ORDINARY MEETING No. 4139 - Hunter's Hill Council · 4139 – 9th December, 2002 INDEX A – MINUTES ... Progress Report on Exemption from SEPP 5 – Housing for Older People and

HUNTER'S HILL COUNCIL

ORDINARY MEETING No. 4139

9th December, 2002 at 7.30pm

ORDER OF BUSINESS PRAYER ATTENDANCE, APOLOGIES, DECLARATIONS A. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES CIVIC CEREMONIES B. MAYORAL MINUTES & REPORTS TABLING OF PETITIONS ADDRESSES FROM THE PUBLIC C. NOTICE OF MOTION (INCLUDING RESCISSION

MOTIONS) REPORTS FROM STAFF D. DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENT E. PUBLIC WORKS & INFRASTRUCTURE F. FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION G. CUSTOMER & COMMUNITY SERVICES H. GENERAL MANAGER J. COMMITTEE REPORTS K. CORRESPONDENCE L. DELEGATES REPORTS M GENERAL BUSINESS N. QUESTIONS WITH OR WITHOUT NOTICE Z. COUNCIL IN COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

HUNTER’S HILL COUNCIL ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL

4139 – 9th December, 2002

INDEX A – MINUTES

1. Minutes of Ordinary Meeting No. 4138 held on 25th November, 2002 ................ 1 B - MAYORAL MINUTES & REPORTS 1. Mayoral SES Appeal……………………………………………………………….1

D – DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENT

1. 67 Pittwater Road, Gladesville ............................................................................ 1 2. 5-9 St. Malo Avenue, Hunters Hill ...................................................................... 7 3. Progress Report on Exemption from SEPP 5 – Housing for Older People and

People with a Disability......................................................................................17 4. Legal Matters ....................................................................................................19 5. Delegated Authority ..........................................................................................20

E – PUBLIC WORKS & INFRASTRUCTURE

1. Boronia Park Plan of Management ..................................................................... 1 2. Tenders for Design, Supply, Installation and Maintenance of Bus Shelter (Advertising Shelters).......................................................................................... 3 3. Tree Preservation Order – Approvals .................................................................. 5

G – CUSTOMER & COMMUNITY SERVICES

1. Community Service Grants 2002/2003 ............................................................... 1

H – GENERAL MANAGER

1. Report on Outstanding Matters ........................................................................... 1 2. Cowell Street Development - Economic and Financial Analysis…………………2 3. Cowell Street Development - Joint Venture Agreement…………………………..4 4. Public Liability and Professional Indemnity Insurance…………………………….9

J – COMMITTEES

1. Minutes of Art and Craft Advisory Committee Meeting held 27th November, 2002 .......................................................................................... 1 2. Minutes of Hunters Hill Village Working Party Meeting No. 2 held 18th November, 2002 ........................................................................................... 5 3. Minutes of Hunters Hill Village Working Party Meeting No. 3 held 2nd December, 2002............................................................................................. 9

4. Minutes of Cowell Street Working Party Meeting held 12th September, 2002…..14 5. Minutes of Cowell Street Working Party Meeting held 16th October, 2002……..16 6. Presentation by Brailey Fenton and Lane Consultants…………………………..17 7. Economic and Financial Analysis………………………………………………..18

-2-

8. Joint Venture Discussion…………………………………………………………19 9. Proposed Development Brief…………………………………………………….20

K – CORRESPONDENCE

1. Items 1 –7 of Correspondence ............................................................................. 1

L – REPORT OF DELEGATES

1. In Memorial ........................................................................................................ 1

M – GENERAL BUSINESS

1. Meetings – Various Committees of Council ........................................................ 1

A

Minutes

A – Minutes


Index 1. Minutes of Ordinary Meeting No. 4139 held on 9th December, 2002 1

.................................... Councillor Bruce Lucas

MAYOR

MINUTES OF ORDINARY MEETING NO. 4139 – 9th December, 2002 A1

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting No. 4139 held on 9th December, 2002. This is page

COMMENCEMENT TIME The meeting opened with Prayer at 7.55 p.m. IN ATTENDANCE The Mayor, Councillor B. Lucas, Councillors P. Astridge, M. Christie, P. Hart, S. Hoopmann, R. Quinn and J. Scotford. ALSO PRESENT The General Manager, Barry Smith, the Manager Public Works & Infrastructure, Don Cottee, the Manager Development & Environment, Steve Kourepis, and the Administration Officer, Greg Egan. APOLOGIES Apologies were received from Clr J. Betar, who is on leave of absence until 14th December, 2002, and Clr M. Kapel. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST The Mayor called for Declarations of Interest without response. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 534/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Astridge, seconded Clr Hart that the Minutes of

Ordinary Meeting No.4138, held on 25th November 2002, be confirmed. ADDRESSES FROM THE PUBLIC 1. HUNTERS HILL VILLAGE WORKING PARTY At his request, Mr. Emilio Calandra, 3 King Street, Hunters Hill addressed the

meeting regarding his letter of 25th October 2002 seeking appointment to the Hunters Hill Village Working Party.

MAYORAL MINUTES & REPORTS (Page B1) 1. MAYORAL SES APPEAL 535/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Hoopmann, seconded Clr Quinn that Council

supports the Mayoral SES Appeal and that an application for a grant be made. REPORTS FROM STAFF DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENT (Pages D1 – D22)



1. DA NO. 02/1134 – 67 PITTWATER ROAD, HUNTERS HILL 536/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Christie, seconded Clr Scotford that Development

Application No. 02/1134, for alterations and additions at 67 Pittwater Road, Hunters Hill, be approved subject to conditions (2001 version) Nos. A1-A4, B7, B14 ($750), C1-C10, C12, C21, C24, C26, C37, C40, C41, C46, C47, C55, C61, C81, C82, C83, C84, C85, C87, C95, C96, C100, C102, D2, D21, PE1, PE6, PE21, S1, S19 and the following special condition:

45. The proposed stramit corrugated roofing over the terrace at the rear of the

driveway is to be deleted and no roof covering is to be installed to the rear terrace.

2. DA NO. 02/1091 – 5-9 ST. MALO AVENUE, HUNTERS HILL 537/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Scotford, seconded Clr Hoopmann that

Development Application No. 02/1091, for the construction of three x three-bedroom townhouses at 5-9 St Malo Avenue, Hunters Hill, be approved subject to standard conditions (2001 version) Nos. A1-A4, B1, B2, B14 ($9,800), C1-C10, C12, C15, C18, C21, C22, C27, C28-C37, C40-C44, C46-C49, C58-C66, C81-C85, C87-C89, C90 (a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, i, l, m, p, q), C94, C95, C96-C100 (Architex, sheet 2-4 rev C, sheet 5 rev D, sheet 8 rev B, 21/11/02, Stormwater drainage layout drawing no. 2002/01/A dated 8/08/02 by Genesis Solutions and schedule of finishes dated 27 Nov 02, drawing no 0177/1), PE1, PE2, PE7, PE8, PE15, PE17, PE21, S1, S11 (45%), S15 (a($1200), c($1395), d($330), e($18), f($375), i($6)) and the following special conditions:

77. A Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994

must be obtained. Application must be made though 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 13 20 92.

Following application, a “Notice of Requirements” will detail water and sewer extensions to be built and 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 landscape design. The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to occupation of the development. The notice must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the Construction Certificate being issued.

78. To ensure compliance with the Building Code of Australia (BCA), the

construction of walls separating units and the construction of the floor separating units from the car park and stairway in the basement shall have a weighted sound reduction index in accordance with specification F2 of the BCA. A Compliance Certificate, outlining the proposed construction and certifying that the documentation complies with the BCA



requirements, shall be issued by a suitably qualified person to the Principal Certifying Authority with the application for a Construction Certificate. A Compliance Certificate issued by a suitably qualified person certifying that the as-built construction complies with the above documentation and meets the BCA requirements shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issuing a Occupation Certificate.

79. To ensure adequate fire safety, walls separating units and floors separating

units from the garage/ staircase are to be constructed in accordance with the requirements of Clause C1.1 and specification C1.1 of the BCA. A Compliance Certificate, outlining the proposed construction and certifying that the documentation complies with the BCA requirements, shall be issued by a suitably qualified person to the Principal Certifying Authority with the application for a Construction Certificate. A Compliance Certificate issued by a suitably qualified person certifying that the as-built construction complies with the above documentation and meets the BCA requirements shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issuing a Occupation Certificate.

80. To safeguard occupants from illness or injuries while evacuating in an

emergency, provisions for escape and construction of exits shall comply with the BCA, Section D – Access and Egress. A Compliance Certificate documenting proposed escapes and construction of exits and certifying that the documentation complies with the BCA requirements shall be issued by a suitably qualified person to the Principal Certifying Authority with the application for a Construction Certificate. A Compliance Certificate issued by a suitably qualified person certifying that the escapes and exits have been constructed in compliance with the above documentation and meet the BCA requirements shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issuing a Occupation Certificate.

81. The landscape plan Dwg No. 6 Rev A is to be revised to make the

following amendments and submitted with the application for a Construction Certificate:

• Substitute Box Elder (Acer negundo) for a deciduous species,

which will not set seed freely in the nearby bushlands as requested in the previous landscape report of 28-07-02. Some of the smaller ornamental Pear species are suggested e.g. Callery Pear (Pyrus calleryana).

• The planting centres of the Dwarf Lilly Pilly are considered to be

too far apart to effect a screen hedge between the three courtyard gardens. Therefore, substitute Syzigium paniculatum with Syzigium “Southern Form” or a ‘variety’ of a similar size and form and plant at 800mm centres in a staggered row.

• 8# Viola heracea to cover an area of 10m2 along the western

boundary is considered to be too low. This plant species should be planted at approximately 400mm centres to effect a successful



ground cover, particularly when used as an understorey plant to Dwarf Lilly Pilly. Numbers in other areas with this plant species may be adjusted accordingly.

82. Stormwater drainage to be implemented in accordance with drawing no.

2002/01/A dated 8/08/02 prepared by Genesis Solutions Pty Ltd. The applicant is responsible to make the connection into Council’s pit at the applicants cost and under Council’s supervision, including any alterations to services.

83. A paving brick footpath of a similar colour and size to that provided by

the developers of Nos. 11 to 23 St. Malo Avenue is to be constructed along the nature strip at the frontage, under Council supervision (refer DA 735/89 Condition 27).

84. A bond or bank guarantee of $5,000 is to be lodged against protection of

sandstone kerbing by development activity, and protection of other Council drainage and roadway infrastructure including street trees.

85. Sediment and erosion control measures are to be adopted during

construction to prevent building materials and loose soil entering Council’s stormwater system, natural watercourses and bushland.

86. An Erosion Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) and Stormwater Management Plan shall be prepared in accordance with the NSW Department of Housing publication “Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction” and submitted to Council for approval prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. (Reason: legal requirement, sediment and erosion control).

87. A longitudinal section of the driveway drawn at 1:20 natural scale shall be prepared and designed using Council’s standard vehicle profile and submitted to Council prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. The section will show the vehicle path from the centre of the road through the layback/dishdrain to the proposed garage, carport and parking place. (Reason: Public access)

88. All service adjustments, if required, will be at the applicant's expense.

(Reason: Public access). 89. Appropriate grated box drains of minimum width 225 mm are to be

constructed to prevent internal runoff from crossing Council's footpath. The box drains are to be connected to the internal stormwater disposal system.

90. The trimming, topsoiling and turfing of the nature strip in St. Malo

Avenue is to be undertaken (Reason: public amenity. 91. The colour schedule shall be amended to change the proposed colour

‘Mojave’ for the blade wall and column balcony framing to be a darker



tone. The approved material palette consisting of a sandstone basement and garden walls and recessive neutral colours as specified in the approved schedule of finishes is an essential part of this application to ensure the development’s compatibility with the Foreshore Scenic Protection Area, and shall not be varied.

3. PROGRESS REPORT ON EXEMPTION FROM STATE ENVIRONMENTAL

PLANNING POLICY (SEPP) NO. 5 – HOUSING FOR OLDER PEOPLE AND PEOPLE WITH A DISABILITY

538/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Astridge , seconded Clr Christie that Council

receives and notes the preliminary statistical analysis report prepared by Council’s Community Liaison Officer, which will form part of the supporting information that will be the basis of Council’s exemption submission.

4. LEGAL MATTERS 539/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Hoopmann, seconded Clr Hart that the report be

received and noted. 5. DELEGATED AUTHORITY 540/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Quinn, seconded Clr Astridge that the report be

received and noted. SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS 541/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Quinn, seconded Clr Scotford at 8.38pm that

Standing Orders be suspended to allow Items L1 – In Memorial and N – Questions Without Notice to be brought forward (to allow one question to be put in the case of the latter) as there were people in the gallery who were waiting consideration of these matters.

DELEGATES REPORTS (Page L1) 1. IN MEMORIAL 542/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Scotford, seconded Clr Quinn that the report be

received and noted and that the condolences of Council be forwarded to the family of the late Mrs. Kathleen Christie.

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE Clr Quinn asked the following Question Without Notice (No. 103/02): “The development at 57 Woolwich Road clearly does not comply with Council’s

conditions of consent. What action is Council taking to ensure compliance with the conditions of consent? Please report on the current status of this development. Can Council officers confirm that, as the S96 application has not been determined



within 40 days, an application has been lodged to the Land and Environment Court on the basis of a deemed refusal?”.

The Manager Development and Environment provided the following response: (to be inserted when answers to the Questions Without Notice are provided by the

relevant officers). RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS 543/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Quinn, seconded Clr Hoopmann at 8.49pm that

Standing Orders be resumed. PUBLIC WORKS & INFRASTRUCTURE (Pages E1 – E6) 1. BORONIA PARK PLAN OF MANAGEMENT A motion was moved by Clr Scotford that the Plan of Management for Boronia

Park be adopted with the exclusion of any reference to a proposed community facility. The motion LAPSED, however, in the absence of a seconder.

A motion was moved by Clr Christie, seconded Clr Astridge that the Plan of

Management for Boronia Park be adopted. SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS 544/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Quinn, seconded Clr Hoopmann at 8.58pm that

Standing Orders be suspended to view the plans. RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS 545/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Astridge, seconded Clr Christie at 9.00pm that

Standing Orders be resumed. 546/02 The motion was put to the meeting and was CARRIED. 2. TENDERS FOR DESIGN, SUPPLY, INSTALLATION AND MAINTENANCE

OF BUS SHELTERS (ADVERTISING SHELTERS) A motion was moved by Clr Scotford, seconded Clr Quinn that:

1. Council enters into a contract with J C Decaux for the provision of advertising bus shelters as per Annexure A to the specification for a period of 15 years.

2. The Mayor and General Manager execute any necessary documentation or

contracts and affix the Seal of Council.



3. A small working party determines the specific design and colour of the shelters to be installed.

4. The contact is subject to deferral of the two proposed shelters in Ryde

Road adjacent to the Gladesville Road intersection for further consultation with the adjacent residents.

An amendment was moved by Clr Hoopmann that: 1. Council enters into a contract with J C Decaux for the provision of

advertising bus shelters as per Annexure A to the specification for a period of 15 years.

2. The Mayor and General Manager execute any necessary documentation or

contracts and affix the Seal of Council.

3. A small working party determines the specific design and colour of the shelters to be installed.

4. The contract is subject to the deletion of all of the proposed shelters in

Ryde Road.

The amendment LAPSED, however, in the absence of a seconder. FORESHADOWED MOTION Clr Christie foreshadowed a motion that Hunter’s Hill Council continues to erect and maintain bus shelters in the Municipality. FORESHADOWED MOTION Clr Astridge foreshadowed a motion that the matter be deferred to the next meeting to allow Councillors to undertake further consultation with the community.

The motion was then put to the meeting and was LOST. Clr Christie moved a motion that Hunter’s Hill Council continues to erect and maintain bus shelters in the Municipality. The motion LAPSED, however, in the absence of a seconder.

547/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Astridge, seconded Clr Scotford that the matter be deferred to the next meeting to allow Councillors to undertake further consultation with the community.

3. TREE PRESERVATION ORDER - APPROVALS 548/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Astridge, seconded Clr Hart that the report be

received and noted.



CUSTOMER AND COMMUNITY SERVICES (Pages G1 – G3) 1. COMMUNITY SERVICE GRANTS 2002/03 549/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Astridge, seconded Clr Quinn that Council

provides grants/donations to community groups as recommended in the report to Council.

GENERAL MANAGER (Page H1) 1. MONTHLY REPORT ON OUTSTANDING MATTERS 550/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Astridge, seconded Clr Scotford that the report be

received and noted. 2. COWELL STREET DEVELOPMENT – ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL

ANALYSIS 551/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Hoopmann, seconded Clr Christie that:

1. The report, results, findings and recommendations of Hill PDA are received and noted.

2. The report, results, findings and recommendations of Hill PDA are treated

as commercial-in-confidence and not released for public inspection.

3. A joint venture development proposal is pursued with the adjoining property owner at 2 Cowell Street.

3. COWELL STREET DEVELOPMENT – JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT 552/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Scotford, seconded Clr Quinn that:

1. Council agrees that Emerald Logic is engaged to facilitate a Joint Venture Agreement on the basis that if no agreement is reached then no fees are payable.

2. Such an agreement is on the basis of equally shared costs with the owners

of 2 Cowell Street – Brailey Fenton and Lane and Co. 3. The comments and clauses suggested by the ICAC are included in any

Joint Venture Agreement. 4. Subject to the successful completion of a Joint Venture Agreement,

Emerald Logic proceeds to invite submissions for the design and construction of a development at 2, 4 and 6 Cowell Street, Gladesville.

5. The General Manager is authorised to execute any services agreements

with Emerald Logic.



6. Subject to receipt of a satisfactory fee proposal, Mr. Joe Vescio is engaged to act on Council’s behalf on this project, as instructed by the General Manager.

4. PUBLIC LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY INSURANCE 553/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Hoopmann, seconded Clr Quinn that Council

accepts the terms of renewal for Public Liability and Professional Indemnity Insurance as advised by AON Risk Services.

COMMITTEE REPORTS (Pages J1 – J14) 1. MINUTES OF THE ART AND CRAFT ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING

HELD ON 27TH NOVEMBER 2002 554/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Astridge, seconded Clr Quinn that the report be

received and noted. 2. MINUTES OF THE HUNTERS HILL VILLAGE WORKING PARTY

MEETING NO. 2 HELD ON 18TH NOVEMBER 2002 555/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Astridge, seconded Clr Scotford that the minutes

of Working Party Meeting No. 2, held on 18th November 2002, be adopted. 3. MINUTES OF THE HUNTERS HILL VILLAGE WORKING PARTY

MEETING NO. 3 HELD ON 2ND DECEMBER 2002 556/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Astridge, seconded Clr Christie that: 1. The Minutes of Working Party Meeting No. 3, held on 2nd December

2002, are adopted. 2. Council adopts the brief for the Heritage Character Study as amended. 3. Council provides 50% of the total funding for the study up to $7,500, as a

budget variation in conjunction with consideration of the December Quarterly Review.

4. The General Manager, in consultation with the Heritage sub-group of the

Hunters Hill Village Working Party, appoints a consultant to undertake the study following the receipt and consideration of submissions from suitably qualified persons.

4. MINUTES OF THE COWELL STREET WORKING PARTY MEETING HELD

ON 12TH SEPTEMBER, 2002 557/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Hart, seconded Clr Astridge that the minutes are

received and noted.



5. MINUTES OF THE COWELL STREET WORKING PARTY MEETING HELD ON 16TH OCTOBER, 2002

558/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Hart, seconded Clr Astridge that the minutes are

received and noted. 6. PRESENTATION BY BRAILEY FENTON AND LANE CONSULTANT 559/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Hart, seconded Clr Astridge that the report is

received and noted. 7. ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS 560/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Hart, seconded Clr Astridge that the results,

findings and recommendations are noted. 8. JOINT VENTURE DISCUSSION 561/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Hart, seconded Clr Astridge that the matter of

completing a Joint Venture agreement is noted. 9. PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT BRIEF 562/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Hart, seconded Clr Astridge that the report is

received and noted. 10. REPORT OF THE GENERAL PURPOSE COMMITTEE INSPECTIONS HELD

ON 7TH DECEMBER 2002 PROCEEDINGS IN BRIEF The General Manager presented a verbal report of the inspection of 5-9 St. Malo

Avenue, Hunters Hill conducted by the General Purpose Committee earlier that evening.

563/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Quinn, seconded Clr Hart that the report be

received and noted. CORRESPONDENCE (PRECIS) (Pages K1 – K6) 1. CORRESPONDENCE 564/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Hoopmann, seconded Clr Scotford that Council

writes to the Minister for Education thanking him for his advice concerning the future of Hunters Hill High School and asking if Council could be kept informed of future developments and progress.

565/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Hoopmann, seconded Clr Scotford that Council

nominates Clr Quinn as a member of the Willoughby/Ryde/Hunters Hill/Lane Cove District Bushfire Management Committee.



566/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Quinn, seconded Clr Hart that Council nominates Clr Scotford as an alternate for Clr Quinn.

567/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Astridge, seconded Clr Hart that the remainder of

the correspondence be received and noted. DELEGATES REPORTS (Page L1) 1. IN MEMORIAL See page A5 (Minute No. 542/02) of these minutes. GENERAL BUSINESS (Page M1) 1. MEETINGS – VARIOUS COMMITTEES OF COUNCIL 568/02 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Astridge, seconded Clr Scotford that the report

listing the various Committees of Council be received and noted. QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

No. Author Date Question Answer 103/02 Clr Quinn 09/12/02 The development at 57

Woolwich Road clearly does not comply with Council’s conditions of consent. What action is Council taking to ensure compliance with the conditions of consent? Please report on the current status of this development. Can Council officers confirm that, as the S96 application has not been determined within 40 days, an application has been lodged to the Land and Environment Court on the basis of a deemed refusal?

104/02 Clr Astridge 09/12/02 Can DA 02/1136 for 7 The Avenue, Hunters Hill be referred to the next Council meeting for determination and a possible General Purpose Committee inspection?

105/02 Clr Astridge 09/12/02 What is the timetable for the clean-up of the Murray Prior



No. Author Date Question Answer Reserve?

106/02 Clr Hoopmann 09/12/02 I attended the successful opening of the Scout Hall on Sunday in Durham Street. Could Council write thanking Zac Reynolds for the part he has played over a long period of time in helping the youth of Hunters Hill in the Scout movement? He will be sadly missed by the community while he is travelling around Australia.

107/02 Clr Scotford 09/12/02 It was reported in Kooraquella that there is a desire for and need of community gardens in various locations so that: 1. older citizens can spend

time together pottering in a community garden with their friends;

2. they beautify the municipality and provide a focus of interest for not only older residents but residents of all ages.

Does Council have any information regarding this matter?

108/02 Clr Scotford 09/12/02 The last time I discussed the matter of the lights on the tennis court at “Merimbah”, I was assured that two tall lights equals four small lights, which was approved. Now there are four tall lights. This looks like the DA consent has been breached. Would the General Manager investigate this and tell Council what has happened?

TERMINATION The meeting terminated at 10.15pm.



I confirm that these Minutes are a true and accurate record of Meeting No. 4139 of Council held on 9th December, 2002. Barry Smith Councillor Bruce Lucas GENERAL MANAGER MAYOR

B

Supplementary Mayoral Minutes & Reports

B – Supplementary Mayoral Minutes & Reports


Index 1. Mayoral SES Appeal 1

.................................... Councillor Bruce Lucas

MAYOR

SUPPLEMENTARY MAYORAL MINUTES & REPORTS

Meeting 4139 – 9th December, 2002 B1


ITEM NO : 1 SUBJECT : MAYORAL SES APPEAL BUSINESS PROGRAM : COMMUNITY SERVICE REPORTING OFFICER : COUNCILLOR BRUCE LUCAS

MAYOR FILE : 200/07 We witness the devastation on our communities from bushfires all over the State with the threat of all of us being on alert at our own back door. Our local SES is in desperate need of an extra vehicle to carry trained volunteers to fire locations. These same dedicated people com e to our rescue in difficult times of storm and fire and now need our urgent help to raise funds. The money is desperately needed to purchase an 11 seater troop carrier which will allow SES troops to be transported to disaster sites. At present, transporting personnel is being carried out on a rotation basis resulting in many being left behind whereas they could be utilised at disaster sites. SES Controller Bruce Edelman has formally requested Council to set up a fund to be principally used to purchase a troop carrier type vehicle, much needed in the type of conditions currently being experienced. A Mayoral SES Appeal has begun at Council and has been ‘kicked off’ by my donation and a generous one from Controller Edelman. The appeal is a chance to prevent disaster happening and, in particular, to purchase an 11 seater troop carrier. Donations are being sought from the public to be lodged at the Council with cheques being made payable to “The Mayoral SES Appeal” and sent to P.O. Box 21, Hunters Hill 2110 or delivered to the Customer Service Centre at Council, 22 Alexandra Street, Hunters Hill.

FINANCIAL IMPACT

Council has the opportunity to apply for a proportion of the cost of a new Troop Carrier through the Emergency Services funding scheme. The grant available is dependent upon the type of vehicle required and the needs of each individual SES unit. The criteria are currently being investigated and it is likely that up to 50% could be available.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council supports the Mayoral SES Appeal and that an application for a grant be made.

D

Development & Environment

D – Development & Environment


Index 1. 67 Pittwater Road, Gladesville 1 2. 5-9 St. Malo Avenue, Hunters Hill 7 3. Progress Report on Exemption from SEPP 5 – Housing for Older People and People with a Disability 17 4. Legal Matters 19 5. Delegated Authority 20

.................................... Steve Kourepis

MANAGER DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENT

REPORT OF DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENT

Meeting 4139 – 9th December 2002 D1

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting No. 4139 held on 9th December 2002. This is page

ITEM NO : 1 SUBJECT : DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION NO: 2002/1134

PROPERTY: 67 PITTWATER ROAD, GLADESVILLE APPLICANT: FRANK A CAVALIER OWNER: COLIN CAMPBELL MCWHIRTER PROPOSAL: ALTERATIONS & ADDITIONS APPLICATION LODGED: 3RD JULY, 2002

BUSINESS PROGRAM : DEVELOPMENT CONTROL REPORTING OFFICER : KATRENA FULLER

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL OFFICER (BLD & ENV)

FILE : 1575/67 DETAILS Council is in receipt of a development application to make alterations and additions to the existing dwelling house on the above property. The proposal involves the demolition of the rear skillion roof addition and the reconstruction of a hip roof structure comprising a bedroom, bathroom, family room and open timber pergola. The works are to match the existing external colours and finishes and maintain the single storey appearance of the dwelling. The proposal maintains the existing floor level to ensure suitable access for the disabled, elderly owner. The matter has been referred to Council for determination due to the non-compliance with the garden area standard as identified in Clause 16A of Local Environmental Plan No. 1 (as amended). Subsequently, the applicant has lodged a State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 objection on this matter. SITE AND ENVIRONS

The site is located on the eastern side of Pittwater Road. The allotment is rectangular in shape and has an area of 522.7m2. The allotment is located slightly above the road alignment, however the site is level. At the rear of the site along the northern boundary alignment is an existing garage and carport. RELEVANT STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS LEP No 1 (as amended) Zone: Residential 2(a1) Conservation Area: No Foreshore Scenic Protection Area: No Listed Heritage Item: No Vicinity of Heritage Item: No Contributory Building: Yes




DEVELOPMENT CONTROL ASSESSMENT CONTROL REQUIRED/

PERMISSIBLE PROPOSED COMPLIANCE

SETBACKS North (Side) East (Rear) South (Side)

1.5m 6m 1.5m

3.65m 10.1m 1m

Yes Yes No

GARDEN AREA 50% 42.19% No NEIGHBOUR NOTIFICATION

NOTIFICATION REQUIRED Yes NUMBER NOTIFIED 5 There were no objections received in relation to the proposed development. PLANNING CONSIDERATION Section 79c of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

Section 79C of the EP& A Act 1979 lists the matters the Council shall take into consideration when determining a development application. The assessment process has taken into consideration the relevant matters as detailed below. (1)(a)(i) – the provisions of any environmental planning instrument

Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan No.1 (as amended 2-36)

The subject site is zoned Residential 2(a1) in Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan No.1, gazetted on the 10th December 1982. As such, the proposed development is permissible within the zone subject to consent.

The LEP sets out the criteria that a new development is required to comply with by law prior to the issue of development consent. The objectives of the Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan are as follows: To conserve the identity of the Municipality of Hunter's Hill, Council as established by its heritage, character, topography and residential amenity, by – (a) conserving the environmental heritage significance, the foreshore and riverscape, the townscape

quality and tree covered environment of the Municipality through regulation of the use and development of land, buildings and structures;

(b) retaining specific evidence of the thematic development of the environmental heritage of the Municipality through conservation of items of environmental heritage;

(b1) integrating heritage conservation into the planning and development control processes; (b2) providing for public involvement in the matters relating to the conservation of the area's

environmental heritage; (b3) ensuring that new development is undertaken in a manner that is sympathetic to, and does not

detract from, the heritage significance of the items and their settings, as well as streetscapes and




landscapes and the distinctive character that they impart to the land to which this plan applies; (c) increasing the area and standard of public open space in the Municipality; (d) improving public access to the shores of the Lane Cove and Parramatta Rivers; (e) providing off-street parking facilities at or near shopping centres at Boronia Park, Gladesville

and Hunters Hill; and (f) providing or assisting in the provision of public amenities and support services consistent with

the development of the area. The proposal is considered compliant with the above objectives. However, the existing dwelling does not comply with the requirements for garden area as identified in Clause 16A of the LEP. Notwithstanding this, the proposal does not alter the external façade of the building fronting Pittwater Road and would not have an impact on the heritage significance of the area. The dwellings within this vicinity are made up of a majority of contributory buildings. As defined in Local Environmental Plan No. 1 (as amended), the buildings listed in Schedule 7 contribute to the history, identity and character of the local area. The proposal complies with Clauses 2, 12, 15 and 19 of Hunters Hill LEP No. 1 (as amended). As previously discussed, the proposal does not comply with the garden area requirements as identified in Clause 16A of LEP No. 1. Clause 16A states: 16A. (1) In this clause, "garden area" means any area within an allotment of land which has

not been built on and which, in the opinion of the council, is designed, constructed or adapted for outdoor living or outdoor recreation, but does not include decks, balconies or swimming pools (other than swimming pools with a water surface area of less than 40 square metres and which don't project more than 150 mm above ground level), driveways, parking areas, drying yards or other service areas.

(2) The council shall not grant consent to the erection or use of a building on an

allotment of land within Zone No. 2(a1), 2(a2) or 2(a3) unless the allotment has a garden area equal to or greater than 50% of the area of the allotment.

(3) Notwithstanding subclause (2), the council shall not grant consent to the erection or

use of a building on an allotment of land within a zone referred to in that subclause which has a frontage to the Lane Cove River or the Parramatta Rivers unless the allotment has a garden area equal to or greater than 60% of the area of the allotment.

The non-compliance is in relation to the lack of garden area, as identified in Clause 16A(1) as detailed above. The proposal has a garden area of 42%, which is eight percent short on the overall requirements. As previously discussed, a State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 (SEPP No. 1) objection has been lodged with the application, to allow support for the application to be granted. Attached is a copy of the SEPP No. 1 document. State Environmental Planning Policy No.1 This Policy provides flexibility in the application of planning controls operating by virtue of development standards in circumstances where strict compliance with those standards would, in




any particular case, be unreasonable or unnecessary or tend to hinder the attainment of the objects specified in Section 5(a) (i) and (ii) of the Act. As identified above, SEPP No.1 allows the flexibility to determine applications that do not necessarily comply with the numerical standards of Council’s policies but may in fact comply with the objectives, as in this instance. The proposal, as previously discussed, involves the demolition and reconstruction of the rear skillion addition at the rear of the existing dwelling. The proposal requests a reduction in the garden area of the site by three percent. The buildings on site were constructed prior to the introduction of the garden area provisions. Along the northern side of the property a driveway extends to the garage at the rear. In accordance with the garden area provisions, the built upon areas, driveway and exclusion areas (widths of less than 2m), the garden area does not meet the minimum requirements. The property does not currently comply with the garden area provisions. It should be noted that the garden area provisions were adopted into Council’s planning policies after the construction and establishment of the site. It is unreasonable and unnecessary in this instance to refuse the application due to the driveway, dwelling and garage exceeding the requirements as set out in Clause 16A in LEP No.1. The applicant has increased the garden area from what was originally imposed by the removal of the roof covering over the proposed pergola. The proposal reduces the amount of garden area by the decreased setback from the site boundary. The applicant argues the following: • The reduction of garden area is to the rear of the dwelling and is not visible from the

streetscape. • The site is constrained by the location of the existing garage, which is accessed by a

driveway. The garage and driveway occupy 25.93% of the site. • The excessive driveway results in the loss of potential garden area. • If the garage were located within the building line, the proposed garden area would increase

to 56%. • The relocation of the garage is undesirable due to the adverse effect it would have on the

streetscape and the heritage value of the contributory building. • The proposed addition is of minor proportion, extending the gross floor area of the house by

10.8%. The applicant argues a number of reasons as to why the Council should use its discretion and determine the development application accordingly. The proposed addition amounts to a 15m2 reduction in garden area with the rear patio treatment being unroofed to maintain the maximum amount of garden area possible. Under the circumstances, it is considered that it is unnecessary and unreasonable to require the applicant to comply with the garden area when the proposed development would not hinder or have an impact upon the adjoining premises or on the general amenity of the residential area. The site currently does not comply with the provisions of the Local Environmental Plan No. 1 (as amended) or Development Control Plan No. 15 with regard to garden area provisions. The development would not impact on adjoining residences and will not alter the significance of the external façade of the dwelling.




It is deemed that, in light of the above, it would be unreasonable to refuse the application on the grounds of non-compliance with the garden area provisions. (1)(a)(ii) – any draft planning instrument that is or has been placed on public exhibition and details of which have been notified to the consent authority There are no draft local environmental plans of relevance to the proposed development.

(1)(a)(iii) – any development control plan

Development Control Plan No. 15 – Residential Development is the policy that applies to residential development. The purpose of the plan is to provide more detailed planning and building controls than are available in LEP No.1 (as amended). One of the functions of DCP No.15 is to establish parameters for the assessment of amenity issues such as privacy, solar access, preservation of views and car parking. The objectives as outlined in DCP No. 15 are as follows: a. Development should be compatible with the landscape character of the area. Generally, the

landscape character of Hunters Hill is encapsulated in the “tree” whether indigenous, native or exotic. Hunter’s Hill Council is committed to protecting and enhancing the area’s landscape character and natural environment.

b. Development, particularly when viewed from the street or other public place, should be compatible with the character and scale of any existing building to be retained on the site and residential development in the immediate vicinity.

c. Development, particularly when viewed from public reserves, National Parks, waterways or across valleys, should not be obtrusive in or upon the natural landscape.

d. In areas with significant stylistic/architectural associations and identity, additions and new development should be designed in sympathy with their surrounds.

The proposed development will not alter the external appearance of the building. The dwelling marries in with the existing amenity of the streetscape and does not hinder the outlook of adjoining properties. As previously discussed, the dwelling is a single storey contributory building located on the eastern side of Pittwater Road. The existing dwelling remains fairly intact from its external appearance. The dwelling has had a single storey skillion addition to the rear, however, the façade and significance have been maintained. The proposal demolishes this skillion addition and reconstructs it in a slightly larger format that ties into the external façade elements that are significant. The proposal complies with the relevant clauses of the DCP and does not impact on adjoining premises in relation to privacy and amenity. The dwelling maintains its single storey appearance. The development proposal complies with the aims and objectives of the DCP whilst maintaining the significance of the dwelling. As can be viewed from the Development Control Assessment Table, the proposal does not comply with the southern boundary side setback. This is a new portion of the building that has been located 1m from the side boundary. An inspection of this portion has disclosed that the location of the rear portion of the dwelling will not impact on the neighbouring premises. The setback is deemed acceptable due to the location of the building to the rear with the total length of the wall being 4m. In this instance, the variance to the DCP control is acceptable.




The proposal was referred to Council’s Heritage Advisor and also the Manager Public Works and Infrastructure. Council’s Heritage Advisor made the following comments: • The dwelling is a Schedule 7 item, not located within a conservation area. • The garage appears original. The house is a good example of an inter-war bungalow. • The proposal is acceptable from a heritage viewpoint. The Manager Public Works and Infrastructure made no comment in relation to the proposed development. (1)(b)(c) – the likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impacts in the locality. suitability of the site for the development.

The proposal is not considered to have any environmental, social or economic impact and, given its zoning and location, is suitable for the development proposal. (1)(d) – any submissions made in accordance with this act or the regulations

The proposed development was notified to the adjoining neighbours and no submissions were received. (1)(e) – the public interest The proposed development will not have significant impact on the neighbourhood. The proposed development is located to the rear of the existing dwelling with the majority not being visible from Pittwater Road. However, this small portion that is visible is not considered to impact on the neighbouring premises or the amenity of the streetscape. CONCLUSION Having regard to the matters for consideration under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment Act 1979, LEP No.1, DCP No.15 and Council’s Local Approvals Policy, the application is considered suitable for approval subject to conditions. FINANCIAL IMPACT

There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget or forward estimates. RECOMMENDATION

That Development Application No. 02/1134, for alterations and additions at 67 Pittwater Road, Gladesville, be approved, subject to conditions (2001 version) Nos. A1-A4, B7, B14 ($750), C1-C10, C12, C21, C24, C26, C37, C40, C41, C46, C47, C55, C61, C81, C82, C83, C84, C85, C87, C95, C96, C100, C102, D2, D21, PE1, PE6, PE21, S1, S19 and the following special condition: 45. The proposed stramit corrugated roofing over the terrace at the rear of the driveway is to be

deleted and no roof covering is to be installed to the rear terrace.




ITEM NO : 2 SUBJECT : DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION NO: 02/1091

PROPERTY: 5-9 ST MALO AVE, HUNTERS HILL APPLICANT/OWNER: TONY KRSLOVIC PROPOSAL: CONSTRUCTION OF 3 X 3 BEDROOM TOWNHOUSES AND BASEMENT PARKING APPLICATION LODGED: 20 MAY 2002

BUSINESS PROGRAM : DEVELOPMENT CONTROL REPORTING OFFICER : DANIELA BANTLE

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL OFFICER

FILE : 1641/5 DETAILS Council is in receipt of a development application to construct three townhouses accommodating three bedrooms in each dwelling, located on two floor levels above a basement car-parking level. The application does not include sub-division. The proposal constitutes low-rise attached housing and is permissible under LEP 1. The original submission did not comply with a number of Council’s controls, including height and density controls, it was considered to be out of character with the surrounding developments and had proposed intrusive lift-towers. An amended submission deleted the lift towers, reduced the height, included privacy planting to the roof decks, increased the front setback and amended the finishes and colours. Subsequently, amended plans were submitted which are the subject of this report. The amended plans generally comply with Council’s planning controls, except that the proposal does not comply with Clause 13(3) regarding the minimum site area per bedroom, for which a SEPP 1 objection has been lodged. SITE AND ENVIRONS

The subject property consists of a vacant allotment on the north side of St Malo Avenue at the entrance to the Pulpit Point area. The site has a trapezoid geometry with a frontage of 15.57m, a rear boundary of 25.42m, an eastern side boundary of 35.83m, a western side boundary of 39.02m and an area of 897 square metres. The existing streetscape is characterised by two storey dwellings over a garage at or below ground level fronting the street. The streetscape towards the east of the subject site is characterised by a highly uniform repetition of dwellings of similar height and design, apparently undertaken under previous planning controls for Pulpit Point. The proposal does not comply with LEP 1, Clause 13 in respect of the minimum site area required per bedroom. A State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 (SEPP 1) objection has been submitted and is discussed in the report.




RELEVANT STATUTORY INSTRUMENTS Zone LEP No 1 (as amended): Residential 2(b) Conservation Area: Yes Foreshore Scenic Protection Area: Yes Listed Heritage Item: No Vicinity of Heritage Item: No Contributory Building: No The proposed development is classified under the Building Code of Australia as a Class 2 (sole occupancy units) and Class 7a building (carpark component). DEVELOPMENT CONTROL ASSESSMENT CONTROL REQUIRED/

PERMISSIBLE PROPOSED COMPLIANCE

SETBACKS North (rear) East (side) South (front) West (side)

6m 1.5m* varies** 1.5m*

7.2m 1.5 mainly in line withadjoining 1.5m

Yes Yes Yes No***

GARDEN AREA 45% 45% Yes HEIGHT 7.2m

2 storeys 7.2m 2 storeys

Yes

SITE AREA 900sqm min for 9 bedrooms

897 sqm No – See SEPP 1 objection

PRIVATE OPEN SPACE 40sqm, incl 20sqm(min 4m) offliving room

57sqm Yes

CAR PARKING SPACE 2/dwelling >125sqm 1 visitor

6 1

Yes Yes

* Max. one third of max. wall height but not closer than 1.5m **The front setback is to be determined in relation to those of the adjoining development, allotment dimensions and character of the street. *** Does not comply with the min. one third of max. wall height requirement (should be 2.2m approx for wall height), however meets the objectives of the setback controls. NEIGHBOUR NOTIFICATION

The original plans were notified and 4 submissions were received. The application was subsequently amended and re-notified. Below is a summary of the submissions in response to the amended application. NOTIFICATION REQUIRED Yes NUMBER NOTIFIED 7 NAME AND ADDRESS OF RESPONDENTS ISSUES OF CONCERN TO

RESPONDENTS




David Dewiar 3 Francis Street

• Writes that he has no longer any objection

Steven Wang 3 St Malo Avenue

• Too much traffic, risk for people • Should be one family per site,

not three • Should only be one family home

to preserve unique street view Nicholas Varnai 23 Le Vesinet Drive

• No objection, however wishes information regarding maximum number of residences permissible on Pulpit Point Estate.

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING POLICY NO.1 (SEPP 1) OBJECTION Minimum Site Area Per Bedroom The proposal does not comply with Clauses 13 of Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan No. 1 (HHLEP) in terms of the required minimum site area per bedroom. The applicant has submitted a SEPP No.1 Objection (attachment A) to address the non-compliance. In considering a SEPP 1 Objection, 5 questions need to be answered (Winton Property Group Limited v North Sydney Council [2001] NSWLEC 46): “First, is the planning control in question a development standard? Second, what is the underlying object or purpose of the standard? Third, is compliance with the development standard consistent with the aims of the Policy, and in particular with the objects specified in section 5(a) (i) and (ii) of the EP&A Act? Fourth, is compliance with the development standard unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case? Fifth, is the objection well founded?” The particular development standard that is breached is Clause 13(3) of LEP 1, relating to minimum required site area per bedroom. The subject site area is 897 square metres but 3 x 3-bedroom dwellings (9 bedrooms total) are proposed requiring 900 square metres site area. Clause 13(3) states, inter alia:

The council shall not consent to the erection of a building to be, or the use of a building as, a residential flat building or low rise multi-unit housing, on land within a zone specified in Column 1 of the table to this clause, unless the site area on which the building is to be erected or used is not less than the area calculated by multiplying the number of bedrooms in the building by the areas specified for that zone in Column II of the table. Column I Column II Column III Zone no Minimum site areas per

bedroom (in square metres) Minimum proportion of site areas used as garden area

2(b) 100 45% The SEPP 1 Objection argues that strict compliance with the subject development standard would effectively hinder the attainment of the objects specified in Section 5(a) (i) and (ii) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment (EP&A) Act 1979, which are:




5(a) To encourage: (i) The proper management, development and conservation of natural and artificial

resources, including agricultural land, natural areas, forests, minerals, water, cities, towns and villages for the purpose of promoting the social and economic welfare of the community and a better environment;

(ii) The promotion and co-ordination of the orderly and economic use and development of the land.

The SEPP 1 Objection argues that “Strict compliance with the subject development standard would effectively hinder this objective [a)(ii)], because the proposed development would be required to reduce the number of bedrooms by one to satisfy a numeric requirement that would achieve nothing in terms of bulk, scale, height or appearance of the building. It is argued that the proposed development will provide much needed three bedroom accommodation in a sought after area of Hunters Hill. The SEPP 1 Objection also argues that strict compliance would hinder the attainment of objective 5(a)(ii) because: “It would effectively require that the building not be developed to it full potential, while not providing any gain to the public interest by the deletion of one bedroom. Such a requirement would be neither orderly nor economic.” The SEPP 1 Objection then goes on to demonstrate that the proposal satisfies the planning objectives of the standard. The proposal complies with the specific numeric controls of LEP 1 and DCP 15, including the minimum 45% garden area and height controls. The applicant’s SEPP 1 Objection’s main arguments are: • There will be no public perception that Council’s planning controls are being ignored, or not

enforced, as the scale, bulk, height and appearance of the building will not be altered by the deletion of one bedroom. The change will not be recognisable from either street, and will have no benefit for neighbours.

• The proposed change to the number of bedrooms within the building will not enhance the aesthetic value of the site or benefit the residents of the locality.

• The additional bedroom will increase the residential amenity of the development. • The numeric departure from the standard is of such small number as to be inconsequential.

The site area is 897m2, a shortfall of 3.0m2, or 0.33%. It is recommended that the SEPP 1 Objection be supported, as the objection is well founded, demonstrates that the proposal meets the objectives of the planning standard breached and strict compliance would in this particular case be unreasonable and unnecessary. It is then necessary to assess the proposal as to its merit. RESPONSE TO NEIGHBOUR OBJECTION The only objection received in response to the amended application refers to traffic generation and number and type of dwellings proposed. The proposal is in accordance with the planning provisions, which permit low-rise attached housing. It is considered that the traffic impact of such development would have been anticipated with the zoning of the site and the impact is acceptable. The proposed type of dwelling (townhouses) is in accordance with the planning provisions and is acceptable. The proposed dwellings are designed to appear like one detached family home and are in sympathy with




the surrounding developments. The proposed three townhouses are designed in accordance with the relevant planning controls and the number of dwellings proposed is considered appropriate. In response to the submission requesting information on the maximum number of dwellings permitted in the Pulpit Point Estate, a letter of reply was sent stating that “The proposed development application is not contrary to any original development approval. A consent may be modified by a further consent.”. PLANNING CONSIDERATION Section79C of the environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

Section 79C of the EP& A Act 1979 lists the matters the Council shall take into consideration when determining a development application. The assessment process has taken into consideration the relevant matters as detailed below. (1)(a)(i) – the provisions of any environmental planning instrument

Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan No.1 (as amended 2-36)

The subject site is zoned Residential 2(b) in Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan No.1, gazetted on the 10th December 1982. As such, the proposed development is permissible within the zone subject to consent.

The LEP sets out the criteria that a new development is required to comply with. The objectives of the Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan are as follows: To conserve the identity of the Municipality of Hunter's Hill, Council as established by its heritage, character, topography and residential amenity, by – (a) conserving the environmental heritage significance, the foreshore and riverscape, the townscape

quality and tree covered environment of the Municipality through regulation of the use and development of land, buildings and structures;

(b) retaining specific evidence of the thematic development of the environmental heritage of the Municipality through conservation of items of environmental heritage;

(b1) integrating heritage conservation into the planning and development control processes; (b2) providing for public involvement in the matters relating to the conservation of the area's

environmental heritage; (b3) ensuring that new development is undertaken in a manner that is sympathetic to, and does not

detract from, the heritage significance of the items and their settings, as well as streetscapes and landscapes and the distinctive character that they impart to the land to which this plan applies;

(c) increasing the area and standard of public open space in the Municipality; (d) improving public access to the shores of the Lane Cove and Parramatta Rivers; (e) providing off-street parking facilities at or near shopping centres at Boronia Park, Gladesville

and Hunters Hill; and (f) providing or assisting in the provision of public amenities and support services consistent with

the development of the area. The proposed development meets the objectives of the LEP, although it does not comply with the specific provision of Clause 13 of the LEP relating to minimum site area per bedroom. A SEPP 1 objection has been submitted and is recommended to be supported. The development is considered a




positive contribution to the local area, is sympathetic to the amenity of the neighbouring properties and the streetscape, and does not adversely impact on the Conservation Area or the Foreshore Scenic Protection Area. (1)(a)(ii) – any draft planning instrument that is or has been placed on public exhibition and details of which have been notified to the consent authority There are no draft local environmental plans of relevance to the proposed development.

(1)(a)(iii) – any development control plan

Development Control Plan No. 15 – Residential Development is the policy that applies to residential development. The purpose of the plan is to provide more detailed planning and building controls than are available in LEP No.1 (as amended). One of the functions of DCP No.15 is to establish parameters for the assessment of amenity issues such as privacy, solar access, preservation of views and car parking. The objectives as outlined in DCP No. 15 are as follows: a. Development should be compatible with the landscape character of the area. Generally, the

landscape character of Hunters Hill is encapsulated in the “tree” whether indigenous, native or exotic. Hunter’s Hill Council is committed to protecting and enhancing the area’s landscape character and natural environment.

b. Development, particularly when viewed from the street or other public place, should be compatible with the character and scale of any existing building to be retained on the site and residential development in the immediate vicinity.

c. Development, particularly when viewed from public reserves, National Parks, waterways or across valleys, should not be obtrusive in or upon the natural landscape.

e. In areas with significant stylistic/architectural associations and identity, additions and new development should be designed in sympathy with their surrounds.

The applicant has consulted extensively with Council’s staff and modified the application to achieve an acceptable built form. From the original submission, the height has been reduced, proposed lift towers deleted, the front setback increased, the impact on privacy from the roof top garden has been improved and the finishes and colours have been amended to be more recessive and sympathetic to the character of Hunter's Hill. The proposed development is compatible with the landscape character of the area and, in particular, the context of Pulpit Point, the proposal is compatible with the character and scale of the residential development in the immediate vicinity, the proposal does not affect any views and does not impact on the privacy of the adjoining properties. (1)(b)(c) – the likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impacts in the locality. suitability of the site for the development.

The proposed development does not cause any undue overshadowing of adjoining properties, no views are affected and the proposal provides adequate car parking. Within the Pulpit Point Estate visual catchment, the proposed basement parking arrangement is acceptable. There is a minor non-compliance with the side setback, as the proposal does not comply with the requirement that the setback be a minimum one third of the maximum wall height. The setback of the




building to the western boundary should be 2.2m approximately, instead of the 1.58m proposed, however the proposed setback is for a 8 metre long feature wall, which does not contain any windows overlooking the side boundary but conceals windows to the front and rear which improves the privacy. The reduced setback does not overshadow or impact on the amenity of the adjacent property and meets the objectives of the setback controls. The rear yards of the proposed development do not meet the DCP’s requirement for access to sunlight. This is due to the site-specific impediment of the cliff adjoining the rear boundary that causes overshadowing. The proposal achieves the objectives of the controls by providing roof top terraces, which will have access to sunlight. Environmental impacts have been discussed above. No significant social or economic impact is expected. Council’s landscape consultant reviewed the proposed landscape plan and recommended some changes, which have been included in the proposed conditions of consent. (1) (d) – any submissions made in accordance with this act or the regulations

The proposed development was notified to the adjoining neighbours. The submissions are discussed above. (1)(e) – the public interest No adverse impact on the public interest is expected. FINANCIAL IMPACT

There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget or forward estimates. RECOMMENDATION

Having regard to the matters for consideration under Section 79c of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Amendment Act 1979, LEP No.1, DCP No.15 and Council’s Local Approvals Policy, it is recommended that Development Application No. 02/1091, for the construction of three x three-bedroom townhouses at 5-9 St Malo Avenue, Hunters Hill, is approved subject to standard conditions (2001 version) Nos. A1-A4, B1, B2, B14 ($9,800), C1-C10, C12, C15, C18, C21, C22, C27, C28-C37, C40-C44, C46-C49, C58-C66, C8-C85, C87-C89, C90 (a, b, c, d, e, f, g, h, I, l, m, p, q), C94, C95, C96-C100 (Architex, sheet 2-4 rev C, sheet 5 rev D, sheet 8 rev B, 21/11/02, Stormwater Drainage Layout drawing 2002/01/A dated 8/8/02 prepared by Genesis Solutions, and schedule of finishes dated 27 Nov 02, drawing no 0177/1), PE1, PE2, PE7, PE8, PE15, PE17, PE21, S1, S11 (45%), S15 [a($1200), c($1395), d($330), e($18), f($375), I($6)] and the following special conditions: 77. A Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be obtained.

Application must be made though 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 13 20 92.

Following application, a “Notice of Requirements” will detail water and sewer extensions to be built and 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 landscape design. The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to occupation of the development. The notice must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the Construction Certificate being issued.

78. To ensure compliance with the Building Code of Australia (BCA), the construction of walls separating units and the construction of the floor separating units from the car park and stairway in the basement shall have a weighted sound reduction index in accordance with specification F2 of the BCA. A Compliance Certificate, outlining the proposed construction and certifying that the documentation complies with the BCA requirements, shall be issued by a suitably qualified person to the Principal Certifying Authority with the application for a Construction Certificate. A Compliance Certificate issued by a suitably qualified person, certifying that the as-built construction complies with the above documentation and meets the BCA requirements, shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issuing an Occupation Certificate.

79. To ensure adequate fire safety, walls separating units and floors separating units from the

garage/ staircase are to be constructed in accordance with the requirements of Clause C1.1 and specification C1.1 of the BCA. A Compliance Certificate, outlining the proposed construction and certifying that the documentation complies with the BCA requirements, shall be issued by a suitably qualified person to the Principal Certifying Authority with the application for a Construction Certificate. A Compliance Certificate issued by a suitably qualified person, certifying that the as-built construction complies with the above documentation and meets the BCA requirements, shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issuing a Occupation Certificate.

80. To safeguard occupants from illness or injuries while evacuating in an emergency, provisions

for escape and construction of exits shall comply with the BCA, Section D – Access and Egress. A Compliance Certificate, documenting proposed escapes and construction of exits and certifying that the documentation complies with the BCA requirements, shall be issued by a suitably qualified person to the Principal Certifying Authority with the application for a Construction Certificate. A Compliance Certificate issued by a suitably qualified person, certifying that the escapes and exits have been constructed in compliance with the above documentation and meet the BCA requirements, shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issuing a Occupation Certificate.

81. The landscape plan Dwg No. 6 Rev A is to be revised to make the following amendments and

submitted with the application for a Construction Certificate:

• Substitute Box Elder (Acer negundo) for a deciduous species, which will not set seed freely in the nearby bushlands as requested in the previous landscape report of 28-07-02. Some of the smaller ornamental Pear species are suggested e.g. Callery Pear, (Pyrus calleryana).

• The planting centres of the Dwarf Lilly Pilly are considered to be too far apart to effect

a screen hedge between the three courtyard gardens. Therefore, substitute Syzigium paniculatum with Syzigium “Southern Form” or a ‘variety’ of a similar size and form and plant at 800mm centres in a staggered row.




• 8# Viola heracea to cover an area of 10m2 along the western boundary is considered to

be too low. This plant species should be planted at approximately 400mm centres to effect a successful ground cover, particularly when used as an understorey plant to Dwarf Lilly Pilly. Numbers in other areas with this plant species may be adjusted accordingly.

82. Stormwater Drainage is to be implemented in accordance with drawing 2002/01/A dated

8/8/02 prepared by Genesis Solutions P/L. The applicant is responsible to make the connection into Council’s pit at the applicant’s cost and under Council’s supervision, including any alterations to services.

83. A paving brick footpath of a similar colour and size to that provided by the developers of

Nos. 11 to 23 St. Malo Avenue is to be constructed along the nature strip at the frontage, under Council supervision.

(refer DA 735/89, Condition 27).

84. A bond or bank guarantee of $5,000 is to be lodged against protection of sandstone kerbing by development activity, and protection of other Council drainage and roadway infrastructure including street trees.

85. Sediment and erosion control measures are to be adopted during construction to prevent

building materials and loose soil entering Council’s stormwater system, natural watercourses and bushland.

86. An Erosion Sediment Control Plan (ESCP) and Stormwater Management Plan shall be prepared in accordance with the NSW Department of Housing publication “Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction” and submitted to Council for approval prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. (Reason: legal requirement, sediment and erosion control).

87. A longitudinal section of the driveway drawn at 1:20 natural scale shall be prepared and designed using Council’s standard vehicle profile and submitted to Council prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. The section will show the vehicle path from the centre of the road through the layback/dishdrain to the proposed garage, carport and parking place. (Reason: Public access)

88. All service adjustments, if required, will be at the applicant's expense. (Reason: Public access).

89. Appropriate grated box drains of minimum width 225 mm are to be constructed to prevent internal runoff from crossing Council's footpath. The box drains are to be connected to the internal stormwater disposal system.

90. The trimming, topsoiling and turfing of the nature strip in St. Malo Avenue is to be

undertaken. (Reason: public amenity).

91. The colour schedule shall be amended to change the proposed colour ‘Mojave’ for the blade

wall and column balcony framing to be a darker tone. The approved material palette consisting of a sandstone basement and garden walls and recessive neutral colours as specified in the




approved schedule of finishes is an essential part of this application to ensure the development’s compatibility with the Foreshore Scenic Protection Area, and shall not be varied.




ITEM NO : 3 SUBJECT : PROGRESS REPORT ON THE EXEMPTION FROM

STATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING POLICY (SEPP) NO. 5 – HOUSING FOR OLDER PEOPLE AND PEOPLE WITH DISABILITY

BUSINESS PROGRAM : FORWARD PLANNING - DEVELOPMENT CONTROL -

HOUSING FOR AGED AND DISABLED REPORTING OFFICER : STEVE KOUREPIS


FILE : 770/38 INTRODUCTION

State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) No. 5 – Housing for Older People and People with Disability was gazetted on 1 December 2002 following a major review. SEPP 5 was originally introduced in 1982 and required certain facilities and services to be available to residents.

The major change to the policy was to encourage smaller developments in existing areas, such as infill housing, recognising that many older people and people with disabilities, who are in need of occasional support services, prefer to live in their existing communities rather than in special housing.

Other changes in 2000 where the introduction of stronger adaptable housing provisions, clarification of the meaning of reasonable access to community facilities and services, provisions to achieve better design, allowance for Council’s levies for Section 94 contributions and the exemption of high risk areas.

Planning NSW subsequently advised that guidelines would be prepared to enable Council to seek an exemption from the state policy. The guidelines have now been released.

COUNCIL’S POSITION

On 8 April 2002, Council considered a report by the Manger Development and Environment on possible exemption of Hunters Hill from State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) No. 5 – Housing for Older People and People with a Disability, where it was resolved as follows:

1. Council, as a matter of policy, encourages the provisions of aged persons and disabled persons housing within the municipality in the form of infill housing.

2. Council commissions a report to seek an exemption from the State Policy with the primary view

of better addressing the built form controls, deemed more consistent with Council’s current planning polices.




In light of Council’s resolution above, this report is only to inform you of the progress to date of preparing Council’s submission for exception. A preliminary statistical analysis report has been prepared by Council’s Community Liaison Officer, which is attached. It is this report that will form part of the basis of Council’s exemption submission.

PLANNING COMMENTS – PROGRESS TO DATE

Following an initial review of the attached document, under the heading of Hunters Hill Estimated Demands for Independent Living, the table reveals that it is estimated that approximately 765 people will be seeking more manageable forms of housing by the year 2020. Therefore, this estimate will form part of the criteria in formulating a request for exemption from SEPP 5.

With this detailed information, the next stage to the preparation of the exemption report will be primarily to investigate where suitable locations of such housing types could be achieved ensuring that the existing planning controls are respected, with regard to the built form controls, and that the existing character of the area is not impacted upon.

EXEMPTION PROCESS

The process for exemption is for Council to submit a report to the Director General that demonstrates that sufficient choice of housing will exist to meet the needs of older people or people with a disability over 10-15 year period.

Subsequently, attention is required to be given to the provisions of low-income groups, which is a new and previously irrelevant matter for consideration and one on which the actual legislation is silent. This appears to be consistent with the approach of the NSW government to enforce social responsibilities for public housing from State government to the private sector.

The final decision rests with the Minister for Planning and the exemption is subject to regular monitoring. The exemption will be granted where it can be demonstrated that sufficient choice can be provided under either existing controls or through changes to controls together with an implementation program and timetable. The report should also cover supply and demand issues accordingly.

FINANCIAL IMPACT Whilst most of the supporting demographic information can be completed in-house by Council’s Community Liaison Officer, it is considered that some external assistance will be required. In this regard, it is estimated that pursuing the submission would cost in the order of $3,000.00. RECOMMENDATION That Council receives and notes the attached preliminary statistical analysis report prepared by Council’s Community Liaison Officer, which will form part of the supporting information that will be the basis of Council’s exemption submission.




ITEM NO : 4 SUBJECT : LEGAL MATTERS BUSINESS PROGRAM : DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENT REPORTING OFFICER : STEVE KOUREPIS


FILE : 505/01 APPEALS

Status reports in relation to recent or pending appeals are attached.

FINANCIAL IMPACT

There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget or forward estimates.

RECOMMENDATION

That the report be received and noted.




ITEM NO : 5 SUBJECT : DELEGATED AUTHORITY BUSINESS PROGRAM : DEVELOPMENT CONTROL REPORTING OFFICER : JOE VESCIO


FILE : 200/10

Development Application No. 01/1032 (A) Zone 2(a3) Construction Certificate No. N/A Notification No objection Applicant David & Robin Carr Value N/a Premises 30 Ferry Street, Hunters Hill Garden Area 58% Classification (BCA) Class 1a, 10a Date Lodged 4/10/2002 Assessing Officer Daniela Bantle Determination Date 18/11/2002 Proposal Change of roof material from corrugated iron to slate Determination Approved subject to conditions

Development Application No. 02/1196 Zone 2(a1) Construction Certificate No. 02/7146 Notification No objection Applicant Andrew McMaster Value $30,000 Premises 15 Augustine Street, Hunters Hill Garden Area 50% Classification (BCA) Class 1a, 10b Date Lodged 08/10/2002 Assessing Officer Katrena Fuller Determination Date 25/11/2002 Proposal Alterations & additions Determination Approved subject to conditions

Development Application No. 02/1160 Zone 2(a2) Construction Certificate No. N/A Notification No objection Applicant Turning Properties Pty Ltd Value $40,000.00 Premises 11A Toocooya Road, Hunters Hill Garden Area Approx 52% Classification (BCA) Class 1 Date Lodged 07/08/2002 Assessing Officer Steve Kourepis Determination Date 25/11/2002 Proposal Garage and atrium Determination Refused

Development Application No. 02/1201 Zone 2(a1) Construction Certificate No. N/A Notification No objection Applicant Paul & Anne McBurnie Value $150,000 Premises 17 Makinson Street, Gladesville Garden Area 50% Classification (BCA) Class 1a Date Lodged 18/10/2002 Assessing Officer Katrena Fuller Determination Date 25/11/2002 Proposal Alterations and additions Determination Approved subject to conditions




Development Application No. 02/1146 Zone 2(a2) Construction Certificate No. N/A Notification No objection Applicant Patricia Grace Value $300,000 Premises 54 Woolwich Road, Hunters Hill Garden Area >50% Classification (BCA) Class 1A Date Lodged 18/07/2002 Assessing Officer Joe Vescio Determination Date 21/11/2002 Proposal Alterations and additions Determination Approved

Development Application No. 02/1157A Zone 2(a2) Construction Certificate No. N/A Notification N/A Applicant Dianne & Geoffrey Stacey Value $130,000 Premises 18 Nelson Parade, Hunters Hill Garden Area N/A Classification (BCA) Class 1a, 10a Date Lodged 10/10/2002 Assessing Officer Joe Vescio Determination Date 27/11/2002 Proposal S96 – modification to approved additions Determination Approved

Development Application No. 01/1090C Zone 2(a2) Construction Certificate No. No Application Notification N/A Applicant X Pace Design Group Value N/A Premises 1 Ferry Street, Hunters Hill Garden Area N/A Classification (BCA) Class 1a Date Lodged 11/11/2002 Assessing Officer Joe Vescio Determination Date 26/11/2002 Proposal New dwelling house – Section 96 Determination Approved subject to original conditions

Development Application No. 02/1191 Zone 2(a1) Construction Certificate No. 02/7142 Notification No objection Applicant Derek & Jackie Low Value $22,300 Premises 4 Auburn Street, Hunters Hill Garden Area 56% Classification (BCA) Class 10b Date Lodged 27/09/2002 Assessing Officer Katrena Fuller Determination Date 22/11/2002 Proposal Fibre glass swimming pool Determination Approved subject to conditions

Development Application No. 02/1194 Zone 2(a2) Construction Certificate No. N/A Notification No objection Applicant Julius Boker Architects -

Brad Inwood Value $30,000

Premises 78 Alexandra Street, Hunters Hill Garden Area 69% Classification (BCA) Class 10a and 10b Date Lodged 04/10/2002 Assessing Officer Katrena Fuller Determination Date 22/11/2002 Proposal Work shed and in-ground swimming pool Determination Approved subject to conditions




FINANCIAL IMPACT


RECOMMENDATION


E

Public Works & Infrastructure

E – Public Works & Infrastructure


Index 1. Boronia Park Plan of Management 1 2. Tenders for Design, Supply, Installation and Maintenance of Bus Shelter (Advertising Shelters) 3 3. Tree Preservation Order – Approvals 5

.................................... Don Cottee

MANAGER PUBLIC WORKS & INFRASTRUCTURE

REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS & INFRASTRUCTURE

Meeting 4139 – 9th December, 2002 E1


ITEM NO : 1 SUBJECT : BORONIA PARK PLAN OF MANAGEMENT BUSINESS PROGRAM : RECREATION AND PARKS: RESERVES

MANAGEMENT - PLAN OF MANAGEMENT REPORTING OFFICER : DON COTTEE

MANAGER PUBLIC WORKS & INFASTRUCTURE FILE : 615/11 BACKGROUND

A report on the draft Boronia Park Plan of Management was considered by Council on 25th November, 2002 when it was resolved that the following additional information be provided:

1. inclusion of the correct timelines in Section 5.2 – Management Strategy;

2. clarification of the location of the proposed community center, which is shown differently on page 32 and the map attached to the plan;

3. more accurate delineation of the skateboard facility, car park and netball courts on Figure 5;

4. details of the location of additional signage identifying off-leash areas.

Amendments have been made to the drawings and tables.

PLANNING FOR FUTURE NEEDS The reference to the skateboard facility has been altered to youth facility. Council will be conducting a new youth survey and the flexibility to adequately provide for a future identified need is essential. Any proposal is subject to development consent. It is possible to provide for four netball courts. The amended drawings show the location of dog regulatory signage. The wording of the signs may vary according to need. For Risk Management purposes, it is necessary to provide suitable and adequate signage for all operating needs in the reserve. The details cannot be shown on the drawings. It is to be noted that no submission have been received on the provision of a community centre or an associated sponsorship for it’s construction. HISTORY OF THE DEVELOPMENT OF THE PLAN




A report was submitted to the meeting of the General Purpose Committee of Council on 3rd December 2001 (workshop session) with residents, interested groups and the consultant, Storm Consulting. Committee Resolution The Committee resolved, on the motion of Clr. Hoopmann, seconded by Clr Kapel, that an area be delineated as an off-lead area in the northern part of Boronia Park comprising part of the area between the remnant bushland on the east and Park Road on the west.

Dogs are allowed on-lead in all parts of the reserve except (see map): • Ovals 1, 2 and 3. • Nature area north of Princes Street. • Foreshores to the north of Princes Street to High Street. • Within 10 metres of playgrounds. The future community facility options would be canvassed on the appropriate location although the location south of the grandstand is favoured on an area designated as community land.

The site for the skateboard facility is to be located to the south of the existing grandstand on land that is designated as community land.

Cycleways

1. Implementation as per Bike Plan.

2. Implementation of proposals in submission by Bike North.

A series of workshops was conducted with key stakeholders during March 2002. These meetings were facilitated by Tina Spiegal. Representatives were invited to attend one of three workshops covering sport and recreation, dog exercise area and environment and a combined meeting of the groups was held to finalise recommendations. A revised draft plan of management was placed on exhibition recently and all residents who attended the workshops and made earlier submissions were advised of alterations to the document and of the exhibition period and timetable leading to final adoption. A copy of the final plan is provided separately for the reference of Councillors. FINANCIAL IMPACT The implementation of the plan is limited to the program funding as detailed in the Strategic Management Plan. RECOMMENDATION That the Plan of Management for Boronia Park Reserve be adopted.




ITEM NO : 2 SUBJECT : TENDERS FOR DESIGN, SUPPLY, INSTALLATION

AND MAINTENANCE OF BUS SHELTERS (ADVERTISING SHELTERS)

BUSINESS PROGRAM : ASSEST MANAGEMENT – BUS SHELTERS REPORTING OFFICER : DON COTTEE

MANAGER PUBLIC WORKS & INFASTRUCTURE FILE : 630/01 PURPOSE OF THE REPORT

Income from advertising on bus shelters has been adopted by Council in the 2002/2003 Strategic Management Plan. Tenders have been called for the design, supply, installation and maintenance of advertising bus shelters. A detailed specification was prepared covering all aspects of the process. The specification covers control on advertising content. Three tenders have been received. THE TENDERS The three tenders are:

1. J C Decaux – Offering three designs.

2. Anemone Blue– Offering one design.

3. ADSHEL – Offering three designs (other options available).

THE SITING OF THE SHELTERS

As discussed during the Management Plan process, the siting of shelters has been limited to the arterial road system with locations of Victoria Road, Ryde Road, Gladesville Road, Pittwater Road and Burns Bay Road and generally within or near commercial areas.

The Tender is on the basis of providing shelters at twenty two sites. The location of the proposed shelters is detailed in the schedule below.




SCHEDULE OF SHELTERS

Pittwater Road:

• Boronia Park Primary School

• Ryde Road junction

• Outside Medical Centre (35 Pittwater Road)

• Bus stop (outside 3 & 3A Pittwater Road)

Gladesville Road:

• Outside Hotel

Burns Bay Road:

• Ramp to Hunters Hill (North bound)

• Ramp from Lane Cove (South bound) Ryde Road:

• 10 Ryde Road (Site of Adshel trial shelter)

• 53 Ryde Road

• Near intersection of Gladesville Road (Both sides) Victoria Road:

• Riverside Girls High (Both sides)

• Crown Street (Both sides)

• Mid Block Salter Street/Crown Street (Both sides)

• Salter Street (Both sides)

• 109 Victoria Road (Both sides)

• 137 Victoria Road

FINANCIAL IMPACT The 2002/2003 budget included income from bus shelters advertising of $25,000 per annum. The acceptance of the tenders would provide an income stream in excess of $150,000 per annum which is well above the estimates and would minimise costs associated with the provision of shelters. RECOMMENDATION 1. That Council enter into a contract with J C Decaux for the provision of advertising bus shelters.

2. That the Mayor and General Manager execute any necessary documentation or contracts and affix the Seal of Council.




ITEM NO : 3 SUBJECT : TREE PRESERVATION ORDER - APPROVALS BUSINESS PROGRAM : RECREATION AND PARKS – ENVIRONMENT

MANAGEMENT – URBAN AMENITY REPORTING OFFICER DON COTTEE

MANAGER PUBLIC WORKS & INFRASTRUCTURE

FILE 785/03

APPLICANT DATE RECEIVED WORK REQUESTED & REASON GIVEN

Mr and Mrs Lessi 48A Woolwich Road Woolwich (1760/48A)

24 October 2002 1 x Brushbox (located front driveway): - Application for removal approved. APPROVED: - Council Meeting, 25 November, 2002.

Mr Max Smith 12 Aston Street Hunters Hill (1045/12)

29 October 2002 9 x Evergreen Alder (located down side of driveway): - Inappropriate species for this location because of proximity to concrete driveway and dwelling next door. This species will grow too large and cause structural damage. Application for removal approved. 1 x Eucalyptus Scoparia (located back garden): - Tree is in decline with extensive deadwood and reduced crown. Application for removal approved. 1 x Eucalyptus Nicolli (located back garden): - Overmature specimen. This species is not long- lived in Sydney. Application for removal approved. 1 x Eucalyptus (located in front garden): - Tree has bracket fungus. Extensive decay in trunk. Tree is now unsafe. Application for removal approved. APPROVED: - 19 November, 2002. Note: Site is being re-landscaped with new trees and other plantings.




Mr Rodger Tuckwell 17/10 Mount Street Hunters Hill (1515/10)

6 November 2002 1 x Cocos Palm (located adjacent to driveway): - Application for removal is approved. 1 x Banksia (located adjacent to driveway): - Smaller specimen restricting access to carport. Site has adequate tree cover. Application for removal is approved. APPROVED: - 25 November, 2002.

Ms Evelyn Kelly 7 Ryde Road Hunters Hill (1635/7)

8 November 2002 1 x Cocos Palm (located adjacent to house): - Application for removal is approved. APPROVED: - 25 November, 2002.

Mr Peter Davidson 13 Sunnyside Street Gladesville (1670/13)

12 November 2002 1 x Cedrus (located adjacent to dwelling): - Application for removal is approved. APPROVED: - Council Meeting, 25 November, 2002.

FINANICAL IMPACT There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget or forward estimates. RECOMMENDATION That the report be received and noted.

G

Customer & Community Services

G – Customer & Community Services


Index 1. Community Service Grants 2002/2003 1

.................................... Margaret Kelly

COMMUNITY LIAISON OFFICER

REPORT OF CUSTOMER & COMMUNITY SERVICES

Meeting 4139 – 9th December 2002 G1


ITEM NO : 1 SUBJECT : COMMUNITY SERVICE GRANTS 2002/03 BUSINESS PROGRAM : COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT REPORTING OFFICER : MARGARET KELLY FILE : 200/13 Council has set aside $6,000 in this year’s budget for grants to community organisations. The purpose of the grants is to provide some financial assistance to the range of organisations providing community, cultural and welfare services in the area. Sporting organisations have not been included.

Council has received twenty seven applications this year.

Guidelines for the community grants remain the same as last year, that is:

1. Applicants must be a constituted non-profit community organisation providing a community service to residents of the Hunters Hill Local Government Area.

2. A maximum grant of $500 is available under the Community Service Grants Scheme.

3. Applications are to be submitted on the standard form and must outline the specific purpose of the grant.

4. Organisations receiving a grant from Council must provide a brief written report to Council at the end of the financial year outlining the use of the grant, together with a copy of an audited financial report showing how the monies were spent.

At its meeting of 23rd September 2002, Council resolved that a subcommittee comprising Councillors Lucas, Astridge, Quinn and Kapel meet to review the grant applications and provide recommendations to Council on the grants to be awarded. The subcommittee has met and the table below details their recommendations to Council.

Group Service Type Project Name Recommended

Grant

1st Boronia Scouts Scouts Kitchen renovation $100

Villa Maria Playgroup Playgroup Equipment for playgroup $150

Hunters Hill Senior Support Group

Community newsletter to all households

Community newsletter - Kooraequlla $400

Gladesville Learning for Leisure

Recreational activities for older people Gentle exercise classes $150

The Children's Montessori Society Preschool Compost and recycling $100




Group Service Type Project Name Recommended

Grant Citizen Advocacy Ryde-Hunters Hill Inc.

Advocacy service for people with disabilities A Book of Stories $200

Bennelong & Surrounds Residents for Reconcilliation Aboriginal reconciliation

Commemorative marker on grave of Lucy Willerri $250

Figtree Playgroup Playgroup Storage sheds $500Aunties & Uncles Co-operative Family Project Ltd.

Provides a volunteer "adopted" extended family

Information stall at Gladesville Library $100

Riverside Girls High School P & C School Retaining wall $0Lifestart Cooperative Ltd

Early intervention for children with disabilities Purchase of trampoline $250

1st Hunters Hill Scout Group Scouts Repairs to boatshed $150Hunters Hill Croquet Club Inc. Croquet club

Improvement to pathway and seating area. $200

Hunters Hill Respite Care Centre

Respite care for frail aged Replacement of cook top $300

Moocooboola Computer Club for Seniors Inc.

Computer training for seniors Upgrade of equipment $350

Riverside Preschool Preschool Special needs support $0Hunters Hill Historical Society Historical society

Management of documents in museum archives $300

The Coffee Club-Carers of Children with Disabilities

Support for carers of children with disabilities The Coffee Club $300

Ryde-Hunters Hill Life Education Centre

Primary school drug education

Supply of printed educational material $100

Ryde-Hunters Hill Community Transport Community transport Volunteers’ first aid training $350Hunters Hill Probus Club Seniors group Commemorative plaque $50Royal Volunteer Coastal Patrol - Sydney Division Harbour rescue service Purchase of life lines $0Gladesville Community Aid Community service Computer data transfer. $500Blandville Court Tenants Group

Tenant group (Dept of Housing) Meeting area $300

Combined Pensioners Association Seniors group Outings at a reduced cost $150Rotary Youth Driver Awareness Youth service U-Turn the Wheel Program $500

BIRDS Brain injury rehabilitation service Equipment $250




FINANCIAL IMPACT

An amount of $6,000 has been allocated in the 2002/03 budget for grants to community organisations. To date, no funds have been expended in respect of this matter.

RECOMMENDATION

That Council provides grants/donations to the community groups as recommended in the above table.

H

General Manager

H – General Manager


Index 1. Report on Outstanding Matters 1 2. Cowell Street Development – Economic and Financial Analysis 2 3. Cowell Street Development – Joint Venture Agreement 4 4. Public Liability and Professional Indemnity Insurance 9

............................. Barry Smith

GENERAL MANAGER

REPORT OF GENERAL MANAGER Meeting 4139 – 9th December, 2002 H1


ITEM NO : 1 SUBJECT : REPORT ON OUTSTANDING MATTERS BUSINESS PROGRAM : MANAGEMENT & COUNCIL SUPPORT REPORTING OFFICER : BARRY SMITH FILE : 210/01 Attached is the updated Monthly Report on Outstanding Matters, which lists all items considered by Council to warrant provision of a further report or for which it is considered appropriate to provide further information to Council.

FINANCIAL IMPACT

There is no direct financial impact as a result of consideration of this report.

RECOMMENDATION


SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT OF GENERAL MANAGER

Meeting 4139 – 9th December, 2002 H2


ITEM NO : 2 SUBJECT : COWELL STREET DEVELOPMENT - ECONOMIC AND

FINANCIAL ANALYSIS BUSINESS PROGRAM : ASSET MANAGEMENT REPORTING OFFICER : BARRY SMITH FILE : 1130/2, 4 & 6 Council commissioned Hill PDA to undertake an economic and financial analysis of the proposed development options for Council properties at 4 and 6 Cowell Street and also including the adjoining property at 2 Cowell Street. A copy of the report has been forwarded to Councillors under separate cover.

There are a number of recommendations and some of them are contained on pages 18 and 19 of the report. While the brief required only an economic and financial analysis, Hill PDA also drew a series of conclusions about how the project could proceed. These are

1. Prepare a Strategic Master Plan for the Town Centre

2. Prepare a development brief

3. Call for expressions of interest

4. Evaluation of submissions

5. Negotiate partnership structure

In respect of Recommendation No. 1, at the last Ordinary Meeting of Council it was resolved in respect of Gladesville that:

1. Council confirms its agreement to prepare a Draft Local Environmental Plan and Draft Development Control Plan for the Gladesville Commercial Centre in conjunction with Ryde City Council generally in accordance with the attached brief and partnership agreement, as may be amended by the General Manager.

2. The Manager Development & Environment (or delegate) act as Council’s project manager

and informs Council on the progress of the project. 3. Council allocates appropriate funds in its 2003/04 Management Plan to reimburse Ryde City

Council for Hunters Hill’s apportionment of consultancy fees. Recommendations 2 – 5 are dealt with in the following report.




In strict financial terms, the project is financially viable, however the revenue generated could vary depending upon the type of development proposed.

Feasibility Option 1 (Council as Developer) estimates a Development Profit of $926,945 and Option 2 (Hypothetical Developer) estimates a Development Profit of $1,529,637. These estimated profits would then be shared in accordance with any Joint Venture agreement with the owners of the adjoining property.

The main purpose of this exercise was to provide information to Council that confirmed that proceeding with a development on a joint venture basis was financially viable.

The key financial findings are contained on page 13 of the report and are summarised as follows:

�� The development scenario based on the provisions contained in the Development Control Plan is feasible.

�� The development scenario generates a Residual Land Value of $2.8 million.

�� For the component owned by Hunters Hill Council, the Residual Land Value is $1.83 million.

�� In a joint venture, the development would generate an estimated $584,000 in profit for Council.

Scenario 2, as contained on page 14 of the report, essentially reflects the outcome that should be the objective for Council in Gladesville – “To enhance the public domain and achieve an outcome that reinforces the function of Gladesville.”

While there is some added risk to this option, it is felt that this risk can be transferred to a potential developer through an appropriate agreement. The following report addresses this in more detail.

FINANCIAL IMPACT

The cost of the report was $10,000 and was funded by Council from the Asset Management Reserve.

RECOMMENDATION

1. The report, results, findings and recommendations of Hill PDA are received and noted.

2. The report, results, findings and recommendations of Hill PDA are treated as commercial-in-confidence and not released for public inspection.

3. A joint venture development proposal is pursued with the adjoining property owner at 2 Cowell Street.




ITEM NO : 3 SUBJECT : COWELL STREET DEVELOPMENT – JOINT VENTURE

AGREEMENT BUSINESS PROGRAM : ASSET MANAGEMENT REPORTING OFFICER : BARRY SMITH FILE : 1130/2, 4 & 6 BACKGROUND

This matter has been discussed a number of times and it is apparent that it would be simpler and more effective to construct a ‘Joint Venture Agreement’ when the parties involved have a more definite idea of the desired and expected outcomes of any proposed development.

Once these are known, they can then be captured in the agreement, which potentially can provide more certainty and clarity to any desired outcomes.

This is, in part, the approach suggested by Hill PDA:

�� Prepare a development brief

�� Call for expressions of interest

�� Evaluation of submissions

�� Negotiate partnership structure.

However, at the Ordinary Meeting held on 26th November 2001, Council resolved to adopt the following recommendations from the Working Party in respect of a Joint Venture Agreement and a Proposed Development Brief.

ITEM NO. 3 – ‘DRAFT’ JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT

RECOMMENDATION TO COUNCIL

Moved by Clr. Hoopmann seconded by Clr. Hart that:

1. Each party seeks their own independent legal advice on the form and content of the proposed Joint Venture Agreement.

2. The draft Joint Venture Agreement is forwarded to the ICAC for advice on its suitability, form and content.

3. An appropriately qualified consultant undertakes an economic and financial analysis of development options.




ITEM NO. 4 – PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT BRIEF


Moved by Clr. Kapel seconded by Clr. Hoopmann that:

1. The brief is noted and expressions of interest are sought from three experienced architects, following receipt of the economic and financial analysis.

2. The Working Party nominates three experienced architects for the project.

REPORT

The following report addresses the previous resolution and suggests various options that have subsequently arisen and that need to be considered to successfully achieve the desired outcomes.

Form and Content of JV Agreement (Item No. 3 Recommendation 1)

In respect of the Joint Venture Agreement, both parties’ solicitors have recommended various amendments that suggest that a different approach is required to facilitate a more satisfactory outcome that more closely reflects the findings of the feasibility analysis.

To this end, the owners of 2 Cowell Street suggested that consultants, Emerald Logic, could be able to assist in facilitating a JV Agreement.

The Working Party has met twice with the facilitator and there is a general agreement that the approach being proposed, which encapsulates, firstly, the creation of a JV Agreement and, secondly, the calling for expressions of interest leading to the calling of ‘selective tenders’, is a process that reduces and transfers risk.

The proposal put forward by Emerald Logic is also on the basis that, if Stage 1 – a JV Agreement is not reached, then no payment is made, and this is also attractive.

If an agreement is reached then a fee of $25,000 is payable – shared equally between the two parties.

This is really the fundamental cornerstone of this project, because if no agreement is reached then the project will not proceed to the best advantage of either party.

Comments by ICAC (Item No. 3 Recommendation 2)

Notwithstanding that the ‘draft’ agreement forwarded to the ICAC for comment may vary as a result of the above process, the following recommendations should be considered when framing any agreement:

�� Inclusion of a clause in the agreement that nothing in the document will be deemed or construed so as to fetter the exercise of Council’s discretion as the consent authority.

�� Inclusion of a clause that states that Council is not liable to the other parties in respect of any loss or damage suffered as a result of its obligation not to fetter its discretion.




�� The ICAC also supports our proposal that any DA submitted for the project will be referred to an independent consultant planner for assessment.

�� The ICAC also recommends that planning staff dealing with the DA, and Councillors who will ultimately determine the DA, not be involved in the management of the Joint Venture. This will help ensure a degree of separation of Council’s dual roles as developer and consent authority.

Feasibility Study (Item No. 3 Recommendation 3)

See previous report Item No. H2

Development Brief (Item No. 4 Recommendations 1 and 2)

It is proposed that the development brief adopted will be incorporated into the documentation for the ‘expressions of interest’ wherever relevant. The proposal suggested by Emerald Logic is that, rather than seeking first an architectural solution and then calling tenders for construction, a ‘design and construct’ approach is taken and the costs of preparing documentation for both will then be passed onto the successful party.

The preparation of the brief, invitation documents and Emerald Logic as part of the overall fee proposal would undertake coordination of expressions of interest.

Managing the Project

Following the completion of the Joint Venture Agreement, the Cowell Street Working Party and its functions will be largely redundant and a more appropriate management structure needs to be reflected in the JV Agreement.

It is suggested that a Joint Venture Management Group, who would make recommendations to Council, should be created. Such a group would undertake the assessment of expressions of interest and, following selection, continue to manage the overall project.

Similarly, the Joint Venture Management Group will need to engage a Development Manager during this construction phase of the project with appropriate qualifications and experience to ensure that the development achieves the objectives and desired outcomes of the JV parties. Costs would be recovered from the project. That person would report to the JV Management Group who would have carriage of the day-to-day operational aspects of the project, thereby leaving Council to undertake its statutory role as consent authority. Proper governance, accountability and transparency processes and procedures will need to be adopted and put in place to manage the public accountability aspects of the project.

In this regard, Council needs to consider that should any Councillors be appointed to the Joint Venture Management Group then those Councillors should be excluded from any consent processes.

Council also needs to consider providing a dedicated resource to this project to ensure that Council’s objective… “To enhance the public domain and achieve an outcome that reinforces the function of Gladesville”…is achieved. To this end, discussions have been held with Mr. Joe Vescio with a view to engaging his services on a consultancy basis for this project and the Gladesville LEP/DCP project.




Given his role in both projects to date, and his knowledge of Council’s objectives for them, this would seem to be a sensible and cost-effective option. A fee proposal has yet to be discussed, however any fees would be recoverable from both projects.

Timetable Stage 1 – Joint Venture Agreement Should this proceed as recommended, it is anticipated that the Joint Venture Agreement will be completed by the end of January 2003. Stage 2 – Expressions of Interest Should this proceed as anticipated then a period of 12 weeks will be needed which means completion by the end of April 2003. Stage 3 – DA Assessment Process Should this matter proceed in accordance with normal Council processes, and with limited or no objections to the proposal, approvals should be completed by the end of August 2003. Stage 4 – Construction Dependent upon approvals and starting date, construction could start in the fourth quarter of 2003 and be completed before the end of 2004. CONCLUSION The variations to the approach and the management options proposed have resulted from many discussions between the parties and reflect a genuine desire to see a development proceed. The variations to approach also reflect the obvious need to be flexible in pursuing an overall outcome that benefits the Council and ultimately the community. This is reflected in the recommendations shown below. FINANCIAL IMPACT

The initial cost of proceeding with the Joint Venture Agreement and calling for submissions is $25,000 shared equally between the parties. The cost to Council will be $13,750 (including GST) and funds are available from the Asset Management Reserve for this purpose.

Costs associated with development management will be included as a Council overhead cost of the project and be recovered accordingly.

RECOMMENDATION

1. Council agrees that Emerald Logic is engaged to facilitate a Joint Venture agreement, on the basis that if no agreement is reached then no fees are payable.

2. Such an agreement is on the basis of equally shared costs with the owners of 2 Cowell Street - Brailey, Fenton, Lane and Co.

3. The comments and clauses suggested by the ICAC are included in any Joint Venture agreement.




4. Subject to the successful completion of a Joint Venture agreement, Emerald Logic proceeds to invite submissions for the design and construction of a development at 2, 4 & 6 Cowell Street Gladesville.

5. The General Manager is authorised to execute any services agreements with Emerald Logic.

6. Subject to receipt of a satisfactory fee proposal, Mr. Joe Vescio is engaged to act on Council’s behalf on this project, as instructed by the General Manager.




ITEM NO : 4 SUBJECT : PUBLIC LIABILITY AND PROFESSIONAL INDEMNITY

INSURANCE BUSINESS PROGRAM : MANAGEMENT & COUNCIL SUPPORT REPORTING OFFICER : BARRY SMITH FILE : 450/10 Council recently agreed to continue its membership in METROPOOL and this has proven to be a prudent decision given the recently advised renewal terms and conditions for our Public Liability and Professional Indemnity insurance. Councillors would be aware of the significant increases being reported and experienced in insurance costs in recent months and, following two potential breaches of the primary layer, METROPOOL considered that there was a risk of similar increases. METROPOOL’S Broker, AON Risk Services, have now confirmed the renewal of the combined liability program for the period 31 October 2002 to 31 October 2003 on the following basis:- �� Primary Limit: $10 million - Insurers: GE Frankona - 50%, QBE - 50% �� Underlying Council Deductible: To be increased from $50,000 to $100,000 Both GE Frankona and QBE have confirmed that they would accept the option of METROPOOL taking up an additional $50,000 excess which would be before the erosion of the aggregate rather than individual Councils holding the full $100,000 deductible. Looking at the statistics, apart from $1,000 paid in 1999/2000, there are no claims, post 1998, where payments have been made in excess of $50,000. The total METROPOOL Premium therefore remains as expiring i.e. at $440,000: �� Secondary Limit: $40 million excess of $10 million �� The total METROPOOL Premium remains as expiring i.e. at $200,000 Recognising that the claims review clause had been breached and that the primary underwriters had the ability to significantly increase the premiums, as well as the deductibles, in line with the general increases being offered to clients in Australia, the terms proposed are excellent. Last year, without the issue of the claims review breach, insurers confirmed that, for a new three-year contract, they would be seeking an increase of the Council deductible to $100,000. In essence, despite the significant hardening in the market, they have maintained the expiring premium when they could have charged a much higher premium in line with market increases.




The proposed primary renewal terms provided by GE Frankona and QBE are in recognition of the long term relationship developed over the last six years and the fact that METROPOOL Councils had not budgeted this year for significant premium increases, thinking that the existing contract would run through to 31st October 2003. The Broker suggests that the terms submitted by London reflect the long term relationship that has been established with London insurers, however, they emphasise that a full marketing exercise will need to be conducted next year where we would expect premiums would increase significantly beyond current levels and in line with current market terms. FINANCIAL IMPACT

Council’s contribution to METROPOOL for the current financial year will be $92,243 and $114,600 has been allocated in the 2002/2003 Budget. It is suggested that the saving of $22,357 is transferred to a Reserve for Insurance Losses under the Excess, as a hedge against any future claims following the increase in excess from $50,000 to $100,000.

RECOMMENDATION

Council accepts the terms of renewal for Public Liability and Professional Indemnity Insurance as advised by AON Risk Services.

J

Committees

J – Committees


Index 1. Minutes of Art and Craft Advisory Committee Meeting held on 27th November, 2002 1 2. Minutes of Hunters Hill Village Working Party Meeting No. 2 held on 18th November, 2002 5 3. Minutes of Hunters Hill Village Working Party Meeting No. 3 held on 2nd December, 2002 9 4. Minutes of Cowell Street Working Party Meeting held on 12th September, 2002 14 5. Minutes of Cowell Street Working Party Meeting held on 16th October, 2002 16 6. Presentation by Brailey Fenton and Lane Consultants 17 7. Economic and Financial Analysis 18 8. Joint Venture Discussion 19 9. Proposed Development Brief 20

.................................... Annie Pool

COMMUNITY RELATIONS OFFICER

……………………… Barry Smith

GENERAL MANAGER

REPORT OF COMMITTEES Meeting 9th December 2002 J1


ITEM NO : 1 SUBJECT : MINUTES OF ART AND CRAFT ADVISORY

COMMITTEE MEETING HELD ON 27TH NOVEMBER, 2002

BUSINESS PROGRAM : ARTS & CULTURE REPORTING OFFICER : ANNIE POOL FILE : 040/02 PRESENT

Morna Staunton Ross McBride Barrie Drake Chris Cocquio Jude Burgess Rosaleen Tidswell Ric Hedley Dulcie Armstrong Sue Collins Graeme Chambers Clr. Sue Hoopmann Annie Pool

1. APOLOGIES

Wayne Pearson Clr. Justin Betar Helen Nolte

2. GENERAL BUSINESS

2.1 Exhibition Dates

The dates listed and confirmed are:

Delivery of Entries

Thursday, 1 May 2003 10.00am – 4.00pm Friday, 2 May 2003 10.00am – 4.00pm Saturday, 3 May 2003 9.00am – 11.00am



Opening Night

Friday, 9 May 2003 7.00pm – 9.00pm

Exhibition Dates and Times

Saturday, 10 May 2003- Sunday, 18 May 2003 10.00am – 4.00pm

Collection of Entries

Unselected

Saturday, 10 May 2003 – Monday, 19 May 2003 10.00am-4.00pm

Selected/Unselected

Sunday, 18 May 2003 5.00pm – 7.00pm Monday, 19 May 2003 10.00am – 4.00pm

CRAFT CLARIFICATION

The Committee agreed that the Craft medium for the 2003 Exhibition will be ceramics. For purposes of the entry form and catalogue, the following definition will be used in all printed material:

“Defined by the Committee as any article made of clay, which has been fired.”

A weight restriction of 50kg will be applied to all ceramic works.

2.3. Judges

Suggestions for people to contact:

Art

Margaret Woodward John Winch C/O- Post Office, Stuart Town (Ironbark) Susan Archer Bob McPhillips Meadowbank TAFE Betty Church Willandra

Sculpture

Vince Vozzo

Ceramics

Contact President of the Potters Society of Australia for advice.



2.4. Restriction on Number of Works Entered

The Committee agreed to restrict the number of artworks that an artist can enter into the Exhibition to 3. This will alleviate much of the anxiety that occurred from the last Exhibition with the high number of works not selected for hanging.

2.5. Screens

Ryde Art Society hires out art screens and attached lighting for $10 per screen and light. This may well alleviate the difficulties with borrowing Drummoyne’s screens and not having sufficient lighting.

Further details regarding the dimension of the screens will need to be sought.

3. ANY OTHER BUSINESS

3.1 50th Anniversary

Graeme Chambers suggested that the Committee should start planning for the 50th Art and Craft Exhibition to be held in 2004. Further suggestions included:

• that a separate exhibition of past winners be mounted prior to the ‘general’ Exhibition;

• we invite past winners to submit artworks; and

• we utilise The Weekly Times in an attempt to find details regarding past winners.

Volunteers were sought to join a 50th Anniversary Sub-committee. Nominees included:

• Chris Cocquio

• Ross McBride

• Ric Hedley

• Barrie Drake

3.2 Australian Artist

Ric Hedley suggested that details regarding the next exhibition should be forwarded to Australian Artist.

3.3 Australia Day Awards

Morna Staunton advised the Committee that she would be nominating the 48th Hunters Hill Art and Craft Exhibition for ‘Community Event of the Year’ as part of the Hunters Hill Australia Day Awards.



The Committee agreed that the 48th Art and Craft Exhibition would be a deserving winner for ‘Community Event of the Year’.

4. NEXT MEETING

The next meeting of the Art and Craft Advisory Committee will be held on Tuesday 14 January 2003 at 5.30pm in Council’s Small Hall.

FINANCIAL IMPACT

There is no direct financial impact as a result of this report. RECOMMENDATION


SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT OF COMMITTEES Meeting 9th December 2002 J5


ITEM NO : 2 SUBJECT : MINUTES OF HUNTERS HILL VILLAGE WORKING

PARTY MEETING NO. 2 HELD ON 18TH NOVEMBER, 2002

BUSINESS PROGRAM : MANAGEMENT AND COUNCIL SUPPORT REPORTING OFFICER : BARRY SMITH FILE : 770/03 ATTENDANCE

4.1 Members: Councillors 1. Clr. Bruce Lucas

2. Clr. Peter Astridge 3. Clr. Jenny Scotford 4.

Hunter’s Hill Trust 1. Tony Coote 2. Philip Jenkyn

Local residents within the study area King Street Precinct Mary/Matthew Street Precinct Avenue/Figtree Road Precinct

1. David Buckingham 2. Mario Pellegrino 1. Ross Williams 2. David Salter 1. Meredith Bayfield 2. Deborah Anschau

Local residents from the community at large 1. Margaret Helman 2. Andrew O’Connell

Local shop keepers within the study area 1. Colin Johnston 2.

Commercial land holders within the study area

1. Rolf Latimer 2. Ray Touma

4.2 Project Team: General Manager Barry Smith

Manager Development & Environment Joe Vescio

Senior Development Officer Steve Kourepis

Development Control Officer Daniela Bantle

Community Services Liaison Officer Margaret Kelly



4.3 Advisors to the Working Party: Legal Advisor John Cole

Planning/Urban Design Advisor Robin Bradley

Heritage Architect Advisor Brian MacDonald

Heritage/Conservation Advisor Robyn Christie

Artistic Advisor

APOLOGIES

Clr. Sue Hoopmann Mr. Nick Feros.

ITEM NO. 1 - MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING

RESOLVED on the motion of Philip Jenkyn, seconded Clr. J. Scotford that the Minutes of the Working Party Meeting No.1, held on 4th November, be confirmed.

MATTERS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES

There were no matters arising from the minutes.

ITEM NO. 2 - STRATEGICALLY PLANNING THE WAY FORWARD

Proceedings in Brief The General Manager presented a methodology for progressing the project. The Working Party generally were more concerned to ensure that the guidelines framed at the public meeting held on 13th February 2002 were being used to facilitate the process.

WORKING PARTY RESOLUTION

RESOLVED on the motion of Philip Jenkyn, seconded Ray Touma that: A. The Working Party adopts the wording of Resolution B of the public meeting held on 13th

February 2002 as varied at this meeting, as a guideline.

Working Party Guidelines for Hunters Hill Village

1. Plans and proposals in keeping with the character and heritage of the Municipality

2. The preparation of an independent Heritage Report, which includes the identification of any additional buildings to be retained

3. Plans and proposals for the Hunters Hill Village and its surrounding area that adhere to the existing zonings, heights, floor space ratios and garden areas, or entail variations to these existing guidelines



4. Plans, in cooperation with the RTA, for the control and management of traffic through the commercial centre, and along Ryde and Gladesville Roads (and surrounding streets), particularly dealing with the volume and speed of traffic and appropriate safe access

5. Appropriate parking areas for the Village, not adversely impacting on surrounding areas

6. Design guidelines for new and existing buildings appropriate to the present scale and character of the Village

7. Significant and appropriate landscaping not only for the commercial areas but also the surrounding areas including, with their consent, RTA land adjoining the Expressway

8. Improvements in relation to signage footpaths, lighting, poles, street furniture, bus shelters and the like.

B. A small working group consisting of Rolf Latimer, Andrew O’Connell, Robin Bradley

and Daniela Bantle prepares design options for the Village based on the above criteria, for discussion at the next Working Party meeting.

ITEM NO. 3 - HERITAGE ASSESSMENT

Proceedings in Brief A discussion took place regarding the need to have this work undertaken urgently as it was a fundamental component to the overall process.


RESOLVED on the motion of Tony Coote, seconded Clr. Astridge that a small working group, consisting of Brian McDonald, Robyn Christie, Tony Coote, Philip Jenkyn and Steve Kourepis, complete a brief for a ‘Heritage Character Study’ of the Village and recommend a list of suitable consultants to undertake the project.

ITEM NO. 4 - ROADS AND TRAFFIC AUTHORITY

Proceedings in Brief A discussion took place on the need to consider implementing some of the traffic recommendations sooner rather than later. However, it was acknowledged that any future development proposals may impact on traffic and this also needed to be considered. There was general agreement that the Working Party needed to be able to discuss these issues with relevant technical experts.


RESOLVED on the motion of Meredith Bayfield, seconded Mario Pellegrino that:



1. Chris Stapleton (Urbis Report Traffic Consultant) be invited to the next meeting of the Working Party

2. Any relevant data, such as traffic counts or information available from the RTA, is provided to the next Working Party meeting.

ITEM NO. 5 - REVIEW OF ROBINSON REPORT

Proceedings in Brief General discussion took place that established a need to undertake surveys that would identify the needs and wants of people utilising the Village, both within the contextual plan area and the wider community. It was also agreed that the social needs and purpose of the Village needed to be clearly identified to assist in any forward planning process.


RESOLVED on the motion of Ross Williams seconded by Margaret Helman that a shopper and social survey, including a resident survey, is undertaken as soon as possible.

GENERAL BUSINESS

1. Tour of Sites

Proceedings in Brief Working Party members submitted a number of sites that could be considered for site visits to view good examples of urban design, public domain improvements and traffic management.


RESOLVED on the motion of Margaret Helman, seconded David Buckingham that:

1. A tour itinerary is developed based on the suggested sites.

2. Photos are obtained of sites that may be relevant but are not to be visited

3. Councils where projects have been developed under the Main Street Program are invited to make a presentation to the Working Party

4. The tour is held on a Saturday.

FINANCIAL IMPACT

There is no direct financial impact resulting from consideration of this report.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Minutes of Working Party Meeting No. 2, held on 18th November 2002, are adopted.



ITEM NO : 3 SUBJECT : MINUTES OF HUNTERS HILL VILLAGE WORKING

PARTY MEETING NO. 3 HELD ON 2ND DECEMBER, 2002

BUSINESS PROGRAM : MANAGEMENT AND COUNCIL SUPPORT REPORTING OFFICER : BARRY SMITH FILE : 770/73 ATTENDANCE

4.1 Members Councillors 1. Clr. Bruce Lucas

2. Clr. Peter Astridge 3. Clr. Sue Hoopmann 4.

Hunter’s Hill Trust 1. Tony Coote 2. Philip Jenkyn

Local residents within the study area King Street Precinct Mary/Matthew Street Precinct Avenue/Figtree Road Precinct

1. David Buckingham 2. Mario Pellegrino 3. Ross Williams 4. David Salter 5. Meredith Bayfield 6. Deborah Anschau

Local residents from the community at large 1. Margaret Helman 2. Andrew O’Connell

Local shop keepers within the study area 1. Colin Johnston 2. Nick Feros

Commercial land holders within the study area

1. Rolf Latimer 2.

4.2 Project Team General Manager Barry Smith

Manager Development & Environment Steve Kourepis

Senior Development Officer

Development Control Officer Daniela Bantle

Community Services Liaison Officer



4.3 Advisors to the Working Party Legal Advisor John Cole

Forward and Strategic Planning Joe Vescio

Planning/Urban Design Advisor

Heritage Architect Advisor Brian MacDonald

Heritage/Conservation Advisor Robyn Christie

Artistic Advisor Michel Santry

Also in attendance: Chris Stapleton (Chris Stapleton Traffic Planning) and Rob Varga (Traffic and Transport Planning).

APOLOGIES

Clr. Jenny Scotford Ray Touma Margaret Kelly Robin Bradley

ITEM NO. 1 - MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING

RESOLVED on the motion of Clr. Peter Astridge, seconded Rolf Latimer that the Minutes of the Working Party Meeting No.2, held on 18th November, be confirmed.

MATTERS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES

There were no matters arising from the minutes.

ADDRESSES TO THE WORKING PARTY

Mr. Mark Sgroi of Hunters Hill Fruit Market addressed the Working Party concerning traffic and parking in the Village Centre following changes introduced by the RTA in the AM and PM peaks. Mr. Sgroi asked if these changes could be reviewed as part of the village planning process.

ITEM NO. 2 - VILLAGE DESIGN OPTIONS

Proceedings in Brief

Mr. Andrew O’Connell provided a presentation on behalf of the Working Group on the current streetscape views of the village area, a design concept for discussion and eight suggested planning principles that the Working Party might adopt for redevelopment of the village. The eight principles are:

1. Emphasise the peninsula location of the village.

2. Landscape and beautify the streets.

3. Define the Village Centre.



4. Address the traffic and parking problems.

5. Respect the heritage of hunters Hill.

6. Reinforce the existing subdivision pattern.

7. Set defined building envelopes.

8. Minimise environmental impact to adjoining properties.

RESOLVED on the motion of Philip Jenkyn, seconded Clr. P. Astridge that the Working Group be thanked for their efforts and presentation, and that the eight principles be listed for discussion at the next meeting, after all members have had the opportunity to consider them.

ITEM NO. 3 - TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT


Mr. Rob Varga and Mr. Don Cottee commenced a panel session in response to general traffic management questions.

RESOLVED on the motion of Clr. Peter Astridge, seconded Meredith Bayfield that this matter is deferred until later on the agenda when Chris Stapleton arrives.

ITEM NO. 4 - HERITAGE CHARACTER STUDY


Brian McDonald presented the draft brief on behalf of the Heritage sub-group including some suggested minor amendments.


RESOLVED Philip Jenkyn, seconded Clr. P. Astridge that:

1. Council adopts the brief as amended.

2. Council considers providing 50% of the total funding for the study up to $7,500.

3. The General Manager, in consultation with the Heritage sub-group, appoints a consultant to undertake the study following the receipt and consideration of submissions from suitably qualified persons.

ITEM NO. 3 - TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT


Rob Varga, Chris Stapleton and Don Cottee resumed the earlier panel discussion in respect of the fourteen original recommendations of the ‘Robinson Report’ regarding access and a traffic.



Consensus was reached that the original recommendations, with some alteration, additions and deletions, could form the basis of a traffic plan for the village, however, discussions with the RTA were required as soon as possible to gauge their interest and reaction.

RESOLVED on the motion of Philip Jenkyn, seconded Clr. P. Astridge that the views of the RTA are sought on the following matters:

1. Lane Cove/Chatswood to/from Victoria Road/City/West: Regional road providing a high level of linkage. Key access to Hunters Hill Village Centre, which needs some form of design statement, i.e. planting, signage or built, to mark the entry. Interaction with Hunters Hill through on/off ramps could be rationalised to a single intersection (see also point 7).

2. Church Street to Woolwich: Only connection with the eastern end of Hunters Hill peninsula. Traffic light phasing at eastern on/off ramps could be improved at morning peak for local residents heading out of the peninsula. Pedestrian crossing at Durham Street needs to be reviewed to improve safety (see also point 9).

3. Ryde Road towards North Ryde/Ryde/Epping: Provides short cut for traffic from/to north wishing to bypass Victoria/Pittwater Roads or Burns Bay/Epping Roads. Traffic volumes need to be maintained in accordance with RTA guidelines, but the flow could be managed better through the use of traffic calming measures. These should start to the west of Park Road, slowing traffic down well before it hits the proposed pedestrian crossing (giving access to Figtree Park) and the Gladesville Road intersection.

4. Gladesville Road towards Gladesville: Provides a local link to Gladesville. The street is wide enough to provide alternating angled parking and parallel parking. It is lined with mature Box Gums, which form an impressive avenue. This avenue should be reinforced with new trees where any are missing. Footpaths need resurfacing with an even surface and should be regularly monitored and replaced.

5. Access to Figtree Park: New threshold pedestrian crossings across Ryde and Gladesville Roads to provide safer and more convenient access to the park. Improved access should make the park more attractive to use.

6. Gladesville Road Intersection: Traffic-calmed, single lane, traffic light controlled intersection set on a raised threshold that integrates into adjacent footpaths, separated by bollards etc. This space is intended to be a visually interesting entry to the shopping centre. The narrowed roadway acts as one of a series of choke points that slow the traffic through the centre. Traffic light control ensures that there is sufficient provision for pedestrians to cross. Left turn on red from the eastern section of Gladesville Road into the western end is removed. Relocate existing eastern side pedestrian lights from Gladesville Road to Howard Place intersection.

7. Gladesville Road/Joubert Street/Freeway On-Off Ramp Intersection: This intersection is rationalised to being four-way traffic light controlled from the several on-off ramps and Joubert Street connections. This ensures that all streets maintain the same level of access that they have at present. It improves the ability to turn right



from Gladesville Road into Joubert Street. It also removes the on-demand pedestrian crossing (see also point 1).

8. Investigate Howard Place: Consider and investigate Howard Place becoming: (a) one-way and/or (b) a pedestrian mall and/or (c) creating a car park at the rear of the south-side shops through the aggregation of the available rear yards of these premises.

9. Church Street Overpass and Pedestrian Approaches: To improve the linkages across the Freeway, the footpaths need to be widened and made attractive to use. Where they cross roadways, there should be a continuous surface from the footpath to the pedestrian crossing such that it is easy for mothers with strollers and disabled to use (see also point 2).

10. Local Traffic Management: If the traffic calming measures along Ryde Road are introduced: (a) traffic may try to use local streets to bypass Ryde Road (part of considering these measures must be an assessment of the possible impacts on local streets such as Matthew Street and Luke Street); (b) the location of bus stops will need to be investigated and reviewed where necessary; and (c) the provision of kerbside parking between Howard Place and Joubert Street (south side) also will need to be reviewed, particularly in the am and pm peak periods.

FINANCIAL IMPACT

There is no direct financial impact resulting from consideration of this matter with the exception of Item No. 4, which requires a budget allocation to fund Council’s proportion of the proposed heritage character study.

RECOMMENDATION

1. That the Minutes of Working Party Meeting No. 3, held on 2nd December 2002, are

adopted.

2. That Council adopts the Heritage Character Study brief as amended.

3. That Council provides 50% of the total funding for the study up to $7,500, as a budget variation in conjunction with consideration of the December Quarterly Review.

4. That the General Manager, in consultation with the Heritage sub-group of the Hunters Hill Village Working Party, appoints a consultant to undertake the study following the receipt and consideration of submissions from suitably qualified persons.



ITEM NO : 4 SUBJECT : MINUTES OF THE COWELL STREET WORKING

PARTY MEETING HELD 12TH SEPTEMBER 2002 BUSINESS PROGRAM : MANAGEMENT & COUNCIL SUPPORT REPORTING OFFICER : BARRY SMITH FILE : 1130/2, 4 &6 PRESENT

Working Party Members: Clr. Bruce Lucas - Mayor Clr. Miriam Kapel Mr. Barry Smith General Manager Mr. Ted Brailey (Owner No. 2 Cowell Street) Mr. John Fenton (Owner No. 2 Cowell Street) Mr. Christopher Lane (Owner No. 2 Cowell Street) APOLOGIES Clr. Phillip Hart Clr. Sue Hoopmann ITEM NO.1 – MINUTES OF WORKING PARTY MEETING 15TH AUGUST 2002 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr. Lucas, seconded by Clr. Kapel that the minutes are adopted.

ITEM NO. 2 – ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS


Mr. Alex Wilson and Mr. Michael Watson from Hill PDA presented the ‘draft’ findings of their report.

RESOLVED on the motion of Clr. Lucas, seconded by Clr. Kapel that this matter is deferred until the final report from Hill PDA is received.

ITEM NO. 3 – JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT


The General Manager tabled comments on the agreement and advised that Council’s Solicitor was unable to attend this meeting.



RESOLVED on the motion of Clr. Kapel, seconded by Clr. Lucas that this matter is deferred until the next meeting.

GENERAL BUSINESS

Timetable for Completion of Current Work Program

The following timetable targets were agreed subject to further advice:

1. Financial Feasibility and Economic Analysis 25th September 2002

2. Architectural Brief (Response to design concepts) 17th October 2002

3. Joint Venture Legal Agreement 12th September 2002

DATE OF NEXT MEETING

Thursday 17h October 2002 at 5.30pm

FINANCIAL IMPACT

The financial impacts resulting from the recommendation contained in Item 2 of this report will be funded from the Development Reserve and sufficient funds are available for the purposes proposed.

RECOMMENDATION

The minutes of the Working Party meeting are received and noted.



ITEM NO : 5 SUBJECT : MINUTES OF THE COWELL STREET WORKING

PARTY MEETING HELD 16TH OCTOBER 2002 BUSINESS PROGRAM : MANAGEMENT & COUNCIL SUPPORT REPORTING OFFICER : BARRY SMITH FILE : 1130/21, 4 & 6 PRESENT

Working Party Members: Clr. Bruce Lucas - Mayor Clr. Miriam Kapel Mr. Barry Smith General Manager Mr. Ted Brailey (Owner No. 2 Cowell Street) APOLOGIES Clr. Phillip Hart Clr. Sue Hoopmann Mr. John Fenton (Owner No. 2 Cowell Street) Mr. Christopher Lane (Owner No. 2 Cowell Street) ITEM NO.1 – MINUTES OF WORKING PARTY MEETING 12TH SEPTEMBER 2002

ITEM NO. 2 – PRESENTATION BY BRAILEY FENTON AND LANE CONSULTANT (No report)

ITEM NO. 3 - ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL ANAYSIS (Report attached)

ITEM NO. 4 – JOINT VENTURE AGREEMENT DISCUSSION (No report)

ITEM NO. 5 – PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT BRIEF (No report)

As a quorum was not going to be present, the meeting was adjourned, following a presentation by Richard Dell (Emerald Logic) in respect of Item No. 2, to a date and time to be fixed.

FINANCIAL IMPACT

There is no direct financial impact resulting from consideration of this matter.

RECOMMENDATION

The minutes of the Working Party meeting are received and noted.



ITEM NO : 6 SUBJECT : PRESENTATION BY BRAILEY, FENTON AND LANE

CONSULTANT BUSINESS PROGRAM : ASSET MANAGEMENT REPORTING OFFICER : BARRY SMITH FILE : 1130/2, 4 & 6 Following the discussion held on 16th October 2002, a proposal has been received from Emerald Logic and is attached to this report for discussion. The proposal does not follow a previous resolution of Council in this matter.

Council has previously resolved that:



The proposal contained in Item No. 6 later on this agenda follows this resolution and the Working Party will need to consider these items concurrently.

FINANCIAL IMPACT

The potential financial impact of this proposal initially would be $25,000 shared equally between the parties.

RECOMMENDATION

That this matter is discussed further.

NOTE:

This Item is also considered in conjunction with Item No. H3 – General Manager’s Reports earlier on this agenda.



ITEM NO : 7 SUBJECT : ECONOMIC AND FINANCIAL ANALYSIS BUSINESS PROGRAM : ASSET MANAGEMENT REPORTING OFFICER : BARRY SMITH FILE : 1130/2, 4 & 6 A copy of the Hill PDA report was attached to the meeting agenda for the 16th October and the results, findings and recommendations need to be considered and dealt with appropriately.

The essential recommendations are contained on pages 18 and 19 of the report. These are:

1. Prepare a Strategic Master Plan for the Town Centre.

Once the above is completed:

2. Prepare a development brief.

3. Call for expressions of interest.

4. Evaluation of submissions.

5. Negotiate partnership structure.

In strict financial terms, the project is financially viable, however the revenue generated could vary significantly depending upon the type of development proposed (Financial Feasibility Model).

FINANCIAL IMPACT

The cost of the report was $10,000 and this was funded entirely by Council.

RECOMMENDATION

The results, findings and recommendations are considered and dealt with appropriately.

NOTE:




ITEM NO : 8 SUBJECT : JOINT VENTURE DISCUSSION BUSINESS PROGRAM : MANAGEMENT & COUNCIL SUPPORT REPORTING OFFICER : BARRY SMITH FILE : 1130/2, 4 & 6 This matter has been discussed a number of times and it is apparent that it would be simpler and more effective to construct a ‘Joint Venture Agreement’ when the parties involved have a more definite idea of the desired and expected outcomes of any proposed development.

Once these are known, they can then be captured in the agreement, which potentially can provide more certainty and clarity to any agreement.

FINANCIAL IMPACT

There is no direct financial impact resulting from consideration of this matter.

RECOMMENDATION

The matter of completing a ‘Joint Venture’ agreement is deferred until the primary concepts of a development proposal have been finalized.

NOTE:




ITEM NO : 9 SUBJECT : PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT BRIEF BUSINESS PROGRAM : ASSET MANAGEMENT REPORTING OFFICER : BARRY SMITH FILE : 1130/2, 4 & 6 Council has previously resolved that:



The proposal contained in Item No. 3 earlier on this agenda does not follow this resolution and the Working Party will need to consider these items concurrently.

FINANCIAL IMPACT

The process proposed could also be managed externally and the estimated cost is less than $10,000.

RECOMMENDATION

That this matter is discussed further.

NOTE:




DRAFT BRIEF FOR PREPARATION OF A

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION

(a) 4-6 COWELL STREET

&

(b) 2, 4 and 6 COWELL STREET, GLADESVILLE Introduction Council has recently resolved to prepare a Development Application for the development of 4-6 Cowell Street Gladesville, which is owned by Council AND/OR 2, 4 and 6 Cowell Street Gladesville that may include a joint venture with the owners of Number 2. This follows the recent commissioning and preparation of a Draft Development Control Plan for the redevelopment of the properties at 2-6 and 3-7 Cowell Street, and adjoining car parks. Only two landholders, one of whom is Council, own all of these sites. The Council places a high priority on improving the appearance, amenity, efficiency and economic performance of the Gladesville Shopping Centre and has recently completed an Environmental Enhancement Plan in conjunction with Ryde City Council, a Retail Study and a Development Control Plan. In the past, improvements to the public domain have taken place in an ad hoc manner whilst private developments have proceeded in the absence of overall design guidelines and an appropriate policy framework. However, owing to the reasonable size of the area, it is considered that a properly planned and designed output can be produced. The Council considers that a coordinated approach to development of the sites is urgently required, particularly due to pressure from the owners to redevelop and maximise the yield from their landholdings. In addition, it is considered that development must occur without further delay so as to provide the necessary injection to stimulate interest in and vitality of the centre. This part of Cowell Street provides the entry to the Gladesville Retail Centre and its location and link is of prime importance in this context.



Council is therefore inviting three (3) architectural practices to submit a tender accompanied by concept plans. A fee of $5000.00 is offered to each practice to part cover costs associated with the tender. Upon payment and submission to Council, the works become the property of the Council and the designer releases any copyright for the concepts, which may or may not be adopted by Council. Council provides the following information: �� Various staff reports in relation to the matter; �� Copy of DCP 22 – Cowell Street; �� Survey plan of levels and features of the site and surrounds. The Sites (a) 4-6 Cowell Street The subject site is situated on the northwestern side of Cowell Street and adjoins a two storey red texture circa 1960’s building at No. 2 to its south and a three (3) storey brick and tiled residential flat building to its north. The site is currently vacant but has been utilised as a temporary public car park since the commencement of the construction of the “Gladesville Retail Village”. The Draft DCP seeks to remedy the inherent problems created by an introverted box type development dislocated from the rest of the commercial/retail activity of the strip. The site has an area of approximately 1331m2 including a right of carriageway, which is situated adjacent to the northeast boundary. The land has a cross fall in the order of 1:5 to 1:6, which is reflective of the grade of the street. (b) 2, 4 and 6 Cowell Street (Shown as Site 1 in DCP No. 22) This site is as described above but includes the two storey red texture circa 1960’s building at No 2. The site has an area of approximately 2058m2 including a right of carriageway, which is situated adjacent to the southeast boundary. The land has a cross fall in the order of 1:5 to 1:6, which is reflective of the grade of the street. Public Car Parking Council is concerned to ensure that adequate provision is made for future public car parking within the shopping centre precinct. Concept plans should include the provision of an additional level of future public car parking as suggested in the ‘parking options’ submitted by Project Planning Associates as annexed. Open Space and Public Amenity Council is seeking to develop the sites to their maximum potential, having regard to the opportunities and constraints of the site as established by a proper site analysis, and subject to the objectives of the applicable DCP controls being satisfied. In this regard, a critical consideration is the amenity of the adjoining residents at No. 8 Cowell Street. To improve both neighbour amenity and the provision of open space within the precinct, Council has resolved to provide within this development a space known as ‘the piazza’ with an area of not less than 450 square metres.



Council may consider a higher and narrower building footprint if additional open space and improved amenity are achieved as a result. Residential Housing Strategy Opportunities for alternative affordable residential accommodation (i.e. studios and one bed units) should be fully explored, however it is essential that the ground floor at minimum be retail/commercial, on a mixed-use basis. Brief This Brief seeks the submission of a development application, to the satisfaction of the General Manager, for the consideration of the Council. The application will be referred to an independent consultant planner for assessment. The proposal will require: 1. Detailed site analysis.

2. Architectural plans including all necessary information and documentation as required in Council’s Development Application form and within any applicable development control plan.

3. Plans in compliance with the requirements and objectives of the LEP, DCP 21 – Commercial Development and DCP 22 - Cowell Street.

4. Plans which seek to develop the site to its maximum potential, having regard to the opportunities and constraints of the site as established by a proper site analysis, and subject to the objectives of the applicable DCP controls being satisfied. In this regard, a critical consideration is the amenity of the adjoining residents at No. 8 Cowell Street.

5. Provision of a public space of not less than 450 square metres.

6. Options of building over, or not building over, the existing Rights of Way affecting 4-6 Cowell Street (northern boundary) and 2 Cowell Street (southern boundary).

7. Incorporating, if practicable, opportunities for affordable residential accommodation (i.e. studios and one bed units), however it is essential that the ground floor at minimum be retail/commercial, on a mixed use basis with a café/restaurant adjacent to a north-facing elevated terrace (refer DCP).

8. Detailed Model at 1:200 scale showing adjoining development.

9. Shadow diagrams at 1:200 scale (plan and section) demonstrating the effect of shadowing on existing adjacent residential development at No. 8 Cowell Street during the winter solstice.

10. Computer-generated 3D photomontage of the proposed development within its existing context.

11. Traffic impact report prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced traffic engineer/consultant.

12. Landscape plans prepared by a suitably qualified landscape architect.

13. Submission of a detailed Statement of Environmental Effects addressing issues such as: amenity impacts; streetscape and townscape; design; traffic and car parking; Retail

Study observations; relevant planning instruments and policies including HHLEP No 1, DCP 21 – Commercial, Cowell Street DCP and s79C of the EP & A Act.

9. Design based on energy efficiency and ecologically sustainable principles.



10. A building of high architectural and urban design merit, which will provide the catalyst for desired future character and the gentrification of the area.

Council’s program for the completion of the project is 4 months from engagement, however this is subject to negotiation with the successful tenderer. Selection Criteria Proposals will be evaluated by assessment against the following criteria (and may include interview): a. degree of understanding of the spirit of the brief.

b. evidence of creative and realistic methodology, together with clarity and approach to the job as expressed in concept plans for a suitable design option for the sites which satisfies the performance and prescriptive requirements of the DCP. These should include 1:200 floor plans and site plan, and a minimum one perspective from the north east of a development possibility of 4-6 Cowell Street.

c. extent of relevant experience of the individuals/organisation based on the principal’s C.V.

d. fees. Enquiries Any enquiries or additional information should be directed in the first instance to the Manager Development and Environment. Telephone: 9879 9411 Email: [email protected] Closing Date Submissions which include concept plans for both options should be received by xxx pm xx/xx/xx and addressed to: The General Manager Hunters Hill Council P.O Box 21 Hunters Hill NSW 2110 or by fax: 9809 7338 or email: [email protected],gov.au

REPORT OF COMMITTEES Meeting 4139 – 9th December 2002 J25


BACKGROUND INFORMATION Gladesville at a glance The establishment of the Bedlam Point Ferry in 1832 and construction of the Great North Road gave the impetus for the commencement of a settlement where Gladesville Shopping Centre sits today. The Bayview Tavern, Gladesville Public School and two churches near Pittwater Road appear to mark the first signs of significant settlement taking place. These buildings were constructed in or around 1880, though preceded by farming settlements in the area and at least 2 other stone cottages dating from the 1860s (e.g. Post Office cottage). The accessibility of the Gladesville area was much improved by the opening of the first Gladesville Bridge in 1881, the Iron Cove Bridge in 1882 and Pittwater Road in 1884-5. From that time on, development in the centre proceeded steadily, though most of the shops remaining today appear to date from the late 1910s to the 1930s. The Gladesville Shopping Centre is a neighbourhood strip shopping area lining Victoria Road, which is a major arterial road linking Parramatta and Ryde with the Sydney CBD. Physically, the centre sits on either side of Victoria Road, which itself follows a ridge dividing the Tarban Creek (east side) and Parramatta River (west side) catchments. The centre’s elevated position affords significant views to the south and west toward the Parramatta River (although these are mainly concealed by the shop fronts). Local governance of the centre falls between the responsibilities of Ryde City Council and Hunter’s Hill Council. The centre generally serves the convenience shopping and commercial needs of the local population. Gladesville’s primary trade area could be considered to include the suburbs of Gladesville, East Ryde, Hunters Hill, Boronia Park, Henley, Huntley’s Point, Tennyson and Putney. The shopping/commercial strip is characterised by 3 distinct precincts. The core area is retail oriented while the fringe areas have a mix of retail, commercial, residential and service-related land uses. The centre is affected by traffic congestion during peak hours along Victoria Road. Car parking is currently available on street on Victoria Road (outside peak hours) and surrounding streets and in off- street car parks, including the Council car parks with access off Flagstaff Street, Pittwater Road and Coulter Street. Frequent bus services connect the centre with Ryde and the Sydney CBD. Other bus services connecting nearby suburbs are available. The centre contains several community services including Ryde-Hunters Hill Library, Gladesville Public School, occasional care, pre-school, Gladesville Community Aid and several churches. The centre has experienced very little growth in retail floor space in recent years. A major shopping development has recently been constructed on the Flagstaff Street car park site (Hunters Hill Council). The centre contains a Coles Supermarket and 22 specialty shops. The centre is surrounded by a variety of housing forms including dwelling houses (some of which have been identified as items of environmental heritage significance or contributory buildings), town houses, semi-detached housing and walk-up flats. Planning Workshop Australia undertook a planning study of the shopping centre on behalf of the Councils in 2000. The study was quite exhaustive in analysing the centre’s retail role and traffic, parking and pedestrian issues.



Because of the spread-out nature of commercial establishments, it is difficult to determine where the shopping centre begins and ends. Generally, the focus of retail development is situated between Pittwater Road and Wharf Road. However, retailing continues south to Punt Road and north to Westminster Avenue. Connecting streets to Victoria Road do contain some commercial uses, including Massey, Cowell and Linsley Streets and Western Crescent, however retailing is very much focused on Victoria Road. One of the objectives of the Cowell Street DCP is to turn the shops around to face north and pedestrianised access way. Shops and businesses in the centre rely heavily on the on-street car parking afforded outside peak hours along Victoria Road, as these are the most accessible short-term car parking spaces. On-street car parking is augmented by the provision of 3 public car parks comprising in the order of 250 spaces: • John Wilson Car Park (off Pittwater Road) • Coulter Street Car Park • Cowell Street Car Park. Buildings in the centre generally are 2 storeys in height predominantly as a consequence of the relatively level nature of the Victoria Road properties, although many are 3 storeys at the rear. Exceptions to this include up to 5 levels surrounding the Jordan Street/Victoria Road intersection, the 3-4 level Gladesville RSL Club in Linsley Street and a 4 level residential/retail development at the corner of Meriton Street and Victoria Road. The most dominant built form in the centre appears to be the NRMA building of 5 levels near the corner of Jordan Street. Its appearance contrasts sharply with older style shop fronts and historic churches located in its immediate vicinity. Buildings in the centre are of variable age and condition, and typically excessive and poorly designed signage clutters the facades of buildings. Significant heritage buildings in the centre include 2 churches fronting the Victoria Road/Jordan Street/Pittwater Road intersection (which together with other buildings form a distinctive northern entry to the centre), the Bayview Tavern and several sandstone cottages which front Victoria Road along the centre’s northern and southern fringes. These latter buildings date from the nineteenth century and reflect Victoria Road’s (formerly Great North Road) role as the primary communications corridor through the area at that time. Identified heritage structures are protected from demolition within the respective Council’s planning instruments. Victoria Road today is still a major communications corridor connecting Sydney and Parramatta generally along the northern shore of the Parramatta River. The road carries in excess of 50,000 vehicles daily. The busiest section of the road through the centre lies south of the Victoria Road/Jordan Street/Pittwater Road. Land use in the centre is mixed. Shopfronts containing retail and professional uses dominate along Victoria Road. Other uses evident in the centre include: • Gladesville Public School • Our Lady Queen of Peace School • Gladesville RSL Club • 2 motels • 3 churches • community services



The Hunters Hill Local Environment Plan No.1 as amended controls development in the centre, as well as Development Control Plan No. 21 – Commercial Development and the Cowell Street Draft DCP (currently on exhibition). The subject site is zoned Business 3(a) – General pursuant to the Hunters Hill LEP, and is not situated within a Conservation Area or Foreshore Scenic Protection Area. Surrounding development is similarly zoned 3(a) except 8 & 9 Cowell Street, which is zoned Residential 2(b). Hunters Hill Council, as part of the preparation and implementation of its housing strategy, amended its local environmental plan to encourage shop-top housing and to remove the floor space ratio controls in the centre. FSR controls are now contained in DCP 21, which allows for some flexibility. Preliminary observation of the centre tends to suggest that it is economically healthy, with few shop vacancies. The shops are reasonably accessed by foot from the parking areas. The links between the new “Gladesville Retail Village” Flagstaff Street shopping development and the Victoria Road shopping area desperately need to be improved. Urban design elements that give Gladesville Shopping Centre a distinct 'sense of place' are few. The centre’s heritage items, as well as Trim Place, could be considered to fall into this category. Street furniture is utilitarian at best. The two Fig trees adjacent to the site are the key defining streetscape elements.





K

Correspondence

K – Correspondence


Index 1. Items 1 –7 of Correspondence 1

.................................... Barry Smith

GENERAL MANAGER

REPORT OF CORRESPONDENCE Meeting 4139 – 9th December, 2002 K1


ITEM NO : 1 SUBJECT : CORRESPONDENCE BUSINESS PROGRAM : MANAGEMENT & COUNCIL SUPPORT REPORTING OFFICER : GENERAL MANAGER FILE : 200/02 1. MS. CONNIE EWALD, 82 WOOLWICH ROAD, WOOLWICH writes to thank Council for

nominating her for a Premier’s Seniors Achievement Award which she was recently awarded in the Environment/Science category and which she received from the Premier at a special luncheon ceremony (015/03).

2. THE HON. KIM YEARDON MP, MINISTER FOR ENERGY, writes to advise of the immediate implementation of voluntary water restrictions and urges Council to ensure that it adheres to the restrictions.

Under the Drought Management Plans developed by Sydney Water and the Sydney Catchment Authority, voluntary water restrictions are implemented when water storage levels reach a capacity of 65%. Current water storage levels for Sydney, the Illawarra and the Blue Mountains are 67.5% but, in view of the poor meteorological outlook over the coming months, the Minister believes that immediate implementation will be welcomed by the community as a proactive water conservation measure (370/55).

3. THE HON. JOHN WATKINS MP, MINISTER FOR EDUCATION AND TRAINING, writes to advise of the following action to be taken regarding the future of Hunters Hill High School:

�� Mr. Greg Jones, Principal of Cromer Public School, has been deployed to assist with the development of plans to enhance public education in the area served by the school and will coordinate and facilitate communication between the school community and officers of the Department of Education and Training to ensure the maximum benefit to the school.

�� A Hunters Hill High School working party will be formed and members will include Mr. Jones, other members of the project team, the Relieving Principal (Ms. Judith Felton), two other school representatives and two community representatives (Mr. Phil Daniels and Ms. Kathy Prokhovnik).

�� All necessary maintenance work at the school will be completed by the end of January 2003. The program of works includes carpentry, electrical work, painting, floor repairs, ground works and roof and gutter cleaning.

�� The Department is sending letters to the parents of Year 6 students in surrounding schools advising that the high school is now accepting enrolments for 2003.



�� A selection panel has been convened for the appointment of a Principal for Hunters Hill High School and expressions of interest will also be sought for an additional Deputy Principal position, which will be filled for two years to facilitate school planning and curriculum support.

�� A marketing plan has been developed to promote the school to the wider community and, as part of this plan, advertisements will be placed in local papers promoting enrolment at the school and promotional material, such as a brochure and prospectus, will be developed for the school (1535/1).

4. SUPERINTENDENT GARRY MCBAIN, EXECUTIVE OFFICER, WILLOUGHBY/RYDE/HUNTERS HILL/LANE COVE DISTRICT BUSHFIRE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE writes to invite Council to nominate a Councillor as a member of the Committee.

The District Bushfire Management Committee was established by Land Managers and the NSW Fire Brigades to meet the requirements of the Rural Fire Service Act so as to minimize the impact of bush fires on the community. It meets every three months and currently comprises representatives from Willoughby, Ryde, Hunters Hill and Lane Cove Councils, National Parks and Wildlife Service, NSW Police, TollAust and NSW Fire Brigades.

At the last meeting on 15 October, the Committee decided that, for it to be even more effective, each Council should also be represented by a Councillor to ensure communication back to the Council and its residents (260/01).

5. SENIOR CONSTABLE MICHELLE MATHIESON, GLADESVILLE DETECTIVES, GLADESVILLE LOCAL AREA COMMAND, writes enclosing a pamphlet (copy attached) that has been released publicly which seeks support for the town of Garah because of the current drought.

Gladesville LAC has decided to support this town, which is a small community of 100 people including about 20 children, by seeking donations of gifts, clothing, toys, books and food to make the residents’ Christmas a little better. They seek Council’s support in this and also suggest that Council may be able to generate some publicity for the appeal in the community (370/42).

6. LGOV WEEKLY ISSUE No. 47/02 dated 22nd November, 2002

ITEM 2, NEW SEPP 5 PLANNING CRITERIA FOR BUSHFIRE AREAS - The State Government is in the process of strengthening its planning laws for aged and disabled housing (SEPP 5) in order to add new criteria to protect residents from bushfires. Councils will be required to seek the approval of the Rural Fire Service (RFS) Commissioner in relation to road access when assessing all SEPP 5 development proposals in bushfire prone areas.

The new criteria will ensure that all new developments for the aged and the disabled have adequate access into and out of homes and that Councils must refuse any new development if the road access and egress compromises evacuation. It will be against the law for Councils to approve any development of this kind without taking the advice of the RFS Commissioner on road access. Under the new laws: • The RFS Commissioner will take access issues into account when approving



developments for the aged and disabled in bush fire prone areas. • Areas with limited access and egress will be identified by the Commissioner and

developments for the aged and disabled will be prohibited. • Councils must ensure that buildings do not breach setback requirements in the bushfire

guidelines. • Councils must prepare bushfire maps as a priority. Planning NSW is presently reviewing the terms of amendment and will notify key stakeholders when the new laws take effect.

ITEM 3, FAIR GO FOR LIBRARIES FUNDING CAMPAIGN - The Local Government Association 2002 Annual Conference resolved to: • note and condemn the low increase in State Government funding for public libraries in

the 2002/03 budget in particular and over the last 20 years in general, given that public libraries are an important cornerstone of local communities;

• encourage all Councils to join the Metropolitan Public Libraries Association and the Country Public Libraries Association in seeking a significant State Government budget enhancement for public libraries in future budgets;

• encourage all Councils to join the Metropolitan Public Libraries Association, the Country Public Libraries Association and local residents in the ‘Fair Go for Libraries’ campaign aimed at all State election candidates scheduled for November 2002 to highlight the need for a significant State Government budget enhancement for public libraries to all parties.

In the coming weeks Lgov NSW strongly encourages all Councils to involve themselves in the libraries campaign, especially by distributing the campaign postcards, encouraging local residents to use the postcards and hosting local events to highlight the need for a significant State Government budget enhancement for Public Libraries to all local political parties and candidates.

The Metropolitan Public Libraries Association and the Country Public Libraries Association have already distributed materials and taken orders for the postcards. The postcard campaign will continue from November and culminate in a week of action in early February. The exact date for the week of action will be advised in a forthcoming Lgov Weekly. Lgov NSW is concerned that none of the NSW political parties seem to understand the importance of public libraries, the level of community demand for these services, the need for a significant boost by the State to the library funding effort or the legitimacy and gravity of Local Government’s case.

ITEM 15, LOCAL GOVERNMENT WEEK 2003 - Local Government Week 2003 will take place from 28 July to 3 August 2003. The theme for the week is Local Government elections and it will be launched at an awards evening in Sydney. The theme has been selected to raise awareness of Local Government and the September 2003 elections.



Lgov NSW Marketing and Communication Unit will produce a Local Government Week kit with ideas and community activities for Councils, which will be sent to Councils and be made available on the Lgov NSW web site by mid next year.

Suggestions received in response to a survey following Local Government Week 2002 will be incorporated into next year’s activities.

A resource kit for primary school teachers and Councils will also be produced early next year. Copies will be sent to Councils and be made available on the Lgov NSW web site. The kits will provide information on the important role of Local Government and it will be recommended that teachers cover the Local Government segment of their syllabus during Local Government Week. Local Government Week will be launched on Monday, 28 July 2003 at the Local Government Awards Evening following on from the success of previous years.

It is proposed the following awards will be announced at the event: • A R Bluett Awards • R H Dougherty Awards for 2002 • 2003 Australia Day Council Local Community Awards • Youth Week Local Council Awards.

A copy of the Index for Lgov Weekly No. 47/02 is attached.

7. LGOV WEEKLY ISSUE No. 48/02 dated 29th November, 2002

ITEM 1, NATIONAL AWARDS FOR EXCELLENCE FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT - The 2002 National Awards for Local Government were announced at the General Assembly in Alice Springs recently. NSW winners are:

Council Award Project title Tumut Shire National Award Winner

Rural Winner – Business and Regional Development category

Development of a paper mill in Tumut Shire

Hastings Commendation – Business and Regional Development category

Hastings Food and Agriculture Opportunities Program

Newcastle City Commendation – Business and Regional Development category

Newcastle Floorspace and Employment Survey

Leichhardt Commendation – Community Services category

Graffiti Strategy – Graffiti Trailer and Graffiti Kits

Hornsby Shire Commendation – Environment – Sustaining Local Communities: Local Agenda 21 category

Creating a Living Environment

Wollondilly Shire Commendation – Financial Management category

State of Wollondilly



Kiama Municipal Commendation – Health Services and Aged Care category

Kiama Council Broerage Nursing Project

Baulkham Hills Shire

Winner – Organisational Practices category

Event Management Guide

Blue Mountains City

Commendation – Organisational Practices category

Productivity Focused Professional Development Strategy for the Blue Mountains City Council Staff

ITEM 4, PREMIER’S SENIORS WEEK AWARDS PROGRAM - The Department of Ageing, Disability and Home Care is seeking Local Government support in managing the Premier’s Seniors Week Awards Program. The Department sent nomination forms and an outline of the role Councils are being asked to play to each Council on Friday, 29 November 2002. The awards celebrate individuals and organisations in the community who promote the well being of older people. They also acknowledge NSW seniors for their contribution to the development of local committees. Seniors Week is an important week on the NSW Government calendar for both State Government agencies and Local Government. Nominations for the awards close on 20 January 2003 and presentations will occur during Seniors Week from 16-21 March 2003. The Department of Ageing, Disability and Home Care recognises the essential role that Councils play in conducting Seniors Week in local communities and look to develop stronger partnerships with Local Government to make sure the event is celebrated across the State.

ITEM 10, 2002/03 LOCAL AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PROJECTS GRANTS - The NSW Government, through its Environmental Trust, has made available $750,000 for the 2002/03 Local Air Quality Improvement Projects Grants for councils. Applications close on 28 February 2003. NSW Councils and Regional Organisations of Councils (ROCs) are invited to apply to the Environment Protection Authority (EPA) for funding assistance for projects designed to tackle air emissions from local industrial, commercial, construction, residential and transport related sources. The aim of projects will be to help reduce emissions and improve air quality at a local level. Grants ranging from $10,000 to $100,000 per project will be made to successful applicants. ITEM 18, CLEAN UP AUSTRALIA DAY - Clean Up Australia recently contacted Councils to recruit support for the 2003 ‘Australia’s Own Medication’ campaign. The 2003 clean up dates are: • Business Clean Up Day: 25 February • Friday Schools Clean Up Day: 28 February • Clean Up Australia Day: Sunday, 2 March.



Since 1989, more than 200,000 tonnes of rubbish has been collected and Councils are regarded as invaluable to the management of Clean Up Australia activities. The support provided by Local Government ensures the ongoing success of the campaign and significantly contributes to the future of the nation’s natural environment and resources. To reduce resources for the campaign, an Online Site Registration Form is available on the Clean Up website at www.cleanup.com.au. The site search facility on the website allows volunteers to search for clean up sites close to them in any area of Australia.

ITEM 19, MAJOR 2003 INTERNATIONAL LOCAL GOVERNMENT CONFERENCE - The International Union of Local Authorities will hold its Inaugural Congress in Sydney from 9-11 April 2003. The congress theme is ‘Local Government Leading Sustainable Communities’. It will focus on four key areas in exploring the theme: • economic development • environmental sustainability post Johannesburg • sustainable capacity building • civil society. All sessions will be plenary. A broad cross section of speakers has been invited to address the key areas and more information will be provided about the speakers and topics as soon as possible. Councils are urged to support this landmark conference. A copy of the Index for Lgov Weekly No. 48/02 is attached.

FINANCIAL IMPACT


RECOMMENDATION

That the correspondence be received and noted.

L

Report Of Delegates

L – Report Of Delegates


Index 1. In Memorial 1

............................. COUNCILLOR JENNIFER SCOTFORD

REPORT OF DELEGATES Meeting 4139 – 9th December, 2002 L1

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting No. 4139 held on 9th December,2002. This is page

ITEM NO : 1 SUBJECT : IN MEMORIAL BUSINESS PROGRAM : INFORMATION OF COUNCIL REPORTING OFFICER : COUNCILLOR JENNIFER SCOTFORD FILE : 200/08 Mrs Kathleen Christie nee Robertson was buried on Wednesday 4th December, 2002, following her passing at age 92 years. Mrs Christie was a life time resident of Hunters Hill and was a descendent of the Clark Family after which Clarke’s Point and Reserve are named. Her Great Grandfather is believed to have built the family home at Clark’s Point (since removed) and 9 Elgin Street with the family living at No. 9 until his death.

Following his demise, Mrs Christie’s Mother built a home at 3 Elgin Street where the family lived until her death, at which time Kathleen and her husband Max (who predeceased her seventeen years ago) moved to 79 Woolwich Road.

Mrs Christie will be greatly missed by her son Colin Christie, daughter Robin Bayley and her many Grandchildren and Great Grandchildren.

FINANCIAL IMPACT

There is no direct financial impact as a result of consideration of this report. RECOMMENDATION

That the report be received and noted and that the condolence of the Council be forwarded to the family of the Late Mrs Kathleen Christie.

M

General Business

M – General Business


Index 1. Meetings – Various Committees of Council 1

.................................... Barry Smith

GENERAL MANAGER

REPORT OF GENERAL BUSINESS Meeting 4139 – 9th December, 2002 M1


ITEM NO : 1 SUBJECT : MEETINGS - VARIOUS COMMITTEES OF COUNCIL BUSINESS PROGRAM : MANAGEMENT & COUNCIL SUPPORT REPORTING OFFICER : GENERAL MANAGER FILE : 205/01 PURPOSE DATE TIME LOCATION Occupational Health & Safety Committee 05/12/02 2.30pm Council Chamber Cowell Street Joint Development Working Party 05/12/02 5.00pm Council Chamber Ordinary Meeting of Council 09/12/02 7.30pm Council Chamber Parks & Trees Advisory Committee 17/12/02 7.45am Council Chamber Conservation Advisory Panel 18/12/02 7.00pm Council Chamber Hunters Hill Senior Support Group 13/01/03 10.00am 44 Gladesville Road Art & Craft Advisory Committee 14/01/03 5.30pm Small Hall Public Transport & Traffic Advisory Committee 21/01/03 7.30pm Council Chamber Ordinary Meeting of Council 10/02/03 7.30pm Council Chamber Access Advisory Committee 13/02/03 12.30pm TBA Gladesville Road Community Centre Management Committee

20/02/03 2.30pm 44 Gladesville Road

Ordinary Meeting of Council 24/02/03 7.30pm Council Chamber School Principals Liaison Committee 05/03/03 12.30pm Small Hall Children’s Services Committee 11/03/03 7.30pm Council Chamber Bushland Management Working Group TBA Domestic Animal Working Group TBA Environmental Management Committee TBA Hunters Hill – Le Vésinet Friendship Committee TBA Hunters Hill Traffic Committee TBA Hunters Hill Village Working Party TBA Local Place Names Committee TBA Moocooboola Festival Committee TBA Young in Art Working Party TBA Note: Details relating to Working Parties will be included as the meetings are arranged.

FINANCIAL IMPACT


RECOMMENDATION


Documents

ORDINARY MEETING No. 4139 - Hunter's Hill Council · 4139 – 9th December, 2002 INDEX A – MINUTES ... Progress Report on Exemption from SEPP 5 – Housing for Older People and