AGENDA - LPP

Meeting:

Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP)

Date:

Thursday, 26 April 2018

Time:

4.00pm

Venue:

Civic Theatre, Georges River Civic Centre, corner MacMahon and Dora Streets, Hurstville

Panel Members:

Paul Vergotis (Chairperson)

Michael Leavey (Expert Panel Member)

Juliet Grant (Expert Panel Member)

George Vardis (Community Representative)

Council Staff:

Tina Christy (Manager Development and Building)

Tony Ristevski (Team Leader Development Assessment)

Cathy Mercer (Team Leader DA Administration)

Monica Wernej (DA Admin Assistant)

 

  

1. On Site Inspections - 2.00pm –  3.30pm

a)    445-447 Forest Road Penshurst

b)    37 Gungah Bay Road Oatley

 

 

 

 

Break - 3.30pm

2. Public Meeting – Consideration of Items 4.00pm 6.00pm

Public Meeting Session Closed - 6.00pm

(Break – Light Supper served to Panel Members)


Georges River Council – Local Planning Panel   Thursday, 26 April 2018

Page 3

 

 

3. Reports and LPP Deliberations in Closed Session - 6.30pm

 

LPP010-18        445-447 Forest Road Penshurst – DA2015/0011

(Report by Coordinator Development Assessment)

LPP011-18        37 Gungah Bay Road Oatley – DA2017/0419

(Report by Independent Assessment)

 

 

 

 

4. Confirmation of Minutes by Chair

 


 

REPORT TO GEORGES RIVER COUNCIL

LPP MEETING OF Thursday, 26 April 2018

 

LPP Report No

LPP010-18

Development Application No

DA2015/0011

Site Address & Ward Locality

445-447 Forest Road Penshurst

Mortdale Ward

Proposed Development

Alterations and additions to existing place of public worship (mosque) including first floor addtions, new doomed roof, ground floor additions, internal alterations and 16m high minaret attached to the north east of the building

Owners

Trustees of the Islamic Society Hurstville

Applicant

Trustees of the Islamic Society Hurstville

Planner/Architect

 CSK Planning

Date Of Lodgement

27/01/2017

Submissions

Total - 1531 submissions and petition with 608 signatures

Cost of Works

$580,000.00

Local Planning Panel Criteria

Number of submissions exceeds 10

List of all relevant s.4.15 matters (formerly s79C(1)(a))

Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No 2 – Georges River Catchment,

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007,

Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012, Hurstville Development Control Plan No 1 - LGA Wide

List all documents submitted with this report for the Panel’s consideration

Final Traffic Review - McLaren, Traffic and Parking Study prepared by PAG,

Mosque parking study from applicant,

Attendance Management and Traffic Control Policy Penshurst Mosque,

IHAP report - 22 Sep 2016

Report prepared by

Coordinator Development Assessment

 

 

Recommendation

THAT the application be refused in accordance with the reasons included in the report.

 

Summary of matters for consideration under Section 4.15

Have all recommendations in relation to relevant s4.15 matters been summarised in the Executive Summary of the assessment report?

 

Yes 

Legislative clauses requiring consent authority satisfaction

Have relevant clauses in all applicable environmental planning instruments where the consent authority must be satisfied about a particular matter been listed, and relevant recommendations summarised, in the Executive Summary of the assessment report?

 

Yes

Clause 4.6 Exceptions to development standards

If a written request for a contravention to a development standard (clause 4.6 of the LEP) has been received, has it been attached to the assessment report?

 

Not Applicable

Special Infrastructure Contributions

Does the DA require Special Infrastructure Contributions conditions (under s7.24)?

 

Not Applicable

Conditions

Have draft conditions been provided to the applicant for comment?

 

N/A - Refusal

 

Site Plan

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1.         On 22 September 2016 the Georges River Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP) considered a report for “Alterations and additions to existing place of worship (mosque) including first floor additions, new domed roof, ground floor additions, internal alterations and 16m high minaret attached to the north east of the building”. The application was deferred from that IHAP meeting for the applicant to provide additional information in relation to a plan of management and an on-street car parking survey.

 

The applicant has submitted the required information and the development application and submitted information were placed on public exhibition. Council received a total of 556 submissions in response to the notification of the development. One of the submissions included a traffic and parking study that conflicted with the findings of the applicant’s study.

 

As the key issue in this application was traffic and parking impacts and Council was in receipt of conflicting reports, Council commissioned an independent review of the submitted reports.

 

Taking into consideration the review of the reports, the deficiencies in the plan of management and in consideration of recent case law the application is recommended for refusal.

 

Report in Full

 

A       BACKGROUND

2.         On 22 September 2016 the Georges River Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (IHAP) considered a report for “Alterations and additions to existing place of worship (mosque) including first floor additions, new domed roof, ground floor additions, internal alterations and 16m high minaret attached to the north east of the building”.

 

The report to the IHAP recommended approval of the application. A copy of the previous assessment report is attached.

 

Upon consideration of the report and after hearing submissions on behalf of the applicant and the objectors the IHAP resolved as follows:

 

"The Georges River Council IHAP as the delegate of the Georges River Council defers Development Application No. DA2015/0011 for alterations and additions to existing place of worship (mosque) including first floor additions, new domed roof, ground floor additions, internal alterations and 16m high minaret attached to the north east of the building at 445-447 Forest Road, Penshurst, and invites the applicant to submit additional information for consideration at a future meeting of the IHAP:

·    On street parking survey for Friday noon and evening service prayer times for four (4) consecutive Fridays. The survey is to be carried out for the on street parking within a 400m radius and be conducted by a suitably qualified independent traffic expert.

·    A revised Plan of Management;

-     dealing with the method by which the number of persons attending the premises is to be limited to two hundred and fifty (250),

-     dealing with how the on street parking in the area will be managed.

-     identify for each component the procedures for ensuring all actions are undertaken.

-     including provisions to ensure that actions can be reviewed and complaints monitored.

-     that provides a detailed timetable of activities and events that are proposed to be conducted throughout the year and the estimated likely numbers to attend.

-     should include liaison and methods to ensure Council is made aware of procedures.

 

In response to the deferral of the matter from the IHAP the applicant submitted the following documents:

-     Attendance Management, Parking and Traffic Control Policy

-     Alternate Local Prayer Venues map and addresses

-     Alternative Eid Salat places and times list

-     Estimated future timings of Ramadan and Eid

-     Plan of Management

-     On-Street Car Parking Assessment prepared by Hemanote Consultants

-     Public parking in Penshurst map

-     Communication Policy

-     Complaints and Grievance Policy

-     Attendance Management and Traffic Control Policy

-     Attendance counts and summaries for August, September and October

 

These documents were placed on public exhibition/notification from 7/12/2016 to 5/01/2017. In response to the public exhibition of the material Council received 317 submissions against the proposal and a petition with a 529 signatures. Council also received 239 letters of support for the proposal.

 

As part of the submission process Council received submissions from the Penshurst Action Group (PAG). The PAG submission included a traffic and parking report prepared by a traffic engineer (Transport Planning Partnership) and a detailed submission from a planning consultant (Daintry Associates).

 

B       ASSESSMENT OF ADDITIONAL INFORMATION SUBMITTED

 

Traffic and Parking

3.         Council is in receipt of four traffic/parking studies for the development:

-     Solution 1 Traffic Engineers Traffic and Parking Impact Report (TPIR) dated November 2014 of the Proposed Alterations and Additions Penshurst Mosque. (provided by the applicant)

-     Amended Solution 1 Traffic Engineers Traffic and Parking Impact Report (TPIR) dated June 2015 of the Proposed Alterations and Additions Penshurst Mosque. (provided by the applicant)

-     On-Street Car Parking Assessment dated November 2016 prepared by Hemanote Consultants (provided by the applicant)

-     Hurstville City Council Traffic Study dated December 2013 of Penshurst (Study conducted by Council)

-     The Transport Planning Partnership Traffic and Parking Study (TPS) dated 2nd December 2016 of 445-447 Forest Road, Penshurst (provided by the Penshurst Residents Action Group)

 

A summary of the above documents is as follows:

 

Council’s Traffic Study

Officers from the former Hurstville City Council conducted a parking survey on the streets surrounding the Mosque in 2013. The study made the following observations:

-     Illegally parked cars are a problem in the Study area with specific safety concerns on Forest Road, Austral Street and St Georges Parade Penshurst.

-     Despite on road occupancy, residents of Carruthers Street, Inverness Ave, Salisbury Street, Immanra Crescent and Rostrov Street park illegally over Council land.

-     Ocean Street, St Georges Parade and Forest Penshurst are close to full parking occupancy during peak periods.

-     On Friday afternoon there is an increase in illegally parked vehicles along Forest Road and St Georges Parade, Penshurst.

-     On site observations during busy Mosque hours showed that many users of the Mosque parked along Forest Road, St Georges Parade, Austral Street, Nelson Street and Salisbury Street up to Rostrov Street only.

-     Rostrov Street and Austral Street, Penshurst becomes occupied during school pick up and drop off periods. During these times double parking and illegal u-turns over double centre lines are common in Austral Street, Penshurst.

 

The applicant’s studies

The Amended Solution 1 Traffic Engineers Traffic and Parking Impact Report (TPIR) indicates that the proposed mosque development is not envisaged to have adverse impacts on the surrounding traffic conditions and public parking provided, and the parking requirements of the attendees at the mosque can conveniently be accommodated by the on street public parking inventory available in the vicinity of the site. This study estimates that the DCP Parking requirement from the floor space proposed at the Mosque would be 19 spaces. The report does not make an assessment of the total requirement (existing and proposed floor space) so does not take into account the existing deficiency. The report also does not take into account the existing on-street parking demand.

 

The On-Street Parking Assessment provided by the applicant states:

 

The peak period for parking utilisation on Friday was found to be at 1:00pm with parking utilisation rate of between 65.8% to 71.1% (i.e. between 207 to 245 car parking spaces being unoccupied), with a larger number of unoccupied spaces at other surveyed times throughout the day.

 

The report concludes that there is adequate on-street parking to facilitate the use. The report also makes reference to the proximity of the site to public transport and states:

 

It should be noted that typically members of the congregation of the subject place or worship who live locally would either walk to the site or utilise public transport and would utilise car-pooling as normally family members and friends would travel together to attend the prayer services. This would obviously reduce the parking demand generated by the congregation of the subject site.

 

Penshurst Action Group Study

The Penshurst Action Group (PAG) presented Council with a report prepared by The Transport Planning Partnership Traffic and Parking Study (TTPP Study) dated 2nd December 2016. This report estimates that the DCP parking requirement from the floor space proposed at the Mosque would be 48 spaces in total based on GFA. As part of the TTPP study a parking demand survey was undertaken. This study estimates that the existing use utilises 90 on-street parking spaces during a normal Friday prayer time.

 

 

The TTPP study concludes that there are four primary reasons to refuse the current development application:

-     Existing parking demand – during peak times for the mosque the nearby streets are up to 156% above capacity. There is limited capacity in the surrounding streets for any additional parking

-     Existing risky behavior demonstrated by worshippers eg crossing Forest Road by most direct route (ie not at lights)

-     Existing risky behavior demonstrated by Mosque staff in terms of traffic control

-     Impracticality of the PoM

 

Peer Review of Submitted Information

As demonstrated above, the studies provided by the applicant and the PAG vary significantly in their findings. In order to provide a fair and impartial view of the documents Council officers engaged an independent traffic consultant. McLaren Traffic were engaged as this firm has experience in assessing the traffic impacts of places of worship and has relevant Land & Environment Court experience.

 

The McLaren review concludes as follows:

-     There are currently intolerable levels of parking congestion within road network that is located within the immediate vicinity of the Penshurst Mosque.

-     The intolerable parking conditions occur during the peak times of the Mosque usage (i.e. Friday mid-day period).

-     TTPP and Council study observations reveal that Mosque patrons are the primary causes of the intolerable parking levels observed with significant illegal parking observed and recorded.

-     TTPP study observations reveal that Mosque patrons are the primary causes of the intolerable parking levels observed with significant illegal parking observed and recorded.

-     The  patronage  limit  within  the  Applicant’s  Plan  of  Management  is  not  operationally enforceable.

-     That Mosque patrons undertake risky parking and pedestrian crossing behaviours on nearby public roads within the immediate vicinity of the Mosque.

-     That the TTPP report provides details of the Mosque patronage and pedestrian crossing behaviour which is not addressed by the Applicant’s traffic consultant.

-     That the Mosque staff impose a safety risk to road users while performing traffic management duties within public roads.

-     That illegal parking still occurs even when the Management Plan is in place.

-     Significant shortfalls of parking demand are exhibited within the analysis presented as part of the Solution 1 Traffic Engineers Traffic and Parking Impact Report and Hemanote Consultants On-Street Parking Assessment that do not provide an accurate and holistic representation of the parking and patronage impacts of the proposal.

-     The parking occupancy survey data used in the TTPP Traffic and Parking Study is more accurate than that of the Solution 1 report and therefore draws more meaningful conclusions.

-     The TTPP Traffic and Parking Study considers the existing operational conditions of the Mosque in much more depth than the Solution 1 Traffic and Parking Impact Report.

-     The TTPP report provides appropriate, well-based analysis and justification of the conclusions made within the report, and therefore, weight should be given to its outcomes

 

The Green Travel Plan advocated by the applicant is also questioned by McLaren:

 

Further, it is highly questionable that any significant proportion of patrons would use bicycle, walking and public transport alternatives, given that the main users of the mosque during a Friday lunchtime are single males who utilise private vehicles from their place of work to mosques. Based on MTE research, the observed car occupancy rate at other mosques is typically 1.5 persons per car with 90-95% private car usage.

 

Council comment:

The existing parking demand associated with the Mosque activity is high (91%-100%) with parking at capacity in surrounding roads adjacent to the site. A parking occupancy rate of 156% has been recorded in St Georges Road including the unauthorised use of the private car park off St George Road. During peak times for the Mosque there is limited capacity in the surrounding streets for any additional parking.

 

The following photographs demonstrate the difference in availability of street parking on a week day where there is a service on at the mosque and a regular week day.

NearMap photo dated Tuesday 11 August 2015 – a date when there was a service at the mosque

NearMap photo dated Tuesday 12 December 2017. No service at the Mosque at this day

 

The current parking situation at the mosque is intolerable, and whilst there is little that can be done about the existing situation, it is unacceptable to contemplate any increase in floor area that could potentially increase the capacity of the Mosque and exacerbate the existing traffic and parking issues. 

 

The information provided by the TTPP study and the McLaren review is consistent with the findings of the in Nasser Hussein v Georges River Council [2016] NSWLEC 1548 (Hussein v GRC), where the Court considered the traffic and parking impacts of a mosque at King Georges Road, South Hurstville. In the decision handed down on that case the Court accepted that:

·    the prayer rooms would accommodate more mats than shown (see par 57 in Hussein v GRC). 

·    a car occupancy averaging 1.5 people per car for mosque worshippers is appropriate (see pars 61-62 in Hussein v GRC).

·    for the peak Friday midday prayer, most worshippers would be men who would drive from work and therefore need to park (see par 63 in Hussein v GRC).

·    for night prayers, worshippers would be less likely to walk or share (see par 64 in Hussein v GRC)

·    on-street parking available within a fixed radius should not be included given there are no existing safe pedestrian crossing facilities on a very busy road (see par 59 in Hussein v GRC)

 

In terms of the proposed Green Travel Plan, Council officers concur with the McLaren view that it is “highly questionable that any significant proportion of patrons would use bicycle, walking and public transport alternatives”. Further to this, there is a discrepancy in the Plan as it states as an action “Allocate priority parking spaces for car poolers”. There is no parking available on the site, so it is unclear how this action will be achieved without the reliance on Council signposting on the street.

 

In terms of road safety, the TTPP traffic report observes that up to 51% of the patrons arrived by car or on foot came from the other side of Forest Road. From observations in that report there was a trend in patrons’ reluctance to go out of their way to use pedestrian crossing facilities located some 120m from the site.

 

Council has also received submissions from residents that indicates dangerous behavior from visitors to the mosque in terms of the risky crossing of Forest Road illegal parking too close to street corners and driveways.

 

Although the applicant has stated that there will be no increase in patron numbers from what currently exists on the site, in reality the proposed works to the building will facilitate a more usable floor area and the potential for greater patronage.

 

As the traffic and parking situation as existing is unacceptable, any potential increase in patronage as a result of the additions is not supported.

 

Patronage & Capacity

4.         The patronage and potential capacity of the existing and proposed Mosque is a matter of contention between the parties.

 

The applicant has stated that the existing maximum patronage on the site has been 270 people, but on an average Friday the maximum anticipated patronage would be 250 people. The applicant is proposing a limitation of 250 people which is consistent with previous discussions with council officers.

 

Council has received submissions stating that proposal will have the capacity to accommodate substantially more that 250 patrons.

 

In the TPP traffic report it is estimated that:

 

“The density of the existing pray hall is 0.83sqm per patron, based on the 189.2sqm GFA (excluding service room) and an attendance of 229. If the pray hall GFA of 250sqm was applied as consistent with the Council approach, the potential patronage would be approximately 303 people.

 

Projecting the existing patronage based on the proposed GFA on the ground floor (272sqm), the potential patronage would reach approximately 329 people if the existing density is maintained.”

 

A further submission prepared by Daintry Associates states:

 

“The first-floor plans (see Figure 1 & Annexure 3 at A3 scale) shows a female Scripture Space, not titled a Female Prayer area. Nevertheless, as women can attend prayers, it is my opinion that the 94sqm of GFA at the first-floor level will be used for female prayer areas.

 

That being the case and applying the existing population rate per sqm to that area, at the rate of 1 person per 0.7sqm for the 94sqm (female) then adding the 272sqm (male) which is 366sqm, the real population could be as high as 406. That also excludes foyer and the ground floor scripture room which provide additional capacity.”

 

Council does not dispute that the proposed works will facilitate a potential for additional patronage on the site. In order to properly restrict and control the patronage a robust Plan of Management would be required.

 

Plan of Management

5.         The applicant has submitted an amended Plan of Management (PoM). This PoM covers the following issues:

a)    Details of the proposed hours of operation

b)    Staff and attendees of the premises

c)    Traffic and parking arrangements

d)    Noise minimisation measures

e)    Procedure for special festivals/prayer days including Ramadan

f)     Garbage collection

g)    Access of emergency services

h)    Community relations

i)     Complaint management

j)     Compliance with the Land & Environment Court Guidelines for PoM’s.

 

To ensure that the above 250 person restriction for Congregation Numbers for Fridays and Festival/Special Events is abided by, the PoM proposes the following actions:

 

1.   The Mosque shall be sign-posted that:

a)   the premise is approved to accommodate 250 worshippers for any individual sermon/event;

b)   worshippers seeking to attend prayer/sermons after this 250 maximum number has been achieved shall be referred to the nearest alternative Mosque; and

c)   the Mosque Trustees shall update attendance on the Penshurst Mosque website that full attendance has been reached and advise of any alternative venues for potential worshippers;

2.   Trustees will use an electronic counter to monitor attendance numbers;

3.   Trustees will allocate one Society member to “man-the-door” and count worshippers and enforce the 250 person limit where necessary;

4.   Attendance at these Sermons/Events shall be recorded through ticketing attendance books which shall be signed off by the “Man-the-door” Society member and the Imam, and dated at the close of the Days Sermons/Events.  These attendance number books shall be retained for a minimum period of twelve (12) months;

5.   All attendance book documentation stored by the Trustees shall be readily made available for Council inspection upon request; and

6.   Council Officers are invited to, without notice, attend these Sermons/Events to monitor and acknowledge the implementation of the actions 1 – 4 outlined above.

 

Council Comment on the PoM:

The PoM will have little effect in mitigating the existing and proposed traffic impacts – this is because patrons would have already parked and gone to the entrance of the site before they were not let in. This is emphasised in Newcastle Muslim Association v Newcastle City Council [2012] NSWLEC1056 at para 100: “the POM cannot control how many people attempt to enter the site, it can only restrict the number of persons who can access the site”.

 

There is no ability to manage the 251st arrival or visitors or late comers, and it appears that the proposal is reliant on the behaviour of worshippers, management by volunteer worshippers and the PoM does not detail any viable system to prevent the attendance of the 251st or further persons.

 

There is reference in the PoM to direct patrons to alternative venues, however by the time that the patrons travel to the alternate venues the services are likely to be concluded. The PoM also advises that when the capacity reaches 250 there will be a notice on the website of the Mosque. This is impractical as the capacity is likely to be reached just before a service/prayer time and patrons are likely to have already arrived.

 

The application proposes a 4:30am start time at certain times of the year. Although the site is zoned SP2, it is located in very close proximity to residential land uses. In order to accept the PoM the Council needs to be satisfied that early morning and late evening management practices will ensure that the noise impacts from worshipers arriving and leaving will not cause unacceptable noise amenity impacts upon adjoining residential neighbours. 

 

To address noise the PoM states:

 

“The Trustee’s and the Imam will encourage patrons to enter and leave the site in an orderly fashion and the importance of minimising outdoor noise, particularly at the sunrise prayer. This measure will be reinforced through the installation of signs at both the entrance and exit points at the site reminding attendees to minimise noise at all times.  Signage at the facility shall also request persons not to smoke on the footpaths outside the facility in order to minimise noise impacts.”

 

The PoM uses the terminology “the Trustee’s and the Imam will encourage patrons to, ...”, however inadequate information has been included on what remedies will be in place is “encouragement” fails. It is common for patrons to gather for a conversation after a religious service and in the early hours of the morning when there is limited background noise any increase in the numbers of people gathering could have an adverse impact.

 

The Plan of Management and the associated documents from the applicant show good intent to mimimise the amenity impact of the development in terms of parking and noise, however they do not provide adequate detail on how the plan will be enforced. Given that there is an existing unacceptable impact from the existing use, any breach of the PoM in terms of additional patrons and therefore additional impacts is unacceptable.

 

C       PART 7.11 CONTRIBUTIONS

6.         The proposed development requires payment of $5,800.00 in contributions based on the stated cost of works under the provisions of the Georges River S94A plan.

 

The estimated cost of works of $580,000 provided by the applicant is considered to be inaccurate. If the LPP was of a mind to approve the development application a more accurate building cost estimate provided by a quantity surveyor should be provided.

 

D       NEIGHBOUR NOTIFICATION

7.         The amended proposal was notified as per the original application and to everyone who made a submission on the original application. In response 239 submissions in support and 317 submissions plus a petition with 529 signatures were received.

 

The following matters were raised in support of the application:

 

-     The mosque provides social programs for youth in the area

-     There is a good sense of community within the congregation

-     The site has been operating for a number of years with minimal complaints from the public

-     The existing building is not fit for use and is in urgent need of repair and renovation

 

Comment: Site inspections by Council Officers have revealed that there is a need for renovation of the existing premises, however the proposed development is considered to be a potential intensification of use and has been assessed as such.

 

The social benefits of the Mosque, the existing congregation and the local Islamic community is not disputed, however the potential intensification of the use on the broader community is considered to have a negative impact.

 

The following is a summary of the objections received:

 

Traffic and parking issues

This was the main concern from the submitters. There is concern that the lack of parking for the current mosque results in widespread congestion of neighbouring residential streets and illegal parking, cars parked across driveways, too close to intersections and parking infringements. Any increase in capacity will exacerbate the existing unacceptable situation

 

Comment: An assessment of the parking and traffic impacts of the development is contained in this report above. The existing use is lawful and there is little that can be done to mitigate the existing parking impacts.

 

A detailed traffic and parking assessment is undertaken in a previous part of this report. Any works that have the capacity to have further detrimental impact without proper and enforceable measures are not supported.

      

Permissibility/compliance with planning controls/zoning

There was concern raised the proposal was contrary to the zoning of the site and that the height and floor space proposed does not comply with Council's planning controls. There was a misconception amongst many submissions that the site was zoned Residential.

 

Comment: The site is zoned SP2 - Infrastructure and the zoning maps that accompany Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 show the use of the land as "church". The existing use is consistent with the use indicated on the zoning map.

 

The SP2 zone does not have height or floor space ratio development standards that apply. The directly adjoining zone is RE1 - Public Recreation. This zone also does not have development standards for height and floor space.

 

The closest zone with development standards is the R3 - Residential Zone. As discussed in this report above, the height to the upper external wall (excluding the domes) and the floor space ratio of the development are not inconsistent with the development standards in the R3 zone.

 

The design of the mosque is incompatible with the surrounding area

 

Comment: There is no coherent architectural style in the surrounding area which is characterised by a mixture of older style and more contemporary three (3) - four (4) storey residential flat buildings and the existing two (2) storey Pole Depot building to the rear.

 

Although the design of the building is different architecturally from these surrounding uses, it is not considered to have any significant detrimental impact on amenity. The proposal seeks to use similar materials to those existing on site and while the building is increased in height, with an additional level, three (3) domes and minaret, it will continue to function and have the appearance of a place of public worship.

 

The use is not compatible with the surrounding area

 

Comment: The site has been used as a mosque for at least twenty eight (28) years and prior to that was used as by a different denomination as a place of public worship. This application does not seek to alter the use that has been established at the site for a number of years. Any increase in the impacts of the use are not supported.

 

The height of the minaret is excessive and will dominate the streetscape

 

Comment: It is not uncommon for places of public worship to have distinctive architectural features that have a greater height than surrounding buildings. Although the height of the minaret is greater than surrounding buildings, it does not have a detrimental impact on any surrounding property.

 

The building will result in overshadowing to the neighbouring open space and the Pole Depot

 

Comment: The existing building is located due north of the entrance to the Pole Depot and the adjoining playground. This proposal seeks to use the existing walls that are located very close to the boundary of the site and therefore some overshadowing to the Pole Depot will occur.

 

There are nearby heritage items at 469 Forest Road and 55 Penshurst Street. The design is not compatible with these items.

 

Comment: The building is located over 180m from the item at 469 Forest Road and 150m from the item at 55 Penshurst Street. Further to this, there are existing buildings located within the view corridor of the mosque to these heritage items. The proposed additions are not considered to detract from the significance of these heritage items.

 

General concerns regarding the minaret

Concerns that the minaret was going to be used for "call to prayer". This will be distraction for drivers on Forest Road, would create a privacy impact, and is not suited to a residential area.

 

Comment: The Statement of Environmental Effects and the Plan of Management clearly states that there is no intention to use the minaret for broadcasting of any nature including the call for prayer. To further ensure this, a condition has been recommended that the minaret is not used for any purpose.

 

There is access to the top of the minaret through an internal staircase. The staircase is required so that the minaret can be maintained. Although there are window openings in the minaret, given the location of the minaret on the site and the narrow internal staircase, any impact on privacy is limited.

 

As discussed in this report above, the minaret is an architectural feature that is common with mosques. Many other places of public worship have distinctive architectural features so that they are clearly identified as places of prayer.

 

24 hour use

Submitters were concerned with the fact that the mosque may be in operation 24 hours a day as specified in the submitted Statement of Environmental Effects.

 

Comment: The applicant has provided the following response “The Mosque, as would be the case with most religious orders, is open to the public 24 hours a day for counselling and prayer, however, in practice the Mosque is locked during evenings for security reasons but can be opened by the Iman upon request.  This is standard practice aimed at providing a community service and is not intended to accommodate on-going prayer services but rather accommodate individual needs for counselling.”

 

This is considered to be consistent with the operations of other places of worship. It is however noted that the Mosque will accommodate services commencing at 4:30am. The Plan of Management has not adequately addressed how the amenity impacts of the surrounding area will be protected during the early morning.

 

Adequacy of the Plan of Management and Operational Details

Concern was raised about the adequacy of the PoM in terms of enforceability and due to the inconsistencies contained within the document.

 

Comment: This is discussed in detail above. Council officers agree that the PoM is inadequate to ameliorate any amenity concerns and adequately control the number of patrons.

 

Capacity of the Mosque

Submitters do not believe that the capacity will be a maximum of 250 people as stated by the applicant. The proposed GFA of the building allows for a much greater capacity

 

Comment: The GFA of the proposed building will have the capacity to accommodate more patrons that currently exists. This is discussed above.

 

E       CONCLUSION

8.         Although there is an existing Mosque at the site that has a valid development consent, there is significant impacts from the current operation of the premises due to traffic and parking impacts. Any increase in the capacity of the premises to accommodate additional patrons cannot be supported.

 

Council is now in receipt of a comprehensive review of the traffic and parking impacts and has assessed the applicant’s amended information in line with recent decisions of the Land & Environment Court.

 

The applicant has not adequately demonstrated that the proposed Plan of Management is capable of controlling the adverse impacts of the development, or limiting the number of patrons to an acceptable number ie 250. Accordingly, the application is now recommended for refusal.

 

DETERMINATION AND STATEMENT OF REASONS

9.         THAT pursuant to Section 4.16(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, the Council refuses development consent to Development Application DA2015/0011 for the alterations and additions to existing place of worship (mosque) including first floor additions, new domed roof, ground floor additions, internal alterations and 16m high minaret attached to the north east of the building at Lots 2 and 3 DP 14475 and known as 445-447 Forest Road, Penshurst, for the following reasons:

 

1.         The proposed development does not provide any on-site car parking and the existing use on the site has resulted in a parking demand that is beyond the existing capacity of the nearby local streets. Any increase in patronage would exacerbate an already unacceptable situation.

 

2.         The Plan of Management submitted with the application has failed to adequately address how the impacts of the development will be managed.

 

3.         The proposed development is unsatisfactory having regard to Part 4.15(c) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in that the site is at capacity and is not suitable for the development proposed

 

4.         Approval of the development would not be in the public interest and contrary to Part 4.15(e) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1

Final Traffic Review - McLaren - 445-447 Forest Rd Penshurst

Attachment 2

Traffic and  Parking Study prepared by PAG - 445-447 Forest Rd Penshurst

Attachment 3

Mosque parking study from applicant - 445-447 Forest Rd Penshurst

Attachment 4

Attendance Management and Traffic  Control Policy Penshurst Mosque - 445 Forest Rd Penshurst

Attachment 5

IHAP Report - 22 Sep 2016 - 445-447 Forest Rd Penshurst

Attachment 6

17076-02FA - Letter of Advice from McLaren - April 2018 - 445-447 Forest Rd Penshurst

Attachment 7

17076-01FB - Letter of Advice from McLaren - April 2018 - 445-447 Forest Rd Penshurst

 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 26 April 2018

LPP010-18              445-447 Forest Road Penshurst

[Appendix 1]           Final Traffic Review - McLaren - 445-447 Forest Rd Penshurst

 

 

Page 18

 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 26 April 2018

LPP010-18              445-447 Forest Road Penshurst

[Appendix 2]           Traffic and  Parking Study prepared by PAG - 445-447 Forest Rd Penshurst

 

 

Page 24

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 26 April 2018

LPP010-18              445-447 Forest Road Penshurst

[Appendix 2]           Traffic and  Parking Study prepared by PAG - 445-447 Forest Rd Penshurst

 

 

Page 43

 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 26 April 2018

LPP010-18              445-447 Forest Road Penshurst

[Appendix 2]           Traffic and  Parking Study prepared by PAG - 445-447 Forest Rd Penshurst

 

 

Page 45

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 26 April 2018

LPP010-18              445-447 Forest Road Penshurst

[Appendix 2]           Traffic and  Parking Study prepared by PAG - 445-447 Forest Rd Penshurst

 

 

Page 82

 


 


 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 26 April 2018

LPP010-18              445-447 Forest Road Penshurst

[Appendix 2]           Traffic and  Parking Study prepared by PAG - 445-447 Forest Rd Penshurst

 

 

Page 85

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 26 April 2018

LPP010-18              445-447 Forest Road Penshurst

[Appendix 2]           Traffic and  Parking Study prepared by PAG - 445-447 Forest Rd Penshurst

 

 

Page 103

 


 


 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 26 April 2018

LPP010-18              445-447 Forest Road Penshurst

[Appendix 2]           Traffic and  Parking Study prepared by PAG - 445-447 Forest Rd Penshurst

 

 

Page 105

 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 26 April 2018

LPP010-18              445-447 Forest Road Penshurst

[Appendix 3]           Mosque parking study from applicant - 445-447 Forest Rd Penshurst

 

 

Page 107

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 26 April 2018

LPP010-18              445-447 Forest Road Penshurst

[Appendix 4]           Attendance Management and Traffic  Control Policy Penshurst Mosque - 445 Forest Rd Penshurst

 

 

Page 125

 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 26 April 2018

LPP010-18              445-447 Forest Road Penshurst

[Appendix 5]           IHAP Report - 22 Sep 2016 - 445-447 Forest Rd Penshurst

 

 

Page 131

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 26 April 2018

LPP010-18              445-447 Forest Road Penshurst

[Appendix 6]           17076-02FA - Letter of Advice from McLaren - April 2018 - 445-447 Forest Rd Penshurst

 

 

Page 161

 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 26 April 2018

LPP010-18              445-447 Forest Road Penshurst

[Appendix 7]           17076-01FB - Letter of Advice from McLaren - April 2018 - 445-447 Forest Rd Penshurst

 

 

Page 166

 


 


 


 


 


 


Georges River Council – Local Planning Panel   Thursday, 26 April 2018

Page 172

 

REPORT TO GEORGES RIVER COUNCIL

LPP MEETING OF Thursday, 26 April 2018

 

LPP Report No

LPP011-18

Development Application No

DA2017/0419

Site Address & Ward Locality

37 Gungah Bay Road Oatley

Mortdale Ward

Proposed Development

Demolition of existing structures and construction of a two storey dwelling with an attached single storey secondary dwelling

Owners

Bin Zhou and Fang Wang

Applicant

Jessica Wang

Planner/Architect

 Architect - Green Tree Designs

Date Of Lodgement

20/09/2017

Submissions

Nil

Cost of Works

$474,650.00

Local Planning Panel Criteria

Probity as the owner is a member of staff at Georges River Council

List of all relevant s.4.15 matters (formerly s79C(1)(a))

Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No 2 - Georges River Catchment, State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009,

State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 - Remediation of Land, State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004, State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017,

Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Environment), Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012, Hurstville Development Control Plan No 1 - LGA Wide

List all documents submitted with this report for the Panel’s consideration

Site Plan, Survey Plan, Architectural Drawings, Landscape Plan,

Statement of Environmental Effects, Shadow Diagrams,

Waste Management Plan, Schedule of Colours and Finishes,

Concept Drainage and Hydraulic Plan, BASIX Certificate

Report prepared by

Independent Assessment

 

 

Recommendation

THAT the application be approved in accordance with the conditions included in the report.

 

Summary of matters for consideration under Section 4.15

Have all recommendations in relation to relevant s4.15 matters been summarised in the Executive Summary of the assessment report?

 

Yes 

Legislative clauses requiring consent authority satisfaction

Have relevant clauses in all applicable environmental planning instruments where the consent authority must be satisfied about a particular matter been listed, and relevant recommendations summarised, in the Executive Summary of the assessment report?

 

Yes

Clause 4.6 Exceptions to development standards

If a written request for a contravention to a development standard (clause 4.6 of the LEP) has been received, has it been attached to the assessment report?

 

Not Applicable

Special Infrastructure Contributions

Does the DA require Special Infrastructure Contributions conditions (under s7.24)?

 

Not Applicable

Conditions

Have draft conditions been provided to the applicant for comment?

 

No, standard conditions have been attached (with fencing deleted from proposal due to insufficient detail and a condition that ensure the existing right-of-carriageway remains unimpeded)

 

Site Plan

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

Proposal

1.         The application proposes demolition of all existing structures and construction of a new two (2) storey dwelling house containing four (4) bedrooms, with an attached single storey secondary dwelling containing two (2) bedrooms. The proposal also includes an attached double garage for the principal dwelling.

 

Site and Locality

2.         The subject site is legally described as Lot 451 DP 850836 and is known as 37 Gungah Bay Road, Oatley. The property is located on the eastern side of Gungah Bay Road, between Acacia Street and Seaforth Avenue.

 

The dimensions of the site are approximately 20.12m (width) x 27.62m (depth), with a total area of 555.8sqm. There is an existing single storey fibro dwelling situated on the subject land and the property is affected by a 1m wide drainage easement and 2.5m wide right of carriageway (ROC) and easement for services. 

 

Surrounding development in the immediate locality consists of a mix of detached dwelling houses in predominantly low density residential setting. 

 

Zoning and Permissibility

3.         The site is zoned R2 Low Density Residential and the proposed development (ie dwelling houses and secondary dwellings) is permissible with development consent.

 

Submissions

4.         The application was notified in accordance with Council’s requirements as per the Hurstville Development Control Plan No 1 (as amended 13 July 2016) and no submissions were received.

 

Level of Determination

5.         The application is forwarded to the LPP for determination for probity reasons as the owner is a member of Georges River Council staff.

 

Conclusion

6.         Having regard to the matters for consideration listed under Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and following a detailed assessment of the proposal, Development Application No. 2017/0419 should be approved.

 

Report in Full

 

DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL

7.         The application proposes demolition of all existing structures and construction of a new two (2) storey dwelling house containing four (4) bedrooms, with an attached single storey secondary dwelling containing two (2) bedrooms. The proposal also includes an attached double garage for the principal dwelling.

 

Pedestrian access to the principal dwelling is via a pathway from Gungah Bay Road. Pedestrian access to the proposed secondary dwelling is provided along the southern (side) boundary of the site. Vehicular access to the site for the principal dwelling is currently available from the existing right of carriageway (ROC), which burdens and benefits both the subject site and the adjoining property to the rear, known as 37A Gungah Bay Road.

 

A double garage is proposed in conjunction with the principal dwelling and is located to the rear of the building. The proposal maintains the ability for a vehicle to enter and exit the site in a forward direction by including a reversing swept path that encroaches on 37A Gungah Bay Road, which is permitted by virtue of the Section 88B instrument for the ROC which allows for this to occur.

 

Notably, the proposal includes approximately 14sqm of batter slope directly behind (to the east) the existing garage in addition to some fill adjoining the garage (in the north eastern corner). These elements are within the ROC as shown on the site plan. This issue is discussed further in the assessment section of this report.

 

The proposal does not involve the removal of any significant vegetation.

 

DESCRIPTION OF THE SITE AND LOCALITY

8.         The subject site is legally described as Lot 451 DP 850836 and is known as 37 Gungah Bay Road, Oatley. The property is located on the eastern side of Gungah Bay Road, between Acacia Street and Seaforth Avenue.

 

The dimensions of the site are approximately 20.12m (width) x 27.62m (depth), with a total area of 555.8sqm. There is an existing single storey fibro dwelling situated on the subject land.

 

The land slopes and drains to the north-western corner of the site fronting Gungah Bay Road. There is no significant vegetation on site that will be affected by the proposal.

 

The property is affected by a 1m wide drainage easement and 2.5m wide right of carriageway (ROC) and easement for services, which runs along the northern boundary of the site which reciprocally benefits and burdens both the subject site and the property to the rear at 37A Gungah Road. 

 

Surrounding development in the immediate locality consists of a mix of detached dwelling houses in predominantly low density residential setting. 

 

 

Figure 1 - Site Plan of the proposed development

 

Figure 2 - View of the site from Gungah Bay Road, Oatley

 

APPLICABLE PLANNING CONTROLS

9.         The applicable planning controls relevant to the proposal are contained within:

 

·    Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No 2 – Georges River Catchment (Deemed SEPP);

·    State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009;

·    State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 - Remediation of Land;

·    State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004;

·    State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017;

·    Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Environment);

·    Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012;

·    Hurstville Development Control Plan No 1 2007.

 

PLANNING ASSESSMENT

10.       The site has been inspected and the proposed development has been assessed under the relevant Section 4.15(1) "Matters for Consideration" of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. 

 

Environmental Planning Instruments

 

Local Environmental Plan

 

Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012

11.       The site is zoned R2 Low Density Residential under the Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 (HLEP 2012). The proposed development (ie dwelling houses and secondary dwellings) is permissible with development consent and satisfies the zone objectives.

 

The maximum building height is 9m and the maximum floor space ratio (FSR) is 0.6:1. The proposal complies with the abovementioned development standards that apply to the site under the HLEP 2012.

 

Compliance is also achieved for the development standards which limit the sizes of dwelling houses (clause 6.5) and secondary dwellings (clause 5.4(9)) under the HLEP2012. Further discussion on how compliance is achieved with these development standards follows the compliance table below.

Figure 4 - Extract from Zoning Map (HLEP 2012)

 

The extent to which the proposal complies with the relevant standards of Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012 is outlined in the table below.

 

Clause

Standard

Proposed

Complies

Part 2 – Permitted or Prohibited Development

R2 Low Density Residential

Dwelling houses and secondary dwellings are permissible in the R2 zone.

Yes

Objectives of the Zone

The proposal is consistent with the objectives of the zone as it will provide for the needs of the housing needs of the community within a low density residential environment, and will induce a range of housing types – i.e. introduction of a secondary dwelling to the site.

Yes

4.3 – Height of Buildings

9m as identified on Height of Buildings Map

7.75m

Yes

4.4 – Floor Space Ratio

0.6:1 as identified on Floor Space Ratio Map

0.57:1

Yes

4.5 – Calculation of floor space ratio and site area

FSR and site area calculated in accordance with Cl.4.5

In accordance with Cl.4.5

Yes

5.4(9) Secondary dwellings floor space

Floor area not to exceed the greater of 60sqm or 10% of total floor area of principal dwelling whichever is greater

52sqm

Yes (See discussion below)

5.10 – Heritage Conservation

Heritage impact statement required if site involves heritage item

Site does not contain or adjoin a heritage item

N/A

6.1 – Acid Sulfate Soils

Acid Sulfate Soils Management Plan must be prepared

Site not affected by acid sulphate soils

N/A

6.4 – Foreshore Scenic Protection Area

Council cannot grant consent to the carrying out of development on land within a Foreshore Scenic Protection Area unless consideration has been made of the following:

 

“(3)(a) affect the natural environment, including topography, rock formations, canopy vegetation or other significant vegetation, and

 

(b) affect the visual environment, including the views to and from the Georges River, foreshore reserves, residential areas and public places, and

 

(c) affect the environmental heritage of Hurstville, and

 

 

(d) Contribute to the scenic qualities of the residential areas and the Georges River by maintaining the dominance of landscape over built form.”

The site is not located within a Foreshore Scenic Protection Area

N/A

6.5 Gross Floor Area of Dwellings in Residential Zones

The maximum gross floor area (GFA) for a dwelling house in the R2 zone with a site area of ≤ 630sqm is 305.69sqm (ie 55% of site area)

The maximum GFA for the proposed dwelling house is 255.25sqm (ie 45.9% of site area)

Yes (see comments below)

6.7 – Essential Services

Water, electricity, sewerage, stormwater, drainage, vehicular access.

Existing services available per site survey and existing residential accommodation on the site.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Adequate facilities for the supply of water, electricity and sewerage are available to the site.

The proposed stormwater drainage measures are acceptable and the property slopes and drains to Gungah Bay Road.

Vehicle access is available from Gungah Bay Road.

 

Compliance with Maximum Gross Floor Area for Dwelling Houses and Secondary Dwellings

12.       Clause 6.5 includes a development standard which seeks to limit the gross floor area of dwellings within certain residential zones.

 

Specifically, clause 6.5 stipulates the maximum gross floor area for a development that is a dwelling house on land within the R2 Low Density Residential zone that has a site area of equal to or less than 630sqm is 55% of the site area.

 

The proposal includes a building whereby part of that building includes a dwelling house (principal dwelling), and part of the building includes a secondary dwelling.

 

It is noted that the definition of a ‘building’ per Section 1.4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the Act) includes ‘part of a building’. As such, the aforementioned clause within the HLEP2012 can be interpreted to apply to that part of the building which contains the principal dwelling only.

 

In this circumstance, it is noted that the principal dwelling, or ‘dwelling house’, includes a gross floor area of 255.25sqm, and is therefore compliant with the development standard prescribed under clause 6.5.

 

Regarding the maximum gross floor area permitted for secondary dwellings, reference is made to clause 5.4(9) of the HLEP2012 which prescribes a maximum gross floor area for secondary dwelling of 60sqm or 10% of the total floor area of the principal dwelling, whichever is the greater.

 

The proposed secondary dwelling includes a gross floor area of 59sqm which is less than 60sqm, and less than 10% of the total floor area of the principal dwelling. Therefore, the secondary dwelling complies with clause 5.4(9) of the HLEP2012.

 

Having regard to the above, whether looking at the maximum gross floor area permitted for the dwelling house or secondary dwelling, compliance with the HLEP2012 development standards is achieved.

 

State Environmental Planning Policies

13.       Compliance with the relevant state environmental planning policies is outlined in the table below.

 

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING POLICY

COMPLIES

Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No 2 - Georges River Catchment

Yes

State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 - Remediation of Land

Yes

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index BASIX) 2004

Yes

State Environmental Planning Policy Affordable (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 - Division 2 Secondary Dwellings

Noted

(See comment below)

State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017

Not directly relevant to the proposal

Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Environment)

 

Relevant consideration but not pertinent to the assessment due to status of the draft

 

Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No 2 - Georges River Catchment (Deemed SEPP)

14.       The Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No 2 – Georges River Catchment (deemed SEPP) applies to subject land.

 

The policy aims to maintain and improve the water quality and river flows of the Georges River and its tributaries and ensure that development is managed in a manner that is in keeping with the national, state, regional and local significance of the catchment.

 

All stormwater from the proposed development can be treated in accordance with Council’s Water Management Policy and would satisfy the relevant provisions of the aforementioned deemed SEPP.

 

We note that the Department of Planning and Environment (DPE) is seeking to consolidate this SEPP along with several others and include relevant provisions within a new draft policy that was recently exhibited referred to as the new Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Environment).

 

Further details in relation to the new draft SEPP are provided under the relevant heading below.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No 55 - Remediation of Land (SEPP 55)

15.       SEPP 55 aims to promote the remediation of contaminated land in order to reduce the risk of harm to human health or any other aspect of the environment.

 

Clause 7 requires contamination and remediation to be considered in determining a development application. The consent authority must not consent to the carrying out of development on land unless it has considered whether or not the land is contaminated.

 

The site has a history of residential uses and as such, site contamination is not suspected. In this regard, no further assessment is warranted with regards to site contamination.

 

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

16.       A BASIX Certificate has been issued for the proposed development and the commitments required under the certificate have been satisfied.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy Affordable (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 (ARHSEPP)

17.       As per clause 8 of the ARHSEPP, the ARHSEPP applies to the extent of any inconsistency between it and any other environmental planning instrument. On this point, it is noted that the provisions of clause 22 of the ARHSEPP specify that development for the purposes of secondary dwellings may be carried out with consent.

 

As covered earlier, the provisions of the HLEP 2012 already prescribe secondary dwellings as being permitted with consent in the R2 zone. As such, there is no inconsistency between the ARHSEPP and the HLEP 2012.

 

Similarly, the ARHSEPP includes development standards pertaining to the maximum size of secondary dwellings being not more than 60sqm or that prescribed under another environmental planning instrument. The HLEP 2012 does not include any inconsistency with the maximum size of secondary dwellings as per clause 5.4(9) of the HLEP2012 outlined earlier, which also specifies a maximum area of 60sqm. The proposal achieves compliance with a gross floor area of 59sqm.

 

Clause 22(4)(a) of the ARHSEPP indicates that the consent authority must not refuse consent to development for the purposes of secondary dwellings on the basis of site area if the secondary dwelling is attached to the principal dwelling, and must not refuse consent if no additional parking for the secondary dwelling is to be provided.

 

It is noted that the proposal is attached to the principal dwelling and does not include any parking for the secondary dwelling.

 

The proposal is being recommended for approval.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017 (Vegetation SEPP)

18.       The Vegetation SEPP applies to land in the Sydney and Newcastle metropolitan areas, and all land that is zoned for urban purposes or environmental conservation/management under the Standard Instrument - Principal Local Environmental Plan.

 

The SEPP was introduced as part of suite of Land Management and Biodiversity Conservation (LMBC) reforms that commenced in New South Wales on 25 August 2017.

 

The SEPP works together with the Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 and the Local Land Services Amendment Act 2016 to create a framework for the regulation of clearing of native vegetation in NSW.

 

The SEPP applies to clearing of:

 

1. native vegetation above the Biodiversity Offset Scheme (BOS) threshold where a proponent will require an approval from the Native Vegetation Panel established under the Local Land Services Amendment Act 2016; and

 

2. vegetation below the BOS threshold where a proponent will require a permit from Council if that vegetation is identified in the council’s development control plan (DCP).

The proposal does not involve any clearing and as such, the provisions within the Vegetation SEPP are not directly relevant to the proposal.

 

Draft Environmental Planning Instruments

 

Draft State Environmental Planning Policy (Environment) (Environment SEPP)

19.       The DPE have been working to develop a new SEPP for the protection and management of our natural environment. The policy will replace seven (7) existing SEPP’s including the Greater Metropolitan Regional Environmental Plan No. 2 - Georges River Catchment by updating and consolidating relevant provisions.

 

The new Draft Environment SEPP was exhibited from 31 October 2017 until the 31 January 2018. Engagement is now closed and feedback is currently being considered.

 

As such, the draft plan is a consideration in the assessment of this application however given the timeframe for adoption is not yet imminent or certain, no further assessment is required.

 

Development Control Plans

 

Hurstville Development Control Plan No 1 (DCP 1)

20.       The provisions of the Hurstville DCP 1 apply to the proposed development, with the relevant sections listed below.

 

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN No 1 – LGA WIDE – SECTION 4.4 DWELLING HOUSES ON STANDARD LOTS

21.       The proposed dwelling has been assessed against the requirements of Section 4.4 of Council’s Development Control Plan No 1 – LGA Wide as shown below.

 

Clause

Standard

Proposed

Complies

4.4.2. Building Height

DS2.1 Max. ridge height as per LEP

 

DS2.2. Max. ceiling height to external wall = 7.2m

 

DS2.4. Buildings to be staggered or stepped into the natural slope of the land (Steep or sloping sites)

7.75m

 

 

5.8m

 

 

N/A

Yes

 

 

Yes

 

 

Yes

4.4.3 Setback Controls

 

Front Setback

(Building Line):

DS3.1 Minimum setback from the primary street boundary is:

 

a.   4.5m to the main building face

 

b.   5.5m to the front wall of the garage, carport roof or onsite parking space

 

 

 

 

4.5m

 

 

 

Garage is located at the rear behind primary dwelling

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

Yes

 

Side Boundary Setbacks:

DS3.4. 900mm – ground floor level

 

 

 

1.2m – first floor level

 

 

Northern boundary setback – 3.5m

Southern boundary setback – 1.8m

 

Northern boundary setback – 3.5m

Southern boundary setback – 1.8m

 

Yes

 

Yes

 

 

Yes

 

Yes

Rear Setback:

DS3.6. Ground Floor

Level – 3m 

 

First floor level – 6m

 

Where a first floor balcony is proposed at the rear, 6m from the balustrade

 

3.3m

 

 

9m

 

No balcony proposed

Yes

 

 

Yes

 

Yes

4.4.4. Facades

DS4.1. DS4.1. The dwelling house has a front door or window to a habitable room facing the primary street frontage.

 

DS4.2. The dwelling house incorporates at least two of the following building elements facing any street frontage:

a. entry feature or portico

b. awnings or other features over windows c. eaves and sun shading d. window planter box treatment

e. bay windows or similar features

f. wall offsets, balconies, verandas, pergolas or the like

 

DS4.3. Garage doors are not wider than 6m.

The front door and living area window both face the primary street frontage.

 

 

The dwelling house incorporates the following:

·    Entry feature; and

·    The master bedroom at first floor is offset 9.0m from the first floor boundary wall fronting Gungah Bay Road.

 

Garage door measures 4.8m in width

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

4.4.6. Solar Access

DS6.1. Development allows for at least 3 hours of sunlight on the windows of main living areas and adjoining principal private open space of adjacent dwellings between 9.00 am and 3.00 pm on 22 June.

 

DS6.2. Development complies with the Energy Efficiency section in Appendix 1 of this DCP and BASIX requirements.

 

The development allows for more than 3 hours sunlight to adjoining developments.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Achieved

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

4.4.7. Visual Privacy

DS7.1. Windows of proposed dwelling must be offset from neighbouring windows by 1m, especially windows of high-use rooms.

 

DS7.2. Windows for primary living rooms must be designed so that they maintain privacy of adjoining site’s principal private open space.

 

Window offsets and highlight windows are used at ground floor level to mitigate any privacy impacts.

No windows are proposed at first floor along the southern elevation.

Yes

4.4.9. Vehicle access, parking and manoeuvring

DS9.1. Minimum car parking:

2 car parking spaces

2 car parking spaces provided

Yes

4.4.10. Landscaped areas and private open space

DS10.1. Where located outside the FSPA, a minimum of 20% of site area is landscaped open space.

 

DS10.2. Where located in the FSPA, a minimum of 25% of the site area is landscaped open space.

 

DS10.3. The minimum dimension of landscaped open space is 2m in any direction.

 

DS10.5. An area of Principal Private Open Space is to be provided which:

a.   has a minimum area of 30m2

b.   has a minimum dimension of 5m

c.   is located at ground level and behind the front wall of the dwelling

d.   is directly accessible from a main living area

24% (134.83sqm) of landscaped open space is provided.

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

Achieved

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

58sqm

 

Achieved

 

Achieved

 

 

 

 

Achieved

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

N/A

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

Yes

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

Yes

4.4.11. Stormwater

Drainage by gravity to adjacent road kerb & Council’s drainage system

Drainage by gravity to Georges River

 

See stormwater assessment table provided under the heading ‘DCP No 1 -

Yes

 

Building Height

22.       The proposal results in a development that will measure 7.75m in height to the ridge of the dwelling. The proposed building height complies with the 9m maximum height as outlined in HLEP2012.

 

The proposal will comprise a maximum ceiling height of 5.8m to external wall which complies with the maximum ceiling height of 7.2 as required by the DCP.

 

The proposed building has been appropriately designed to respond to the topography of the site and is consistent with the building height of surrounding two (2) storey development within the immediate vicinity.

 

Setbacks

23.       The DCP requires a minimum front setback of 4.5m (Clause 4.4.3) for the principal dwelling. The proposed development provides a 4.51m front setback to the face of the main building in accordance with this control.

 

At ground floor the development presents a northern (side) boundary setback of 3.5m and a southern (side) boundary setback of 1.8m. The proposed side setbacks are therefore consistent with the minimum side setback control of 900mm prescribed within Clause 4.4.3 of the DCP.

 

At first floor the development presents a northern (side) boundary setback of 3.5m and a southern (side) boundary setback of 1.8m. The proposed side setbacks are therefore consistent with the minimum side setback control of 1.2m prescribed within Clause 4.4.3 of the DCP.

 

The development proposes a 3.3m rear setback at ground floor level and a 9m rear setback at first floor level. The proposed rear setbacks at both ground and first floor level are compliant with Council’s controls. The development dos not propose any balconies.

 

Facades

24.       Council’s residential dwelling controls require the incorporation of at least two of the nominated building elements outlined within section 4.4 of the DCP (DS 4.2).

 

The dwelling house incorporates a front door and entry feature along with windows that face the primary street frontage (Gungah Bay Road) and as such, is considered to be acceptable.

 

The garage door is not visible from the front façade as it is located to the rear of the proposed dwelling house, however, the proposed width of the garage door does comply with Council’s maximum 6m requirement.

 

Solar Access

25.       The DCP states that development should allow for at least 3 hours of sunlight on the windows of main living areas and adjoining principal private open space of adjacent dwellings between 9.00am and 3.00pm on 21 June.

 

The shadow diagrams provided with the subject application indicate that the development allows for more than 3 hours sunlight to adjoining developments and therefore comply with the solar access controls prescribed in Section 4.4.6 of the DCP.

 

Visual Privacy

26.       Windows have been offset and highlight windows are used at ground floor level to mitigate any privacy impacts. No windows are proposed at first floor along the southern elevation. No balconies are proposed as part of the development.

 

Vehicle access, parking and manoeuvring

27.       Council’s controls require the provision of two (2) on-site parking spaces for the principal dwelling and no parking is required for the secondary dwelling. The proposed development provides a double garage for the principal dwelling and therefore satisfies the afore-mentioned parking requirement.

 

Vehicular access to the site is currently available from the existing right of carriageway (ROC), which burdens and benefits both the subject site and the adjoining property to the rear, known as 37A Gungah Bay Road).

 

The proposal maintains the ability for a vehicle to enter and exit the site in a forward direction by including a reversing swept path that encroaches on the adjoining site, which is acceptable given the Section 88B instrument for the ROC allows for this to occur.

 

The proposal includes approximately 14sqm of batter slope within the ROC as shown on the site plan directly behind (to the east) the existing garage. In addition some fill adjoining the garage (in the north eastern corner) is also proposed within the ROC. This will reduce the available area of the ROC and potential impede on the level of access and manoeuvrability currently afforded on the ROC.

 

Accordingly, it is recommended that a suitable condition of consent be imposed to ensure that these works do not form part of the development consent and the ROC is left unimpeded.

 

Landscaped Areas and Private Open Space

28.       Where a site is located outside the Foreshore Scenic Protection Area (FSPA), a minimum of 20% of site area is landscaped open space. The subject development proposes 24% (134.83sqm) of landscaped open space is provided.

 

Council’s controls prescribe a minimum 30sqm area of principal private open space to be provided for a dwelling house. The development provides 58sqm complying with Council’s controls. The private open space is directly accessible from a main living area and is located at ground level behind the front wall of the dwelling.

 

Stormwater

29.       The property slopes and drains to the street (Gungah Bay Road) and the proposed method of stormwater drainage is for discharge to be directed to Council’s kerb and gutter as indicated in the Statement of Environmental Effects.

 

The BASIX commitments require a 3000L rainwater tank and the concept drainage and hydraulic plan show overflow being directed to Council’s existing stormwater system at the street.

 

The submitted stormwater plan has been assessed as a concept plan only. Final detailed plans of the drainage system, prepared by a suitably qualified engineer shall be submitted for approval with the Construction Certificate.

 

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN No 1 – LGA WIDE – SECTION 4.6 SECONDARY DWELLINGS

 

Clause

Standard

Proposed

Complies

4.6.1 Site Area

DS1.1. Minimum site area is 450sqm

555.8sqm

Yes

4.6.2 Floor Area

DS2.1. The maximum floor area is 60sqm, or 10% of the total floor area of the dwelling house, whichever is greater.

59sqm

Yes

4.6.3 Building Height

DS3.1. Maximum building height is 1 storey.

 

 

DS3.2. Minimum floor

to ceiling height is 2.4m.

 

DS3.3. Maximum floor to ceiling height is 3.6m.

1 storey within lower ground level of the development.

 

2.43m

 

 

 

N/A

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N/A

4.4.4 Setbacks

DS4.1. The minimum setback to side and rear boundaries is 900mm.

 

DS4.2. The secondary dwelling is setback behind the main building face to a primary or secondary street.

Southern (side) setback – 1.8m

 

The secondary dwelling is setback behind the main building face to Gungah Bay Rd.

Yes

 

 

 

Yes

4.4.5 Car parking

DS5.1. Car parking is located behind the main building face to primary or secondary streets.

 

DS5.2. Car parking requirements for the principal dwelling must still be achieved.

 

DS5.3. Car parking does not interfere with the parking and movement of vehicles associated with the dwelling house.

Car parking is provided at the rear of the dwelling

 

 

Complies - Two (2) car parking spaces provided

 

 

Achieved

Yes

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

 

 

Yes

4.4.6 Landscaped Open Space

DS6.1. The landscaped area for a secondary dwelling is shared with the principal dwelling.

 

DS6.2. Minimum landscaped open space outside the FSPA is 20% of the site area.

Landscaped area accessible from secondary dwelling.

 

 

24% (134.83sqm)

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

 

Yes

 

 

 

4.4.7 Subdivision

DS7.1. Subdivision of secondary dwellings is not permitted.

Subdivision is not proposed

Yes

4.4.8 Stormwater

DS7.2. Stormwater management is in accordance with the provisions contained in Section 4.4 Dwelling Houses on Standard Lots – PC.11.

See Assessment in Section 4.4 Dwelling Houses on Standard Lots – PC.11.

Yes

 

Site Area

29.       A minimum site area of 450sqm is required for development that involves the construction of secondary dwellings. This is to ensure that setbacks, parking, landscaping and access can reasonably be achieved on site.

 

The site area for the proposed development is 555.8sqm and as such, the proposal complies with the aforementioned control.

 

Floor Area

30.       The DCP prescribes a maximum floor area is 60sqm, or 10% of the total floor area of the dwelling house, whichever is greater for a secondary dwelling. The secondary dwelling proposes a floor area of 59sqm complying with Council’s controls 

 

Building Height

31.       The secondary dwelling proposes a height of one (1) storey within the lower ground level of the development. The secondary dwelling is designed with a ceiling height of 2.43m complying with the minimum ceiling height of 2.4m as prescribed in Council’s controls.

 

Setbacks

32.       There are no front setbacks detailed in the DCP that apply to secondary dwellings. The proposed secondary dwelling is located in line with the principal dwelling and this is considered to be acceptable as it presents as part of the main building. Access to the secondary dwelling is not visible from the street and is located along the southern elevation of the development.

 

The minimum side and rear setback for secondary dwellings is 900mm. The proposed secondary dwelling provides a 1.8m setback to the side (southern boundary) of the site. The rear setback is not applicable in the circumstances as the principal dwelling extends out behind the secondary dwelling – refer to Figure 2 earlier in this report. Therefore, the proposal satisfies Council’s side setback requirement.

 

The design of the secondary dwelling is well integrated into the design of the overall development and therefore will not present as two (2) dwellings when viewed from Gungah Bay Road.

 

Car parking

33.       There are no specific parking requirements for secondary dwellings in the DCP and the proposal does not include any onsite parking for the for the secondary dwelling.

 

Landscaped Open Space

34.       Council’s controls for landscaped open space require the landscaped area for a secondary dwelling to be shared with the principal dwelling. The secondary dwelling achieves compliance with this control.

 

The minimum amount of landscaped open space on a site outside the FSPA is 20% of the site area. The development proposes 24% (134.83sqm) and therefore complies.

 

Stormwater

35.       See Assessment in Section 4.4 Dwelling Houses on Standard Lots – PC.11.

 

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN NO 1 – LGA WIDE – SECTION 3.1 CAR PARKING AND MANOEUVRING

36.       The extent to which the proposed development complies with the parking provisions is outlined below.

 

Section 3.1

Requirement

Proposed

Complies

3.1.1.5 Layout

AS2890.1 – Min. dimensions (double garage) = 5.4m x 5.4m

5.6m x 5.4m (double garage)

Yes

3.1.1.9 Ramp, Transitions & Driveways

AS2890.2 – Ramp and transition grades and height clearance over the ramp

Compliance achieved.

Yes

 

Layout

37.       The development proposes a double garage measuring 5.6m x 5.4m, complying with AS2890.1 – Min. dimensions (double garage) = 5.4m x 5.4m

 

Ramp, Transitions & Driveways

38.       Compliance with the relevant Australian Standard (AS2890.2 – Ramp and transition grades and height clearance over the ramp) is achieved.

 

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN NO 1 – LGA WIDE - SECTION 3.4 CRIME PREVENTION THROUGH ENVIRONMENTAL DESIGN  

39.       The extent to which the proposal complies with the requirements Section 3.4 is detailed below.

 

Section 3.4

Requirement

Proposed

Complies

PC1 – Site and building layout

-Provide surveillance opportunities

-Dwelling addresses street

-Habitable rooms are directed towards the front of the building

-Entrance clearly visible

The dwelling complies with these requirements.

Yes

PC3 – Landscaping

Avoid medium height vegetation with concentrated top to bottom foliage

Landscape plan prepared by a landscape architect and is appropriate

Yes

PC4 – Fencing

Front fence  preferred height of 1m

1.8m high picket fence

No. See comment below.

PC6 – Building identification

Dwellings to be clearly numbered

Can be provided

To be conditioned

 

Site and Building Layout

40.       The dwelling provides the following and therefore complies with Council’s controls:

·    Provides surveillance opportunities over the street and also the ROC;

·    Dwelling addresses street;

·    Habitable rooms are directed towards the front of the building; and

·    Entrance clearly visible

 

Landscaping

41.       The landscape plan has been prepared by a landscape architect and is considered appropriate. The plan ensures the development is designed comply with Section 3.4 of the DCP.

 

Fencing

42.       The development originally proposed a 1.8m high picket fence along the front elevation of the property. Insufficient details of the fencing were provided with the application to ascertain compliance with the provisions of the DCP, and as a result the front fence has been deleted from the development application.

 

An appropriate condition is to be imposed in the consent stating that the front fence does not form part of this development application.

 

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN No 1 – LGA WIDE – SECTION 3.5 ENERGY EFFICIENCY

43.       The proposal has achieved a BASIX Certificate and therefore complies with the objectives of Section 3.5 of Development Control Plan No. 1. The proposed development also complies with the solar access requirements of Development Control Plan No 1 – LGA wide.

 

ENVIRONMENTAL, SOCIAL AND ECONOMIC IMPACTS

 

Natural Environment

44.       The proposed development will not result in any significant adverse impacts to the natural environment. The subject site contains one (1)  tree within the front setback of the site which will be removed as a result of the proposal.

 

A landscape plan prepared by a landscape architect has been submitted with the application. The plan shows that suitable replacement planting will be introduced resulting in an overall improvement in landscaping across the site.

 

Built Environment

45.       The proposal is not considered to have any adverse impacts on the built environment. It complies with all key controls and will achieve a built form that is consistent with the applicable planning framework and the character of the local area.

 

Social Impact

46.       The proposal will not give rise to adverse social impacts. It provides for the development of one (1) new principal dwelling house in addition to a secondary dwelling. As such, the development will provide more housing choice to meet the needs of the community, which is considered to be beneficial in terms of social impacts and in line with the objectives of the R2 Low Density Residential zone under the HLEP2012.

 

Economic Impact

47.       The proposed development is not considered to generate any adverse economic impacts.

 

Suitability of the Site

48.       The proposed development is of a scale and design that is suitable for the site having regard to its size, shape, topography, vegetation and relationship to adjoining developments.

 

SUBMISSIONS AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST

49.       The proposal was notified to sixteen (16) adjoining neighbours for a period of fourteen (14) days during which time no submissions were received.

 

CONCLUSION

50.       The application seeks approval for demolition of existing structures and construction of a new two (2) storey dwelling, with an attached single storey secondary dwelling.

 

The application has been assessed against having regard to the matters of consideration listed in section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, including the provisions of any environmental planning instrument, any proposed instrument and any development control plan.

 

The likely impacts of the development, along with the suitability of the site, any submissions made in relation to the proposal and the public interest have been thoroughly evaluated.

 

The proposed development is generally consistent with all relevant requirements and the application is recommended for approval, subject to suitable conditions of development consent.

 

DETERMINATION AND STATEMENT OF REASONS

 

Statement of Reasons

 

1.   The proposed development provides housing within a low density residential environment in accordance with the applicable zone objectives.

2.   The proposed development, subject to the recommended conditions, is consistent with the objectives of the applicable environmental planning instruments, being SEPP 55 – Remediation of Land, SEPP (BASIX) 2004, and Hurstville Local Environmental Plan 2012.

3.   The proposed development is consistent with the objectives of the applicable development control plan, being Hurstville DCP No 1.

4.   The proposed development is considered to be of an appropriate scale and form for the site and the character of the locality.

5.   In consideration of the aforementioned reasons, the proposed development is a suitable response to the site and its approval is in the public interest. 

 

THAT pursuant to Section 4.16(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, the Council grants development consent to Development Application DA2017/0419 for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a new two (2) storey dwelling, with attached single storey secondary dwelling at Lot 451 DP 850836 and known as 37 Gungah Bay Road Oatley, subject to the following conditions of consent:

 

Schedule A – Site Specific Conditions

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS

The conditions that follow this section A of the Notice of Determination are general conditions which are imposed to ensure that the development is carried out in accordance with the development consent.

 

1.         DEV6.1 - Approved Plans - The development must be implemented in accordance with the approved plans and supporting documentation listed below which have been endorsed by Council’s approved stamp, except where marked up on the plans and/or amended by conditions of this consent:

 

Description

Reference No.

Date

Revision

Prepared by

Site Plan

Dwg No. 03

09.02.18

-

Green Tree Designs

Elevations 1 & 2

Dwg No. 09

09.02.18

-

Green Tree Designs

Elevations 3 & 4

Dwg No. 10

09.02.18

-

Green Tree Designs

Ground Floor Plan

Dwg No. 07

09.02.18

-

Green Tree Designs

First Floor Plan

Dwg No. 08

09.02.18

-

Green Tree Designs

Schedule of External Finishes

201714

17.09.18

-

-

 

2.         Fencing - Fencing does not form part of this application. Consent for any fencing should be pursued separately from this application.

 

3.         Right of Carriageway - This consent does not authorise any buildings, structures or other elements within the existing right of carriageway described in Deposited Plan 850836 (such as the proposed fill and batter slope) as shown on the site plan referred to in Condition 1.

 

SEPARATE APPROVALS UNDER OTHER LEGISLATION

These conditions have been imposed to ensure that the applicant is aware of any separate approvals required under other legislation, for example: approvals required under the Local Government Act 1993 of the Roads Act 1993.

 

4.         APR7.2 - Section 138 Roads Act 1993 and Section 68 Local Government Act 1993 - Unless otherwise specified by a condition of this consent, this Development Consent does not give any approval to undertake works on public infrastructure.

 

Separate approval is required under Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993 and/or Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993 for any of the following activities carried out in, on or over a public road (including the footpath) listed below.

 

An application is required to be lodged and approved prior to the commencement of any of the following works or activities;

 

(a) Placing or storing materials or equipment;

(b) Placing or storing waste containers or skip bins;

(c)  Erecting a structure or carrying out work

(d) Swinging or hoisting goods over any part of a public road by means of a lift, crane or the like;

(e) Pumping concrete from a public road;

(f)   Pumping water from the site into the public road;

(g) Constructing a vehicular crossing or footpath;

(h)  Establishing a “works zone”;

(i)   Digging up or disturbing the surface of a public road (e.g. Opening the road for the purpose of connections to utility providers);

(j)   Stormwater & ancillary works in the road reserve; and

(k)  Stormwater & ancillary to public infrastructure on private land

(l)   If any excavation is to be supported by the use of below ground (cable) anchors that are constructed under Council’s roadways/footways.

 

These separate activity approvals must be obtained and evidence of the approval provided to the Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

The relevant Application Forms for these activities can be downloaded from Council’s website www.georgesriver.nsw.gov.au.  For further information, please contact Council’s Customer Service Centre on (02) 9330 6222.

 

5.         APR7.3 - Vehicular Crossing - Minor Development - Constructing a vehicular crossing and/or footpath requires a separate approval under Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993 prior to the commencement of those works. 

 

To apply for approval, complete the Driveway Crossing on Council Road Reserve Application Form which can be downloaded from Georges River Council’s Website at www.georgesriver.nsw.gov.au. Lodge the application form, together with the associated fees at Council’s Customer Service Centre, during business hours.  Refer to Section P1 and P2, in Council’s adopted Fees and Charges for the administrative and inspection charges associated with Vehicular Crossing applications.

 

An approval for a new or modified vehicular crossing will contain the approved access and/or alignment levels which will be required to construct the crossing and/or footpath.   Once approved, all work shall be carried out in accordance with Council’s specifications applicable at the time, prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

 

REQUIREMENTS OF OTHER GOVERNMENT AGENCIES

These conditions have been imposed by other NSW Government agencies either through their role as referral bodies, concurrence authorities or by issuing General Terms of Approval under the Integrated provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

6.         GOV8.12 - Sydney Water – Tap in TM - The approved plans must be submitted to a Sydney Water Tap in TM to determine whether the development application will affect Sydney Water’s sewer and water mains, stormwater drains and/or easements, and if further requirements need to be met.  The approved plans will be appropriately endorsed.  For details please refer to ‘Plumbing, building and developing’ section of Sydney Water’s web site at www.sydneywater.com.au then see ‘Building’, or telephone 13000 TAP IN (1300 082 746).  The Certifying Authority must ensure that a Tap in TM agent has appropriately stamped the plans prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

These conditions either require modification to the development proposal or further investigation/information prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate to ensure that there is no adverse impact.

 

7.         CC9.1 - Fees to be paid - The fees listed in the table below must be paid in accordance with the conditions of this consent and Council’s adopted Fees and Charges applicable at the time of payment (available at www.georgesriver.nsw.gov.au).

 

Payments must be made prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate or prior to the commencement of work (if there is no associated Construction Certificate).

 

Council will only accept Bank Cheque or Electronic Funds Transfer (EFT) for transaction values of $500,000 or over. Council must be contacted prior to payment to determine correct total amount to be paid and bank account details (if applicable).

 

A summary of the fees to be paid are listed below:

 

Fee Type

Fee

GENERAL FEES

Long Service Levy (to Long Service Corporation)

Or, provide evidence of Payment direct to the Long Service Corporation.

See https://portal.longservice.nsw.gov.au/bci/levy/

Builders Damage Deposit

$1,900.00

Inspection Fee for Refund of Damage Deposit

$550.00

 

General Fees

The fees and charges above are subject to change and are as set out in the version of Council's Schedule of Fees and Charges or as required by other Government Authorities, applicable at the time of payment.

 

8.         CC9.4 - Damage Deposit – Minor Works - In order to insure against damage to Council property the following is required:

 

(a) Pay Council, before the issue of the Construction Certificate, a damage deposit for the cost of making good any damage caused to any Council property as a result of the development: $1,900.00

 

(b) Pay Council, before the issue of the Construction Certificate, a non-refundable inspection fee to enable assessment of any damage and repairs where required:  $550.00

 

(c)  Submit to Council, before the commencement of work, a photographic record of the condition of the Council nature strip, footpath and driveway crossing, or any area likely to be affected by the proposal.

 

At the completion of work Council will inspect the public works, and the damage deposit will be refunded in full upon completion of work where no damage occurs. Otherwise the amount will be either forfeited or partly refunded according to the amount of damage.

 

9.         CC9.6 - Site Management Plan - A Site Management Plan detailing all weather access control points, sedimentation controls, fencing, builder’s site sheds office, amenities, materials storage and unloading arrangements must be submitted with the application for the Construction Certificate. 

 

10.       CC9.9 - BASIX Commitments - All energy efficiency measures as detailed in the BASIX Certificate No. 861093M must be implemented on the plans lodged with the application for the Construction Certificate.

 

11.       CC9.13 - Low reflectivity roof - Roofing materials must be low glare and reflectivity. Details of finished external materials including colours and texture must be provided to the Certifying Authority.

 

12.       CC9.34 - Stormwater System - The submitted stormwater plan has been assessed as a concept plan only. Final detailed plans of the drainage system, prepared by a professional engineer specialising in hydraulic engineering, shall be submitted for approval with the Construction Certificate.

 

(a) All stormwater shall drain by gravity to Council's kerb and gutter directly in front of the development site in accordance with the Australian/New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 3500.3: 2015 (as amended).

(b) All overflows of roof waters from any rainwater tank shall drain by gravity to Council’s kerb and gutter directly in front of the development site in accordance with the Australian/New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 3500.3: 2015 (as amended).

(c) All other impervious surface water runoff such as driveways and footpaths shall drain by gravity to Council’s kerb and gutter directly in front of the development site.

 

13.       CC9.43 - Stormwater Drainage Plan Details - Stormwater drainage plans including pipe sizes, type, grade, length, invert levels, dimensions and types of drainage pits prepared by a professional engineering specialising in hydraulic engineering shall be submitted with the Construction Certificate application.

 

These plans shall be prepared in accordance with the Australian Institute of Engineers Australian Rainfall and Runoff (1987) and Council's Stormwater Drainage Policy

 

14.       CC9.44 - Driveway Construction Plan Details - Detailed engineering plans for the driveway shall be submitted with the Construction Certificate application for approval that show:

 

(a) Longitudinal and cross sections, gradients, access onto the proposed lots, type of construction materials designed in accordance with Council's Subdivision standards and AS/NZS2890.1-2004.

(b) Suitable underground provision for the supply of all relevant services to the proposed lots (proposed position of pipes and conduits).

(c)  The full length of the driveway designed with a minimum 150mm thick reinforced concrete and minimum of 2.7m wide pavement/kerb face to kerb face width, and a non-slip surface.

 

15.       CC9.48 - Structural details - Engineer's details prepared by a practising Structural Engineer being used to construct all reinforced concrete work, structural beams, columns & other structural members.  The details are to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority for approval prior to construction of the specified works.

 

A copy shall be forwarded to Council where Council is not the PCA.

 

16.       CC9.51 - Engineer’s Certificate - A certificate from a professional Engineer specialising in structural engineering certifying the structural adequacy of the existing structure, to support all proposed additional superimposed loads shall be submitted to the Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

17.       CC9.53 - Commonwealth Disability (Access to Premises) Standard - The Commonwealth Disability (Access to Premises - Buildings) Standards 2010 (the Premises Standards) applies to all applications (i.e. Construction Certificate). This requires any new building, part of a building and the affected part of the existing building to comply with the Premises Standards, the Building Code of Australia and AS 1428. 

 

18.       CC9.78 - Waste Management Plan - A Waste Management Plan incorporating all requirements in respect of the provision of waste storage facilities, removal of all materials from the site that are the result of site clearing, extraction, and, or demolition works and the designated Waste Management Facility shall be submitted to the Certifying Authority prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate.

 

19.       CC9.79 - Waste Storage - Residential and Mixed Use Developments - The plans shall include details of the waste storage area. The waste storage area shall not be visible from the street. The waste storage area shall be located within the lot/building in accordance with the approved plans. 

 

20.       CC9.84 - Landscape Plans - All landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the approved landscape plans. The landscaping shall be maintained in accordance with the approved plans in perpetuity.

 

21.       CC9.85 - Tree Removal prohibited - This consent does not approve the removal or pruning (branches or roots) of any trees on the subject property, Council’s public footway, public reserves or on neighbouring properties.

 

PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF WORK (INCLUDING DEMOLITION & EXCAVATION)

These conditions have been imposed to ensure that all pre-commencement matters are dealt with and finalised prior to the commencement of work.

 

22.       PREC10.1 - Demolition & Asbestos - The demolition work shall comply with the provisions of Australian Standard AS2601:2001 – Demolition of Structures, NSW Work Health & Safety Act 2011 and the NSW Work Health & Safety Regulation 2011.  The work plans required by AS2601:2001 shall be accompanied by a written statement by a suitably qualified person that the proposals contained in the work plan comply with the safety requirements of the Standard. The work plans and the safety statement shall be submitted to the PCA prior to the commencement of works.

 

For demolition work which involves the removal of asbestos, the asbestos removal work must be carried out by a licensed asbestos removalist who is licensed to carry out the work in accordance with the NSW Work Health & Safety Act 2011 and the NSW Work Health & Safety Regulation 2011 unless specified in the Act and/or Regulation that a license is not required.

 

All demolition work including the removal of asbestos, shall be undertaken in accordance with the Demolition Code of Practice (NSW Work Cover July 2015)

 

Note: Copies of the Act, Regulation and Code of Practice can be downloaded free of charge from the SafeWork NSW website: www.SafeWork.nsw.gov.au.

 

23.       PREC10.2 - Demolition Notification Requirements - The following notification requirements apply to this consent:

 

(a) The developer /builder must notify adjoining residents five (5) working days prior to demolition.  Such notification is to be a clearly written note giving the date demolition will commence, contact details of the developer/builder, licensed asbestos demolisher and the appropriate regulatory authority. Notification is to be placed in the letterbox of every premises (including every residential flat or unit, if any) either side and immediately at the rear of the demolition site.

(b) Five (5) working days prior to demolition, the developer/builder is to provide written notification to Council advising of the demolition date, details of the SafeWork licensed asbestos demolisher and the list of residents advised of the demolition.

(c)  On demolition sites where buildings to be demolished contain asbestos, a standard commercially manufactured sign containing the words “DANGER ASBESTOS REMOVAL IN PROGRESS” measuring not less than 400mm x 300mm is to be erected in a prominent visible position (from street frontage) on the site. The sign is to be erected prior to demolition work commencing and is to remain in place until such time as all asbestos material has been removed from the site to an approved waste facility.

 

24.       PREC10.3 - Demolition work involving asbestos removal - Work involving bonded asbestos removal work (of an area of more than 10 square metres) or friable asbestos removal work must be undertaken by a person who carries on a business of such removal work in accordance with a licence under clause 458 of the Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011.

 

25.       PREC10.10 - Dial before your dig - The applicant shall contact “Dial Before You Dig on 1100” to obtain a Service Diagram prior to the issuing of the Construction Certificate.  The sequence number obtained from “Dial Before You Dig” shall be forwarded to Council’s Engineers for their records.

 

26.       PREC10.12 - Existing drainage easement, drainage reserve or stormwater drainage system benefiting Council - Council drainage easement(s) drainage reserve(s) or stormwater system either pass through or are adjacent to the site.  No building or other structure must be placed over the drainage easement or stormwater system or within the zone of influence taken from the invert of any pipe.

 

The applicant must determine the exact location, size and level details of the potentially affected stormwater drainage systems and without causing any damage to the public system ensure its protection. The owner, principal contractor or owner builder must not obstruct or otherwise remove, disconnect or render inoperable the Stormwater Drainage System.

 

Works such as fences must not obstruct the natural stormwater flowpath or alter the flowpath in such a way as to direct or concentrate stormwater on to neighbouring properties.

 

Where the relocation or reconstruction of Council’s drainage system is approved then all work carried out on Council’s assets will revert to the ownership, care, control or management of Council. Therefore, upon handover to Council, the asset must comply with Council’s Construction of drainage and associated works specification.

 

The applicant must meet all costs associated with such works.

 

Note: This condition does not set aside the need to obtain relevant approvals under the Roads Act 1993 or Local Government Act 1993 for works within Roads and other public places.

 

27.       PREC10.14 - Registered Surveyors Report - During Development Work - A report must be submitted to the PCA at each of the following applicable stages of construction:

 

(a) Set out before commencing excavation.

(b) Floor slabs or foundation wall, before formwork or commencing brickwork.

(c)  Completion of Foundation Walls - Before any construction of flooring, detailing the location of the structure relative to adjacent boundaries and floor levels relative to the datum shown on the approved plans.

(d) Completion of Floor Slab Formwork - Before pouring of concrete/walls construction, detailing the location of the structure relative to adjacent boundaries and floor levels relative to the datum shown on the approved plans.  In multi-storey buildings a further survey must be provided at each subsequent storey.

(e) Completion of any Roof Framing - Before roof covered detailing eaves/gutter setback from boundaries.

(f)   Completion of all Work - Detailing the location of the structure (including eaves/gutters) relative to adjacent boundaries and its height relative to the datum shown on the approved plans.  A final Check Survey must indicate the reduced level of the main ridge.

 

Work must not proceed beyond each stage until the PCA is satisfied that the height and location of the building is proceeding in accordance with the approved plans.

 

28.       PREC10.15 - Utility Arrangements - Arrangements are to be made with utility authorities in respect to the services supplied by those authorities to the development. The cost associated with the provision or adjustment of services within the road and footway areas is to be at the applicant’s expense.

 

DURING CONSTRUCTION

These conditions have been imposed to ensure that there is a minimal impact on the adjoining development and surrounding locality during the construction phase of the development.

 

29.       CON11.1 - Site sign – Soil & Erosion Control Measures - Prior to the commencement of works (including demolition and excavation), a durable site sign, issued by Council in conjunction with this consent, must be erected in a prominent location on site. The site sign warns of the penalties which apply to pollution, storing materials on road or footpath and breaches of the conditions relating to erosion and sediment controls. The sign must remain in a prominent location on site up until the completion of all site and building works.

 

30.       CON11.2 - Hours of construction for demolition and building work - Any work activity or activity associated with the development consent that requires the use of any tools (including hand tools) or any power operated plant and machinery that creates noise on or adjacent to the site shall not be performed, or permitted to be performed, except between the hours of 7.00 am to 5.00 pm, Monday to Saturday inclusive. No work or ancillary activity is permitted on Sundays, or Public Holidays.

 

Note: A penalty infringement notice may be issued for any offence.

 

31.       CON11.3 - Ground levels and retaining walls - The ground levels of the site shall not be excavated, raised or filled, or retaining walls constructed on the allotment boundary, except where indicated on approved plans or approved by Council.

 

32.       CON11.11 - Physical connection of Stormwater to site - No work is permitted to proceed above the ground floor slab level of the building until there is physical connection of the approved stormwater drainage system from the land the subject of this consent to Council's stormwater pipeline in Gungah Bay Road.

 

33.       CON11.12 - Cost of work to be borne by the applicant - The applicant shall bear the cost of all works associated with the construction of the development that occurs on Council property.  Care must be taken to protect Council's roads, including the made footway, kerbs, etc., and, where plant and vehicles enter the site, the footway shall be protected against damage by deep-sectioned timber members laid crosswise, held together by hoop iron straps and chamfered at their ends.  This construction shall be maintained in a state of good repair and condition throughout the course of construction.

 

34.       CON11.13 - Obstruction of Road or Footpath - The use of the road or footpath for the storage of any building materials, waste materials, temporary toilets, waste or skip bins, or any other matter is not permitted unless separately approved by Council under Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993 and/or under Section 68 of the Local Government Act 1993.  Penalty infringement Notices may be issued for any offences and severe penalties apply.

 

35.       CON11.21 - Waste Management Facility - All materials removed from the site as a result of demolition, site clearing, site preparation and, or excavation shall be disposed of at a suitable Waste Management Facility. No vegetation, article, building material, waste or the like shall be ignited or burnt.

 

Copies of all receipts for the disposal, or processing of all such materials shall be submitted to the PCA and Council, where Council is not the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF THE OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

These conditions have been imposed to ensure that all works have been completed in accordance with the Development Consent prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate

 

36.       OCC12.4 - BASIX Certificate - All energy efficiency measures as detailed in the approved BASIX Certificate in the plans approved with the Development Consent must be implemented before issue of any Occupation Certificate.

 

37.       OCC12.5 - BASIX Compliance Certificate - A Compliance Certificate must be provided to the PCA regarding the implementation of all energy efficiency measures as detailed in the approved BASIX Certificate before any Occupation Certificate is issued.

 

38.       OCC12.6 - Completion of Landscape Works - All landscape works must be completed before the issue of the Final Occupation Certificate.

 

39.       OCC12.9 - Driveways and parking spaces - Minor Development - Internal driveways and parking spaces are to be adequately paved with concrete or bitumen, or interlocking pavers to provide a dust-free surface.

 

40.       OCC12.12 - Demolition - The dwelling house must be demolished prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

ONGOING CONDITIONS

These conditions have been imposed to ensure that the use or operation of the development does not adversely impact on the amenity of the neighbourhood or environment.

 

41.       ONG14.27- Amenity of the neighbourhood - The implementation of this development shall not adversely affect the amenity of the neighbourhood or interfere unreasonably with the comfort or repose of a person who is outside the premises by reason of the emission or discharge of noise, fumes, vapour, odour, steam, soot, dust, waste water,

 

ADVICE

This advice has been included to provide additional information and where available direct the applicant to additional sources of information based on the development type.

 

42.       ADV17.2 - Long Service Levy - The Long Service Corporation administers a scheme which provides a portable long service benefit for eligible workers in the building and construction industry in NSW. All benefits and requirements are determined by the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986. More information about the scheme and the levy amount you are required to pay to satisfy a condition of your consent can be found at http://www.longservice.nsw.gov.au.

 

The required Long Service Levy payment can be direct to the Long Service Corporation via their web site https://online.longservice.nsw.gov.au/bci/levy.  Payments can only be processed on-line for the full levy owing and where the value of work is between $25,000 and $6,000,000. Payments will be accepted for amounts up to $21,000, using either MasterCard or Visa.

 

43.       ADV17.5 - Security deposit administration & compliance fee - Under Section 97 (5) of the Local Government Act 1993, a security deposit (or part) if repaid to the person who provided it is to be repaid with any interest accrued on the deposit (or part) as a consequence of its investment.

 

Council must cover administration and other costs incurred in the investment of these monies. The current charge is $50.00 plus 2% of the bond amount per annum.

 

The interest rate applied to bonds is set at Council's business banking facility rate as at 1 July each year.  Council will accept a bank guarantee in lieu of a deposit.

 

All interest earned on security deposits will be used to offset the Security Deposit Administration and Compliance fee. Where interest earned on a deposit is not sufficient to meet the fee, it will be accepted in full satisfaction of the fee.

 

44.       ADV17.7 - Council as PCA – Deemed to Satisfy Provisions of BCA - Should the Council be appointed as the PCA in determining the Construction Certificate, the building must comply with all the applicable deemed to satisfy provision of the BCA.  However, if an alternative fire solution is proposed it must comply with the performance requirements of the BCA, in which case, the alternative solution, prepared by an appropriately qualified fire consultant, accredited and having specialist qualifications in fire engineering, must justifying the non-compliances with a detailed report, suitable evidence and expert judgement. Council will also require if deemed necessary, for the alternative solution to undergo an independent peer review by either the CSIRO or other accredited organisation.  In these circumstances, the applicant must pay all costs for the independent review.

 

45.       ADV17.13 - Site Safety Fencing - Site fencing must be erected in accordance with SafeWork Guidelines, to exclude public access to the site throughout the demolition and/or construction work, except in the case of alterations to an occupied dwelling. The fencing must be erected before the commencement of any work and maintained throughout any demolition and construction work.

 

A demolition licence and/or a high risk work license may be required from SafeWork NSW (see www.SafeWork.nsw.gov.au).

 

Schedule B - Prescribed Conditions

 

Prescribed conditions are those which are mandated under Division 8A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 and given weight by Section 80A (11) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

Detailed below is a summary of all the prescribed conditions which apply to development in New South Wales. Please refer to the full details of the prescribed conditions as in force, at www.legislation.nsw.gov.au.

 

46.       PRE16.1 - Clause 97A – BASIX Commitments - This Clause requires the fulfilment of all BASIX Commitments as detailed in the BASIX Certificate to which the development relates.

 

47.       PRE16.2 - Clause 98 – Building Code of Australia & Home Building Act 1989 - Requires all building work to be carried out in accordance with the Building Code of Australia.  In the case of residential building work to which the Home Building Act 1989 relates, there is a requirement for a contract of insurance to be in force before any work commences.

 

48.       PRE16.3 - Clause 98A – Erection of Signs - Requires the erection of signs on site and outlines the details which are to be included on the sign.  The sign must be displayed in a prominent position on site and include the name and contact details of the PCA and the Principal Contractor.

 

49.       PRE16.4 - Clause 98B – Home Building Act 1989 - If the development involves residential building work under the Home Building Act 1989, no work is permitted to commence unless certain details are provided in writing to Council.  The name and licence/permit number of the Principal Contractor or Owner Builder and the name of the Insurer by which work is insured under Part 6 of the Home Building Act 1989.

 

Schedule C – Operational & Statutory Conditions

 

These conditions comprise the operational and statutory conditions which must be satisfied under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000. Please refer to the full details of the Act and Regulations as in force, at www.legislation.nsw.gov.au.

 

50.       OPER15.1 - Requirement for a Construction Certificate - The erection of a building must not commence until a Construction Certificate has been issued.

 

51.       OPER15.2 - Appointment of a PCA - The erection of a building must not commence until the applicant has:

 

(a) appointed a PCA for the building work; and

(b) if relevant, advised the PCA that the work will be undertaken as an Owner -Builder.

 

If the work is not going to be undertaken by an Owner - Builder, the applicant must:

 

(c)  appoint a Principal Contractor to undertake the building work. If residential building work (within the meaning of the Home Building Act 1989) is to be undertaken, the Principal Contractor must be a holder of a contractor licence; and

(d) notify the PCA of the details of any such appointment; and

(e) notify the Principal Contractor of any critical stage inspections or other inspections that are required to be carried out in respect of the building work.

 

An Information Pack is attached for your convenience should you wish to appoint Georges River Council as the PCA for your development.

 

52.       OPER15.3 - Notification of Critical Stage Inspections - No later than two days before the building work commences, the PCA must notify:

 

(a) the consent authority and the Council (if not the consent authority) of his or her appointment; and

(b) the applicant of the critical stage inspections and other inspections that are to be carried out with respect to the building work.

 

53.       OPER15.4 - Notice of Commencement - The applicant must give at least two days notice to the Council and the PCA of their intention to commence the erection of a building.

 

A Notice of Commencement Form is attached for your convenience.

 

54.       OPER15.7 - Critical Stage Inspections - The last critical stage inspection must be undertaken by the PCA.  The critical stage inspections required to be carried out vary according to Building Class under the Building Code of Australia and are listed in Clause 162A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

55.       OPER15.8 - Notice to be given prior to critical stage inspections - The principal contractor for a building site, or the owner-builder, must notify the PCA at least 48 hours before each required inspection needs to be carried out.

 

Where Georges River Council has been appointed as the PCA, 48 hours notice in writing, or alternatively 24 hours notice by facsimile or telephone, must be given when specified work requiring inspection has been completed.

 

56.       OPER15.9 - Occupation Certificate - A person must not commence occupation or use of the whole or any part of a new building unless an Occupation Certificate has been issued in relation to the building or part.

 

Only the PCA appointed for the building work can issue the Occupation Certificate.

 

An Occupation Certificate Application Form is attached for your convenience.

 

If you need more information, please contact the Development Assessment Planner below on 9330-6400 during normal office hours.

 

 

 

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1

Site Plan Issue C - 37 Gungah Bay Road Oatley

Attachment 2

Elevations 1 and 2 Issue C - 37 Gungah Bay Road Oatley

Attachment 3

Elevations 3 and 4 Issue C - 37 Gungah Bay Road Oatley

 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 26 April 2018

LPP011-18              37 Gungah Bay Road Oatley

[Appendix 1]           Site Plan Issue C - 37 Gungah Bay Road Oatley

 

 

Page 202

 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 26 April 2018

LPP011-18              37 Gungah Bay Road Oatley

[Appendix 2]           Elevations 1 and 2 Issue C - 37 Gungah Bay Road Oatley

 

 

Page 203

 


Georges River Council - Georges River Local Planning Panel (LPP) - Thursday, 26 April 2018

LPP011-18              37 Gungah Bay Road Oatley

[Appendix 3]           Elevations 3 and 4 Issue C - 37 Gungah Bay Road Oatley

 

 

Page 205