Agenda of Cumberland Independent Assessment & Hearing ... · Cumberland Council Cumberland Independent Assessment & Hearing Panel - 8 February 2017 Page 3 CONTENTS Report No. Name

Cumberland Council

Cumberland Independent Assessment & Hearing Panel - 8 February 2017 Page 1

A meeting of the Cumberland Independent Assessment & Hearing Panel will be held at

11:30 a.m. at the Merrylands Administration Building, 16 Memorial Avenue, Merrylands

on Wednesday, 8 February 2017.

Business as below:

Yours faithfully

CUMBERLAND COUNCIL

ORDER OF BUSINESS

1. Receipt of Apologies

2. Declarations of Interest

3. Address by invited speakers

4. Reports:

- Development Applications

- Planning Proposals

Cumberland Council


CONTENTS

Report No. Name of Report Page No.

Development Applications

C001/17 159 Joseph Street, Lidcombe ................................................................................. 5

Planning Proposals

C002/17 Planning Proposal for 190-220 Dunmore Street, Pendle Hill (Bonds Spinning

Mill site) - Post Exhibition Report .......................................................................... 67

C001/17 Cumberland Council


159 Joseph Street, Lidcombe

Responsible Division: Environment & Infrastructure

Officer: Manager Development Assessment

File Number: DA-92/2016

Delivery Program Code: 2a.1.1 Assess and determine development applications,

construction and building certificates and produce section

149 certificates

Application lodged 05-Apr-2016

Applicant Bureau S R H Pty Limited

Owner Mr W S Wei

Application No. DA-92/2016

Description of Land Lot 4 DP 35510, 159 Joseph Street, LIDCOMBE NSW 2141

Proposed Development Demolition of existing dwelling house and construction of a

10 room boarding house

Site Area 543.80m2

Zoning Zone R2 - Low Density Residential

Disclosure of political

donations and gifts

Nil disclosure

Heritage Nil

Issues Submissions

SUMMARY

1. Development Application No. DA-92/2016 was received on 5 April 2016 for the

demolition of existing structures and construction of a two storey boarding house

with 10 rooms at 159 Joseph Street, Lidcombe.

2. The application was publicly notified to the occupants and owners of the adjoining

properties for a period of 14 days from 17 May 2016 to 31 May 2016 Two

submissions including a petition containing 5 signatures were received which

raised concerns regarding loss of amenity, overshadowing, increased parking

generated from the development, traffic related incidents, noise impacts, privacy

impacts, waste management and incompatibility of the development with the

locality.

3. Minor issues were identified with regard to confirmation from the contamination

consultant that the site was suitable to accommodate the proposed development

under clause 7 of SEPP 55; and engineering matters where a downstream

easement was required to be investigated. The applicant has addressed these

concerns.

4. The proposal for a purpose built boarding house is considered to be generally

consistent with the provisions under the State Environmental Planning Policy

(SEPP) Affordable Rental Housing 2009.



5. The application is recommended for deferred commencement approval subject to

conditions as nominated within the attached schedule.

Introduction

Subject Site and surrounding area

The subject site is legally described as Lot 4 in DP 35510, known as 159 Joseph Street,

Lidcombe. The site is located on the eastern side of Joseph Street and has a frontage of

15.85m to Joseph Street and a total site area of 548.33sqm. The site is located

approximately 150m from a bus stop with regular services to Lidcombe Station, which is

a major junction station on the CityRail network.

Currently a single storey brick and tile residential dwelling are located on the subject site.

The existing dwelling is in a reasonable condition. The development seeks to utilise the

land in accordance with the zoning and to take advantage of its proximity to both Berala

and Lidcombe town centres.

The subject site is located at the edge of an established residential area with the site

adjoining low‐density residential dwelling to the north and east. The site is within close

proximity of TAFE NSW South Western Sydney Campus as well as the University of Sydney

Lidcombe Campus. The site enjoys good access to public open space areas being

opposite Coleman Park. The majority of residential dwellings to the north of the subject

site comprise single storey residential dwellings interspersed by larger two storey

residential dwellings.

Locality Plan



Aerial Plan

Site Notice and Site frontage



161-163 Joseph Street, Lidcombe

155-157 Joseph Street, Lidcombe

165 Joseph Street – Newly Constructed Boarding House (DA-198/2013)



Distance from closest Bus Stop (Approximately 140m)

Description of the proposed development

Council is in receipt of a development application for the demolition of existing dwelling

and associated structures and construction of a boarding house containing 10 boarding

rooms.

The boarding house is proposed to contain 10 boarding rooms. All boarding rooms are

proposed as double rooms with the exception of Room 9 which is proposed as a single

room. The proposed boarding house can accommodate a maximum of 19 lodgers. All

boarding rooms are proposed to be self contained with private bathroom and

kitchenette being provided in each boarding room. One communal room is also

proposed.

The operation of the boarding house will be overseen by an off-site manager.

Management details have been provided in a plan of management accompanying the

development application.

History

- The subject development application DA-92/2016 was lodged on 5 April 2016.

Following a detailed assessment of the proposal, minor issues were identified with

regard to confirmation from the contamination consultant that the site was

suitable to accommodate the proposed development under clause 7 of SEPP 55

and engineering matters where a downstream easement was required to be

investigated. The proposal was considered to be generally consistent with the

provisions under the SEPP Affordable Rental Housing 2009 and was therefore

satisfactory.

- The applicant was made aware of a recent similar development application heard

by the Cumberland Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel on 20 December

2016 (DA-343/2016 - 32 Norval Street, Auburn) where the matter was deferred

for a separate hearing on the following matters:



1. Increase the eastern building set back in order to provide landscape

buffering.

2. Ensure convenient internal access for all residents to the communal lounge

and common open space.

3. Provision of adequate bin storage in an appropriate location that does not

adversely impact the amenity of the residents within the building, adjoining

building or the common open space.

4. The rear of the land where the car park is provided is to be reconfigured to

provide landscape buffering to the southern and eastern boundary.

5. The pedestrian pathways to the front setbacks along Hevington Road be

deleted and landscaping provided.

The applicant notes that while all of the above nominated points are not relevant to

the subject site, changes have been made to facilitate points 1 and 2. In this regard,

effort has been made to introduce substantial side boundary setbacks (varying

between 1.6m to 2.6m for the northern side setback and 900mm and 1.9m on the

southern setback).

Additionally, whilst all boarding rooms have separate external access, creating

difficulty to introduce an internal corridor, the development has been amended to

provide increased access from all units to the communal living area, by introducing

additional doorways to the communal living area, reducing the path of travel to this

space from each boarding room. It should be noted that, excluding rooms 8, 9 and 10,

each boarding room has a separate living space on the ground floor which will reduce

the dependence on the communal living room.

Contact with relevant parties

The assessing officer has undertaken a site inspection of the subject site and surrounding

properties and been in regular contact with the applicant throughout the assessment process.

Internal Referrals

Development Engineer

The development application was referred to Council’s Development Engineer for

comment who has raised no objections to the proposed development subject to

conditions of consent.

As the development slopes to the rear, Council’s Development Engineer has requested

that a downstream easement be provided so as all stormwater drainage is directed to

Wayland Avenue (behind the subject site). To obtain the easement, Council’s

Development Engineer has requested that the application be approved via deferred

commencement so as to obtain the following:

A minimum 1.2m wide drainage easement to drain the site by gravity to Wayland

Avenue through downstream/adjoining site(s) shall be registered with Land and

Property Information.

Cumberland Council shall be nominated as authority to vary or modify the above

easement.



Copy of the registered ‘transfer granting easement’ document shall be submitted

to and approved by Cumberland Council.

Environment and Health Unit

The development application was referred to Council’s Environment and Health Unit for

comment which has raised no objections to the proposed development subject to

conditions of consent.

External Referrals

Roads and Maritime Services

The applicant has not nominated the development application as an integrated

development application. Notwithstanding this, separate approval may be required under

the Roads Act 1993 prior to construction of the proposed vehicular crossing. Accordingly,

a condition advising of this will be imposed on any development consent.

NSW Police

The development application was referred NSW Police for comment on the 21 June

2016. Council received a response on the 22 June 2016 advising recommended

conditions to be imposed to ensure crime is minimised and a specific condition for an on-

site care taker/manager to ensure house rules and other policies are being adhered to,

including the request for contact details of the caretaker and owner to be provided to

police in case of an emergency or community complaint.

Comment: According to the provisions under the SEPP Affordable Rental Housing

2009, for Boarding house developments, if the numbers of lodgers exceed

20 on site, then an onsite caretaker or manager is required to be provided.

Given that the subject proposal proposes to house under 20 (19 lodgers at

maximum capacity) an onsite manager is therefore not required to be

provided. In this instance, as the proposal is generally consistent and

compliant with the provisions under the SEPP for boarding house

developments and the proposal is purpose built and designed to

accommodate a maximum of 19 lodgers, it is considered difficult to

request for an onsite manager at this point in time as this would affect the

overall design. Further, Council is unable to enforce the provision of an

onsite manager as the proposal is compliant with the relevant planning

controls. The application is also supported by a Plan of Management (POM)

which details specific house rules and management of the boarding house.

The Plan of Management submitted is considered to be satisfactory in this

regard.

Planning Comments

The provisions of any Environmental Planning Instruments (EP& A Act s79C(1)(a)(i))

State Environmental Planning Policies



(a) State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land

The requirement at clause 7 of SEPP No. 55 for Council to be satisfied that the site is

suitable or can be made suitable to accommodate the proposed development has been

considered in the following table:

Matter for Consideration Yes/No

Does the application involve re-development of the site or a change of land use? Yes

No

In the development going to be used for a sensitive land use (eg: residential, educational,

recreational, childcare or hospital)? Yes

No

Does information available to you indicate that an activity listed below has ever been

approved, or occurred at the site?

acid/alkali plant and formulation, agricultural/horticultural activities, airports, asbestos

production and disposal, chemicals manufacture and formulation, defence works, drum re-

conditioning works, dry cleaning establishments, electrical manufacturing (transformers),

electroplating and heat treatment premises, engine works, explosive industry, gas works,

iron and steel works, landfill sites, metal treatment, mining and extractive industries, oil

production and storage, paint formulation and manufacture, pesticide manufacture and

formulation, power stations, railway yards, scrap yards, service stations, sheep and cattle

dips, smelting and refining, tanning and associated trades, waste storage and treatment,

wood preservation

Yes

No

Is the site listed on Council’s Contaminated Land database? Yes

No

Is the site subject to EPA clean-up order or other EPA restrictions? Yes

No

Has the site been the subject of known pollution incidents or illegal dumping? Yes

No

Does the site adjoin any contaminated land/previously contaminated land? Yes

No

Details of contamination investigations carried out at the site:

A Phase 1 Preliminary Site Contamination Investigation report, prepared by GETEX and dated 10 May 2016 was

submitted to accompany the development application. The report concluded that the site would be made

suitable for the proposed development provided:

A Phase 2 Contamination Investigation is completed.

Where the Phase 2 investigation identifies that remediation is required, then the remediation is to be

undertaken in accordance with a Remedial Action Plan (RAP).

Once remediation works are completed a validation assessment is to be undertaken.

A Phase 2 Site Contamination Assessment report, prepared by GETEX and dated 12 August 2016 was submitted

to satisfy the requirements as above. The report concluded that the Site would be suitable for the proposed

development of a two storey boarding house with no sub-surface component.

Council’s environmental health officer has reviewed the report and is satisfied that the proposal can proceed

subject to recommended conditions of consent.

Has the appropriate level of investigation been carried out in respect of contamination

matters for Council to be satisfied that the site is suitable to accommodate the proposed

development or can be made suitable to accommodate the proposed development?

Yes

No



(b) SEPP Affordable Rental Housing 2009

The relevant objectives and provisions of this policy have been considered in the

assessment of the development application. In general, the proposed development is

considered to perform satisfactorily having regard to the SEPP.

This policy provides for affordable rental housing to be developed on most residentially

zoned allotments on which dwelling houses are permissible and aims to address a

developing state wide deficiency in the availability of affordable rental housing. The policy

provides incentives for the development of affordable rental housing, including relaxation

of development standards.

The relevant requirements and objectives of the State Environmental Planning Policy

(Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 have been considered in the following assessment

table:

Requirement Yes No N/A Comment

8 Relationship with other environmental

planning instruments

If there is an inconsistency between this Policy

and any other environmental planning

instrument, whether made before or after the

commencement of this Policy, this Policy

prevails to the extent of the inconsistency.

Division 3 Boarding houses

25 Definition

In this Division:

communal living room means a room within a

boarding house or on site that is available to

all lodgers for recreational purposes, such as

a lounge room, dining room, recreation room

or games room.

26 Land to which Division applies

This Division applies to land within any of the

following land use zones or within a land use

zone that is equivalent to any of those zones:

(a) Zone R1 General Residential,

(b) Zone R2 Low Density Residential,

(c) Zone R3 Medium Density Residential,

(d) Zone R4 High Density Residential,

(e) Zone B1 Neighbourhood Centre,

(f) Zone B2 Local Centre,

(g) Zone B4 Mixed Use.

The subject site is zoned R2 Low Density

Residential.

27 Development to which Division applies

(1) This Division applies to development, on

land to which this Division applies, for the

purposes of boarding houses.

(2) Despite subclause (1), this Division does

not apply to development on land within Zone

R2 Low Density Residential or within a land

The development is proposed on land

zoned R2 Low Density Residential in the

Sydney region. This division applies to the




use zone that is equivalent to that zone in the

Sydney region unless the land is within an

accessible area.

(3) Despite subclause (1), this Division does

not apply to development on land within Zone

R2 Low Density Residential or within a land

use zone that is equivalent to that zone that is

not in the Sydney region unless all or part of

the development is within 400 metres walking

distance of land within Zone B2 Local Centre

or Zone B4 Mixed Use or within a land use

zone that is equivalent to any of those zones.

Note: accessible area means land that is

within:

(a) 800 metres walking distance of a public

entrance to a railway station or a wharf from

which a Sydney Ferries ferry service operates,

or

(b) 400 metres walking distance of a public

entrance to a light rail station or, in the case of

a light rail station with no entrance, 400

metres walking distance of a platform of the

light rail station, or

(c) 400 metres walking distance of a bus stop

used by a regular bus service (within the

meaning of the Passenger Transport Act

1990) that has at least one bus per hour

servicing the bus stop between 06.00 and

21.00 each day from Monday to Friday (both

days inclusive) and between 08.00 and 18.00

on each Saturday and Sunday.

walking distance means the shortest distance

between 2 points measured along a route that

may be safely walked by a pedestrian using,

as far as reasonably practicable, public

footpaths and pedestrian crossings.

development as the land is located within

an accessible area. The site is

categorised as being within an accessible

area as it is located within 400 metres

walking distance of a bus stop used by a

regular bus service (within the meaning of

the Passenger Transport Act 1990) that

has at least one bus per hour servicing

the bus stop between 06.00 and 21.00

each day from Monday to Friday (both

days inclusive) and between 08.00 and

18.00 on each Saturday and Sunday.

The site is located within the Sydney

region.

28 Development may be carried out with

consent

Development to which this Division applies

may be carried out with consent.

29 Standards that cannot be used to refuse

consent

(1) A consent authority must not refuse

consent to development to which this Division

applies on the grounds of density or scale if

the density and scale of the buildings when

expressed as a floor space ratio are not more

http://www.legislation.nsw.gov.au/xref/inforce/?xref=Type%3Dact%20AND%20Year%3D1990%20AND%20no%3D39&nohits=y






than:

(a) the existing maximum floor space

ratio for any form of residential

accommodation permitted on the land, or

(b) if the development is on land within a

zone in which no residential

accommodation is permitted—the

existing maximum floor space ratio for

any form of development permitted on

the land, or

(c) if the development is on land within a

zone in which residential flat buildings

are permitted and the land does not

contain a heritage item that is identified

in an environmental planning instrument

or an interim heritage order or on the

State Heritage Register—the existing

maximum floor space ratio for any form

of residential accommodation permitted

on the land, plus:

(i) 0.5:1, if the existing maximum floor

space ratio is 2.5:1 or less, or

(ii) 20% of the existing maximum floor

space ratio, if the existing maximum

floor space ratio is greater than 2.5:1.

There is no applicable maximum FSR for

land zoned R2 within Auburn LEP 2010.

Dwelling houses a type of residential

accommodation are permitted in the R2

Low Density Residential zone.

Residential Flat Buildings are prohibited

within the R2 Low Density Residential

zone.

(2) A consent authority must not refuse

consent to development to which this Division

applies on any of the following grounds:

(a) building height

if the building height of all proposed

buildings is not more than the maximum

building height permitted under another

environmental planning instrument for

any building on the land,

(b) landscaped area

if the landscape treatment of the front

setback area is compatible with the

streetscape in which the building is

located,

(c) solar access

where the development provides for one

or more communal living rooms, if at

least one of those rooms receives a

minimum of 3 hours direct sunlight

between 9am and 3pm in mid-winter,

(d) private open space

if at least the following private open

space areas are provided (other than the

front setback area):

(i) one area of at least 20 square

metres with a minimum dimension of 3

metres is provided for the use of the

lodgers,

(ii) if accommodation is provided on

site for a boarding house manager—one

area of at least 8 square metres with a

The maximum building height for the site

permitted under Auburn LEP 2010 is 9m.

A maximum building height of

approximately 7m is proposed.

Accordingly, the development satisfies

this requirement.




minimum dimension of 2.5 metres is

provided adjacent to that

accommodation,

(e) parking

if:

(i) in the case of development in an

accessible area—at least 0.2 parking

spaces are provided for each boarding

room, and

(ii) in the case of development not in

an accessible area—at least 0.4 parking

spaces are provided for each boarding

room, and

(iii) in the case of any development—

not more than 1 parking space is

provided for each person employed in

connection with the development and

who is resident on site,

(f) accommodation size

if each boarding room has a gross floor

area (excluding any area used for the

purposes of private kitchen or bathroom

facilities) of at least:

(i) 12 square metres in the case of a

boarding room intended to be used by a

single lodger, or

(ii) 16 square metres in any other case.

The development is within an accessible

area. Therefore the number of parking

spaces required for the proposed

development = 10 x 0.2 = 2

The above calculation is based on the

development consisting of 10 boarding

rooms and no employees resident on the

site.

Number of parking spaces proposed = 2

Therefore number of parking spaces

provided complies.

The gross floor area for each boarding

room (excluding any area used for the


facilities) is as follows:

Ground floor

Room 01(double room) = 20.3m2

Ground floor/ first floor

Room 02 (double room) = 22.1m2






First floor



Room 10 (single room) = 16m2

Room 10 is the only boarding room

nominated for a single lodger. The gross

floor area for this room exceeds 12m2. All

other boarding rooms comply with the

16m2 requirement.

(3) A boarding house may have private

kitchen or bathroom facilities in each

boarding room but is not required to have

those facilities in any boarding room.

(4) A consent authority may consent to

development to which this Division

applies whether or not the development

All boarding rooms are proposed to

contain private kitchen and bathroom

facilities.

The proposed development complies with




complies with the standards set out in

subclause (1) or (2).

the standards.

30 Standards for boarding houses

(1) A consent authority must not consent to

development to which this Division applies

unless it is satisfied of each of the following:

(a) if a boarding house has 5 or more

boarding rooms, at least one communal

living room will be provided,

(b) no boarding room will have a gross

floor area (excluding any area used for

the purposes of private kitchen or

bathroom facilities) of more than 25

square metres,

(c) no boarding room will be occupied by

more than 2 adult lodgers,

(d) adequate bathroom and kitchen

10 boarding rooms are proposed.

Accordingly, a minimum of one communal

room is required.

A communal living room is defined as

follows:

communal living room means a room

within a boarding house or on site that is

available to all lodgers for recreational

purposes, such as a lounge room, dining

room, recreation room or games room.

One communal room at ground floor level

is proposed. This room is proposed to be

available to all lodgers for recreational

purposes.

The gross floor area for each boarding

room (excluding any area used for the


facilities) is as follows:

Ground floor

Room 01(double room) = 20.3m2

Ground floor/ first floor







First floor



Room 10 (single room) = 16m2

All boarding rooms are nominated as

accomodating a maximum of 2 lodgers

with the exception of room 10 which is

proposed to accommodate one lodger

only.

Each boarding room contains private

bathroom and kitchen facilities.




facilities will be available within the

boarding house for the use of each

lodger,

(e) if the boarding house has capacity to

accommodate 20 or more lodgers, a

boarding room or on site dwelling will be

provided for a boarding house manager,

(f) (Repealed)

(g) if the boarding house is on land

zoned primarily for commercial purposes,

no part of the ground floor of the

boarding house that fronts a street will

be used for residential purposes unless

another environmental planning

instrument permits such a use,

(h) at least one parking space will be

provided for a bicycle, and one will be

provided for a motorcycle, for every 5

boarding rooms.

(2) Subclause (1) does not apply to

development for the purposes of minor

alterations or additions to an existing boarding

house.

The boarding house has the capacity to

accommodate a maximum of 19 lodgers.

Accordingly, a boarding room for a

boarding house manager is not proposed.

An off-site manager is proposed.

The development is not on land zoned

primarily for commercial purposes.

Number of boarding rooms = 10

Therefore number of parking spaces

required for a bicycle = 2 and number of

parking spaces required for a motorcycle

= 2.

2 spaces for a bicycle and 2 spaces for a

motorcycle are proposed.

Accordingly, the proposal complies with

this requirement.

30A Character of local area

A consent authority must not consent to

development to which this Division applies

unless it has taken into consideration whether

the design of the development is compatible

with the character of the local area.

The development is proposed within a R2

Low Density Residential zoning.

Development to the north and east of the

site consists of older single storey and

newer two storey dwelling houses. To the

south are single dwellings and a 2 storey

boarding house at 165 Joseph Street.

Joseph Street is a classified road carrying

a large volume of traffic.

As shown on the submitted plans the

current proposal is designed to adopt a

comparable building form similar to a

large two storey residential dwelling. In

consideration of the likely future

character of this local area and

anticipated building forms, it can be seen

that the current proposal will be entirely

consistent with the future character of

the locality as envisaged under the

controls contained within the Auburn LEP

2010.




The building is setback from the front

boundary providing visual continuity and

building pattern. The front setback

achieves an appropriate balance between

providing a turning area for vehicles

(considered appropriate due to the site’s

location on Joseph Street) and providing

landscaping commensurate with a low

density residential area.

Part 4 Miscellaneous

52 No subdivision of boarding houses

A consent authority must not grant consent to

the strata subdivision or community title

subdivision of a boarding house.

No subdivision is proposed as part of this

application. This will be reinforced as a

condition on any consent issued.

(c) SEPP BASIX 2004

As the development relates to a new residential development, a BASIX certificate has

been submitted to accompany the development application. The plans and details

submitted with the development application satisfy the relevant BASIX commitments

required to be endorsed on the development application plans. Conditions will be

imposed on the development consent to ensure that the construction of the new

residential development is in accordance with all specified BASIX commitments. The

proposed development is considered acceptable in respect of the relevant requirements

of SEPP (BASIX) 2004.

(d) State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

Development with frontage to classified road

The development fronts Joseph Street, a classified road. Accordingly Clause 101 of

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 applies to the development

as follows:

101 Development with frontage to classified road

(1) The objectives of this clause are:

(a) to ensure that new development does not compromise the effective and

ongoing operation and function of classified roads, and

(b) to prevent or reduce the potential impact of traffic noise and vehicle emission

on development adjacent to classified roads.

(2) The consent authority must not grant consent to development on land that has a

frontage to a classified road unless it is satisfied that:

(a) where practicable, vehicular access to the land is provided by a road other than

the classified road, and

(b) the safety, efficiency and ongoing operation of the classified road will not be

adversely affected by the development as a result of:



(i) the design of the vehicular access to the land, or

(ii) the emission of smoke or dust from the development, or

(iii) the nature, volume or frequency of vehicles using the classified road to gain

access to the land, and

(c) the development is of a type that is not sensitive to traffic noise or vehicle

emissions, or is appropriately located and designed, or includes measures, to

ameliorate potential traffic noise or vehicle emissions within the site of the

development arising from the adjacent classified road.

Comments:

A Traffic and Parking Assessment Report prepared by Varga Traffic Planning Pty Ltd

dated 16 March 2016 advises as follows in respect of projected traffic generation:

Projected increase in the traffic generation potential of the site as a consequence

of the development proposal is statistically insignificant and will clearly not have

any unacceptable traffic implications in terms of road network capacity.

The application has also been referred to Council’s Development Engineer who has

raised no objection to the proposal subject to the imposition of conditions, including a

requirement that all vehicles be driven in a forward direction at all times when entering

or leaving the premises (which is facilitated by the provision of a turning bay within the

front setback area and a requirement to submit a construction traffic management plan

to Council prior to the commencement of work.

Impact of road on the proposed development is addressed below.

Impact of road noise or vibration on non-road development

As the proposal relates to a residential use, Clause 102 of SEPP Infrastructure 2007 is

applicable. The subject site is located adjacent to a road (Joseph Street) with an annual

average daily traffic volume of more than 40,000 vehicles (based on the traffic volume

data published on the website of the RTA) and is considered to likely be adversely

affected by road noise or vibration. In accordance with Clause 102(2), the consent

authority is to take into consideration any guidelines issued by the Director-General. The

relevant Guideline being ‘Development near Rail Corridors and Busy Roads – Interim

Guideline’.

As per the ‘Development near Rail Corridors and Busy Roads – Interim Guideline’ an

Acoustic Report prepared by Acoustic Noise & Vibration Solutions P/L, dated

03/03/2016 accompanied the development application. The Development near Rail

Corridors and Busy Roads – Interim Guideline establishes noise criteria for residential

buildings which are consistent with the noise criteria adopted in Clause 102(3) of the

SEPP Infrastructure 2007 as follows:

(3) If the development is for the purposes of a building for residential use, the consent

authority must not grant consent to the development unless it is satisfied that

appropriate measures will be taken to ensure that the following LAeq levels are not

exceeded:



(a) in any bedroom in the building—35 dB(A) at any time between 10.00 pm and

7.00 am,

(b) anywhere else in the building (other than a garage, kitchen, bathroom or

hallway)—40 dB(A) at any time.

The Acoustic Report prepared by Acoustic Noise & Vibration Solutions P/L, dated

03/03/2016 concludes as follows:

The construction of the proposed development at No. 159 Joseph St, Lidcombe, if

carried out as recommended in the plans and specifications and including the

acoustic recommendations in this report, will meet the required noise measures.

A condition will be imposed on any development consent requiring details of the acoustic

treatments recommended in the Acoustic Report prepared by Acoustic Noise & Vibration

Solutions P/L, dated 03/03/2016 to be submitted with the Construction Certificate

application and implemented prior to the release of the Occupation Certificate.

Regional Environmental Plans

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

The subject site is identified as being located within the area affected by the Sydney

Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005. The proposed

development raises no issues as no impact on the catchment is envisaged.

(Note: - the subject site is not identified in the relevant map as ‘land within the

‘Foreshores and Waterways Area’ or ‘Wetland Protection zone’, is not a ‘Strategic

Foreshore Site’ and does not contain any heritage items. Hence the majority of the SREP

is not directly relevant to the proposed development).

Local Environmental Plans

Auburn Local Environmental Plan 2010

The provision of the Auburn Local Environmental Plan (ALEP 2010) is applicable to the

development proposal. It is noted that the development achieves compliance with the

core statutory requirements of the ALEP 2010 and the objectives of the R2 low density

zoning. A summary of the core provisions is considered in the compliance table below.

Clause Yes No N/A Comment

Zone R2 Low Density Residential

1 Objectives of zone

• To provide for the housing needs of the

community within a low density residential

environment.

• To enable other land uses that provide

facilities or services to meet the day to day needs

of residents.

2 Permitted without consent

Home occupations

3 Permitted with consent

The relevant objectives are complied

with.

A ‘boarding house’ is permitted with

consent in the R2 Low Density

Residential zone.




Bed and breakfast accommodation; Boarding

houses; Building identification signs; Business

identification signs; Dual occupancies; Dwelling

houses; Group homes; Neighbourhood shops;

Roads; Semi-detached dwellings; Any other

development not specified in item 2 or 4

4 Prohibited

Agriculture; Air transport facilities; Amusement

centres; Animal boarding or training

establishments; Boat building and repair

facilities; Boat sheds; Camping grounds; Car

parks; Caravan parks; Cemeteries; Charter

and tourism boating facilities; Commercial

premises; Correctional centres; Crematoria;

Depots; Eco-tourist facilities; Electricity

generating works; Entertainment facilities;

Environmental facilities; Exhibition villages;

Extractive industries; Farm buildings; Forestry;

Freight transport facilities; Function centres;

Heavy industrial storage establishments;

Highway service centres; Home occupations

(sex services); Industrial retail outlets;

Industrial training facilities; Industries;

Information and education facilities; Marinas;

Mooring pens; Moorings; Mortuaries; Open cut

mining; Passenger transport facilities; Port

facilities; Recreation facilities (major);

Registered clubs; Research stations;

Residential accommodation; Restricted

premises; Rural industries; Service stations;

Sewerage systems; Sex services premises;

Signage; Storage premises; Tourist and visitor

accommodation; Transport depots; Vehicle

body repair workshops; Vehicle repair stations;

Veterinary hospitals; Warehouse or

distribution centres; Waste or resource

management facilities; Water recreation

structures; Water supply systems; Wharf or

boating facilities; Wholesale supplies

A ‘boarding house’ is defined as follows

under Auburn LEP 2010:

boarding house means a building that:

(a) is wholly or partly let in lodgings, and

(b) provides lodgers with a principal place

of residence for 3 months or more, and

(c) may have shared facilities, such as a

communal living room, bathroom, kitchen

or laundry, and

(d) has rooms, some or all of which may

have private kitchen and bathroom

facilities, that accommodate one or more

lodgers, but does not include

backpackers’ accommodation, a group

home, hotel or motel accommodation,

seniors housing or a serviced apartment.

Note. Boarding houses are a type of

residential accommodation—see the

definition of that term in this Dictionary.

Part 4 Principal development standards

4.1 Minimum subdivision lot size

(1) The objectives of this clause are as

follows: A subdivision is not proposed. The

allotment will remain the same size.

(a) to ensure that lot sizes are able to

accommodate development

consistent with relevant

development controls, and

(b) to ensure that subdivision of land is

capable of supporting a range of

development types.

(2) This clause applies to a subdivision of any

land shown on the Lot Size Map that

requires development consent and that is

carried out after the commencement of

this Plan.

(3) The size of any lot resulting from a

subdivision of land to which this clause

applies is not to be less than the minimum




size shown on the Lot Size Map in relation

to that land.

(3A) Despite subclause (3), the minimum lot

size for dwelling houses is 450 square

metres.

(3B) Despite subclause (3), if a lot is a battle-

axe lot or other lot with an access handle

and is on land in Zone R2 Low Density

Residential, Zone R3 Medium Density

Residential, Zone B6 Enterprise Corridor,

Zone B7 Business Park, Zone IN1 General

Industrial and Zone IN2 Light Industrial,

the minimum lot size excludes the area of

the access handle

(3C) Despite subclauses (3)–(3B), the minimum

lot size for development on land within the

Former Lidcombe Hospital Site, as shown

edged blue on the Lot Size Map, is as

follows in relation to development for the

purpose of:

(a) dwelling houses:

(i) 350 square metres, or

(ii) if a garage will be accessed

from the rear of the property -

290 square metres, or

(iii) if the dwelling house will be on

a zero lot line - 270 square

metres,

(b) semi-detached dwellings - 270

square metres,

(c) multi dwelling housing - 170 square

metres for each dwelling,

(d) attached dwellings - 170 square

metres.

(4) This clause does not apply in relation to

the subdivision of individual lots in a strata

plan or community title scheme.

4.3 Height of buildings

Maximum permissible height for the

subject site is 9m.

Proposed maximum height is 7m

measured to the roof ridge.

The development therefore satisfies the

height requirements of the LEP.


follows:

(a) to establish a maximum building

height to enable appropriate

development density to be

achieved, and

(b) to ensure that the height of

buildings is compatible with the

character of the locality

(2) The height of a building on any land is not

to exceed the maximum height shown for

the land on the Height of Buildings Map.

(2A) Despite subclause (2), the maximum height

of office premises and hotel or motel

accommodation is:

(a) if it is within the Parramatta Road

Precinct, as shown edged orange on




the Height of Buildings Map—27

metres,

(b) if it is on land within Zone B6

Enterprise Corridor within the

Silverwater Road Precinct, as shown

edged light purple on the Height of

Buildings Map—14 metres

4.4 Floor space ratio


follows:

(a) To establish a maximum floor space

ratio to enable appropriate

development density to be

achieved, and

(b) To ensure that development

intensity reflects its locality

(2) The maximum floor space ratio for a

building on any land is not to exceed the

floor space ratio shown for the land on the

Floor Space Ratio Map.

The site does not incorporate a maximum

FSR.

(2A) Despite subclause (2), the maximum floor

space ratio for development for the

purpose of multi dwelling housing on land

other than land within the Former

Lidcombe Hospital Site, as shown edged

black on the Floor Space Ratio Map, is as

follows:

(a) for sites less than 1,300 square

metres—0.75:1,

(b) for sites that are 1,300 square

metres or greater but less than

1,800 square metres—0.80:1,

(c) for sites that are 1,800 square

metres or greater—0.85:1.

(2B) Despite subclause (2), the maximum floor

space ratio for the following development

on land in Zone B6 Enterprise Corridor

within the Parramatta Road Precinct, as

shown edged orange on the Floor Space

Ratio Map, is as follows:

(a) 1.5:1 for bulky goods premises,

entertainment facilities, function

centres and registered clubs, and

(b) 3:1 for office premises and hotel or

motel accommodation.

(2C) Despite subclause (2), the maximum floor

space ratio for the following development

on land in Zone B6 Enterprise Corridor

within the Silverwater Road Precinct, as

shown edged light purple on the Floor

Space Ratio Map, is as follows:

(a) 1.5:1 for bulky goods premises,

entertainment facilities, function

centres and registered clubs, and

(b) 2:1 for office premises and hotel or

motel accommodation.

(2D) Despite subclause (2), the maximum floor




space ratio for retail premises on land in

Zone B6 Enterprise Corridor within the

Commercial Precinct, as shown edged

green on the Floor Space Ratio Map is

1.5:1.

The provisions of any Draft Environmental Planning Instruments (EP& A Act s79C(1)(a)(ii))

The proposed development is not affected by any relevant Draft Environmental Planning

Instruments.

The provisions of any Development Control Plans (EP& A Act s79C(1)(a)(iii))

Auburn Development Control Plan 2010

a. Detached Dwellings and Dual Occupancy

The proposal relates to a purpose built boarding house and, as such, the planning

controls contained under this section of the DCP are considered to be limited to the

proposed development and overall application. Notwithstanding, it is noted however that

the boarding house adheres to the building envelope controls in so far as the height (2

storey) and siting of the building is compatible to that of a two storey dwelling house.

The proposed boarding house proposes height and setbacks that comply with provisions

for a detached dwelling, ensuring that the bulk and scale is appropriate and compatible

with the existing characteristics of the locality. Furthermore, the proposal has been

designed to protect the amenity for future tenants and of adjoining dwellings by

maintaining existing solar access currently enjoyed by neighbouring properties.

It is noted that the development introduces a large front setback of approximately 8

metres to allow for a turning bay to be provided within the front setback to allow vehicles

to enter and leave the site in a forward manner, given that Joseph Street is a main road.

A rear setback of 5.8 to 6 metres has been provided which is considered to provide for a

functional outdoor area which is suitably landscaped to reduce the bulk and scale of the

building. The side setbacks, varying between 1.6m to 2.6m (northern boundary) and

900mm to 1.9m (southern boundary), providing for a sheltered under croft walkway for

residents are considered to be acceptable given the siting of the building.

The proposed boarding house development also respects the streetscape and low to

medium density, scale and character of the area. The building has also been designed to

provide a strong street presentation. The proposal is therefore considered to be

satisfactory and compatible with the surrounding developments in the area.

b. Parking and Loading

This part does not apply to the subject development as the applicable development

standards and required parking rates are addressed previously under State

Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

c. Access and Mobility



The relevant requirements and objectives of the Access and Mobility part of Auburn DCP

2010 have been considered in the assessment of the development application. It is

noted an Access/ Compliance Report was submitted as part of the original Development

Application documentation. An accessible car parking space is proposed and one

adaptable unit (Room 01) has been proposed. Conditions will be imposed on any

development consent requiring compliance with the relevant Australian Standards and

BCA provisions.

d. Waste

The relevant requirements and objectives of the Waste part of Auburn DCP 2010 have

been considered in the assessment of the development application. A satisfactory waste

management plan has been submitted to support the application and a waste storage

area is proposed to be located on the eastern side of the property boundary adjacent to

the communal open space. Operational waste details have also been provided in the

submitted Plan of Management. The application is considered to be consistent with the

objectives and relevant requirements of the Waste part of Auburn DCP 2010. Conditions

will be imposed on any development consent.

e. Stormwater Drainage

The relevant requirements and objectives of the Stormwater Drainage part of Auburn DCP

2010 have been considered in the assessment of the development application. Suitable

stormwater plans and specifications have been submitted to accompany the

development application. Council’s Engineers have raised no objection to the proposed

stormwater design and appropriate conditions have been provided to be imposed on any

development consent. Councils Engineers have recommended that the application be

approved by way of deferred commencement to facilitate the granting of the easement

through the downstream owners. The application is considered to be consistent with the

objectives and relevant requirements of the Stormwater Drainage part of Auburn DCP

2010.

Tree Preservation

Five existing trees located within the front setback are proposed to be removed to

facilitate the development. A landscape plan has been submitted and is considered to be

satisfactory.

79C(1)(a)(iiia) - any planning agreement that has been entered into under section 93F, or

any draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under section

93F, and

There is no draft planning agreement associated with the subject Development

Application.

The provisions of the Regulations (EP& A Act s79C(1)(a)(iv))

The proposed development raises no concerns as to the relevant matters arising from the

EP& A Regulations 2000.



79C(1)(a)(v) - any coastal zone management plan (within the meaning of the Coastal

Protection Act 1979)

There is no Coastal Zone Management Plan applicable for the Auburn area.

The Likely Environmental, Social or Economic Impacts (EP& A Act s79C(1)(b))

It is considered that the proposed development will have no significant adverse

environmental, social or economic impacts in the locality.

The suitability of the site for the development (EP&A Act s79C(1)(c))

The subject site and locality is not known to be affected by any natural hazards or other

site constraints likely to have a significant adverse impact on the proposed development.

Accordingly, the site can be said to be suitable to accommodate the proposal. The

proposed development has been assessed in regard it its environmental consequences

and having regard to this assessment, it is considered that the development is suitable in

the context of the site and surrounding locality.

Submissions made in accordance with the Act or Regulation (EP&A Act s79C(1)(d

Advertised (newspaper) Mail Sign Not Required

In accordance with Council’s Notification of Development Proposals Development Control

Plan, the proposal was publicly exhibited for a period of 14 days between 17 May 2016

and 31 May 2016. The notification generated two (2) submissions including a petition

containing 5 signatures in respect of the proposal. The issues raised in the public

submissions are summarised and commented on as follows:

Overall amenity concern/Incompatibility with the local context

Inadequate Parking and Access (Insufficient parking provided/Concerns over

access to and from the site/Vehicles parking on Council verge and footpath)

Loss of Privacy

Overshadowing

Noise impacts

Waste Management (Placement of Bins during collection)

Comment: The proposed development is permissible in the R2 low density zoning. The

proposed boarding house is also considered to satisfy the character test

under the relevant SEPP provisions.

The proposal provides sufficient parking on site in accordance with the

parking rates provided under the SEPP to accommodate the development.

The proposal also incorporates a turning bay area to allow for vehicles to

enter and exit the site in a forward manner given that the proposal is on a

main road.



The proposed development incorporates suitable setbacks from all

boundaries to reduce the bulk and scale of the building and subsequently

decreasing privacy impacts. It is noted that all windows on the first floor

incorporate a sill height of 1.5m to further reduce any overlooking on

adjacent sites. The separate stairwell access to upper floors (i.e. for Units

8, 9 and 10) are considered to be appropriately located and separated

from adjacent boundaries to reduce any sight lines to adjoining properties.

It is considered that the proposed development produces an appropriate

outcome on the site that will provide a high level of residential amenity for

future residents and will not adversely impact upon residential amenity

currently enjoyed by existing residents.

The proposed development is located on a shared northern boundary

which will generate overshadowing to the adjoining property to the south

between 9.00am and 3.00pm. Suitable shadow diagrams have been

submitted nominating the impact of shadowing (for both site plan and in

elevation) on June 21st between 9.00am and 3.00pm. The proposed

boarding house proposes height and setbacks that complies with

provisions for a detached dwelling, ensuring that the bulk and scale is

appropriate and compatible with the existing characteristics of the locality.

The proposal has been designed to protect the amenity for future tenants

and of adjoining dwellings by maintaining existing solar access currently

enjoyed by neighbouring properties.

The subject development has been supported by an Acoustic Report which

nominates that Provided all noise control recommendations stated in

Section 10 [the report] have to be adhered to, noise produced from Rooms

and Common Areas of the Boarding House, will not have an adverse effect

on the nearest residential receivers at No. 157 & 161 Joseph St,

Lidcombe. Background noise levels are dominated by high traffic noise

from Joseph and surrounding commercial and residential activities.

Additionally, the proposal has been supported by a Plan of Management to

facilitate tenant behaviour/activity at all times. Appropriate conditions will

be imposed to ensure that all lodgers adhere to the Plan of Management.

Further, conditions recommended by NSW Police regarding appropriate

lighting, CCTV, signage, crowd management, house rules etc. will be

imposed on any consent to ensure compliance, safety and minimised noise

and crime activity.

The proposal has been supported by a suitable Waste Management Plan

and Plan of Management which will be endorsed to facilitate the collection

and management of waste on site. The Plan of Management states that A

weekly cleaner will be employed, at the cost of the Boarding House owner,

to ensure that the common property is clean and to take out the bins for

the council garbage collection and subsequently bring in the bins after

collection. Recycling bins and residual bins will be provided in each room

to promote recycling.

The subject development is considered to be compliant with the legislative

requirements of the SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 and is suitably

designed so as to minimise any impact on any adjoining development.



Council officers have taken into consideration the submissions received in

regards to the proposed development and believe that the development

adequately responds to these concerns.

The public interest (EP& A Act s79C(1)(e))

The public interest is served by permitting the orderly and economic development of land,

in a manner that is sensitive to the surrounding environment and has regard to the

reasonable amenity expectations of surrounding land users. In view of the foregoing

analysis it is considered that the development, if carried out subject to the conditions set

out in the recommendation below, will have no significant adverse impacts on the public

interest.

Section 94 Contribution towards provision or improvement of amenities or services

This part of the Act relates to the collection of monetary contributions from applicants for

use in developing key local infrastructure. The Act reads as follows:

‘(1) If a consent authority is satisfied that development for which

development consent is sought will or is likely to require the provision of or

increase the demand for public amenities and public services within the area,

the consent authority may grant the development consent subject to a

condition requiring:

(a) the dedication of land free of cost, or

(b) the payment of a monetary contribution, or both.

(2) A condition referred to in subsection (1) may be imposed only to require

a reasonable dedication or contribution for the provision, extension or

augmentation of the public amenities and public services concerned.’

Comments:

The development would require the payment of contributions in accordance with Council

Section 94 Contributions Plans. It is recommended that conditions be imposed on any

consent requiring the payment of these contributions prior to the issue of any

construction certificate for the development.

Auburn City Council Operational Plan / Delivery Program

This assessment and report relates to the Auburn City Council Operational Plan and

Delivery Program, Our Places – Attractive and Liveable theme, action “2a.1.1.3 Assess

development applications, complying development and construction certificates”.

Disclosure of Political Donations and Gifts

The NSW Government introduced The Local Government and Planning Legislation

Amendment (Political Donations) Act 2008 (NSW). This disclosure requirement is for all

members of the public relating to political donations and gifts. The law introduces

disclosure requirements for individuals or entities with a relevant financial interest as

part of the lodgement of various types of development proposals and requests to initiate

environmental planning instruments or development control plans.



The applicant and notification process did not result in any disclosure of Political

Donations and Gifts.

Conclusion

The development application has been assessed in accordance with the relevant

requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Auburn Local

Environmental Plan 2010 and the Auburn Development Control Plan 2010 and is

considered to be satisfactory for approval.

The proposed development is appropriately located within the R2 low density residential

zone under the relevant provisions of Auburn Local Environmental Plan 2010. The

proposal is consistent with all statutory and non-statutory controls applying to the

development. The development is considered to perform adequately in terms of its

relationship to its surrounding built and natural environment, particularly having regard to

impacts on adjoining properties.

For these reasons, it is considered that the proposal is satisfactory having regard to the

matters of consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and

Assessment Act, 1979, and the development may be approved subject to conditions.

Report Recommendation:

That Development Application No. DA-92/2016 for the demolition of existing dwelling

house and construction of a 10 room boarding house at 159 Joseph Street, Lidcombe be

approved via deferred commencement subject to the attached conditions set.

Attachments:

1. Draft Conditions of Consent - P004609/2017

Attachments (to be circulated to CIHAP Members under separate cover):

2. Architectural Plans – T006975/2017

3. Landscape Plan – T031599/2016

4. Plan of Management – T031544/2016

5. Submissions – T047755/2016

DOCUMENTS

ASSOCIATED WITH

REPORT C001/17

Draft Conditions of Consent -

P004609/2017

C001/17 – Attachment 1 Cumberland Council


DRAFT CONDITIONS OF DEVELOPMENT CONSENT

DA No: DA-92/2016

Property: 159 Joseph Street, LIDCOMBE NSW 2141

Description: Demolition of existing dwelling house and construction of a 10 room boarding

house

1. The following “Deferred Commencement” conditions are applied and must be

satisfied before the consent can operate:-

Consent is granted subject to the following “deferred commencement” conditions.

In accordance with Section 80(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment

Act, this development consent will not operate until you satisfy the Council as to the

matters set out in these “deferred commencement” conditions.

A) The following “Deferred Commencement” conditions are applied and must be

satisfied before the consent can operate:-

Consent is granted subject to the following “deferred commencement”

conditions. In accordance with Section 80(3) of the Environmental Planning

and Assessment Act, this development consent will not operate until you

satisfy the Council as to the matters set out in these “deferred

commencement” conditions.

DC1.Stormwater Disposal

Stormwater runoff from the development shall be discharged to Wayland

Avenue by gravity system through downstream easement. In this regard,

a) A minimum 1.2m wide drainage easement to drain the site by gravity to

Wayland Avenue through downstream/adjoining site(s) shall be registered

with Land and Property Information.

b) Cumberland Council shall be nominated as authority to vary or modify the

above easement.

c) Copy of the registered ‘transfer granting easement’ document shall be

submitted to and approved by Cumberland Council.

In accordance with clause 95(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment

Regulation 2000, you must produce evidence to the Council within a period of 730

days, sufficient enough for Council to be able to be satisfied of the above matters.

If evidence is produced within the specified period, in accordance with Clause 95(5)

of the Regulation, Council will notify you whether or not it is satisfied as to the above

matters and whether or not the consent will operate.

2. Approved Plans – Deferred Commencement

The development is to be carried out generally in accordance with the following plans

as numbered below, except as modified by the deferred commencement condition of



approval:

Plan Number Prepared By Revision No. Dated

DRWG No. DA102 Bureau SRH

Architecture

A 21/03/2016


Architecture

A 21/03/2016


Architecture

B 24/01/2017


Architecture

A 21/03/2016


Architecture

A 21/03/2016


Architecture

B 24/01/2017


Architecture

A 21/03/2016


Architecture

A 21/03/2016

DRWG No. 13801-01/B ING Consulting

Engineers P/L

B 02/09/2016

DRWG No. 13801-02/B ING Consulting

Engineers P/L

B 02/09/2016

DRWG No. 1273.L.01 Greenland

Design P/L

A 01/03/2016

Schedule of Materials

and Finishes

Bureau SRH Pty.

Ltd.

A 24/01/2017

Acoustic Report

(Reference No. 2016-

050)

Acoustic Noise &

vibration

Solutions P/L

- 03/03/2016

BASIX Certificate No.

703344M

Gradwell

Consulting

- 16/03/2016

Plan of Management Think Planners

Pty Ltd

- 04/03/2016

Arboricultural Impact

Assessment

Redgum

Horticultural

- 25/01/2016

The plans will not be “stamped” by Council until the modifications required by the

deferred commencement condition have been incorporated into revised plans.

(Note:- modifications to the approved plans will require the lodgement and

consideration by Council of a modification pursuant to Section 96 of the

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act).

Reason:- to confirm and clarify the terms of Council’s approval.

3. Additional approvals – Roads Act 1993 (Advisory note)

The works approved under this development consent may require separate approval

under Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993. Such approvals (where applicable) should

be obtained from the Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) prior to the issue of any



Construction Certificate.

Reason:- To ensure all relevant and necessary approvals are obtained prior to any

works commencing on the land.

4. Maximum occupancy

The boarding house is approved to accommodate a maximum of 19 lodgers. Boarding

room no. 9 is not permitted to be occupied by more than 1 lodger. All other boarding

rooms are not permitted to be occupied by more than 2 adult lodgers at any one time.

A schedule showing the boarding room number and the number of lodgers permitted

to be accommodated in each must be displayed near the entrance of the premises.

The schedule shall include the name and a 24 hour contact telephone number of the

owner and/or the boarding house manager. Each boarding room must be clearly

numbered in accordance with the schedule.

Reason:- to confirm the terms of approvals and to comply with the requirements of

State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

5. Boarding Houses Act 2012

The use and operation of the premises shall comply with the requirements of the

Boarding Houses Act 2012 and all associated regulations and guideline. Prior to the

operation of the premises as a boarding house the premises must be registered with

the NSW Department of Fair Trading.

Reason:- to ensure the use and operation complies with the Boarding Houses Act

2012.

6. Compliance with Acts and Regulations for shared accommodation

The use and operation of the premises shall comply with the requirements of Part 1

Standards for places of shared accommodation in Schedule 2 Standards enforceable

by Orders of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 for the construction,

maintenance, and operation of places of shared accommodation.

The use of the premises as a boarding house shall comply with the requirements of

clause 46 regarding Sleeping Accommodation of the Public Health Regulation, 2012.

Reason:- To ensure compliance with Acts and Regulations for shared

accommodation.

7. Occupancy Agreements

No occupation of the premises is to occur without each boarder having a current

agreement for a period of at least 3 months.

Reason:- to ensure that the premises operates within the boarding house use

definition of Auburn Local Environmental Plan 2010.



8. Compliance with Submitted Acoustic Report

The recommended acoustic treatments and noise controls specified in the acoustic

report prepared by Acoustic Noise & Vibration Solutions P/L dated 3 March 2016

(Reference 2016-050) shall be submitted with the Construction Certificate

application and implemented prior to the release of the Occupation Certificate. All

noise reduction measures specified in the acoustic report shall be complied with at all

times during the operation of the premises.

Reason: to ensure reasonable level of amenity is achieved for the development.

9. Operational Plan of Management

The premises shall be operated in accordance with the operational plan of

management prepared by Think Planners P/L dated 4 March 2016. Where there is

any conflict between the provisions of the operational plan of management and

specific conditions of this consent, the specific conditions of this consent shall

prevail.

Reason:- to ensure on-going management of the boarding house is in accordance

with the operational plan of management.

10. Motorcycle and bicycle parking spaces

The development shall provide a minimum of two (2) motorcycle parking spaces and

an area set aside for at least two (2) bicycle parking space.

Details demonstrating compliance shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying

Authority for approval prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

Reason:- to ensure motorcycle and bicycle parking space is provided on site on

accommodate the development.

11. Time period of consent

This consent shall lapse five (5) years from the date of determination unless the

approved building, engineering or construction work has been physically commenced

in accordance with this consent.

Development consent for the use of land does not lapse if the approved use of any

land, building or work is actually commenced prior to the date on which the consent

would otherwise lapse.

Reason:- to satisfy the requirements of Section 95 of the Environmental Planning

and Assessment Act.

12. Submission of Construction Certificate

Construction works are not to commence until such time that a construction

certificate for the proposed works has been issued by Council or an Accredited

Certifier.



Where an Accredited Certifier issues a construction certificate, a copy of the following

documents must be forwarded to Council within 2 days of issue, together with

payment of the Council’s adopted registration fee: determination; application to which

it relates; construction certificate issued; plans and specifications; any fire safety

schedule; and any other documents lodged with the certificate.

Any modification involving building works to the approved development made under

Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 requires the

submission of an amended construction certificate.

Reason:- to comply with the requirements of Section 81A of the Environmental

Planning and Assessment Act and clause 142 of the Environmental Planning and

Assessment Regulation 2000.

13. No alteration without prior Council approval

The completed building is not to be altered externally in character or colour without

the prior consent of Council.

Reason:- to ensure the external appearance of the development is not obtrusive or

offensive and does not degrade the visual quality of the surrounding area.

14. Appointment of Principal Certifying Authority/Notice of Commencement of Work

Site works are not to commence until:-

a) a construction certificate for the building work has been issued by the consent

authority, and

b) the person having the benefit of the development consent has:-

i) appointed a principal certifying authority for the building work, and

ii) notified the principal certifying authority that the person will carry out the

building work as an owner-builder, if that is the case, and

b1) the principal certifying authority has, no later than 2 days before the

building work commences:-

i) notified the consent authority and the council (if the council is not the

consent authority) of his or her appointment, and

ii) notified the person having the benefit of the development consent of any

critical stage inspections and other inspections that are to be carried out in

respect of the building work, and

b2) the person having the benefit of the development consent, if not carrying

out the work as an owner-builder, has:-

i) appointed a principal contractor for the building work who must be the

holder of a contractor licence if any residential building work is involved, and

ii) notified the principal certifying authority of any such appointment, and



iii) unless that person is the principal contractor, notified the principal

contractor of any critical stage inspections and other inspections that are to

be carried out in respect of the building work, and

c) the person having the benefit of the development consent has given at least 2

days’ notice to the council of the person’s intention to commence the erection of

the building.

Reason:- to comply with the requirements of Section 81A of the Environmental

Planning and Assessment Act

15. Principal Certifying Authority

1) The person having the benefit of a development consent or complying

development certificate for development involving building work or subdivision

work may appoint the consent authority, the council or an accredited certifier as

the principal certifying authority for the development.

1A) Despite subsection (1), such an appointment may not be made by any

contractor or other person who will carry out the building work or subdivision

work unless the contractor or other person is the owner of the land on which the

work is to be carried out.

2) Despite subsection (1), an accredited certifier must not be appointed as the

principal certifying authority for development involving subdivision work unless

the subdivision to which the work relates is of a kind identified by an

environmental planning instrument as one in respect of which an accredited

certifier may be a certifying authority.

3) A principal certifying authority for building work or subdivision work to be carried

out on a site is required to be satisfied:-

a) that a construction certificate or complying development certificate has

been issued for such of the building work or subdivision work as requires

development consent and over which the principal certifying authority has

control, before the work commences on the site, and

b) that the principal contractor for the work is the holder of the appropriate

licence and is covered by the appropriate insurance, in each case if

required by the Home Building Act 1989, before any residential building

work over which the principal certifying authority has control commences

on the site, unless the work is to be carried out by an owner-builder, and

c) that the owner-builder is the holder of any owner-builder permit required

under the Home Building Act 1989, before an owner-builder commences

on the site any residential building work over which the principal certifying

authority has control, and

d) that building work or subdivision work on the site has been inspected by

the principal certifying authority or another certifying authority on such

occasions (if any) as are prescribed by the regulations and on such other

occasions as may be required by the principal certifying authority, before

the principal certifying authority issues an occupation certificate or

subdivision certificate for the building or work, and



e) that any preconditions required by a development consent or complying

development certificate to be met for the work before the issue of an

occupation certificate or subdivision certificate have been met, before the

principal certifying authority issues the occupation certificate or

subdivision certificate.

4) A principal certifying authority must also comply with such other requirements of

a like or different nature as may be imposed on principal certifying authorities

by the regulations.

Note. Section 81A prohibits the commencement of building work or subdivision work

unless the consent authority has been notified of the appointment of a principal

certifying authority for the work. Section 109D (2) prohibits the issue of an occupation

certificate authorising the occupation and use of a new building except by the

principal certifying authority appointed for the erection of the building. Section 109D

(3) prohibits the issue of a subdivision certificate for a subdivision involving

subdivision work except by the principal certifying authority appointed for the carrying

out of the subdivision.

Reason:- to comply with the requirements of Section 109E of the Environmental

Planning and Assessment Act.

16. Provision of Street Numbers

A street number is to be displayed in a prominent position at the entrance to the

premises. Numbers are to be of a colour contrasting with the wall to which they are

affixed.

Reason:- to clearly identify the street number of the property.

17. Compliance with the Building Code of Australia

All building work must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the

Building Code of Australia.

Reason:- to ensure compliance with the requirements of the Building Code of

Australia and to comply with Clause 98 of the Environmental Planning and

Assessment Regulation 2000.

18. Insurance requirements under the Home Building Act 1989

A contract of insurance for residential building work must be in force before any

building works commence, where the works are being undertaken by a builder and

tradesperson and the works have a market value of greater than $20,000 (or as

varied from time to time by the Home Building Act 1989).

Where the contract price or the reasonable market cost of the labour and materials

involved does not exceed $20,000, there is no legal requirement for home warranty

insurance to be obtained.

Contractors who carry out residential building work must still hold an appropriate

licence with Fair Trading where the labour and materials involved are valued at over



$1,000.

Home owners should be wary of any builder or tradesperson who says they do not

need insurance if the value of work exceeds $20,000, or who suggests you obtain an

owner-builder permit while they carry out the work for you.

NOTE: Evidence of the contract of insurance or owner builder permit, if required,

must be submitted with the application for construction certificate. The construction

certificate will not be released by Council unless this evidence is provided.

Reason:- to comply with Clause 98 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment

Regulation 2000.

19. Disabled Access & Facilities

Access and facilities for people with disabilities must be provided in accordance with

the relevant requirements of the Building Code of Australia (for all new building work)

and in addition, with the relevant requirements of the ‘Disability (Access to Premises

– Building) Standards 2010’ (including for existing buildings, whether or not any

works are proposed). Details of the proposed access, facilities and car parking for

people with disabilities are to be included in the plans/specifications for the

construction certificate.

Reason: to ensure compliance with the requirements of the Building Code of

Australia

20. Commonwealth Disability Discrimination Act

The Commonwealth Disability Discrimination Act 1992 commenced the ‘Disability

(Access for Premises – Buildings) Standards 2010’ on 1 May 2011 and now applies

to all new buildings and affected parts of existing buildings. Submission and/or

approval of this application does not imply or confer compliance with either the Act or

the new Access Standard. Applicants should satisfy themselves and make their own

inquiries to the Human Rights and Equal Opportunity Commission.

Reason: to provide advice on the requirements of the Commonwealth Disability

Discrimination Act 1992

21. Replacement of Principal Certifying Authorities

Unless the relevant authority so approves in writing, a person may not be appointed

to replace another person as the principal certifying authority for development.

A principal certifying authority appointed to replace another principal certifying

authority must ensure that notice of the appointment and of the approval of that

appointment is given to the consent authority (and, if the consent authority is not the

council, to the council) within 2 days of the appointment.

Reason:- to comply with the requirements of Section 109EA of the Environmental

Planning and Assessment Act and clause 162 of the Environmental Planning and

Assessment Regulation.



22. Notice to Allow Inspections

To allow a principal certifying authority or another certifying authority time to carry out

critical stage inspections or any other inspections required by the principal certifying

authority, the principal contractor for a building site, or the owner-builder, must notify

the principal certifying authority at least 48 hours before building work is commenced

at the site if a critical stage inspection is required before the commencement of the

work.

Reason:- to comply with the requirements of Clause 163 of the Environmental

Planning and Assessment Regulation.

23. Erection of Signs

A rigid and durable sign must be erected in a prominent position on any site on which

building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out:-

a) showing the name, address and telephone number of the principal certifying

authority for the work, and

b) showing the name of the principal contractor (if any) for any building work and a

telephone number on which that person may be contacted outside working

hours, and

c) stating that unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited.

Any such sign is to be maintained while the building work, subdivision work or

demolition work is being carried out, but must be removed when the work has been

completed.

Note: Principal certifying authorities and principal contractors must also ensure that

signs required by this clause are erected and maintained (see clause 227A which

currently imposes a maximum penalty of $1,100.

Reason:- to comply with the requirements of Clause 98A and 136B of the

Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations.

24. BASIX Requirements

Under Clause 97A(3) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000,

it is a condition of this development consent that all the commitments listed in each

relevant BASIX Certificate for the development are fulfilled. In this condition:-

a) Relevant BASIX Certification means:-

i) A BASIX Certificate that was applicable to the development when this

development consent was granted (or, if the development consent is

modified under Section 96 of the Act, a BASIX Certificate that is applicable

to the development when this development consent is modified) or;

ii) If a replacement BASIX Certificate accompanies any subsequent

application for a construction certificate, the replacement BASIX

Certificate; and



b) BASIX Certificate has the meaning given to that term in the Environmental

Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000.

Reason:- To comply with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations.

25. Tree Retention

All reasonable measures shall be undertaken to ensure that the existing trees on the

site, and including street trees adjacent to the site, (other than any tree approved for

removal by Council) are not damaged during the approved demolition works.

Reason: to protect trees in accordance with Council’s Development Control Plan.

26. Demolition of buildings

The building/s shall only be demolished in accordance with the requirements of AS

2601-2001 "The Demolition of Structures".

Amongst others, precautions to be taken shall include compliance with the

requirements of the WorkCover Authority of New South Wales, including but not

limited to:-

a) Protection of site workers and the general public.

b) Erection of hoardings where appropriate.

c) Asbestos handling and disposal where applicable.

d) Any disused service connections shall be capped off to Council's requirements.

e) The disposal of refuse is to be to an approved waste disposal depot.

Reason:- to ensure protection of the public, environment and to uphold public health

standards. This also complies with the requirements of clause 92 of the

Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

27. Demolition – Lead Paint Disposal

The demolition and disposal of materials incorporating lead such as lead paint and

dustpaint shall be conducted in accordance with AS2601-2001 Demolition of

Structures. Removal, cleaning and disposal of lead-based paint shall conform with

relevant EPA guidelines including the Lead Safe A renovator’s guide to the dangers of

lead, NSW EPA, 1998. Hazardous dust shall not be allowed to escape from the site.

Any existing accumulations of dust (eg; ceiling voids and wall cavities) shall be

removed by the use of an industrial vacuum fitted with a high efficiency particulate air

(HEPA) filter. All dusty surfaces and dust created from work shall be suppressed by a

fine water spray. Water shall not be allowed to enter the street and stormwater

systems. Demolition shall not be performed during high winds, which may cause dust

to spread beyond the site boundaries. Please note that Council may require testing to

verify that the soil lead levels are below acceptable health criteria.

Reason:- to ensure the disposal and demolition of materials incorporating lead is

carried out in a safe manner in accordance with relevant regulations.



28. Demolisher Details

The demolisher/owner/applicant shall:-

a) Lodge with Council, and at least forty-eight (48) hours prior to the

commencement of work (due to the potential impact on Council’s infrastructure):-

i) Written notice, indicating the date when demolition of the building is to

commence.

Ii) The demolisher’s full name and address.

iii) Details of Public Liability Insurance.

b) Comply with Australian Standard 2601 – 2001 "Demolition of Structures"; and,

c) Have a current public liability/risk insurance, and policy details of such shall be

submitted to Council for its records.

d) Ensure that all possible/practicable steps are taken to prevent nuisance to the

inhabitants of the surrounding neighbourhood from wind-blown dust, debris, noise

and the like arising from the demolition works

This Consent shall not preclude the demolisher from giving notice to other statutory

authorities, such as Sydney Water Corporation, WorkCover, etc.

Reason:- to ensure details of the demolisher are provided to Council and relevant

safety requirements are met.

29. Demolition Works – noise and vibration

The following shall be compiled with:-

a) Vibration levels induced by the demolition activities shall not exceed 1mm/sec

peak particle velocity (ppv) when measured at the footing of any occupied building.

b) Vibration levels induced by the demolition activities shall not exceed 3mmsec

peak particle velocity (ppv) when measured at the footing of any unoccupied building.

c) The upper noise level from the demolition operations measured over a period of

10 minutes must not exceed the background noise level by more than 10dB(A).

Reason:- to ensure noise and vibration arising from the demolition works does not

impact on the amenity of the surrounding area.

30. Asbestos

a) In the event that asbestos is on a site or building under demolition or

construction, WorkCover NSW is to be contacted to ascertain the appropriate

response, to ensure the safety and protection of existing and future workers and

residents. An Asbestos Removal Contractor licensed by WorkCover NSW is to

handle/remove/transport and dispose of any products containing asbestos in a

manner approved of by the Department of Environment and Conservation (DEC).

Copies of tipping dockets are to be retained and able for viewing by Council officers

on request.



b) Asbestos material can only be disposed of at a landfill site nominated by Waste

Services NSW for that purpose. An appointment must be made with Waste Services

NSW to dispose of asbestos materials at the nominated landfill.

c) Anyone who removes, repairs or disturbs bonded or a friable asbestos material

must hold a current removal licence from Workcover NSW. Before starting work, a

work site-specific permit approving each asbestos project must be obtained from

Workcover NSW. A permit will not be granted without a current Workcover licence. All

removal, repair or disturbance of or to asbestos material must comply with:-

Work Health and Safety Act 2011;

The Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011;

Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997

Environmental Guidelines: Assessment, Classification and Management of Liquid and

Non-Liquid Wastes, NSW EPA, May 1999

Waste Avoidance and Resource Recovery Act 2001.

The Code of Practice for the Safe Removal of Asbestos [NOHSC: 2002 (1998)];

The Guide to the Control of Asbestos Hazards in Buildings and Structures [NOHSC:

3002 (1998)] http://www.nohsc.gov.au ; and

The Workcover NSW Guidelines for Licensed Asbestos Removal Contractors.

Note: The Code of Practice and Guide referred to above are known collectively as the

Worksafe Code of Practice and Guidance Notes on Asbestos. They are specifically

referenced in the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation 2001 under Clause

259.

Under the Work Health and Safety Regulation 2011, the Worksafe Code of Practice

and Guidance Notes on Asbestos are the minimum standards for asbestos removal

work.

Council does not control or regulate the Worksafe Code of Practice and Guidance

Notes on Asbestos. You should make yourself aware of the requirements by visiting

<http://www.workcover.nsw.gov.au> or one of Workcover NSW’s offices for further

advice.

d) In order to ensure safe handling of asbestos materials, the re-use or sale of

asbestos building materials is strictly prohibited.

Reason:- to ensure the safe handling, treatment and disposal of asbestos materials

arising from the demolition/construction works.

31. Services to be capped

Prior to the commencement of demolition works, the applicant must ensure that

utility services to the land upon which the building to be demolished stands, as well

as the building itself, are terminated and capped in accordance with the requirements

of supply authority, eg. Electricity-Supplier of Electricity to the subject premises, Gas-

Supplier of Gas to the subject premises.

Reason:- to ensure all services are capped adequately.



32. Site to be kept in a clean condition

Upon completion of demolition works and if no new building works are commenced

on site, the site shall be kept in a clean manner with landscaping and fencing to the

satisfaction of Council.

Reason: to control soil erosion, and not have any unsightly views.

33. Neighbour 24 notification of commencement of demolition

Prior to the commencement of work the applicant shall provide 24 hours notice in

writing to the neighbours adjoining and opposite the site of the intended time and

date of the start of the demolition work.

Reason:- to ensure details of the demolisher are provided to neighbours.

34. Construction/Demolition Hours

Site works, building works and demolition works, including the delivery of materials or

equipment to and from the property are to be carried out between the hours of 7.00

am and 6.00 p.m. only from Mondays to Fridays and between 8.00 am and 4.00 p.m.

only on Saturdays. No construction works or deliveries for the construction are to

take place on Sundays or public holidays.

Prior to commencement of any demolition or construction work the applicant is to

erect signs on the site, which are clearly visible from the footpaths adjoining the site

boundaries, which state the permitted construction/demolition hours. These signs

must also state “Any instances of site works, building works, demolition works or

deliveries outside the permitted hours can be reported to Auburn Council on 9735-

1222 during office hours or 0417-287-113 outside office hours”.

Reason:- to reduce nuisance to the surrounding properties during the construction

period.

35. Information required prior to the issue of Construction Certificate

The following documentation (where applicable) is to be submitted to Council or the

accredited certifier, prior to the granting of the construction certificate:

a) Detailed building plans and specifications containing sufficient information to

verify that the completed building will comply with the Building Code of Australia.

b) A list of any existing fire safety measures provided in relation to the land or any

existing building on the land (not applicable to dwellings or outbuildings)

c) A list of any proposed fire safety measures provided in relation to the land or any

existing building on the land (not applicable to dwellings or outbuildings)

d) Method of protecting window/door openings as required by BCA Part 3.

Reason:- to ensure that adequate information is submitted to enable assessment or

that the development can proceed with the concurrence of others.



36. Prior to the issue of the construction certificate

The following structural engineering details or design documentation (where

appropriate) shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority (Council or

accredited certifier) prior to the issue of the construction certificate:

a) Reinforced concrete strip footings.

b) Reinforced concrete raft slab.

c) Suspended reinforced concrete slabs.

d) Structural steelwork.

e) Structural timber work exceeding the design parameters of AS1684-1999

"Residential timber-framed construction".

f) Upper floor joist layout

g) Retaining walls.

h) Roof trusses.

i) Wall/roof bracing

j) The existing structure is to be certified as being structurally adequate to carry

out the proposed additional loadings.

k) Other.

Reason:- to ensure the building or structure and its materials and components are

capable of sustaining at an acceptable level of safety and serviceability.

37. Infrastructure Fee

The infrastructure inspection fee in accordance with Councils Fees and Charges

Schedule shall be paid prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

Reason: to contribute to the cost of inspection and identification of any damage to

Council’s infrastructure as a result of the development.

38. Maintain plans on-site

A copy of the construction certificate, the approved plans & specifications and

development consent conditions must be kept on the site at all times and be

available to the Council officers upon request.

Reason:- to ensure a record of the approved plans are readily available.

39. PCA – Inspection of works – general & site management

The building works are to be inspected by the principal certifying authority (or other

suitably qualified person on behalf of the applicant if permitted by the PCA) to monitor

compliance with Council’s approval and the relevant standards of construction.

Documentary evidence of compliance with Council’s approval and relevant standards

of construction is to be maintained by the principal certifying authority.

Upon inspection of each stage of construction, the principal certifying authority (or

other suitably qualified person on behalf of the applicant) is also required to ensure

that adequate provisions are made for the following measures (as applicable), to



ensure compliance with the terms of Council's approval:

Sediment control measures

Provision of perimeter fences or hoardings for public safety and restricted

access to building sites.

Maintenance of the public place free from unauthorised materials, waste

containers or other obstructions.

Reason:- to ensure the development is adequately monitored during the construction

phase.

40. Items not to be placed on roadway

The following items must not be placed on the footpath, roadway or nature strip at

any time:-

a) Building materials, sand, waste materials or construction equipment;

b) Bulk bins/waste skips/containers; or

c) Other items that may cause a hazard to pedestrians.

Reason:- to ensure the public is not inconvenienced, placed in danger and to prevent

harm to the environment occurring.

41. Sign to be erected concerning unauthorised entry to the site

A sign must be erected in a prominent position stating that unauthorised entry to the

site is not permitted. The sign must also name the builder or other person

responsible for the site and a telephone number at which the builder or other person

can be contacted outside working hours. Where Council is not the Principal Certifying

Authority, the sign shall also display the name and contact details of the nominated

Principal Certifying Authority. The sign is to be removed when the building works have

been completed.

Reason:- to restrict public access to the site and to provide suitable contact details in

a clear and conspicuous position.

42. Toilet accommodation for people working at the site

Suitable toilet accommodation is to be provided at the work site at all times. If

temporary toilet accommodation is proposed, it must:-

Have a hinged door capable of being fastened from both inside and outside,

Be constructed of weatherproof material,

Have a rigid and impervious floor; and

Have a receptacle for, and supply of, deodorising fluid.

Reason:- to ensure suitable toilet accommodation is provided for workers.

43. Survey Report

A Registered Surveyors check survey certificate is to be forwarded to the Principal



Certifying Authority (and a copy is to be forwarded to the Council, if the Council is not

the principal certifying authority), detailing compliance with Council’s approval at the

following stage/s of construction:

a) Prior to construction of the first completed floor/floor slab (prior to pouring of

concrete), showing the area of land, building and boundary setbacks and

verifying that the building is being constructed at the approved levels.

b) On completion of the erection of the building showing the area of the land, the

position of the building and boundary setbacks and verifying that the building

has been constructed at the approved levels.

Reason:- to ensure each stage of the development complies with the approved plans.

44. Fencing of Construction Sites – Rental details to be provided to the PCA

Public access to the site and building works, materials and equipment on the site is to

be restricted, when work is not in progress or the site is unoccupied.

A temporary hoarding or fence is to be provided to protect the public, located to the

perimeter of the site (unless the site is separated from the adjoining land by an

existing structurally adequate fence, having a minimum height of 1.5 metres).

Hoardings or fences are to have a minimum height of 1.8 metres and be constructed

of solid plywood sheeting (painted white) or of cyclone wire fencing with geotextile

fabric attached to the inside of the fence, to provide dust control.

Hoardings or fences are to be structurally adequate and be constructed in a good and

workmanlike manner and the use of poor quality materials or steel reinforcement

mesh as fencing is not permissible.

The public safety provisions and temporary fences must be in place prior to the

commencement of any demolition, excavation or building works and be maintained

throughout construction.

NOTE: Should ANY part of the fence or hoarding encroach beyond the boundaries of

the site, it will be necessary to:-

Make payment to Council for the rental of the road reserve area in accordance

with Council’s adopted charges (per metre per month – minimum 3 months)

BEFORE the fence/hoarding is erected.

Supply evidence that the road reserve rental fee has been paid to the PCA and

to any authorised Council officer.

Comply with Council’s specifications for the erection of Class A or B Hoardings.

Reason:- to provide protection to public places and to prevent unauthorised access

to the site.

45. Sedimentation Control

Prior to the commencement of site works, the following measures are to be

implemented on the site to assist with sedimentation control during the construction



phase of the project:-

a) A dish shaped diversion drain or similar structure will be constructed above the

proposed building works to divert run-off to a stable discharge area such as

dense ground cover. This diversion drain is to be lined with turf or otherwise

stabilised.

b) A sediment-trapping fence using a geotechnical fabric specifically designed for

such purpose and installed to manufacturer’s specifications is to be placed

below the construction area.

c) Vegetation and/or existing building structures will be cleared from the

construction site only, other areas to remain undisturbed.

d) Restricting vehicle access to one designated point and having these driveways

adequately covered at all times with blue metal or the like.

e) A vehicle wheel wash, cattle grid, wheel shaker or other appropriate device, shall

be installed prior to commencement of any site works or activities, to prevent

mud and dirt leaving the site and being deposited on the street.

f) Building operations such as brick cutting, washing tools or brushes and mixing

mortar are not permitted on public roadways or footways or in any other

locations which could lead to the discharge of materials into the stormwater

drainage system.

g) Stockpiles of topsoil, sand, aggregate, soil or other material shall not be located

on any drainage line or easement, natural watercourse, footpath or roadway and

shall be protected with adequate sediment controls.

h) The installation of gutters, downpipes, and the connection of downpipes to the

stormwater disposal system prior to the fixing of the roof cladding.

Such measures are to be maintained at all times to the satisfaction of Council and

the Principal Certifying Authority. Failure to do so may result in the issue of penalty

infringement notices.

Reason:- to minimise soil erosion and control sediment leaving the site during

construction and to prevent water pollution from occurring.

46. Display of a warning sign for soil and water management

Throughout the construction/remediation/demolition period, a warning sign for soil

and water management must be displayed on the most prominent point of the

building site, visible to both the street and site works.

Reason:- to ensure all building workers are aware of the need to maintain the

sediment and erosion control devices.

47. Excavations extending below the base of footings of adjoining development

Where excavations extend below the level of the base of the footings of a building on

an adjoining allotment of land, the person causing the excavation must preserve and

protect the building from damage and, if necessary, underpin and support the

adjoining building in an approved manner. The person causing the excavation must

give the owner of the adjoining property at least seven (7) days written notice of its

intention to excavate below the level of the base of the footing. The person must also



furnish the adjoining property owner with particulars of the proposed work.

Reason:- to ensure the support for neighbouring buildings.

48. Noise from construction activities

Noise from construction activities associated with the development shall comply

with the NSW Interim Construction Noise Guidelines (DECCW) 2009.

Reason:- to ensure noise arising from construction activities is in accordance with

relevant legislation and Environment Protection Authority requirements.

49. Dial before you dig (advisory)

Dial Before You Dig is a free national community service designed to prevent damage

and disruption to the vast pipe and cable networks which provides Australia with the

essential services we use everyday – electricity, gas, communications and water.

Before you dig call “Dial before you dig” on 1100 (listen to the prompts) or facsimile

1300 652 077 (with your street no./name, side of street and the distance to the

nearest cross street) or register on line at www.dialbeforeyoudig.com.au for

underground utility services information for any excavation areas.

The Dial Before You Dig service is also designed to protect Australia’s excavators.

Whether you are a back yard renovator, an individual tradesman or a professional

excavator the potential for injury, personal liability and even death exists every day.

Obtaining accurate information about your work site significantly minimises these

risks.

Reason: To ensure that essential services such as electricity, gas, communications

and water are not affected by excavation or construction.

50. Reinstatement of footpath and footpath crossing

The footpath and footpath crossing/s adjacent to the property shall be reinstated by

Council at the completion of works with all costs being borne by the developer.

Alternatives to the pre-payment for this work will be considered if written request is

made to Council.

Reason:- to ensure the footpath and the footpath crossings are repaired from any

damage caused during the construction phase.

51. Vehicle Driveway Crossings and Gutter Laybacks

Arrangements shall be made with Council for the prepaid construction of vehicular

crossings and gutter laybacks at all property entrances and exits, and for the removal

of all disused driveway crossings and gutter laybacks. Alternatives to the pre-payment

for this work will be considered if written request is made to Council. The gutter

crossing and/or the removal of any redundant crossings must be constructed to the

satisfaction of Council (and to the Council’s specifications including payment of any

required bonds) or the prepayment made to Council for Council to carry out the work,



prior to the issue of any occupation certificate.

Removal of obstructions, such as power poles, trees, drainage pits and the like shall

be carried out at the applicant’s expense.

Reason:- to ensure that works are carried out in accordance with Council’s standard.

52. Carrying capacity of driveways – Heavy duty

Suitable heavy-duty driveway crossings are to be installed at all ingress/egress points

to the property at the applicant's cost by Council. Alternatives to the pre-payment for

this work will be considered if written request is made to Council. The gutter crossing

and/or the removal of any redundant crossings must be constructed to the

satisfaction of Council (and to the Council’s specifications including payment of any

required bonds) or the prepayment made to Council for Council to carry out the work,

prior to the issue of any occupation certificate.

Reason:- to ensure the driveways can support the expected weight of heavy vehicles

likely to frequent the site.

53. Street boundary levels

Street boundary levels for vehicle access and drainage purposes are to be obtained

at the applicant’s cost from Council's Service Planning Department prior to

commencement of any works. These levels are to be incorporated in all drainage

submissions required under this determination.

Reason:- to ensure the correct levels are obtained and used for the development.

54. Road opening permit

Prior to commencement of any work on Council roads and footpaths, a road-opening

permit shall be obtained from Council’s Service Planning Department.

Reason:- to safeguard Council property against damage.

55. Restoration works

Prior to commencement of any excavation work on Council roads or footpaths, the

applicant shall pay for all restoration costs. The area of restoration shall be

determined on site between the applicant or its contractor and Council’s Contracts &

Maintenance Engineer.

Reason:- to ensure that Council’s infrastructure is maintained in a safe and

trafficable manner.

56. Works within Council controlled lands

(1) For drainage works:

a) Within Council controlled lands.



a) Connecting to Council’s stormwater drainage system.

Inspections will be required:-

i) After the excavation of pipeline trenches.

i) After the laying of all pipes prior to backfilling.

ii) After the completion of all pits and connection points.

(2) A minimum of 48 hours’ notice shall be given to Council to inspect works.

Inspections may be arranged by telephoning Council’s Works and Services Section

during office hours.

(3) Work is not to proceed until the works are inspected and approved by Council.

Reason:- to ensure works on public/Council controlled lands are carried out as per

Council’s requirements.

57. Footpath /Nature strip maintenance during and after construction

The footpath and nature strip within the street frontages shall be maintained during the

period of construction to Council’s satisfaction.

Reason:- to ensure pedestrian safety during the construction period.

58. Structural Engineering Certificate

The applicant shall submit a structural engineer’s certificate of adequacy verifying

that the works as detailed on the approved plans for the storage tank have been

completed under his/her supervision and that the design is adequate to support the

anticipated design loads. The certificate shall be submitted to Council with the works-

as-executed plan.

Reason:- to ensure the construction is structurally adequate.

59. Stormwater Disposal

Stormwater runoff generated from the Regent Street frontage development shall be

directed to the On Site Detention system prior to being discharged to Wayland Avenue by

gravity system.

Reason:- to prevent localised flooding

60. Submission of full stormwater disposal details

Full stormwater drainage details showing the proposed method of stormwater

collection and disposal are to be submitted to Council or the Accredited Certifier to

ensure the approved stormwater plans are incorporated with the Construction

Certificate.

The details shall be prepared by a suitably qualified person and must be in

accordance "Auburn Development Control Plans 2010 - Stormwater Drainage" and

"Australian Rainfall & Runoff 1987".In this regard,



I. The proposed stormwater system shall be generally in accordance with the

stormwater concept plans 13801-01/B and 13801-02/B issue B dated 02. 09.

2016 prepared by ING Consulting Engineers Pty Ltd.

II. Detail calculations shall be provided to show that adequate surface grates shall be

provided to collect and discharge stormwater runoff from the car park area to high

early discharge control pit.

Note: "Auburn Development Control Plans 2010 - Stormwater Drainage" is available

to purchase at Council or the document can be found at Auburn Council’s web page

www.auburn.nsw.gov.au

Reason:- to ensure the stormwater is suitably discharged.

61. Stormwater disposal – on-site detention

On-site stormwater detention storage is to be provided in conjunction with the

stormwater disposal. The storage is to comply with “Auburn Development Control

Plans 2000 - Stormwater Drainage”. Where multiple detention basins with differing

top water levels are used, the basins must be routed to the outlet pit independent of

each other.

A positive covenant under Section 88E of the Conveyancing Act is to be created on

the title of the property detailing the on-site stormwater detention system

incorporated in the development. The wording of the instrument is to be submitted

and approved by Council prior to lodgement at the Land Titles Office. Evidence

confirming the positive covenant has been registered shall be submitted to Council

prior to occupation of the building or issue of the occupation certificate.

Note:

1. Positive covenant wording shall be obtained from Council prior to lodgement.

2. Work as executed plan shall be accompanied by relevant checklists.

Reason:- to prevent localised flooding by ensuring the detention system is

maintained as designed.

62. Maintenance schedule – OSD

Prior to the issue of the occupation certificate, a maintenance schedule of the

proposed on-site detention facility shall be submitted to Council for approval with the

stormwater work-as executed plan. This maintenance schedule shall be registered as

part of the positive covenant.

Reason: to ensure the onsite detention facility is in good working order

63. Annual maintenance inspection of OSD

Annual maintenance inspection summary of the onsite detention with associated

certificates shall be sent to Council within the first month of every calendar year. In

this regard:



All critical inspections shall be carried out by a qualified person.

A maintenance log book shall be maintained as per the approved maintenance

schedule on site and readily available for inspection by a Council officer.

All associated cost shall be borne by the owner

Reason: to ensure the onsite detention facility is in good working order

64. Footpath Construction – Joseph Street

The footpath adjoining Joseph Street frontage shall be reconstructed in accordance

with the Council’s Standard footpath construction requirements. Site boundary line

levels shall be raised to the boundary line levels, with satisfactory end-transitions

provided.

Detail footpath design shall be submitted and approved by Council’s Works and

Services section prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

Street boundary levels obtained from Council shall be incorporated in the

design.

The details of construction requirements shall be requested from the Council

prior to commencement of construction.

Formwork inspection and footpath inspection shall be carried out by Council.

All associated cost shall be borne by the applicant.

The footpat shall be constructed at the completion of works and finished to the

satisfaction of Council prior to the issue of an Occupation certificate.

All associated cost shall be borne by the applicant

Reason:- to provide a safe footpath for increased pedestrian use and one that will

complement the Auburn Council requirements

65. Works-as-Executed Plan – Drainage Plans

Prior to occupation of the building or issue of the occupation certificate, two (2)

copies of the Works-as-Executed (W.A.E.) Plan prepared by a registered surveyor and

certified by the design engineer shall be submitted to Council. The W.A.E. plan shall

show (where applicable):

i) Whether all works have been completed generally with the approved

drainage plans.

ii) Any departure from the approved plan and conditions.

iii) Any additional work that has been undertaken.

iv) Location, levels and sizes of pipes and pits.

v) Finished floor and finished surface levels. The location of finished levels

should in general correspond with those shown on Council’s approved

drainage plan.

vi) Basement pump out volumes.

NOTE: The WAE surface level shall be taken after all landscaping has been

completed.

In this regard:



The above information is to be superimposed on a full sized copy of Council

approved drainage plan and is to be submitted to Council.

Checklists A3, A4 & A5 in the appendix of the “Auburn development control plans

2000 stormwater drainage” shall be completed and shall be certified by the

practicing hydraulic engineer and the registered surveyor.

Reason:- to account for minor variations and to ensure Council has the final details.

66. Arrangements for Electricity and Telephone Services

Satisfactory arrangements are to be made with Energy Australia, Telstra and/or Optus

for the provision of services to and within the subject land. Written evidence of such

arrangements shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority (Council or

accredited certifier) prior to the issue of the construction certificate.

NOTE: Prior to works commencing, the applicant is advised to contact each provider

to determine the location of various services to avoid damage occurring.

Reason:- to ensure these services are available to the site.

67. Arrangements for Water and Sewer Services

A Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be

obtained.

Application must be made through an authorised Water Servicing Coordinator. Please

refer to “Your Business” section of Sydney Water’s web site at

www.sydneywater.com.au then the “e-developer” icon or telephone 132 092.

Following application a “Notice of Requirements” will detail water and sewer

extensions to be built or charges to be paid. Please make early contact with the

Coordinator, since building of water/sewer extensions can be time consuming and

may impact on other services and building, driveway or landscaping design.

The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority

(Council or accredited certifier) prior to release of the final plan of subdivision or

occupation of the development.

Reason:- to ensure that adequate water and sewer services can be provided to the

site.

68. Sydney Water Approval

The approved development application plans must be accompanied by a valid

Building Plan Assessment Approval Receipt. This receipt can be acquired through the

"Sydney Water Tap" in system by the Sydney Water Authority.

Please refer to the web site www.sydneywater.com.au for:

• Information on the "Sydney Water Tap in" system and

• Registering and applying for the approval receipt for the Proposed Building Plan.



or telephone 13 20 92.

Note:

The consent authority or accredited certifier must either:

• ensure that a valid approval receipt has been obtained from Sydney Water

before the issue of any Construction Certificate (receipt valid usually 1 year from

the date of issue); or

• if there is a combined Development/Construction Certificate application, ensure

that a valid approval receipt has been obtained prior to works commencing on

site.

Reason:- to ensure the development does not damage or interfere with Sydney Water

assets.

69. Aboveground Power Lines

Where practicable, all existing overhead power lines adjacent to the development site

shall be relocated underground to Energy Australia standards and specifications. If

not practicable to relocate the power lines underground, arrangements shall be made

with Energy Australia to place the conduit to carry those power lines underground so

that they can be utilized at a later date by Energy Australia. In this regard all

associated costs shall be borne by the applicant.

Reason:- to improve the aesthetic quality of the area.

70. Amenity

The operation of the premises shall be conducted in such a manner as not to

interfere with or materially affect the amenity of the neighbourhood by reason of

noise, vibration, odour, fumes, vapour, steam, soot, ash, dust, waste water, waste

products, grit, oil, or otherwise.

Reason:- to protect the amenity of the locality.

71. Water Pollution

The operation of the premises shall be conducted in a manner which does not pollute

waters as defined by the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.

Reason:- to protect waterways and stormwater systems from pollution.

72. Removal of Litter

In addition to Council’s street sweeping and cleansing operations, the

owner/manager of the building shall ensure that the footpath, gutter, building entry

and surrounds are kept clean and clear of litter at all times.

Reason:- to maintain a satisfactory level of amenity in the locality.

73. Noise and Vibration



The use of the premises shall not give rise to any of the following when measured or

assessed at “sensitive” positions within any other property. These “sensitive”

positions should be selected to reflect the typical use of a property (ie any outdoor

areas for day and evening but closer to the façade at night time), unless other

positions can be shown to be more relevant.

a) 'offensive noise' as defined in the Protection of the Environment Operations Act

1997.

b) transmission of vibration to any place of different occupancy above the

requirements of AS2670.

c) a sound pressure LAeq,period at any noise sensitive position of any other

premises or occupancy greater than the recommended amenity noise criteria detailed

in the Department of Environment and Conservation, New South Wales (EPA)

Industrial Noise Policy.

d) a sound pressure LAeq,15min at any noise sensitive position greater than the

intrusiveness criteria determined in accordance with the Department of Environment

and Conservation, New South Wales (EPA) Industrial Noise Policy and does not

contain any tones, low frequency or impulsive factors as defined in the Department of

Environment and Conservation, New South Wales (EPA) Industrial Noise Policy table

4.1.

For assessment purposes, the above LAeq sound levels shall be assessed over a

period of 10-15 minutes and adjusted in accordance with EPA guidelines for tonality,

frequency weighting, impulsive characteristics, fluctuations and temporal content

where necessary.

Reason:- to ensure adequate acoustic amenity in the locality.

74. Air conditioning units – location and acoustics

a) Air conditioning units are not to be visible from the street or public place and are

not to obscure windows/window frames or architectural features of the building.

b) The operation of air conditioning units shall be so:

(i) as not to cause “offensive noise” as defined under the Protection of the

Environment Operations Act 1997;

(ii) as to be inaudible at the nearest affected residence between the hours of

10.00pm and 7.00am on weekdays and 10.00pm and 8.00am on

weekends and public holidays;

(iii) as not to discharge a condensate or moisture onto the ground surface of

the premises or into a stormwater drainage system in contravention of the

requirements of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.

c) Should Council receive noise complaints from neighbouring residents in relation

to the air conditioning units, Council may issue a Noise Notice. Such notice

may require you to engage the services of a competent and appropriately

qualified Acoustic Consultant to undertake a noise level assessment of the air

conditioning unit. If the unit is assessed as exceeding the permitted noise

criteria, you may be directed to provide noise attenuation measures such as

an acoustic enclosure and/or relocation of the unit.



Reason:- to ensure that air conditioning units associated with the development are

appropriately located and do not detract from the appearance of the buildings and to

ensure the operation of air conditioning units does not adversely impact on the

acoustic amenity of the locality.

75. Discovery of additional information during remediation, demolition or construction

Any new information which comes to light during remediation, demolition or

construction works which has the potential to alter previous conclusions about site

contamination shall be notified to the Council and the PCA immediately.

Reason:- to ensure Council is informed of any new information relevant to site

conditions and site contamination associated with the development.

76. Off-site soil disposal

Any soil disposed of offsite shall be classified in accordance with the procedures in

the NSW EPA Environmental Guidelines: Assessment, Classification & Management of

Liquid & Non-Liquid Wastes (1999).

Reason:- to ensure soil disposed off-site is classified in accordance with relevant EPA

requirements.

77. Car parking to Comply with Approved Details

The area set aside for the parking of vehicles, and so delineated on the plan prepared

by Bureau SRH and endorsed plan Drawing No DA104, Revision B, dated

24/01/2017, shall not be used for any other purpose.

Reason:- to ensure the car parking area is not used for purposes other than the

parking of cars associated with the use.

78. Vehicles Driven in Forward Direction

All vehicles must be driven in a forward direction at all times when entering or leaving

the premises.

Reason:- to preserve and enhance the safe operation of the car parking area.

79. Traffic Management

A traffic management plan shall be submitted to and approved by Council for all

demolition, excavation and construction activities associated with the development prior

to commencement of work.

Reason:- to minimise the impact on street traffic.

80. Use of building not to commence until conditions of consent satisfied

The use of the premises is not to commence until all terms of this consent have been



satisfied.

Reason:- to ensure compliance with the terms of the development consent.

81. Building not to be adapted for another use

The building is to be used for the purposes of a boarding house only and is not to be

altered or adapted for another use without the prior consent of Council.

Reason:- the building has only been approved for this use and other uses require a

separate approval of Council.

82. CCTV Camera System

The Management/Licensee shall install CCTV surveillance cameras in and around the

premises, placed in strategic places such as the external entrance and exit doors.

The surveillance tapes shall be kept for a period of 14 days for viewing by the police

upon request.

Reason:- to ensure that the use provides adequate visual surveillance and adequate

records for the NSW Police to peruse is required.

83. Surveillance tapes:

The surveillance tapes captured by the CCTV cameras shall be kept for a period of 14

days for viewing by the police upon request with the recording device located in a

secure area to maintain the integrity of the recorded footage.

Reason:- to improve public safety late at night and to maintain the integrity of the

recorded footage.

84. Target hardening strategies to reduce crime

The following target hardening strategies shall be undertaken on site to assist in the

reduction of crime in the locality:-

a) CCTV digital cameras shall be installed in and around the premises, particularly

at the entry and exit points to assist police to identify offenders of crime.

b) Warning signs strategically posted in and around the premises to warn intruders

of the security measures.

c) Additional lightning be installed in and around the premises to act as a

deterrent for crime. The lighting shall be installed in accordance with the

Australian Standards 1158.3 1999.

The details shall be shown in the construction plans for approval by Council or the

Accredited Certifier prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

Reason:- to reduce the incidence of late night crime in the locality and to improve

public safety late at night.

85. Side/Rear Boundary Fencing



Fences located on the side or rear boundaries of the premises, behind the main

building setback (not within the front yard), shall not exceed a maximum height of 1.8

metres.

Reason:- to maintain reasonable levels of amenity to the adjoining premises.

86. Fencing/gates and adjoining land

There must be no encroachment of any part of the structure/s onto the adjoining

premises or onto Council’s road reserve, footway or public place. Any gate openings

shall be constructed so that the gates, when hung, will be fitted in such a manner that

they will not open over the footway or public place.

Reason:- to ensure the fence/gates do not restrict access and that encroachments

do not occur.

87. Mail Box Structure

An Australia Post approved lockable mail box structure(s) shall be centrally located to

the primary street entry of the site.

Reason:- to ensure compliance with Council’s Development Control Plan

requirements.

88. Suitable arrangements to be made for garbage and recycling services

Suitable arrangements for garbage and recycling services are to be made with

Council prior to occupation of the building.

Reason:- to ensure adequate garbage and recycling services are provided for the

development.

89. Ongoing Waste Management

Ongoing waste management within the development shall be carried out in

accordance with the approved Waste Management Plan and the following

requirements:-

a) Appropriate waste management practices are to be adopted within the

development at all times.

b) The waste storage room shall be kept in a clean, tidy and hygienic condition at

all times.

c) The waste and recyclable storage area shall be fully enclosed, adequately

ventilated and constructed with a concrete floor and concrete or cement

rendered walls covering the floor. The floor shall be graded to an approved

sewer connection incorporating a sump and galvanised grate cover or basket. A

hot and cold hose cock shall be provided within the room. Details shall be

provided with the Construction Certificate and endorsed on the construction

drawings, and works completed prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

d) A person shall be employed/nominated to manage the collection of waste



material by Council, including, but not limited to bin placement at the road edge

and retrieval of bins soon after collection of contents, cleansing of bins, storage

of bins in the compound and the like.

e) The nature strip is to be kept in a clean and tidy condition upon garbage

collection.

Reason:- to ensure appropriate ongoing waste management practices within the

development in accordance with Council’s Development Control Plan requirements.

90. Waste and recyclables storage area:

The waste and recyclable storage area shall be fully enclosed, adequately ventilated

and constructed with a concrete floor and concrete or cement rendered walls

covering the floor. The floor shall be graded to an approved sewer connection

incorporating a sump and galvanised grate cover or basket. A hot and cold hose cock

shall be provided within the room. Details shall be provided with the Construction

Certificate and endorsed on the construction drawings, and works completed prior to

the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

Reason:- to ensure the waste and recyclables storage area is appropriately

constructed and able to be readily cleaned and maintained.

91. Final Fire Safety Certificate

Prior to the occupation of the building, the owner of the building shall submit to the

Principal Certifying Authority (Council or Accredited Certifier), a final fire safety

certificate in relation to each essential fire safety measure specified in the fire safety

schedule, attached to the development consent or construction certificate.

Such certificate shall state that each essential fire safety measure specified:-

a) Has been assessed by a properly qualified person, and

b) Was found, at the date of assessment, to be capable of performing to a

standard not less than that required by the current fire safety schedule for the

building for which the certificate is issued.

NOTES:

1. As soon as practicable after a final fire safety certificate is issued, the owner of

the building to which it relates:-

i) Must cause a copy of the statement (and current fire safety schedule) to

be given to the Commissioner of NSW Fire Brigades, and

ii) Must cause a further copy of the statement (and current copy of the

current fire safety schedule) to be prominently displayed in the building.

2. A “fire safety measure” is defined as any measure (including any item of

equipment, form of construction or fire safety strategy) that is , or is proposed to

be, implemented in the building to ensure the safety of persons using the

building in the event of fire.



Reason:- to ensure compliance with Regulations 149 & 171 of the Environmental

Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

92. Annual Fire Safety Statement

The owner of any building in which fire safety measures are installed, must cause the

Council to be given an annual fire safety statement, within 12 months after the last

such statement or final fire safety certificate was issued.

The certificate shall certify:-

a) That each essential fire safety measure has been assessed by a properly

qualified person and was found, at the date of assessment, to be capable of

performing to a standard not less than that required by the current fire safety

schedule.

b) That a properly qualified person has inspected the building and has certified

that, as at the date of inspection, the condition of the building did not disclose

any grounds for a prosecution under Division C.

NOTES:

1. As soon as practicable after an annual fire safety statement is issued, the owner

of the building to which it relates:-

i) must cause a copy of the statement (and current fire safety schedule) to

be given to the Commissioner of NSW Fire Brigades, and

ii) must cause a further copy of the statement (and current copy of the

current fire safety schedule) to be prominently displayed in the building.

2. A “fire safety measure” is defined as any measure (including any item of

equipment, form of construction or fire safety strategy) that is, or is proposed to

be, implemented in the building to ensure the safety of persons using the

building in the event of fire.

Reason:- to ensure compliance with Regulation 171 of the Environmental Planning

and Assessment Regulation 2000.

93. Submission of Works-as-Executed Fire Services Plan

A works-as-executed fire services plan is to be submitted to the Council prior to

occupation of the development, detailing the location of the essential fire safety

measures installed within the building premises.

Reason:- to ensure a record of the location and type of fire safety services is

documented.

94. Occupation Certificate

A person must not commence occupation or use of the whole or part of a new

building unless an occupation certificate has been issued in relation to the building or

part.



The application for an Occupation Certificate must be made to the Principal Certifying

Authority (Council or an accredited certifier) using the approved form.

Reason:- to comply with the requirements of Section 109M/N of the Environmental

Planning and Assessment Act.

95. Auburn DCP 2007 - LGA Wide: Section 94 Development Contributions

Development Contributions are payable in accordance with Auburn Council Council’s

Section 94 Development Contribution Plan 2007, which has been prepared under

Section 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, as amended.

The amounts payable will be adjusted in accordance with the section titled Review of

Contribution rates and are generally indexed on a quarterly basis by the Consumer

Price Index CPI (all Groups Sydney) unless otherwise stated in the plan.

Contributions will be adjusted at the payment date in accordance with the plan and

payment is to be made prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate.

A sum of $23,069.81 is to be paid to Council for the purpose of LGA Wide plans being

the provision of open space and recreation facilities, community facilities,

accessibility and traffic works, town centre upgrades, car parking and Council's

administration of the development contributions framework.

The above sum is broken down to the following items:

Item Amount

Community Facilities $5688.72

Public Domain $12581.94

Accessibility and Traffic $3464.17

Administration $1334.98

TOTAL $23,069.81

Council’s Development Contribution Plan 2007 is available for inspection at Council’s

Customer Services Centre, Civic Place, 1 Susan Street, Auburn or on line at

www.auburn.nsw.gov.au.

Reason: to provide open space and recreation facilities, community facilities,

accessibility and traffic works, town centre upgrades, car parking and Council's

administration of the development contributions framework.

96. Smoke Alarms – Class 1 Buildings

Smoke alarms are required to be installed in each Class 1 building or dwelling in

accordance with the relevant provisions of Part 3.7.2 of the B.C.A. - Housing Provisions.

Smoke alarms must comply with AS 3786 - Smoke alarms and be connected to the

consumer mains electric power supply and provided with a battery back-up.

The smoke alarms are to be installed in suitable locations on or near the ceiling, in any



storey containing bedrooms; located between each part of the dwelling containing the

bedrooms and the remainder of the dwelling, or where bedrooms are served by a

hallway, the smoke alarms are to be located in that hallway; and smoke alarms are to

be installed in any other storey not containing bedrooms, to the satisfaction of the

certifying authority.

Smoke alarms are not be located in “dead-air spaces”, in the corner junction of walls

and ceilings between exposed rafters/joists or at the apex of raked ceilings, as detailed

in Part 3.7.2 of the B.C.A. - Housing Provisions.

Details of compliance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia must be

included in the plans/specification for the construction certificate.

Reason:- to ensure that reasonable levels of fire safety are provided in the building.

97. Sanitary Compartment doors – All Buildings

The door to a fully enclosed sanitary compartment must open outwards OR slide OR be

readily removable from the outside of the compartment, unless there is a clear space

of at least 1.2m between the closet pan within the sanitary compartment and the

nearest part of the doorway.

Reason:- to comply with BCA F2.5 and Part 3.8.3.3.

98. Termite Protection

Where a primary building element in a building may be subject to attach by termites,

those members will need to be protected in accordance with Clause 3.1.3.0 of the

Building Code of Australia. Satisfactory compliance with this requirement is achieved

by applying a preventative treatment in accordance with AS 3660.1-2000.

Where a patented method of physical protection or chemical treatment is carried out, a

certificate shall be submitted to The Principal Certifying Authority from the

installer/pest control firm indicating that the protection used complies with AS 3660.1-

2000 and the Building Code of Australia. This certificate shall be forwarded to The

Principal Certifying Authority prior to the pouring of any slab on ground or prior to a

bearers and joist inspection.

Where an alternative method of treatment is proposed, it is to be provided in

accordance with the requirements of Clause 3.1.3 and Clause P2.1 in Section 2 of the

Building Code of Australia. Details of any proposed performance based compliance

system must be submitted to The Principal Certifying Authority for approval.

A durable notice must be permanently fixed to the building in a prominent location

regarding the installation of termite barriers, such as in a meter box or the like

indicating:-

i) The method of protection; and

ii) The date of installation of the system; and

iii) Where a chemical barrier is used, its life expectancy as listed on the National

Registration Authority label; and



iv) The installer’s or manufacturer’s recommendations for the scope and frequency

of future inspections for termite activity.

Reason: to comply with Clause 3.1.3.0 of the Building Code of Australia and AS

3660.1-2000.

99. Household Type Hot Water System

The household type hot water system is to be supported on construction sufficient to

carry the total mass at full capacity and is positioned to enable adequate access for

operation, maintenance and removal. Roof space or otherwise concealed units are to

have a safety tray and waste for the overflow. (Note: Installation in accordance with AS

1529 is considered satisfactory).

Reason:- to comply with AS 1529.



Planning Proposal for 190-220 Dunmore Street, Pendle

Hill (Bonds Spinning Mill site) - Post Exhibition Report

Responsible Division: Environment & Infrastructure

Officer: Manager Strategy

File Number: SUB275

Delivery Program Code: 5.1.1 Oversee the land use planning, design and

compliance framework for managing and facilitating

appropriate development.

8.1.1 Oversee and implement Council’s Residential

Development Strategy and appropriate housing

opportunities through land use planning.

8.2.1 Ensure housing growth is focussed around centres

and planning controls do not compromise housing

affordability.

9.3.1 Ensure planning and development implements

Environmentally Sustainable Design principles.

Application lodged 10 November 2015

Proponent JBA Planning on behalf of Dyldam (JST (NSW) Pty

Ltd)«Applicant_Name»

Owner J.S.T. (NSW) Pty Ltd«Owner_Name»

Company Details J.S.T. (NSW) Pty Ltd

ACN: 152 607 166

ABN: 37152607166

Registered in: New South Wales

Registration date: 11/08/2011

Description of Land 190-220 Dunmore Street, Pendle Hill

Lot 1 DP 735207

Proposal summary Seeks to amend the land use zoning, maximum building

height, floor space ratio and minimum lot size for the subject

site to enable redevelopment for residential apartment

buildings, local business and public open space.

Subject site / Description

of existing use

The subject site is approximately 79,711m2 and is located on

the fringe of the Pendle Hill local centre. The site is currently

leased by a transport distribution company.

Existing Zoning and

Planning Controls

Land use zoning: IN2 Light Industrial

Maximum building height: No control

Floor space ratio (FSR): No control

Minimum lot size: 1,200sqm

Proposed Zoning and

Planning Controls

Land use zoning: R4 High Density Residential

B2 Local Centre

RE1 Public Recreation

Maximum building height: 12.5m - 39m

Floor space ratio (FSR): 0.7:1 - 2.3:1

Minimum lot size: 900sqm (R4 zone only)



Heritage Site and individual buildings listed under Holroyd LEP 2013.

Disclosure of political

donations and gifts

Disclosure statement provided by proponent indicates no

political donations or gifts were made.

Previous Considerations DCS010-16 – Revised Planning Proposal Request for Bonds

Spinning Mills site (report to 19 April 2016 Council meeting).

SUMMARY

Community consultation was undertaken in relation to a Planning Proposal for 190-220

Dunmore Street, Pendle Hill (the Bonds Spinning Mill site) from 7 September to 19

October 2016. 70 submissions were received, including one late submission and two

petitions. Additionally, a public hearing was held following the exhibition, at which 10

verbal submissions were made.

The Planning Proposal seeks to rezone the site from IN2 Light Industrial to R4 High

Density Residential, B2 Local Centre and RE1 Public Recreation. It also seeks an increase

in the maximum building height ranging from 12.5m (3 storeys) to 39m (12 storeys), and

an increase in the maximum floor space ratio ranging from 0.7:1 to 2.3:1.

The purpose of this report is to acknowledge and respond to the submissions received

during the community consultation period for the Planning Proposal and to provide

recommendations as to how the Planning Proposal should proceed.

REPORT

Background

The land that is the subject of the Planning Proposal is the Bonds Spinning Mill Site

situated at 190-220 Dunmore Street, Pendle Hill (referred to in this report as ‘the subject

site’) and covers an area of approximately 8 hectares. The subject site is located

approximately 4km west of Parramatta, on the outskirts of the Pendle Hill centre, 500m

south-east of Pendle Hill railway station.

The subject site is currently zoned IN2 Light Industrial and is identified as a heritage item

under Holroyd LEP 2013. The site has been used for industrial purposes (manufacturing

and distribution of textiles) since 1923. It was the first spinning mill in the Southern

Hemisphere and was where the Bonds clothing brand originated.



Figure 1: Location of subject site

A request to prepare a Planning Proposal to rezone land at 190-220 Dunmore Street,

Pendle Hill (the Bonds Spinning Mills site) was submitted to Council on 10 November

2015. This revised request amended the previous one endorsed by Council in 2014,

proposing a new concept design with a higher dwelling yield and amended height and

floor space ratio (FSR) maps. The proponent requested rezoning of the site from an IN2

Light Industrial zone to an R4 High Density Residential zone, B2 Local Centre zone and an

RE1 Public Recreation zone, with FSRs ranging from 0.7:1 to 2.4:1 and building heights

ranging between 12.5m (3 storeys) and 38m (12 storeys).

The proposal was reported to Council on 19 April 2016, and Council resolved to proceed

with a Planning Proposal for the site, based on the following planning controls:

R4 High Density Residential, B2 Local Centre and RE1 Public Recreation

Maximum building heights of 14m (approx. 3‐4 storeys) between Dunmore Street

and the proposed park, 39m (adjusted to ADG heights for approx. 12 storeys) in

the centre of the site, 12.5m (approx. 3 storeys) along the southern boundary and

27m (adjusted to ADG heights for approx. 8 storeys) for the remainder of the

southern part of the site.

Maximum floor space ratio of 0.7:1 for the B2 business zone, 1.2:1 for the

northern R4 residential zoned part of the site and 1.9:1 for the southern R4

residential zoned part of the site.

This represented a reduction in the FSR for the southern portion of the site, in order to

achieve a reduced dwelling yield of approximately 1,260 dwellings, down from the

maximum of 1,500 dwellings recommended in the report to Council.



Council received a Gateway Determination on 8 August 2016, which varied the FSR

controls endorsed by Council, reverting to those put forward in the report

recommendation, which included an FSR of 2.3:1 for the southern portion of the site

allowing for the previously recommended 1,500 dwellings. As such, these were the

planning controls that proceeded to public exhibition.

A summary of the planning controls and resultant dwelling yield sought by the proponent,

those endorsed by Council, and those supported by the Gateway Determination, is

provided as follows:

Control Sought by proponent Endorsed by Council Supported by Gateway

Land Use Zoning R4 High Density

Residential

B2 Local Centre


R4 High Density

Residential

B2 Local Centre


R4 High Density

Residential

B2 Local Centre


Height of buildings 12.5m - 20m (3‐6

storeys) between

Dunmore Street and the

proposed park

38m (12 storeys) in

centre of site

24m (8 storeys) for the

remainder of the

southern part of the

site.

14m (3-4 storeys)

between Dunmore

Street and proposed

park

39m (12 storeys) in

centre of the site

12.5m (3 storeys) along

southern boundary

27m (8 storeys) for

remainder of southern

part of site.

14m (3-4 storeys)

between Dunmore

Street and proposed

park

39m (12 storeys) in

centre of the site

12.5m (3 storeys) along

southern boundary

27m (8 storeys) for

remainder of southern

part of site.

Floor space ratio

(FSR)

0.7:1 for B2 zone

2.2:1 for northern part

of R4 zone

2.4:1 for southern part

of R4 zone

0.7:1 for B2 zone


of R4 zone


of R4 zone

0.7:1 for B2 zone


of R4 zone


of R4 zone

Approximate

dwelling yield

1,700 1,260 1,500

The purpose of the planning proposal is to enable the redevelopment of the subject site

for high density residential development, up to 6,000sqm of commercial uses in retained

heritage buildings and public open space including a new local park. The proposal would

also create new roads and pedestrian links through the site.



Figure 2: Concept masterplan of proposed development under amended planning controls

Figure 3: View of proposed development under amended planning controls (looking north across public park)



Figure 4: View of proposed development under amended planning controls (looking south along new road).

A summary of the history of this Planning Proposal is provided in the table below:

2011 Pacific Brands proposal comprising 600 dwellings, heights up

to 8 storeys (did not proceed to Gateway)

2013 Dyldam (Rainbowforce) proposal seeking R4 High Density

Residential zoning with APU for commercial premises, over 1,800

dwellings, building heights up to 17 storeys, 1.5 ha of public

parks/spaces (did not proceed to Gateway)

2014 Dyldam (J.S.T. NSW) revised proposal seeking R4 High Density

Residential, B2 Local Centre & RE1 Public Recreation zones, over

1,600 dwellings, building heights up to 17 storeys, 2.5 ha of

public parks/spaces

October-November

2014

Modified version of the JST scheme endorsed by Council

comprising building heights up to 12 storeys, FSRs averaging

1.4:1 and a dwelling yield of approximately 1,300.

Planning Proposal submitted to DP&E.

February 2015 Gateway Determination issued by DP&E.

November 2015 Revised planning proposal request submitted to Council, including

revised concept prepared by new architect PTW.

April 2016 Council resolution to proceed with Planning Proposal.

May 2016 Planning Proposal based on revised concept submitted to DP&E.

August 2016 New Gateway Determination issued by DP&E.

September-October

2016

Community consultation for Planning Proposal.

Gateway Determination

The Gateway Determination (refer to Attachment 3) included a number of conditions for

Council to address prior to and following community consultation. These are outlined as

follows:



1(a) Amend FSR for southern portion of site from 1.9:1 to 2.3:1 (equating to

1,500 dwellings).

1(b) Demonstrate that the subject land can be adequately serviced in accordance

with S117 Direction 3.1 Residential Zones.

1(c) Update the Phase 2 Environmental Site Assessment to demonstrate that site

contamination can be satisfactorily remediated to enable future residential use,

and update Section 2.3.2 of the Planning Proposal to discuss consistency with

SEPP 55.

1(d) Consult with the Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH) regarding the

heritage significance of buildings on the subject site, the Conservation

Management Plan and Heritage Assessment and include the response of the

public agency with the exhibition material.

Response:

The FSR was amended for public exhibition in accordance with the Gateway

direction.

Council consulted the Department of Planning and Environment on 19 September

2016 regarding conditions 1(b) and 1(c) of the Gateway Determination. The

Department confirmed that Council has satisfied these conditions as follows:

- 1(b) – A statement that adequate servicing of the site is possible has been

incorporated into the Planning Proposal under Section 117 Direction 3.1. This

is supported by the servicing letter in Appendix I of the proponent’s Planning

Proposal request, which Council considers to provide sufficient information for

this stage of the process. The Department advised that Council should

continue with the community consultation process, noting that Council is

required to consult with infrastructure agencies during this period, and that the

Planning Proposal will go back to the Department for its final approval. If there

are any issues with servicing identified these would be addressed prior to any

amendment proceeding and prior to any development on the site being

undertaken.

- 1(c) – Additional information has been incorporated in Section 2.3.3 of the

Planning Proposal indicating that an addendum to the contamination

assessment has been provided, which demonstrates that the site can be made

suitable for residential/commercial uses. The report was included with the

exhibition material and the Department is satisfied that this condition has

been addressed.

OEH was consulted regarding the nominated heritage matters and its response

was included with the public exhibition material.

The Gateway Determination also specified minimum requirements for consultation with

the community and public authorities / utility providers. More detail regarding

consultation is provided in the following section.

Stakeholder Consultation

The stakeholder consultation process for the Planning Proposal consisted of the following

components:

A public exhibition period of 42 days (as resolved by Council at its meeting of 7

October 2014), which commenced on Wednesday 7 September 2016 and

concluded at midnight on Wednesday 19 October 2016.



Letter notifications sent to the owner of the site and all property owners adjacent

to and opposite the subject site and in surrounding streets.

Letter notifications sent to relevant public authorities in accordance with the

Gateway Determination, namely Endeavour Energy, Department of Education and

Communities, Office of Environment and Heritage, Family and Community Services

– Housing NSW, Transport for NSW, Roads and Maritime Services, Sydney Water

Corporation, Telstra and adjoining Councils.

Newspaper advertisements placed in the Council Corporate Page of the

Parramatta Advertiser for four consecutive weeks (as resolved by Council at its

meeting of 7 October 2014), being 7 September, 14 September, 21 September

and 28 September 2016.

Two community information sessions (as resolved by Council at its meeting of 7

October 2014), on Wednesday 14 September from 6pm-8pm and on Saturday 24

September from 10am to 12pm.

A site tour for four selected community representatives on Saturday 15 October

2016, commencing at 10am. Council resolved at its meeting of 7 October 2014 to

conduct an open day/site tour during the exhibition period, however due to the

site currently being leased the proponent raised concern about health and safety

issues that may arise from such an event. Consequently, it was decided to

conduct a restricted tour of the site with a limited number of community

representatives in accordance with the proponent’s risk management plan.

A public hearing (as resolved by Council at its meeting of 7 October 2014) on

Thursday 20 October 2016, commencing at 6pm.

Copies of the Planning Proposal and supporting documentation were placed in the

Merrylands and Wentworthville libraries and in the Customer Service area of the Council

Administration building in Merrylands. The documentation was also made available on

Council’s website.

Written submissions to the Planning Proposal were invited via post or email.

Submissions

Public Authority Submissions Received

Submissions were received from six public authorities in response to the letter

notifications issued. Details of the submissions are provided below.

Endeavour Energy

No objection to the proposal, however, provided specific requirements in relation to any

future development on the site.

Sydney Water Corporation

Advised that detailed investigations will be required to identify any augmentation

requirements for water and wastewater infrastructure, and further detail would be

provided at the Section 73 Phase (i.e. at the stage a construction certificate is issued).

Office of Environment and Heritage (OEH)

Recommends that any increase in FSR for the site should be conditional on

mitigation of any adverse impacts on heritage items and the surrounding historical



character such as changes to land use, built form and shadows. This will require

careful design by heritage and urban design experts.

Notes that the Conservation Management Plan (CMP) prepared for the site

indicates it may be of State or potentially National significance and recommends

that the items identified as having exceptional or high heritage significance be

assessed further as part of the planning proposal and if appropriate considered

for State Heritage nomination.

Recommends additional objectives and controls be included in the proposed DCP

to address potential archaeological impacts.

Response:

Impacts of the proposal on heritage items have been addressed through the CMP,

heritage assessment and urban design report, which were prepared by heritage

and urban design experts.

Council will soon be undertaking a heritage review of Cumberland LGA, which will

enable further investigation of heritage values including the potential nomination

for state listing of the site.

The proposed DCP controls will be incorporated into the DCP for the site (refer to

Attachment 4). It is noted that the correspondence from the OEH was exhibited

during the public exhibition period and no submissions were received in relation to

the correspondence.

Department of Education

Advocating a shift in planning decisions and policies that will enable education

infrastructure to keep pace with student demand generated from population growth.

Various strategies are proposed including optimising the size, amenity and function of

existing schools and enabling shared use of facilities. Further details in relation to

education infrastructure are included later in this report.

Transport for NSW

Identifies the following issues to be addressed:

Additional information regarding vehicle movements and impacts on the road

network including regional and classified roads.

An assessment of impact on the broader transport system, including walking and

cycling infrastructure and public transport and measures to promote sustainable

transport.

Detail any upgrades to road and transport infrastructure required to mitigate

impacts of the Proposal including appropriate funding mechanisms.

Response:

Several iterations of the Traffic and Transport Assessment were submitted to

Council and assessed by Council’s Traffic Engineering section to ensure that the

proponent adequately assessed the traffic impacts of the proposal. This included

detailed traffic counts and detailed analysis of 12 intersections including RMS

strategic intersections on regional/classified roads such as the Cumberland

Highway and Great Western Highway. Council has advised that State Government

of the potential growth occurring in this area as a result of this planning proposal

and other growth in the area and will continue to advocate for the infrastructure

improvements that are the Government’s responsibility.



Further information has been provided by the proponent regarding the impact on

the broader transport system. This is provided below:

The estimated modal split for residents at this site is as follows:

Existing Travel Zone (TZ1003) Development

Employed residents

outbound trips - JTW Mode

Existing Modal Split of

employed people

% Employed

Population JTW

Adjusted

Modal Split

Train 245 34% 744 50%

Bus 0 0% 20 1%

Ferry/Tram 0 0% 0 0%

Vehicle driver 348 48% 440 30%

Vehicle passenger 32 4% 40 3%

Cycle 0 0% 20 (up to 60) 1% (up to 3%)

Other mode 12 2% 25 2%

Walked only 20 3% 55 4%

Mode not stated 9 1% 18 1%

Worked at home or did not

go to work 58 8% 119 8%

Total 724 100% 1481 100%

The existing journey to work data shows zero bus use currently; demand for public

transport appears to be for trains, which is expected to increase primarily as a

result of demand from the new population. Trains generally have capacity issues

in the AM peak so train users travelling in the peaks may find the trains busy, until

such a time that State Government transport initiatives create additional capacity.

However, it is clearly a government initiative to increase train use and this is

consistent with that policy.

The journey to work data shows that zero people currently cycle – there may be an

increase in bike use but it is expected that this may be linked to train use (i.e.

cycling to the station). The number of cyclists to cycle from home to their final

destination is anticipated to be 20 (potentially up to 60). This will not cause

existing cycleways to operate over capacity and this level of bike traffic will not

cause an issue on the road which is where on road cycle facilities are provided.

Similarly, 55 pedestrians who walk to work will not cause footpaths to overflow

although the 744 people who walk to the railway station will mean the footpaths

will be busier than at present. Most footpaths in the vicinity are 1.2m wide and as

such can accommodate 80 people per minute comfortably (LoS D) that is 4700

people per hour. The proposed levels of pedestrian use will not compromise the

footpaths but a DA would need to ensure that the waiting areas at traffic signals

are adequate.

Provisions to promote sustainable transport have been included in the proposed

amendments to the site-specific DCP (refer to Attachment 4).



The proposed improvement at the intersection of Gilba Road/Pendle Way has

been identified and has been the subject of a discussion at Council’s Traffic

Committee. With regard to capacity issues on the State network, it is recognised

that this is a matter for the State Government and beyond the scope of this

planning proposal. Funding mechanisms for road upgrades would be investigated

as part of finalising the VPA for the proposal. Funding for public transport is the

responsibility of the State Government.

It is considered that sufficient information has been provided at this stage to show

that the traffic impacts of the proposal are manageable. Clearly, the proposal

would be subject to a future development application in which a more detailed

and updated traffic and transport analysis would be undertaken.

Roads and Maritime Services

Raises no objection to the Planning Proposal in principle, however does not

support the proposed signalisation of the Gilba Road / Pendle Way intersection

and prefers that this remain as a priority intersection with removal of the raised

pedestrian crossing on Gilba Road south of Pendle Way to assist priority

movement to/from Gilba Road.

Advises that Council may wish to consider alternative intersection treatment

options to be supported by a planning agreement or Section 94 Contributions

Plan.

Response:

It is noted that treatment options for the Gilba Road / Pendle Way intersection

were considered by Council’s Traffic Committee in May 2016 (at which an RMS

representative was present), and the preferred option put forward by the

Committee was for signalisation. The recommendation of the RMS to retain the

existing arrangement at this intersection is not an adequate solution, as this

would result in an unacceptable deterioration in the level of service of the

intersection. It is noted there is no pedestrian crossing at the intersection; there

are only speed humps on Pendle Way, north and south of the intersection

associated with the give way signs in these two locations (necessary for the priority

movement of traffic from Gilba Road onto Pendle Way). Neither of these speed

humps would be removed as they are a necessary safety measure to ensure traffic

slows down at the give way signs. Council will pursue an appropriate treatment for

this intersection that will ensure it operates at an acceptable level of service.

The developer would make contributions to the upgrade of this intersection either

through Council’s Section 94 Contributions Plan or the VPA.

Community Submissions Received

Overview

A total of 70 community submissions were received by Council in relation to the Proposal.

All submissions objected to the Planning Proposal with the exception of one which

supported the Proposal (submitted by the proponent). The submissions also included two

petitions, one comprising over 500 signatures (of which approximately 1/5 were either

outside of the local area or did not provide an address) and the other comprising



approximately 40 signatures. Many signatories to these petitions also provided a

separate submission.

The majority of objectors were located in Pendle Hill and Wentworthville. Some were also

from surrounding suburbs including Girraween, Greystanes and Constitution Hill.

Objectors were primarily property owners but included a number of tenants.

Additionally, a public hearing was held on 20 October 2016. Twenty-three people

registered their attendance and ten submissions were received.

The following outlines the concerns raised in the submissions, categorised by topic, and

provides a response to those concerns.

CONSULTATION & DECISION-MAKING PROCESS

Concerns regarding notification to adjoining properties and notifications regarding

earlier rezoning in Wentworthville.

Concerns relating to the duration and timing of the community consultation

period.

A number of submissions questioned why Council’s resolved dwelling yield for the

site was not supported by the DP&E.

Concerns were raised that resident input into the process would be disregarded.

Some submissions stated that the proposal is only in the interests of Council and

the proponent, not new or existing residents.

A number of submissions questioned why the proposal is being advanced while

Council is under administration and requested the matter be deferred until an

elected Council is in place.

Concerns were also expressed regarding the future development potential of the

Living Care site adjoining the Bonds site to the west.

Response:

The zoning changes in Wentworthville including those in Dunmore Street, Veron

Street, Garfield Street and other areas within the former Holroyd LGA were

introduced in 2013 as part of the comprehensive review of the Holroyd LEP. A

lengthy and in-depth community consultation process was conducted with the

Holroyd community in relation to these changes, commencing in 2007 prior to the

LEP review with a deliberative workshop process involving the notification of all

residents and landowners within the LGA, and later involving two extended public

exhibition periods for the Draft LEP, in 2010 and 2011.

The Planning Proposal is subject to Section S57 of the Environmental Planning

and Assessment Act 1979 and the Gateway Determination issued by the DP&E

and Council has followed these provisions in relation to community consultation

for the proposal. A separate notification process will be undertaken to adjoining

and nearby residents should a development application be lodged for the site.

The public exhibition period for the proposal was 42 days. It is acknowledged that

a two-week school holiday period fell during the exhibition. There is no legislative

requirement for community consultation to be conducted outside of school

holidays, and given the extended period of consultation (14 days longer than the

28-day period required by the Gateway Determination), it is considered that this

provided ample opportunity for the community to view and comment on the

proposal. Two community information sessions were held, approximately 10 days



apart, and on different days / at different times (i.e. Wednesday evening from

6pm-8pm and Saturday morning from 10am-12pm) to provide sufficient

opportunity for all community members to attend.

The Gateway Determination instructed Council to reinstate the 2.3:1 FSR applying

to the southern part of the site, enabling an approximate dwelling yield of 1,500,

which was contrary to that endorsed by the former Holroyd Council, of 1.9:1 and

1,260 dwellings. The DP&E considered that a proposal for 1,500 dwellings had

sufficient merit to proceed to public exhibition on the basis of the supporting

studies (including urban design, traffic, heritage and others), and Council’s

analysis demonstrating that the proposed density could be supported on the site.

The DP&E mandates the timeframes for planning proposals and the Gateway

Determination sets a maximum timeframe within which the LEP must be gazetted.

It would be unreasonable for Council to defer its consideration of a proposal and it

is important that it is progressed in a timely manner. Nonetheless, there are

several matters that need to be addressed prior to finalisation of the proposal

including the preparation and public exhibition of a Draft Voluntary Planning

Agreement (VPA).

The Administrator is delegated by the State Government to fulfil the function of

Council and decision-making in relation to planning matters such as this is part of

this function. The Administrator has also appointed the Cumberland Independent

Hearing and Assessment Panel (CIHAP) to provide recommendations on planning

policy matters to ensure their full and proper consideration is provided to Council.

Council’s consideration of the proposal is based on its planning merit. The

proponent has no influence whatsoever over Council’s decision in relation to this

proposal. Ultimately, the State Government will make the final decision on the

proposed LEP amendment, which is beyond Council’s control.

The proponent has engaged with a number of major community stakeholders

including the Living Care as part of the consultation process and was invited to

provide a presentation on the Masterplan to their residents, which was also

attended by Council staff. The development concept has been designed to

maintain appropriate setbacks and amenity to the retirement village and it is

anticipated that the retirement village will continue to operate in the long term.

BUILDING HEIGHT & DENSITY

Impacts on surrounding area and properties:

Concerns were expressed in some submissions that development of the scale

proposed will impact the low density character of the area and heritage

significance of the site. Submissions noted differences in character in Pendle Hill

to Parramatta, Westmead, Blacktown and the like.

Submissions also noted that the proposal would result in a significant increase in

the population of Pendle Hill.

A number of submissions requested that the height and density proposed for the

site should be significantly reduced and consideration be given to the ability of the

site to support 1,500 units, with regard for the long-term and cumulative effect of

the decision.

Objections were raised regarding a proposed FSR of 2.3:1 on the southern portion

of the site.

Lower maximum building height suggested including 8 storeys in the centre (with

2-3 storeys on the periphery), 6 storeys and 3 storeys.



Reduced population/dwelling yield suggested including 1,200 people, 1,260

units, 1,000 units and 250 units.

Natural ground level should be the baseline for maximum building height controls,

not the flat ''plateau" level built when Bonds extended development to the

southern half of the site. Over much of the southern half of the site the plateau is

significantly higher than natural ground level (over 5m in the south-eastern

corner). The proposal assumes existing ground levels as the baseline for building

heights and consequently understates proposed building heights for most of the

site.

A building height of 39m is not consistent with the surrounding landscape and

given the elevation of the site buildings will seem taller.

The proposed building height combined with the site being on a hill may impact on

air traffic.

It is suggested that development should be subject to an architectural design

competition to ensure design is high quality and universally appealing.

Concerns were expressed regarding the visual impact of the proposal and

potential loss of views. Concerns were also raised regarding overshadowing

(including impacts on solar panels) and overlooking and the associated negative

amenity impacts.

Submissions suggested the southern setback to Collins St properties should be

increased to 12m and building height reduced to 2-3 storeys similar to Rowley St.

Submissions also noted that the development would bring more renters to the

area and will create a ‘slum’.

Response:

While the area retains a predominantly low-density character, State Government

Policy in recent years has required Councils to place higher development densities

in the vicinity of railway stations and established centres in order to accommodate

increasing population growth. Holroyd LEP 2013 reflects this policy approach and

as such the low density character in close proximity to railway stations and local

centres in certain areas is undergoing a transition.

While there is currently no development of the scale proposed between Westmead

and Blacktown, the adopted Wentworthville Planning and Place-Making Strategy

provides for increased densities in Wentworthville, with building heights up to 18

storeys. It is acknowledged that the mid-rise scale of the Proposal is somewhat

higher than existing development in the area, however, it is considered that this

scale can be accommodated within a site of such substantial size. The proposed

scale and density for the site is considered appropriate given its close proximity to

a railway station and to the centres of Westmead and Parramatta (approximately

4km away).

Population growth in areas close to railway stations is necessary to meet Sydney’s

growth demands. It is important that this growth is supported by the appropriate

infrastructure.

The proposed FSR of 2.3:1 for the southern half of the site needs to be higher

than the remainder of the site, as this is where the majority of development would

occur, given the heritage constraints in the northern part of the site.

Height of buildings is a defined term within Holroyd LEP 2013 and means the

vertical distance from existing ground level to the highest point of the building. As

such, natural (original) ground level is not considered in determining building



height controls. It is acknowledged that much of the southern part of the site is

higher than natural ground level, however, proposed setbacks and stepping down

of heights along the southern boundary of the site (to 12.5m or 3 storeys) address

this issue.

The proposed maximum building height of 39m would be restricted to a limited

number of buildings in the centre of the site. From those buildings, heights would

gradually step down toward the boundaries.

While the context of the site to the south, east and west is low density (1-2 storey

development), the context to the north is higher density (3-4 storey) development.

As previously mentioned, this context is changing primarily due to the site’s close

proximity to a railway station. Nonetheless, the proposal responds to its context in

terms of providing adequate setbacks and lower building heights where it adjoins

low density development. It also responds to the site’s heritage through providing

maximum building heights of 14m in the heritage precinct, and retention of view

corridors from Dunmore House.

The site elevation and proposed maximum building heights of 39m are not high

enough to impact on air traffic in this area.

Council has prepared draft Design Excellence Guidelines which were publicly

exhibited in November 2016. The parameters for the guidelines can be reviewed

to apply across a broader area and range of development.

There is no evidence to indicate that the Proposal would adversely impact on

visual amenity or any established view corridors.

Building setbacks, lower heights along boundaries and screening vegetation will

ensure privacy of adjoining properties. Shadow analysis demonstrates that

overshadowing of properties to the south would be less than 50% of the open

space area between 9am and 3pm during the Winter Solstice. Council’s DCP

controls indicate that 3 hours of sunlight between 9am and 4pm on the Winter

solstice must be received by at least one main living area and at least 50% of the

private open space of adjacent dwellings. These controls would need to be met at

DA stage.

It is noted that the proposed setback on parts of the western boundary is only 6m

(minimum ADG requirement for development up to 4 storeys), whereas the

proposed setback along the southern boundary is 9m. The Apartment Design

Guide requires an additional 3m to be provided to the required setback when a

higher density zone adjoins a lower density zone. Greater consideration of the

nature of the setbacks proposed to the rear of premises fronting Rowley Street

and the eastern side of Collins Street is warranted as they have the greatest

potential for amenity impacts, particularly given the elevation of the site above

natural ground level at its southern end. The proposal has been assessed by

Council’s development assessment section, and it is recommended that a rear

setback be established in the DCP rather than just requiring compliance with the

ADG. This would enable provision of a greater buffer at the interface of the two

zones and also allow for screening vegetation along the boundary. A fixed rear

setback of 12m to properties fronting Rowley Street and Collins Street would

provide a more gradual and suitable transition to the adjoining lower density zone

and improved amenity for residents. The proposed building height along these

boundaries is 12.5m (3 storeys), which was previously reduced from 15m (4

storeys) and it is not considered necessary to further reduce this height.

While the proposal includes high density residential development, this would be

built in accordance with the State Government’s Apartment Design Guide,



ensuring quality built form and design. The Design Guide ensures that new

apartment buildings have a high-quality design that promotes health, safety and

liveability for residents. Good amenity is ensured through sunlight access, natural

ventilation, outlook, privacy and ease of access to contribute to resident well-being

and communal spaces provide opportunities for social interaction amongst

residents.

Strategic approach

Concerns were expressed that the Proposal has not been considered in the

context of all other development occurring in the area.

It was also suggested that new development should not be concentrated on one

site but spread out over the entire Pendle Hill area and should occur gradually

instead of all at once.

A submission noted that the urban design strategy for height and density should

be independently reviewed.

Response:

Much new development in the Pendle Hill area was provided for under the

planning controls introduced through Holroyd LEP 2013. These controls were

developed following a comprehensive planning process which involved numerous

studies addressing key issues including housing needs, retail and employment,

urban character, traffic and transport and community/stakeholder consultation.

Council undertakes a coordinated and holistic planning approach in accordance

with its role and responsibility. Legislative provisions require Council and the State

to consider and prepare a planning proposal in response to a request from any

property owner seeking changes to the planning controls affecting their property.

Since the completion of Holroyd LEP 2013 the Council has received a number of

planning proposal requests for properties in the area. Each planning proposal that

Council proceeds with undergoes a rigorous strategic merit assessment and

stakeholder consultation process. The statutory plans for the former Council areas

that constitute the Cumberland LGA will be consolidated and strategic reviews will

continue to be undertaken periodically as growth occurs.

New development in the Pendle Hill area is not restricted to the subject site.

Holroyd LEP 2013 provides for new development to occur over the entire Pendle

Hill area (as well as the broader LGA), with higher densities being concentrated

around railway stations and local centres. Separately to Holroyd LEP 2013, and

following the land owner’s request, Council prepared a Planning Proposal for the

subject site, which given its large size and close proximity to the Pendle Hill railway

station and local centre, can accommodate the proposed development density.

The urban design strategy for height and density was independently reviewed by

Council officers and subject to a comprehensive strategic merit assessment.

Numerous changes were made to the original proposal submitted by the

proponent, including a significant reduction in building height and density. Council

officers are satisfied that the proposal represents an appropriate outcome for the

site and its context.

TRAFFIC, TRANSPORT & PARKING

Impacts

Concerns were expressed that increased traffic will increase noise and air

pollution; and accidents and risk to pedestrian safety.



It was suggested that pedestrians will be unable to cross the eastern end of Gilba

Rd at Pendle Way, promoting the east-west 'rat run' to the detriment of Pendle Hill

residents and the centre. Pedestrian priority is important along both sides of

Pendle Way, including at the corner of Pendle Way and Gilba Road, so pedestrians

can access the Pendle Hill centre.

The proposal will impact already overcrowded footpaths and restrict pedestrian

mobility.

Traffic congestion will increase, including Dunmore St, Rowley St, Smith St, Jones

St, Pendle Way, Goodall St, Joyce St

Concerns were expressed that the site has only two exit points that will create

delays for vehicles waiting to turn onto Dunmore St and a new roundabout or

signals on Dunmore St will cause further delays in traffic.

The intersections of Dunmore St with the Cumberland Hwy and Pendle Way with

the Great Western Hwy are currently operating at near capacity in peak times. The

proposal would exacerbate these issues. It was suggested that the traffic

assessment shows that many surrounding residential streets already exceed the

maximum environmental capacity threshold of 500 vehicles per hour and this will

be further exacerbated by the proposal.

Response:

Any increase in density and traffic does have an impact on noise and air quality,

however, locating higher densities within close proximity to a railway station and

local centre, as well as incorporating shops and services within the subject site

itself, would minimise the number of trips made by residents and hence the

amount of vehicular traffic generated by the proposal, as it is expected that

residents would be able to use alternative transport modes in some instances.

Council will ensure that road/intersection upgrades and traffic control measures

required as a result of growth in the area will be undertaken to improve traffic

operation and road safety for all road users.

There are two signalised pedestrian crossings on Dunmore Street, at Pendle Way

and Goodall Street, as well as a pedestrian refuge at Jones Street. The developer

would be required to provide a further traffic and transport study and details of

proposed road upgrades / pedestrian crossings at DA stage. If installation of an

additional signalised crossing on Dunmore Street is warranted it would be

considered by Council’s Traffic Committee.

Council will consider options to improve traffic flows; and pedestrian access and

safety at the intersection of Gilba Road and Pendle Way, in consultation with RMS.

The proposed treatment of this intersection would be finalised at DA stage.

There is no evidence to indicate that footpaths are overcrowded in the area. The

standard width of footpaths in the area is 1.2m (including in the R4 High Density

Residential zone), widening to 3m in the Pendle Hill centre. It is expected that this

would accommodate the increased pedestrian traffic resulting from the proposal.

Footpath upgrades may be required in the future to accommodate increased

population growth in the area, and this would be addressed as the need arises.

The traffic impacts of the proposal have been assessed and appropriate traffic

management measures proposed to ensure that the impacts of increased traffic

can be accommodated.



The Traffic Assessment indicates that the impact of the proposal on the

intersection of Jones and Dunmore Streets will continue to operate at a

satisfactory level of service compliant with RMS requirements.

The Traffic Assessment indicates that the intersections of Cumberland Highway

with Dunmore Street and Pendle Way would operate near capacity in 2027 with or

without the proposed development. Other intersections at the Cumberland

Highway and Great Western Highway would operate satisfactorily. It is noted that

these intersections are the responsibility of the RMS. Consultation with the RMS

was undertaken during the public exhibition period and it raised no issues in

relation to these intersections.

Several collector streets such as Dunmore Street and part of Jones Street do not

currently meet the environmental capacity threshold of 500 vehicles per hour.

However, it is noted that this threshold is for purely residential roads, rather than

roads that service mixed-use development. Traffic calming measures would be

considered to address these issues. However, local streets, such as Rogers and

Oatlands Streets (east of Jones Street) are and would remain well within this

threshold.

Traffic assessment

It was suggested that the Traffic Report does not adequately consider the

increased traffic resulting from the new access road on Jones St, located between

two existing T-intersections with Rogers St and Oatlands St, particularly from a

safety perspective.

It was also noted that Rowley St is not indicated in most of the traffic study's

distribution maps and is omitted from vehicle counts. The current proposal will

increase through-traffic along this direct route and traffic calming measures will be

needed in Rowley St to discourage through-traffic.

A submission noted that traffic calming measures are needed in local streets to

discourage through-traffic and suggested that the traffic study tries to

accommodate increased traffic by adding the site's traffic to existing traffic,

worsening local amenity. Much of the existing peak traffic to be affected by the

proposal is using Pendle Hill as a "rat run", instead of using RMS' roads

(Cumberland Highway, Great Western Highway, M4). The site's traffic is better

accommodated locally by traffic calming in Pendle Hill to minimise current and

future regional and sub-regional though traffic. Road design and network

configuration (including phasing of traffic lights) must discourage "rat run" regional

traffic going east-west (e.g. Gilba Rd – Dunmore St) and north-south (Pendle Way -

Goodall St) through the residential area, by making residential 'rat runs' tighter

and slower for regional and sub-regional traffic.

A submission contended that while the traffic assessment proposes signalisation

of the Pendle Way/Gilba Rd intersection, this has potential to exacerbate the

intersection’s traffic problems regardless of the intersections being coordinated.

It was noted that the traffic study does not mention the right turn from Pendle Way

into Stapleton St which gives access to the entrance of the car park behind the

shops.

The validity of the traffic movement surveys conducted in 2014 were questioned

due to the recent growth in the area. Traffic volumes should also consider

adjoining suburbs and nearby streets. The use of computer-generated modelling

was questioned.



Traffic phases favour main roads, however, concern was expressed regarding the

implications of feeder streets experiencing larger and more constant flows of

traffic.

A request was made for the traffic modelling to be assessed independently and

concerns were raised regarding the accuracy of data used in the traffic modelling.

A submission suggested that traffic lights be installed outside the adjacent

retirement village for residents to cross Dunmore St and so vehicles can turn onto

Dunmore St during peaks.

Response:

Traffic calming measures would be introduced on Jones Street to reduce any

safety risk associated with the proposed intersection.

Rowley Street was not included within the studies as traffic generated by the

proposal would be unlikely to use this route. Jones Street and Dunmore Street

could be used to reach the wider road network. If any potential risks are identified

during construction, truck routes may be specified within the Construction

Management Plan prepared with any subsequent development applications. It is

anticipated that Council would notify residents of the Construction Management

Plan before issuing any approvals. Additional traffic calming measures can be

considered during the preparation of any subsequent development applications.

The signalisation of Pendle Way/Gilba Rd was discussed at length with Council

engineers and was presented to Council’s Traffic Committee. A number of

proposals were presented for this intersection (which will operate above capacity

with or without the Bonds site being developed). The Committee agreed that traffic

signals were the preferred option to address this concern.

The right turn from Pendle Way into Stapleton Street was not included in the traffic

model as it is unlikely to be affected by the proposal.

The majority of traffic counts in the original traffic report were undertaken in 2014

but in the subsequent addenda addressing Council and RMS concerns, many

more counts were undertaken in 2015. If a DA is submitted for the proposed

development of the site, updated traffic counts will be required at that time.

The traffic volumes were, for modelling purposes, increased by a ‘growth’ factor

extracted from the Bureau of Transport Statistics to allow for traffic growth on the

roads and this would include traffic increases in all adjoining suburbs.

The traffic movement counts were counted manually by a traffic count company.

All traffic modelling was undertaking using proprietary tools accepted by RMS. The

modelling was examined by Council staff and RMS and no significant issues were

raised.

It is the case that RMS gives the majority of the green time at a traffic signal to the

priority movement especially if it is a state road. The traffic signals do however

have minimum and maximum times for each stage in order that they can adjust to

accommodate varying traffic flows. The management of traffic flows at signalised

intersections is the responsibility of RMS.

All traffic reports prepared for this proposal have been reviewed by Council

technical staff and the comments made were subsequently addressed.

Additionally, ‘real-time’ data for the Dunmore Street / Pendle Way intersection was

obtained from the RMS in October 2016, and traffic volumes were found to be

lower than those extrapolated from earlier traffic counts. This indicates that the



traffic assessment may be conservative as it overstates the predicted traffic

numbers.

An allowance for future traffic growth was made within the proponent’s traffic

report. This was achieved by allowing a growth factor, which was extracted from

the Bureau of Transport Statistics, to allow for traffic growth on the roads due to

development in adjoining regions.

The traffic generated by the retirement village would be unlikely to meet the levels

required for RMS to install traffic signals. The traffic demand warrant for each of

four one-hour periods of an average day is shown as follows:

the major road flow exceeds 600 vehicles/ hour in each direction.

the minor road flow exceeds 200 vehicles/ hour in one direction.

It is highly unlikely that the retirement village would generate 200 vehicles per

hour over four one-hour periods.

The traffic assessment has been reviewed by Council and no significant issues

have been raised. The assessment incorporated potential traffic generation for

any future development in the vicinity of the site.

Parking

It was noted that proposed road upgrades will require removal of on-street parking

from Pendle Way and Dunmore St to enable more efficient traffic flow and parking

availability will worsen in Pendle Hill centre, Wentworthville centre and at Pendle

Hill station.

It was suggested that there is inadequate parking provision for new residents and

visitors within the site and for staff / customers / visitors in the new

retail/community area, which will mean increased on-street parking and parking

congestion in surrounding streets including Jones, Rogers and Oatlands Streets.

Concerns were expressed that there are too many vehicles parked in the streets

already including on Pendle Way often blocking driveways, that residents often

use their garage for storage and park in visitor spaces or on the street and that

one unit will often have two cars. It was suggested that two parking spaces should

be provided for each unit and a parking station built on site.

Concern was also raised about dangers of underground car parks including safety

issues and ventilation.

Response:

New intersections and upgrades to existing intersections may result in some loss

of on-street parking depending upon the nature of the works. This would be

addressed in detail at DA stage, should the planning proposal proceed.

It is not expected that the proposal would affect parking availability in the Pendle

Hill centre or at Pendle Hill station, as this is within 400m of the subject site,

which is an easy walking distance. In relation to the Wentworthville Centre, the

Wentworthville Planning and Place Making Strategy provides a holistic approach to

traffic and parking in the centre. The strategy proposes the provision of a multi-

level commuter car park in close proximity to the station. Similarly, parking for

residents, business staff and customers on site in basement parking must be

provided for new development. The strategy also proposes to manage on-street

parking in the Centre to increase the turnover of spaces in key locations.

The Apartment Design Guide provides controls for the provision of residential

parking spaces in apartment development. Councils’ current parking rate

requirements are consistent with the guide; however there is nothing in the guide



that prevents applicants providing greater parking than required. Basement

parking would be provided to service both the residential and commercial

developments.

With any new development that occurs in an area, demand for on-street parking

will increase. Nevertheless, parking for residents, business staff and customers on

site in basement parking must be provided as part of new development. The

minimum parking rates for new high-density residential development are generally

consistent with car ownership rates of residents in this location with high public

transport accessibility.

Illegal parking of vehicles is a matter of enforcement and fines will be issued to

illegally parked vehicles by Council’s Parking Officers when they patrol the area.

The use of garages for vehicle parking is most effectively addressed through strata

body corporates and the proposed development would likely involve open parking

spaces in any case.

Design of basement car parks must meet minimum standards which include

adequate lighting and ventilation.

Public transport

A submission stated that before approving the proposal Council/NSW Government

should

1. Provide a free shuttle bus between Pendle Hill and Wentworthville stations

and shopping centres;

2. Create a multi-level commuter car park at both Pendle Hill and

Wentworthville stations similar to that at Seven Hills.

Concern was expressed that Pendle Hill and Wentworthville stations have limited

train services; and trains are already overcrowded and will not be able to

accommodate the additional population as the train line is at service capacity.

It was noted that bus services in the area are limited. Currently there is only 1 bus

service connecting Pendle Hill to Parramatta and the frequency of this service

needs to be increased, which will in turn add to traffic congestion resulting in

further delays.

Response:

A free shuttle bus is not considered to be warranted in Pendle Hill or

Wentworthville centres, particularly not just as a result of this proposal. A free

shuttle service may be feasible in Parramatta CBD as it is a much larger centre.

The Wentworthville Planning and Place Making Strategy proposes the provision of

a multi-level commuter car park in close proximity to the station and there may be

opportunities for provision of commuter car parking at Pendle Hill station. While

the State Government (Transport for NSW) is responsible for the provision of

commuter car parking, Council will continue to consult with Transport for NSW to

advocate for the availability of commuter parking.

The State Government has invested $1.5 billion in a 3-year program to urgently

address over-crowding issues on Sydney’s train services through extra services,

better infrastructure and new trains. The ‘More Trains More Services’ program will

result in additional train services where and when they are most needed, including

provision of a service every 3 minutes during peak periods from Parramatta to the

CBD by late 2017. The flow-on effect of this will lessen overcrowding of trains on

the Western line, where Pendle Hill station is located. Additionally, the Federal and

NSW Governments have commenced a joint project, the Western Sydney Rail



Needs Scoping Study, to look at the long-term rail service needs of Western

Sydney. A report on the study will be finalised this year. Council will monitor the

progress of these projects, and continue to advocate to the State Government to

ensure that demand for public transport is met in this region.

Local bus services are operated by Hillsbus and include two routes connecting

Pendle Hill with Parramatta via Dunmore Street and Pendle Way. Route 705 has

services every 30 minutes to 1 hour and route 708 has one service in the morning

and one in the afternoon. There is no indication that bus services are operating at

capacity. The frequency of bus services could be increased if existing services

reached capacity. Additionally, frequent train services run from Pendle Hill to

Parramatta. While the proposal would result in increased traffic in the area, the

traffic assessment indicates that road/intersection upgrades and traffic

management measures would ensure no unreasonable delays in traffic flows.

INFRASTRUCTURE

Health, education, community and emergency services

A number of submissions raised concerns in relation to the impacts the proposal

would have on local infrastructure that is already near or at capacity.

Many submissions noted that local schools are already overcrowded and cannot

accommodate additional growth. Demountable buildings are being added in most

schools that are encroaching on activity areas and playing fields and are

impacting the quality of education that can be provided. It was also suggested that

the NSW Government has not allocated future expenditure for school

infrastructure in the area.

Concern was also expressed regarding the availability of childcare centres in the

region and when additional services can be delivered.

The impact on community facilities and services was noted as a concern in

submissions, particularly in relation to current library services being unable to

meet demand.

A number of submissions stated that local health services including hospitals,

medical centres and GPs are already at capacity and more services will be needed

to cater for the additional population. Concern was also raised about the capacity

of emergency services.

Response:

Council will ensure that the necessary local infrastructure (e.g. open space,

community facilities, traffic upgrades) is delivered through Section 94

Contributions or the Voluntary Planning Agreement with the proponent.

There are existing strains on public schools in the region, with local public schools

generally operating at or near capacity. Council is in discussion with the

Department of Education and Communities (DEC) to address the issue of school

capacities and ensure that expansion of permanent school buildings occurs within

a reasonable timeframe, to accommodate the anticipated population growth. The

DEC is aware of the proposal and potential increases in the local population that

would occur as a result. It is developing a strategy that will ensure expansions to

schools in this area can be funded and delivered to meet the demands of an

increasing population in the region. Council will continue to represent the

community on this matter to ensure that a satisfactory solution to this issue is

delivered.



The proponent would contribute to the provision of childcare services either under

the Holroyd Section 94 Contributions Plan or through the provision of such

services within the development site. Details of contributions to be made by the

developer would be provided in the VPA, which will be publicly exhibited in the

coming weeks. A separate report on the Draft VPA will be provided to the CIHAP

following the exhibition.

While local health services may currently be under strain, it should be noted that

Blacktown Hospital has recently completed Stage 1 of a $700m upgrade and work

has already commenced on Stage 2, as well as refurbishment of the existing

facilities. Additionally, a $900m upgrade to Westmead Hospital is planned to be

completed by 2020. Local private services in the form of a GP or other allied

medical practitioners could be accommodated within the site’s heritage precinct.

A community hub space located within the heritage precinct is proposed under the

Draft VPA Heads of Agreement. Further detail regarding developer contributions

for community facilities and services will be provided under the Draft VPA.

Council was not required to consult with any emergency services providers under

the Gateway Determination, however these organisations plan for population

growth and expand their services as demand increases.

Utilities

Concerns were raised with the ability of existing utility services (water, sewerage,

electricity, gas, communications) to meet the demands of the proposal and lower

densities are therefore necessary.

It was suggested that the proposal does not sufficiently demonstrate that the site

can be adequately serviced. Correspondence from the relevant service providers

should be provided to the community for comment and assessment of utilities and

infrastructure demand should occur prior to rezoning or development approval to

ensure adequate servicing can be achieved.

Servicing information provided by the proponent does not mention easements for

drainage and possibly sewerage which traverse residential properties (e.g.

draining from the site into Rogers St) and whether any upgrades would require

permission from property owners to gain access.

Submissions also noted that waste infrastructure/services will require upgrading

and that the additional population will further reduce internet speed and

potentially interfere with free-to-air TV reception because of proposed building

height.

Over-strained infrastructure indicates that a lower density is needed which would

enable a lower impact design near the low density zone and more sustainable

development.

Response:

Council consulted with those public infrastructure authorities specified in the

Gateway Determination, i.e. Endeavour Energy, Sydney Water Corporation and

Telstra during the consultation process. As previously discussed, Sydney Water

Corporation has indicated further investigations will be required to identify any

augmentation requirements for water and wastewater infrastructure, and further

detail would be provided at DA stage. Endeavour Energy has no objection to the

proposal, however specific requirements were provided in relation to any works to

be undertaken on the site. Gas and telecommunications infrastructure could

expanded as development occurs. Any utility service issues if identified at the



development stage must be resolved in order for any development approval to be

issued for the site. No response was received from Telstra.

A statement that adequate servicing of the site is possible has been incorporated

into the Planning Proposal under Section 117 Direction 3.1. This is supported by

the servicing letter in Appendix I of the proponent’s Planning Proposal request,

which Council considers to provide sufficient information for this stage of the

process. The Department advised that Council should continue with the

community consultation process, noting that Council is required to consult with

infrastructure agencies during this period, and that the Planning Proposal will go

back to the Department for its final approval. If there are any issues with servicing

identified at this stage these would be addressed prior to any amendment

proceeding and prior to any development on the site being undertaken.

There are existing Council-owned drainage easements in the vicinity of the subject

site, including one that traverses properties in Rogers Street. It is uncertain at this

stage whether upgrades to the infrastructure within these easements would be

required. If upgrades were required, Council would need to obtain permission from

property owners/residents in order to gain access to their property.

The provision of waste services is determined at the development stage.

There is no evidence to indicate that the additional population would reduce

internet speed or that the proposed building height may interfere with free-to-air

TV reception.

Over-strained infrastructure is not an indication that no further development

should occur, but more an indication that improvements must be provided.

Mechanisms are in place to ensure timely consultation between planning

authorities and infrastructure authorities so that the necessary infrastructure may

be provided to meet demand from population growth.

Stormwater and flooding

Some submissions noted existing and increasing flood affectation of properties in

the area, including in Jones and Rowley Streets and raised concern that more

properties may become flood prone, or that flood affectation may worsen as a

result of the proposal due to the extra water usage of new residents.

It was suggested that the existing stormwater/flood management system for the

precinct be improved to modern standards, including water sensitive urban

design, to minimise downstream effects on overland flooding for properties on the

southern side of Rogers St, which are affected by a drainage easement.

Response:

There is existing flood affectation to some properties in surrounding streets, as

there is across much of the LGA.

Pre and post-development analysis flood modelling would be required at DA stage

to accurately determine the downstream impacts of the proposal. The site would

be required to incorporate on-site detention and water-sensitive urban design

features to ensure there are no impacts on nearby or downstream properties and

that any existing flood affectation is not exacerbated as a result of the proposal.

The existing stormwater infrastructure is up to current standards and has been

designed to convey a 5-year flood event. If modelling indicates that amplification

of the system is required to accommodate a larger event then that would be

investigated at the appropriate time.



Public open space

Many submissions indicated there is a lack of public open space in the area given

the growing population, including facilities for children and large passive

recreation spaces similar to Holroyd Gardens or Central Gardens.

Submissions noted the need to provide sufficient public open space to

accommodate the additional population. One submission commented that the site

provides an excellent opportunity to provide much-need local open space, noting

that it is essential for the site to provide the proposed public park with a minimum

size of the proposed 0.5 hectare.

Some submissions raised concern that the proposal does not include sufficient

public space for the new population. One submission suggested the proposed

open space should be expanded to the southern side of Rogers Street, noting that

rezoning of Harold Park required 1/3 of the precinct to be dedicated as public

open space and a similar approach should be taken here.

Several submissions commented that the planning proposal is not consistent with

the recent review to close Wentworthville pool and that the pool should be

retained and upgraded.

Several submissions mentioned that surrounding sporting fields are at capacity

and any new sporting fields are likely to also reach capacity.

It was mentioned that there is inadequate maintenance and embellishment of

open space. One submission commented that existing parks are not properly

maintained (e.g. Yulunga Reserve, Civic Park); that paving of Dunmore Street is in

poor condition; and that refurbishment of Pendle Hill centre and footpaths is

needed.

It was mentioned that the siting of the park is good in terms of outlook and access

to heritage buildings, and it was suggested that a pedestrian refuge is needed in

Jones St opposite the park.

A submission commented that the landscape strip along Jones St contributes

positively to the amenity and streetscape and should be protected and enhanced

by an RE1 zoning to integrate with the proposed open space and pedestrian

network.

Response:

There are two existing small public parks within 100-200m of the subject site.

Additionally, there is a larger park, Civic Park, within 800m of the site and

Wentworthville Pool is located approximately 700m from the site. There has been

decision to close Wentworthville Pool. The future of the pool will be an decision for

the new Council following the September 2017 election.

It is acknowledged that the Pendle Hill area is deficient in open space, however it

should be noted that Section 94 Contributions cannot be used to fund existing

deficits; they can only be used to meet demand generated by new development.

Holroyd Gardens and Central Gardens are city-wide parks and a new city-wide park

is proposed at Prospect Hill. No city-wide parks are proposed for the Pendle Hill

area. It is intended that a city-wide park is located within a 15-minute drive of all

residents.

A total of 2.5ha of new open space would be provided within the site as part of the

proposal. This represents 31% of the site, which is essentially one-third. This is the

amount deemed necessary for an estimated future population of 3,400.



The proposed park within the subject site would incorporate a range of facilities

such as a playground, children’s bike path and informal sporting facilities/practice

nets as well as passive open space (amongst other items identified in Council’s

Section 94 Contributions Plan). Council’s assessment of open space needs for the

proposal indicated that a proposed park of 5,500sqm, with embellishment

comprising the above-listed works, would meet the needs of the future population.

While the proponent had proposed that the park be slightly smaller in size (a

minimum of 5,000sqm was stipulated in the draft DCP), it is noted that the area of

the RE1 zone as depicted on the exhibited draft LEP zoning map is 5,500sqm.

Given these factors it is considered that the park should be 5,500sqm in size.

Under Council’s Section 94 Plan new sporting fields will be provided in Girraween

and existing fields in Wentworthville and Toongabbie will be upgraded. The

developer would make contributions towards these fields proportionate to the

amount of development occurring within the site.

Maintenance of existing open space and street/footpath paving is the

responsibility of Council’s engineering section. Upgrade/embellishment of existing

open space in the area is identified in Council’s Section 94 Contributions Plan,

and includes works in Civic Park as well as new basketball and cricket facilities, a

community garden and shade tree planting in local playgrounds.

Pedestrian refuges may be needed in Jones Street and Dunmore Street at key

points of pedestrian access to the site, such as the public park. The need for these

refuges could be determined at DA stage, however it is noted that provision of a

pedestrian refuge is subject to certain criteria being met including minimum

thresholds of pedestrian and vehicle traffic.

A landscape strip of 12m would be provided along the Jones Street boundary

under the DCP. This area is considered too narrow to warrant a separate zoning,

however the DCP control would ensure it is provided.

VPA & public benefits

Some submissions suggested that the proposal provides no benefits to the local

community. One submission stated that there should be a public gain

proportionate to the developer’s ability to profit through a change in zone. It was

suggested that the developer should pay for the upgrade and maintenance of

Wentworthville pool for the next twenty years.

Concern was raised that there have been no formal negotiations between Council

and the proponent; that the VPA has not been formalised; and there are no

guarantees that the developer will provide the proposed infrastructure. It was

mentioned that a VPA locking in the community benefits of the proposal needs to

be prepared, exhibited, finalised and registered on title prior to the LEP

amendment.

Several submissions indicated that the VPA should require the developer to deliver

the public benefits (including heritage restoration and the public park) early in the

process.

It was suggested that the Dunmore House view corridor through the site should be

provided at an early stage of development to help offset the proposal's long

construction period.

Concerns were expressed that funds will not be secured to guarantee they are

available when needed and that if the developer runs out of money during

construction the public benefits may be reduced, delayed or not provided.



It was commented that responsibility for maintenance of heritage buildings is

unclear. It was suggested that the site’s heritage must be comprehensively

protected and enhanced throughout construction and that Council should obtain a

bond or unfettered bank guarantee and have explicit rights to step in to

protect/restore heritage if necessary. It was noted that development approvals

should void if heritage is avoidably damaged.

Several submissions suggested that dedication of certain infrastructure to Council,

including the park and community hub space (John Austin Centre) must be a pre-

requisite for development and that dedications should be staged to ensure

delivery of public benefits throughout the project, not just at completion.

Some submissions questioned whether any Section 94 contributions would be

directed back into the Pendle Hill community and what additional infrastructure

would be provided. It was suggested that schools, child care centres, health

facilities, sporting fields and traffic will not benefit from Section 94 contributions

and if the contribution is a large amount it should be used for a critical item of

infrastructure, noting that a reduced yield should be considered.

Response:

Considerable community benefits would be provided as part of the proposal,

including public open space, community facilities and restoration of heritage

buildings. Council has been working with the developer for some time to come up

with a strategy that is acceptable from an impact perspective balanced with

development feasibility.

The Draft Heads of Agreement for a VPA provided by the proponent was assessed

and comments provided in the Council report of 19 April 2016 regarding the

adequacy of the VPA offer. There are clear benefits proposed within the Draft

Heads of Agreement and a report on the VPA which articulates the value of public

benefits will be provided to the CIHAP in the coming weeks. It is noted that around

$10m is being invested into renewal of heritage buildings and $19.5m in

contributions will be made to local infrastructure including community facilities,

open space, local centre upgrades and traffic improvements. The Wentworthville

Pool is a recreational facility that serves the broader community and would not be

used only by residents of the Bonds site, therefore it would be unreasonable for

this developer solely to fund the upgrade and maintenance of the pool. Upgrade of

Council’s three pools is included in its Section 94 Contributions Plan, and the

developer would make contributions to these upgrade works under the Plan.

A VPA between Council and the proponent is currently being negotiated and will be

publicly exhibited in the coming weeks. The VPA will be finalised prior to any LEP

amendment affecting the site.

Given the concerns raised at the public meetings the proponent will now commit

to providing the public park earlier in the process and will enter discussions with

Council about the appropriate stage in which to deliver the park.

The view corridor is from Dunmore house to the Dance Hall. There are no buildings

within this view corridor and it would not be appropriate or feasible to demolish

the existing substantial warehouse buildings until this area is made accessible.

Council would require payment of developer contributions prior to issue of a

construction certificate as well as any contributions associated with the VPA. Any

contributions collected by Council would be used for the works for which they were

designated.



Council would obtain a bank guarantee from the developer and the VPA would set

out the requirements regarding its provision. Council would ensure that all

retained heritage buildings are protected during construction and restoration. The

developer would be required to repair any damage that is caused.

The VPA once executed would be placed on the title of the land. Any future party (if

not the proponent) who develops the site would be required to deliver the public

benefits.

The body corporate would be responsible for maintaining the heritage buildings. In

this regard, the occupation by potential uses such as a supermarket and medical

services would be critical to ensuring the ongoing maintenance of the buildings.

The Draft Heads of Agreement for the VPA indicated that the public park would be

dedicated to Council and this would be locked into the VPA. The proponent has

proposed that the John Austin Centre either be dedicated directly to Council or

alternatively the proponent would enter an agreement to lease the building to

community groups.

As outlined in the Planning Proposal, the developer would pay certain

contributions under Council’s Section 94 Plan. These would be paid in addition to

the benefits provided through the VPA and will include contributions for sporting

fields and citywide open space. Details of contributions towards other

infrastructure such as childcare services and road upgrades will be provided in the

VPA. Provision of schools is the responsibility of the State Government and

provision of health services occurs through the private sector. Neither of these can

be provided using developer contributions.

SOCIAL ISSUES

Many submissions suggested that noise will increase, as a result of new residents,

the new retail area and more traffic; disrupting the peace and impacting on the

sleep, health, well-being and quality of life of existing residents, particularly the

elderly and shift-workers. One submission questioned the distance noise would

travel from car park ventilation motors that are constantly running.

It was also suggested that air pollution will increase and that rubbish dumping in

Jones and Dunmore Streets will worsen.

Submissions commented that there will be more crime, drug dealers and other

undesirable elements.

Concern was expressed that quality of life will be reduced for new residents due to

a large number of people in a confined space and less social interaction leading to

social issues and stress.

It was suggested that no consideration has been given to the special needs of the

retirement village adjacent to the subject site and that construction activities will

cause stress to village residents. A submission mentioned that the proposal will

deter new residents and drive out existing residents from the retirement village.

A submission raised concern regarding the need for safety and security of

retirement village residents and commented that the fence between the two

properties should not be removed, to prevent new residents of the Bonds site from

taking a shortcut across the property. It was also noted that removal of the fence

is unnecessary as residents can use the existing footpath on Dunmore Street.

Some submissions suggested that property values will decrease due to height and

density in close proximity and overlooking / overshadowing and possible flooding

of existing properties or change to flood classification.



Several submissions commented that maintaining the welfare and quality of life of

local residents should be Council’s priority and questioned how existing residents

will be compensated for their loss of quality of life, property values, etc.

It was suggested that 10% of the new units should be earmarked to suit

community living for ageing population.

One submission indicated that the proponent has provided contradictory

information about the provision of affordable housing, with the Planning Proposal

report indicating that affordable housing is addressed in the proposal, while at a

public meeting in October the proponent indicated there is no affordable housing

available in Sydney anymore.

Response:

An acoustic report required as part of any subsequent Development Application

for the site would address noise from any plant equipment. This is therefore not a

matter for consideration at the planning proposal stage.

It is acknowledged that air pollution may increase somewhat primarily due to

increased traffic, however it is also noted that locating more residents close to a

railway station will result in significantly less vehicle trips and therefore less

pollution than if they were located elsewhere.

Council is currently targeting illegal dumping of rubbish, which is a problem that

occurs throughout the LGA, and tends to be more concentrated in high density

areas. Council issues penalty infringement notices and runs community education

programs that aim to improve residents’ awareness and behaviour in relation to

littering and illegal dumping. When an illegal dumping incident is reported to

Council, Council aims to remove the waste within 24-48 hours.

Population growth, whether through low, medium or high density residential

development, increases the potential incidence of crime as evidenced by local

crime statistics. To counter this, buildings and their surrounds are required to be

designed in accordance with NSW Crime Prevention through Environmental

Design (CPTED) Principles and with SEPP 65 Principle 7: Safety. Generally, high

density housing enables increased casual surveillance (more people with

balconies and windows) through overlooking of public spaces, and leads to more

activity on the street and building surrounds. Implementing CPTED principles

through new development will contribute to reduced crime rates (proportionate to

population).

The Apartment Design Guide ensures that apartment buildings have a high-quality

design that promotes health, safety and liveability for residents, including

consideration of quality of life and social interaction.

Construction activities are a DA matter, however, it should be noted that the

majority of residents in the adjacent retirement village live on the western edge of

the site near Pendle Way, away from the subject site, which would minimise any

adverse impacts of construction activities. While there are residents living in the

building near the subject site boundary, adequate setbacks, vegetation and

construction staging would mitigate any impacts. There is no indication that the

proposal would deter new residents or drive out existing residents. The park,

community and retail uses within the Bonds site may be considered a benefit to

many existing residents in the retirement village and may attract new residents.

There is currently no proposed through site link to the adjoining retirement village

in the Masterplan, and this area will remain fenced off. The proponent has

indicated that the Masterplan could allow for a connection in the future should the



residents wish to have better access to the open space and site amenities

however this is solely at the discretion of the Retirement Village.

While the proposal will include high density residential development, this will be

built in accordance with the Apartment Design Guide, ensuring a high-quality built

form and architectural design. The proposal will also create a new community

asset, providing public domain, open space and restored heritage buildings where

there is currently a derelict industrial site. As discussed earlier, the proposal will

have no overshadowing impacts on surrounding properties and overlooking is

minimised through building design, setbacks, screening. The proposal will not

create nor exacerbate flooding on any surrounding or downstream properties. It is

therefore considered that the proposal will not adversely affect surrounding

property values, and may in fact have a positive impact.

Council has an obligation to ensure the welfare and quality of life for local

residents and is fulfilling its duty in this regard. Future development will be subject

to strict guidelines and conditions that ensure high quality development and

minimal impact on surrounding residents. A Social Impact Assessment (prepared

in accordance with Council’s Social Impact Assessment Policy) was submitted by

the proponent, which identifies the social impacts of the proposal. It is evident

that the proposal would have many positive social impacts, such as provision of

new community facilities, open space and retail shops, which would improve the

quality of life for existing residents.

There is no justification for compensation to be provided to existing residents.

Many parts of the Sydney Metropolitan Area are undergoing substantial change in

order to accommodate the population growth that is occurring. Councils have

been mandated by State Government Policy to provide increased housing density

around local centres and railway stations, and Pendle Hill is one such location.

However, it is not considered that any tangible loss of quality of life or property

value would result from this proposal.

The proposal would facilitate independent living through provision of suitable

housing for older people. Council’s DCP requires that 15% of dwellings be

adaptable i.e. specifically for people with disabilities and movement impairments.

No affordable housing (i.e. public housing) will be provided within the

development. The proponent noted at the public meeting that the provision of

additional housing will assist in providing housing that is affordable to first home

buyers and families who are currently priced out of the market due to a lack of

supply and high demand. The proposed redevelopment will add to the diversity of

housing stock and allow people to live closer to growing employment areas in

Parramatta and Westmead, rather than being pushed further west or interstate by

rising house prices.

ECONOMIC ISSUES

Several submissions questioned the need for the proposal given the considerable

amount of new development in the area and a forecast housing surplus for

Western Sydney. It was suggested that this will result in a decrease in value of

apartments, particularly two-bedroom units, in the coming months.

One submission questioned whether development would be delayed if not all units

were sold off the plan.

It was suggested that the site should remain industrial to provide more jobs in the

area especially for young people.



One submission commented that the site is not an appropriate location for a

commercial development.

Concern was expressed that the new retail area will cause existing Pendle Hill

businesses to close, creating unemployment.

It was indicated that Pendle Hill shopping area is inadequate and poor quality.

Response:

While ultimately the market will determine housing supply, Council has a role in

facilitating the provision of housing through the statutory planning process, both to

meet demand and to ensure affordability. Currently there are no signs of an

oversupply in housing at the local level, and indications are that demand for

housing in the Pendle Hill area is still high. While pockets of oversupply exist in

other parts of Sydney, there is a lack of diversity and new quality housing in

Pendle Hill and Wentworthville coupled with strong growth prospects given the

proximity to growing employment areas such as Parramatta and Westmead, and

the Western railway line.

There is no evidence that there would be a decrease in value or an over-supply of

two-bedroom units. The proposal would be completed and released in stages to

the market which would assist in preventing any potential over-supply.

Sale of units is beyond the scope of this planning proposal and is a matter for the

developer to address.

The State Government’s West Central Sub‐regional Strategy specifically identified

the Bonds Spinning Mills Site as an industrial site suitable for an alternate zoning

should the existing operations cease, given its predominantly residential context

and the availability of more suitable employment lands in nearby Girraween.

The proposal would generate considerable employment, both during construction

and operation. The proponent’s Economic Impact Assessment (EIA) indicates that

approximately 1,176 jobs (i.e. full-time 12-month jobs) would be directly

generated over the period of the development. Additionally, the proposal would

support permanent employment post-development through the operation of retail

uses.

The proposal is primarily for high density residential zoning, and a business zoning

would only be applied to a small portion of the site, where heritage buildings are to

be retained. The provision of some commercial floor space is considered

appropriate for the site, to support the new residential development and provide a

viable adaptive reuse of heritage buildings. A peer review of the proponent’s

economic impact assessment recommended that the commercial floor space be

limited to 6,000sqm, so as to minimise the impact on Pendle Hill centre. In

addition, there is a need for additional retail facilities in the Pendle Hill trade area,

while the capacity to accommodate them in existing centres is not evident. As

such, the proposal would address the existing under-supply of retail floor space in

the area.

The proponent’s EIA makes the case for the development of additional retail

services in the Pendle Hill trade area, having regard to:

o the trade area’s existing relative under-supply of retail services in general

and supermarket services in particular; and

o the extent of likely population growth in the trade area between 2011-

2031.



As the proposal would include retail floorspace, it would increase the retail offering

available in Pendle Hill, supplementing the existing centre and addressing the

inadequacy that currently exists.

ENVIRONMENTAL ISSUES

Contamination

Some submissions raised concern that the proposal lacks information on

contamination and proposed remediation, noting that heavy metal and asbestos

contamination is present within the site and indicating that not all of the site has been

tested. It was suggested that prior to rezoning of the site, additional testing should be

done and assurance given that remediation will be effective and carried out safely.

Response:

Council’s assessment of the proposal indicated that it has met the requirements of the

relevant legislation. At this stage of the process compliance with SEPP 55 has been

achieved, however, prior to development consent a Stage 3 Remediation Action Plan

(RAP), Site Audit Statement and Clearance Certificate must be submitted to Council.

Further delineation and remediation of remaining localised contamination would be

required at DA stage, including areas that cannot currently be accessed due to the

presence of site infrastructure. The RAP will identify specific measures to be taken to

ensure that remediation is carried out safely and properly.

Ecological impact

One submission suggested that if threatened species, populations or ecological

communities or their habitats may be adversely affected by the planning proposal,

then Council must consult with OEH. It indicated that there is native vegetation on

the southern and eastern side of the site and many native birds, which would be

impacted by the proposal. It was also suggested that the site is the habitat of

Major Mitchell’s Cockatoo, which has a ‘vulnerable’ conservation status and that a

Species Impact Statement must be submitted with the DA.

Another submission questioned whether flora and fauna studies have been

undertaken and what impacts the proposal would have on native wildlife, noting

there is much native wildlife inhabiting the site, which is protected by law.

Concern was expressed that wildlife habitat will be impacted or destroyed and

noise will disturb nesting and breeding (including birds, bats and possums).

A submission suggested that existing native trees planted on the perimeter of the

site should be retained as they are an essential buffer for nearby residents, and

will need protection during construction. It was also noted that all new planting

should be native species compatible with the Cumberland Plain Woodland

community.

Response:

Previous investigations of the subject site indicate that it does not have any

critical habitat, threatened species, populations or ecological communities or their

habitats. Given that these investigations were undertaken some time ago Council

requested that the proponent prepare a further ecological assessment, which was

undertaken in November 2016. While this would usually be required at DA stage

it was considered more appropriate for it to be undertaken at the planning

proposal stage. The assessment did not identify any threatened species or

ecological communities within the subject site and Council’s Landscape Technical



Officer has verified that there are no further requirements for ecological impact

assessment under the applicable legislation. It is noted that Major Mitchell’s

Cockatoo (Lophochroa leadbeateri) is not present within the subject site as it is

only found west of the Great Dividing Range.

It is acknowledged that the site provides habitat for native species and a number

of native species were recorded during the site investigation. These species are

common or abundant in the region and have a high ability to adapt to urban

environments. As such, it is considered the disturbance of their habitat within the

subject site would not threaten the local or regional occurrence of these animals.

Should the proposal proceed to DA stage, detailed conditions can be imposed to

minimise ecological impacts, including but not limited to ensuring that vegetation

removal is not undertaken during breeding periods, requiring wildlife rescue

personnel to be present to tend to any affected fauna and requiring

enhancement/restoration of native vegetation. The site would continue to provide

habitat for native wildlife once it has been redeveloped given the considerable

area of public and private open space proposed throughout the site and

retention/planting of native vegetation.

Native vegetation within the subject site is located predominantly around the

perimeter (eastern, southern and western boundaries). It should be noted that the

site has been highly modified, with benching undertaken to create a level site for

development of previous industrial uses. As a result a steep fill embankment was

created along the eastern and part of the southern boundaries and dense

boundary/screen planting was undertaken, which included native species such as

Casuarina, Spotted Gum, Ironbark, Silver Wattle and Brush Box. The trees within

the site are generally in good condition. It is recommended by the ecological

investigation report and by Council’s Landscape Officer that existing trees be

retained. Retention of trees along the boundary would provide both wildlife

habitat and a visual buffer to future development. To ensure retention of existing

native trees, it is recommended that the boundary setbacks be increased and the

proposed concept and DCP be amended accordingly. DA conditions ensure that

any vegetation to be retained is protected during construction, e.g. through the

establishment of tree protection zones. It is considered appropriate as part of any

development consent to require enhancement of vegetation involving weed

removal and replanting with increased densities of locally indigenous understorey

species. This would be detailed on the required landscaping plans submitted at

DA stage.

HERITAGE

Several submissions expressed concern that the proposal will have adverse

impacts on the site’s heritage significance. One submission commented that the

site’s heritage should be showcased, but that this will not occur as the majority of

original buildings will be demolished and remaining buildings converted to shops.

It was suggested that the proposed rezoning and additional height will detract

from the heritage significance of the site and adjacent Dunmore House.

One submission suggested that the view corridor east of Dunmore House needs

protection within the Dunmore House site as this will complement and complete

the desirable heritage view corridor created by the proposal.

Concern was also raised about damage to heritage buildings during excavation,

construction or restoration.



Response:

Council went through a lengthy and comprehensive process to ensure that the

heritage impacts of the proposal were adequately addressed and minimised and

to ensure the site’s heritage significance would be conserved, in relation to both

adaptive reuse of heritage buildings as well as design and siting of new

development to ensure protection of the heritage curtilage. The proposal will

enable retention and conservation of many of the site’s heritage buildings,

resulting in minimal loss of heritage values. These include all items listed under

Holroyd LEP and incorporate all buildings identified as having exceptional

significance and three buildings identified as having high significance. While most

buildings would be adapted for new uses, there is an opportunity for certain

elements/buildings to be retained in situ for interpretation purposes (e.g. the CMP

recommends that at least one of the cotton bale stores be conserved in its original

condition for interpretation). Adaptive reuse of heritage buildings is an accepted

and effective way of ensuring their long-term conservation, as it enables repair

and restoration and ensures their long-term maintenance.

The CMP includes design guidelines for new development which ensure that it will

have minimal impact on heritage buildings. The proposed height control for the

northern part of the site, which comprises the heritage precinct, is 14m to ensure

any new buildings in this part of the site are sympathetic to the heritage buildings.

Additionally, the modest height of these new buildings, combined with the

elevated siting of Dunmore House in relation to the Bonds site and its substantial

distance from the boundary would minimise the impact on the view corridor from

Dunmore House.

The view corridor within the Dunmore House site already has protection through

the Conservation Management Plan for Dunmore House, which recommends

adequate view and conservation management for Dunmore House within its own

curtilage.

Any development consent issued for the site would include a condition that

requires a plan of management ensuring adequate protection during construction

for the heritage buildings to be retained. This would be extended to include the

impacts of ground borne vibration during excavation. Measures would include

hoardings and limits to site accessibility. Development must be undertaken in

accordance with the Conservation Management Plan. If damage to any heritage

building occurred as a result of construction/restoration work Council would

address this at the DA stage, and the developer would be required to repair the

damage.

CONSTRUCTION ISSUES

A number of submissions raised concern over the prolonged construction period of

5-10 years and suggested this may result in stress and health issues.

Concern was also raised about noise and air quality impacts, particularly on

children and the elderly.

It was suggested that Council does not enforce construction hours or noise levels

and clarification was sought regarding the restrictions applying to construction

sites in residential areas.

Some submissions suggested that construction workers will park in neighbouring

streets.

A number of submissions expressed concern over construction work generating

increased traffic, particularly heavy vehicles, and dispersal of contaminated



material into neighbouring properties as well as fumes, odour and dust impacting

on health, flora & fauna and damaging heritage buildings.

Some submissions mentioned the possibility of structural damage to nearby

houses during excavation or construction and whether the impact of this has been

assessed.

Submissions also raised concern over exposure to asbestos and other

contaminants and how chemical and asbestos waste would be safely removed, as

well as how residents would be notified of asbestos removal.

Response:

It is acknowledged that where there is new development occurring, this may have

an impact on the local community during the construction period. Developments

occurring on large sites such as this need to be undertaken in several stages over

a number of years. This extended period of construction is unavoidable, however,

Council ensures that all possible reasonable controls to minimise any impacts are

put in place through conditions of development consent, which are enforceable

through Council’s compliance section.

There are numerous and detailed standard conditions of development consent

that address the various issues raised, including but not limited to construction

work / hours, Construction and Traffic Management Plans (including demolition

and transport of materials), excavation, hazardous materials and environmental

management.

If construction work occurs outside of the designated hours and a complaint is

made to Council regarding this, then Council would investigate the matter.

Submissions received at the Public Hearing

Ten verbal submissions were received at the public hearing from community members

who had also made a written submission. These submissions raised the same issues as

those raised in the written submissions addressed above. A copy of the public hearing

report is provided in Attachment 5.

Conclusion

The 6-week community consultation period for the Planning Proposal to amend the

planning controls affecting 190-220 Dunmore Street, Pendle Hill concluded on 19

October 2016. Six submissions were received from Public Authorities, 70 written

submissions were received from the community and 10 verbal submissions were

received at the public hearing (from community members who had also made a written

submission).

The consideration of the community submissions prompted further review of the

amendments proposed in the Planning Proposal. It is recommended that the Planning

Proposal be progressed with revised proposed planning controls, namely a reduced

maximum FSR of 2.2:1 (applying to the southern portion of the site) and increased

setback along the eastern, southern and south-western boundaries of 12m.



Next Steps

Subject to a Council resolution in accordance with the report recommendation, the

following will be undertaken:

Preparation of documentation for the proposed LEP amendment and submitting

request to the DP&E to make the amendment.

Negotiation with proponent to finalise VPA.

Public exhibition of VPA followed by report to CIHAP and Council.

Nomination to Heritage Council for State listing of the site.

Report Recommendation:

That the Cumberland Independent Hearing and Assessment Panel (CIHAP):

1. Receive and note the outcomes of the community consultation.

2. Note Council’s compliance with the conditions of the Department of Planning and

Environment’s Gateway Determination issued for this Planning Proposal in

accordance with section 56(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act

1979.

3. Recommend proceeding with the amendments to the planning controls affecting the

subject site, including controls as revised in this report from those of the Planning

Proposal, outlined as follows:

a) Land use zoning of R4 High Density Residential, B2 Local Centre and RE1 Public

Recreation;

b) Building heights ranging from 12.5m (3 storeys) to 39m (12 storeys);

c) Floor Space Ratio (FSR) ranging from 0.7:1 to 2.2:1;

d) Minimum lot size of 900m2 for residential zone (no minimum lot size for

business and recreation zones).

4. Recommend proceeding with an amendment to Holroyd DCP 2013 to incorporate the

site-specific DCP controls, including the changes proposed in Attachment 4.

5. Recommend that the Draft VPA be finalised and publicly exhibited for 28 days and

reported back to the CIHAP following exhibition.

6. Recommend that this Planning Proposal, with the proposed revised planning controls

as listed above, be reported to Council seeking a resolution to finalise the LEP and

DCP amendments.

Attachments (to be circulated to CIHAP Members under separate cover):

1. Summary of submissions

2. Planning Proposal (incl. Draft LEP maps as exhibited and Council report of 19 April

2016)



3. Gateway Determination

4. Proposed changes to DCP

5. Public Hearing Report

Documents

Agenda of Cumberland Independent Assessment & Hearing ... · Cumberland Council Cumberland Independent Assessment & Hearing Panel - 8 February 2017 Page 3 CONTENTS Report No. Name