in relation to the building. 46. 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






WE ALSO ADVISE 48. This application has been assessed in accordance with the Building Code of



• Structural engineering work

• Air handling systems




Page 71

• Certificates & Schedule of Essential Services 50. Your attention is directed to the following construction requirements of the

Building Code of Australia: 50.1. Structural Engineer’s details being approved by the Principal Certifying

Authority for all concrete footings, slabs, retaining walls and structural steel prior to building work reaching each respective stage. The details must be prepared by a suitably qualified (eg. Bachelor of Engineering) practising structural engineer who has/is eligible for membership of the Institution of Engineers Australia, and be accompanied by a completed Structural Design Certificate (SC1101a copy attached).

50.2. Glazing materials shall be selected and installed in accordance with the relevant provisions of BCA2005 Section B1.4 Clause B1.3 and Australian Standard 1288 and 2047.

50.3. Termite risk management complying with BCA Clause B1.4 (1); and comprise termite resistant materials, or alternatively: (a) protect primary building elements (structural elements) from attack by

subterranean termites (compliance with AS 3660 Part 1) (b) furnish evidence from an accredited applicator/qualified pest controller

of the methods to be used to achieve this before commencement of construction.

(c) permanently affix a durable notice to the building in a prominent location (such as a meter box or the like), indicating: (ca) the method of protection; (cb) the date of installation of the system; (cc) where a chemical barrier is used, its life expectancy as listed on

the National Registration Authority Label; (cd) the installer's or manufacturer's recommendations for the scope

and frequency of future inspections. (d) furnish a certificate from an accredited applicator/qualified pest

controller upon completion of the building confirming that the system has been installed to comply with this condition.

50.4. The openings in the external walls being protected in accordance with BCA2005 Clause C3.2. Protection may be by means of: (i) 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).

(ii) 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.

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

50.5. The fire isolated exit(s) being enclosed by walls, floors and ceilings of non-combustible construction with fire resistance levels in accordance with BCA2005 Clause D2.11, and where more than two access doorways open to a required fire isolated exit, a smoke lobby must be provided or the exit must be pressurised in accordance with BCA2005 Clause D1.7(d).



Page 72

Doorways opening to the fire isolated stairway/passageway/ramp(s) (not including doorways opening to a road or open space), being protected by -/60/30 fire doors that are self-closing or automatic closing to BCA2005 Clause C3.8. (Automatic closing operation must be initiated by the activation of a smoke detector, or a heat detector if smoke detectors are unsuitable in the atmosphere, installed to AS 1670 and located not more than 1.5m horizontal distance from the approach side of the opening. Where any other required suitable fire alarm system, including a sprinkler system, is installed in the building, the activation of this system must also initiate the automatic closing operation.) Every fire isolated stairway/passageway/ramp serving as or forming part of a required exit shall have displayed in a conspicuous position adjacent to each doorway providing access to such stairway/passageway/ramp, a notice in accordance with Section 654 of the Local Government Act 1993 and as specified in Form 4 of the Local Government (Approvals) Regulation 1999; AND (a) A sign shall be installed on the outside of each abovementioned fire

doors, bearing the wording “FIRE DOOR - DO NOT OBSTRUCT OR KEEP OPEN”; and

(b) A sign shall be installed on both sides of the door(s) which discharge from the fire isolated exit to open space bearing the wording “FIRE SAFETY DOOR - DO NOT OBSTRUCT”, the wording in both cases (a) and (b) shall be in capital letters not less than 20mm high in a colour contrasting with the background.

Any owner of a building who fails at any time to ensure the Form 4 notice described above is displayed is guilty of an offence and liable to a penalty of $1,000.00. Fire doors, exit signs, emergency lighting and Form 4 Notices are required in relation to all fire isolated exits. Fire isolated exits described within BCA2005 Clause E2.2/Table E2.2a/NSWb shall be provided with a means of excluding smoke from them where required and in the manner described within that table. Pressurisation system/open access ramps or balconies complying with the relevant requirements under BCA2005 Part E2. This item is an essential fire or other safety measure. Form 4 notice.

50.6. Width of stairs, surface finishes of treads and landings, construction of treads and risers and handrails/balustrades to stairs complying with BCA2005 Part D2.

50.7. Each exit door must swing in the direction of egress (unless it serves a building or part with a floor area not more than 200m², it is the only required exit from the building or part and is fitted with device for holding it in the open position) to BCA2005 Clause D2.20.

50.8. Access and toilet facilities for disabled people being provided in accordance with BCA2005 Part D3, Part F2.4, and AS 1428.1. Full details including ramp widths, gradients, layouts and the like must be submitted for approval to the Principal Certifying Authority.



Page 73

50.9. Provision of a lift suitable for people with disabilities, including provision to the lift (within the building required to be accessible) with a handrail, minimum floor area, clear opening doors, sensory devices and operation buttons to BCA2005 Part D3.3/E3.6.

50.10. Provide a Surveyor’s Certificate to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the pouring of concrete at ground and first floor slab level indicating the finished floor level to a referenced benchmark. These levels must relate to the levels indicated on the approved architectural plans and/or the hydraulic details.


52. The relevant Council Manuals and AUS-SPEC specifications referred to are available from Council for a fee.

53. Private contractors shall submit an application and pay an inspection fee to Council seven days prior to commencement of any works on the footpath or roadway. No work shall be carried out without Council approval.

54. The applicant is to ensure that landscaping and hydraulic plans are co-ordinated. Hydraulic details such as pits, stormwater lines, detention tanks and retaining walls are to be shown on the Landscape Plan as these can effect layout of garden beds and plantings.



57. 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.







Page 74

If you should require any further information, please do not hesitate to contact Bernard Sutton in City Planning, on 9789 9461 between 9.00am and 11.00am Monday to Friday.