ordinary meeting no. 4236 · 2020. 12. 22. · 4236 – 10 september 2007 index a – confirmation...

Ordinary Meeting No. 4236 10 September 2007 at 7.30pm

Hunter ’s H i l l C ounc i l

ORDER OF BUSINESS

Prayer Attendance, Apologies, Declarations of Interests A Confirmation of Minutes Civic Ceremonies B Mayoral Minutes & Reports Tabling of Petitions Addresses from the Public C Notice of Motions

(including Rescission Motions) Reports from Staff D Development & Environment E Public Works & Infrastructure F Finance & Administration G Customer & Community Services H General Manager J Committees 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

4236 – 10 September 2007

INDEX

A – CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

1. Confirmation of Minutes of Ordinary Meeting No.4235 held 27 August 2007....1

B – MAYORAL MINUTES & REPORTS

1. Annual Performance Review – General Manager Barry Smith ..........................1

D – DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENT

1. 1 Passy Avenue, Hunters Hill ................................................................................1 2. 64-66A Woolwich Road, Woolwich .......................................................................9 3. 94 Pittwater Road, Hunters Hill .......................................................................... 17 4. Subregional Strategy ........................................................................................... 31 5. Delegated Authority ............................................................................................. 37 6. Legal Matters ....................................................................................................... 39

E – PUBLIC WORKS & INFRASTRUCTURE

1. Tree Preservation Order – Approvals/Refusals ..................................................1

G – CUSTOMER & COMMUNITY SERVICES

1. Proposed Skate Area at Gladesville Reserve .....................................................1

H – GENERAL MANAGER

1. Payment of Fees & Expenses & the Provision of Facilities to Councillors ........1 2. Naming of Ferry Wharves ......................................................................................3 3. Local Government Reform .....................................................................................4

J – COMMITTEES

1. Minutes of the Hunters Hill Senior Support Group Meeting held 20 August 2007 .......................................................................................................1

2. Minutes of the Conservation Advisory Panel Meeting held 15 August 2007 ....3 3. Minutes of the Public Transport & Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting held

21 August 2007........................................................................................................9 4. Minutes of the Hunter’s Hill Council Event Committee Meeting held

14 August 2007 .................................................................................................... 13 5. Minutes of the Woolwich Village Working Party Meeting held

8 August 2007.......................................................................................................17

M – GENERAL BUSINESS

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

A

Confirmation Of Minutes

A – Confirmation Of Minutes

4236 – 10 September 2007

Index 1. Confirmation of Minutes of Ordinary Meeting No. 4235 held 27 August 2007 1 ................................................ ............................................ Councillor Susan Hoopmann Barry Smith MAYOR GENERAL MANAGER

MINUTES OF ORDINARY MEETING NO.4235 – 27 August 2007 A1

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting No. 4235 held on 27 August 2007. This is page

COMMENCEMENT The meeting opened with Prayer at 7.40pm. IN ATTENDANCE The Mayor Councillor Susan Hoopmann, Deputy Mayor Councillor Peter Astridge, Councillors Annabel Croll, Simon Frame, Jason Lin, Richard Quinn and Ross Sheerin. ALSO PRESENT The General Manager Barry Smith, the Manager Development and Environment Steve Kourepis and Trainee Administration Officer Alice Prudhoe. APOLOGIES No apologies were received. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST The Mayor called for Declarations of Interest without response. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 337/07 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Sheerin, seconded Clr Astridge that the Minutes of

Ordinary Meeting No.4234 held 13 August 2007 be confirmed. REPORTS FROM STAFF DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENT (Pages D1 – D34) 1. DA NO.06/1079-1 – 1 PASSY AVENUE, HUNTERS HILL PROCEEDINGS IN BRIEF Mr. Blain Disher, (Objector) addressed the meeting on the subject matter. SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS 338/07 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Quinn, seconded Clr Croll that at 7.42pm, Standing

Orders be suspended to allow Councillors to view plans. RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS 339/07 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Quinn, seconded Clr Croll that at 7.55pm, Standing

Orders be resumed.



A motion was moved Clr Sheerin, seconded Clr Croll that Development Application No.06/1079-1 for alterations and additions - s.96 (1A) application to modify the consent to dwelling house at No.1 Passy Avenue, Hunters Hill, be deferred for a General Purpose Committee site inspection and further consideration before the next Ordinary Meeting of Council.

340/07 The motion on being put to the meeting was CARRIED. 2. DA NO.05/1021-3 – 12 JOHN STREET, HUNTERS HILL PROCEEDINGS IN BRIEF Ms Mary Yew (Objector) addressed the meeting on the subject matter. 341/07 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Quinn, seconded Clr Sheerin that Development

Application No.05/1021-3 for the demolition of the existing dwelling house and construction of a contemporary two storey dwelling house at No.12 John Street, Hunters Hill, be approved and condition No.55 be amended as follows: Standard Conditions: 55. The development consent No.05/1021-3 relates to the plans prepared by

Felton Constructions Pty Ltd, Drawing Nos. sheet 1 of 10 to 7 of 10 and all date stamped 21 April 2005 and Landscape Plan prepared by Paul Yang, Drawing No.HH-L_00_5_01 and dated 7 June 2005, as amended plans prepared by Felton Constructions Pty Ltd, drawing Nos. sheet 1 of 10 Revision CC/A dated 11/05/06, sheet 3 of 10 Revision CC/A dated 11/05/06, sheet 4 of 10 Revision CC/A dated 11/05/06, sheet 5 of 10 Revision CC/A dated 11/05/06 and sheet 6 of 10 Revision CC/A dated 11/05/06, as amended drawing prepared by Felton Constructions Pty Ltd, Drawing No. Sheet 5 of 11, dated 11 May 2007 as received by Council on 22 June 2007.

56. The obscure glazing proposed for the north-east first floor ensuite window

should be of a permanent form, such as acid etched glass or equivalent. An obscure or translucent film applied to clear glass is not considered to be of permanent form, and will not satisfy this condition of approval.

57. The proposed window on the first floor level, servicing the bathroom to the

eastern elevation, is to be provided with a hopper type window and is not to open any more than 200mm out from the sill. Details are to be submitted and approved by the PCA at the Construction Certificate stage.

3. DA NO. 04/1028-2 – 15 FRANCIS STREET, HUNTERS HILL PROCEEDINGS IN BRIEF Ms Cathy Merchant, Mr. Steven Layman and Mr. Adrian Lahood (Objectors)

addressed the meeting on the subject matter. 342/07 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Sheerin, seconded Clr Quinn that Development

Application No.04/1028-2 for the demolition of the existing dwelling house and the erection of a new dwelling house with basement parking, swimming pool and fencing - section 96 modification at No.15 Francis Street, Hunters Hill, be approved and that condition Nos.62, 84 and 100 of the consent be amended as follows:



62. The development consent No.04/1028 relates to the plans prepared by Asabiyah Drawing 2002.012. Nos.002 F, 003 F, 004 G, 005 F, 100 F, 22 G, 201 F, 202 F, 203 F, 210 G, 300 F, 301 F dated 3 July 2007 as received by Council on 21 August 2007, except where amended by conditions of this consent.

84. A survey plan prepared by a registered surveyor shall be submitted to the

Principal Certifying Authority upon completion of the development on the site confirming the garden area exceeds fifty (50) percent of the site area as required by Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan No.1, as amended, and the general provisions of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act.

100. To ensure compliance with the Swimming Pools Act, 1922, the existing

boundary fence, forming part of the safety fencing to enclose the pool shall be upgraded or otherwise so altered or reconstructed so as to comply with the provisions of the Australian Standard 1926-1986 “Fences and Gates for Private Swimming Pools”. The average height of the dividing fence is to be at least 1.8 metres in height above the natural ground level. Attention is directed to any obligations or responsibilities under the Dividing Fences Act in respect of adjoining property owners, which may arise in respect of this matter and enquiries in this regard may be made at the nearest Local Court.

And new conditions 114 and 115 to read as follows:

114. The front section of the swimming pool being re-sited 300mm to the rear

behind the existing natural ground level so as not to exceed 150mm above ground level for the pool’s retention within the standard of garden area, as defined.

115. The landscaping of the site being carried out in accordance with an

amended landscape plan to reflect the changes to the building surrounds including the amended pool and its surrounding features. Such plan is to be prepared and submitted to Council for approval and stamping prior to the altered work.

Clr Frame retired from the meeting at 8.33pm. 4. DELEGATED AUTHORITY 343/07 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Lin, seconded Clr Quinn that the report be received

and noted. PUBLIC WORKS & INFRASTRUCTURE (Pages E1 – E2) 1. ADOPTION OF THE NORTHERN SYDNEY REGIONAL RABBIT MANAGEMENT

PLAN 344/07 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Astridge, seconded Clr Croll that Council:

1. Sign the Memorandum of Understanding. 2. Endorse the Annual Action Plan (Appendix 4 of the Plan). 3. Endorse the allocation of an additional $1,500 pa to the Destruction of Pest

Species.



FINANCE & ADMINISTRATION (Pages F1 – F2)

1. SUMMARY OF COUNCIL'S INVESTMENTS FOR JULY 2007

345/07 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Astridge, seconded Clr Quinn that the report be

received and noted. GENERAL MANAGER (Pages H1 – H17) 1. CHANGE OF MEETING DATE, OCTOBER 2007 346/07 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Sheerin, seconded Clr Astridge that the Ordinary

Meeting for the fourth Monday in October be rescheduled to Monday 29 October 2007, commencing at 7.30pm.

2. BETTER PRACTICE REVIEW - FINAL REPORT 347/07 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Astridge, seconded Clr Quinn that the report be

received and noted. 3. MONTHLY REPORT ON OUTSTANDING MATTERS 348/07 Resolved on the motion of Clr Astridge, seconded Clr Quinn that the report be

received and noted. COMMITTEE REPORTS (Pages J1 – J16) 1. GENERAL PURPOSE COMMITTEE INSPECTIONS HELD 13 AUGUST 2007 349/07 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Astridge, seconded Clr Croll that the report be

received and noted. 2. MINUTES OF THE GLADESVILLE ROAD COMMUNITY CENTRE MANAGEMENT

COMMITTEE MEETING HELD 9 AUGUST 2007 350/07 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Sheerin, seconded Clr Astridge that the minutes be

received and noted. 3. MINUTES OF THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY PANEL MEETING HELD

18 JULY 2007

351/07 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Croll, seconded Clr Sheerin that the minutes be

received and noted.



4. MINUTES OF HUNTERS HILL LOCAL TRAFFIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING HELD 16 AUGUST 2007

352/07 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Astridge, seconded Clr Lin that:

1. Massey Street – Intersection of Massey Street with Flagstaff Street and Venus Street: (a) Council improve the signage at Flagstaff Street to prevent left-

hand turns into Massey Street. (b) Council consider a study to revise the operation of Massey

Street/Venus Street. 2. Massey Street – Parking: (a) That Council assess the request against the criteria in the RTA publication “Permit Parking” and report back to the Local Traffic

Committee with an appropriate recommendation. (b) That Council considers the likely impact on traffic with the closure

of Top Ryde Shopping Centre. 3. Gaza Avenue – “No Stopping” signs: That signs be installed in Gaza Avenue – “No Stopping 9am–12pm on

Fridays”. 4. Gladesville Road – Parking Restrictions: That 1 hour parking signs on the northern side of Gladesville Road,

between Ryde Road and Matthew Street be installed. 5. Gladesville Road – Pedestrian Facility: That Council investigate and install improved advisory signs in Gladesville

Road, regarding pedestrian movements at the exit ramp to Burns Bay Road.

GENERAL BUSINESS (Page M1) 1. MEETINGS – VARIOUS COMMITTEES OF COUNCIL 353/07 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Astridge, seconded Clr Croll that the report listing the

various Committees of Council be received and noted. QUESTIONS WITH OR WITHOUT NOTICE

No. Author Date Question Answer

25/07 Clr Astridge

27.08.07 Could a report please be brought forward on the prioritisation of road reconstruction throughout the Municipality?

A report on the condition of Council’s road network and priority of work will be presented to Council in October 2007. The data and analysis necessary for the report is currently being collected.

26/07 Could Mayfield Avenue be resurfaced as soon as possible?

Mayfield Ave has a concrete road pavement. There are several signs of failure in the concrete, however, the best



No. Author Date Question Answer

form of repair is to replace the failed sections of concrete. It is not recommended to overlay the concrete with asphalt, as this leads to future maintenance problems. As asphalt ages, it becomes more brittle. The consequence of this is that the cracks in the underlying concrete reflect through the asphalt. This is a common problem, which can be seen in Ryde Road. Concrete road pavements are best left unsurfaced, and if properly maintained, can last for many decades. There will be concrete replacement maintenance work carried out in Mayfield Ave this year.

27/07 Clr Astridge 27.08.09 Could dirt, fill and grass be placed in the dip of footpath outside the dentist premises on the corner of Gladesville Road and Ryde Road (Gladesville Road opposite Hunters Hill Village Shopping Centre)?

The requested work will be completed by Friday 7 September 2007.

TERMINATION The meeting terminated at 9.05pm. I confirm that these Minutes are a true and accurate record of Ordinary Meeting No.4235 held 27 August 2007.

..................................................... ......................................... Councillor Susan R. Hoopmann Barry Smith MAYOR GENERAL MANAGER

B

Mayoral Minutes & Reports

B – Mayoral Minutes & Reports

4236 – 10 September 2007

Index 1. Annual Performance Review – General Manager Barry Smith 1 .................................................

Councillor Susan Hoopmann MAYOR

MAYORAL MINUTES & REPORTS Meeting 4236 – 10 September 2007 B1

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting No.4236 held 10 September, 2007. This is page

ITEM NO : 1

SUBJECT : ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW – GENERAL MANAGER BARRY SMITH

BUSINESS PROGRAM : MANAGEMENT & COUNCIL SUPPORT

REPORTING OFFICER : COUNCILLOR SUSAN HOOPMANN

FILE : 702/03

In accordance with the requirements of the Contract of Employment for the General Manager Mr. Barry Smith, it is proposed that a Performance Review will be undertaken on 20 September 2007, prior to completion of his first year of service. The Department of Local Government, Local Government and Shires Association and Local Government Managers Australia have developed and agreed on a set of ‘Performance Guidelines’ to assist Councils in undertaking performance reviews. A copy of the guidelines is provided to Councillors under separate cover. The sections of the guidelines relevant to the review process are: Establishing the framework for performance management Council/ GM Performance Review Panel Whilst the Council can undertake the performance management of its General Manager, it is recommended that it delegate this task to a GM Performance Review Panel. A Panel provides a better forum for constructive discussion and feedback. It should comprise the Mayor, optionally the Deputy Mayor and one Councillor nominated by the Council. The General Manager should have the option of nominating another Councillor to the Panel. It is good practice to enable Councillors not on the Panel to provide feedback to the Mayor in the week prior to each session. All Councillors should be notified of the relevant dates of the sessions to assist with this process. Those councillors selected to take part on the Panel should have received training on the performance management of General Managers. Training in the performance management of General Managers should be part of councils’ induction programs for councillors following each election. If the decision is made to delegate to a Panel, the extent of that delegation should be clear. It is recommended that the whole process of performance management be delegated to the Panel, including decisions about performance, any actions that should be taken, and the determination of the new performance agreement. The result should be reported to a closed meeting of Council or a Committee of Council. This should not be an opportunity to debate the results, or re-enact the performance management of the General Manager. External Facilitator The Council and the General Manager may agree on the involvement of an external facilitator, experienced in performance management, to assist with the development of the performance plan and the process of performance appraisal (paragraph 7.8 of the Standard Contract of employment). An external facilitator is helpful in ensuring objectivity and fairness in the performance management process. This person can help the Council in identifying what Council’s expectations of the General Manager are. The external facilitator should be a skilled facilitator with a good understanding of the functions of local government and the role and responsibilities of the General Manager. 7.8 The structure and process of the performance review is at the discretion of Council

following consultation with the employee.



Models of Performance Agreements Some of the models for performance agreements currently used by Councils and General Managers are also provided in the guidelines. The model used by Council for the past ten years, is the Process and Outcome Model and this has proven to be very satisfactory. (i) Process and Outcome model

This model divides the agreement into two parts:

Part One relates to process objectives, or the General Manager’s position objectives and responsibilities as per the Contract Part Two relates to strategic objectives, or key outcomes from Council’s Management Plan The measures in this model are both quantitative and qualitative. The scoring method used is a rating system from A to D (or 5.0 to 0.0), where A (5.0) is excellent and D (0.0 – 0.9) is unsatisfactory.

Training of Councillors in Performance Management Councillors have participated in the past three annual reviews and should the same performance agreement be maintained then no additional training should be required. As recommended in the ‘Performance Guidelines’ it is suggested that Council form a review panel for the purpose of undertaking the annual performance review. The Review will be conducted in consultation with Mr. Smith and thereafter, a written statement in terms of Clause 7.10 of his contract will be provided. In accordance with the conditions of the Contract, Council will prepare and send to the employee, within 6 weeks from the conclusion of a performance review, a written statement that sets out: (a) Conclusions about the employee’s performance during the performance review

period, (b) Any proposal by Council to vary the performance criteria as a consequence of a

performance review, and (c) Any directions or recommendations made by Council to the employee in relation to

the employee’s future performance of the duties of the position. In order that this process may be commenced, it is necessary for the General Manager to supply the Panel with a copy of his self-assessment. As suggested in the Performance Guidelines it is proposed that the self-assessment is provided to all Councillors for completion and comment, after which, the Panel will coordinate all responses and draft its assessment.



FINANCIAL IMPACT The contract provides for variations in the total remuneration package as follows: 8.1 Council may, on only one occasion during each year of this contract, approve an increase

in the total remuneration package where the employee’s performance has been assessed in accordance with a performance review as part of a better than satisfactory standard.

8.2 Any increase in remuneration approved under subclause 8.3 will not be paid as a lump sum.

8.3 On each anniversary of the commencement date, the total remuneration package will be increased by a percentage amount that is equivalent to the latest percentage amount increase in remuneration for senior executive office holders by the Statutory and Other Officers Remuneration Tribunal.

RECOMMENDATION 1. The Mayor, Deputy Mayor and one other Councillor form the Review Panel. 2. The General Manager nominate one other Councillor to the Review Panel should

he wish to do so.

3. The review panel be given delegated authority to: (a) Undertake and complete the review process, including the determination

of a new performance agreement for 2007/08. (b) determine any review of the remuneration package in accordance with

section 8.1 of the Contract. 4. The Review be conducted in consultation with Mr. Smith and thereafter, a written

statement in terms of Clause 7.10 of the Contract be provided to the General Manager.

5. The results of the review be reported to Council in Closed Session following

completion. ATTACHMENT Local Government General Manager Performance Management Guidelines (under separate cover).

D

Development & Environment

D – Development & Environment

4236 – 10 September 2007

Index 1. 1 Passy Avenue, Hunters Hill 1 2. 64-66A Woolwich Road, Woolwich 9 3. 94 Pittwater Road, Hunters Hill 17 4. Subregional Strategy 31 5. Delegated Authority 37 6. Legal Matters 39 .........................................

Steve Kourepis MANAGER

DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENT

REPORT OF DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENT

Meeting 4236 – 10 September 2007 D1

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting No. 4236 held on 10 September 2007. This is page

ITEM NO : 1

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION NO : 06/1079-1

PROPOSAL : PARTIAL DEMOLITION, ALTERATIONS & ADDITIONS TO DWELLING, NEW SWIMMING POOL PAVILION, FENCING & LANDSCAPING - SECTION 96(1A) MODIFICATION

PROPERTY : 1 PASSY AVENUE, HUNTERS HILL

APPLICANT : ARCHITECTURAL PROJECTS PTY LTD

OWNER : MRS J.S.OBEID

DATE LODGED : 24 MAY 2007

BUSINESS PROGRAM : DEVELOPMENT CONTROL

REPORTING OFFICER : KERRY SMITH

FILES : 1560/1 & DA06/1079-1 Preamble This application was considered by Council at its Ordinary Meeting on 27 August 2007, where it was resolved to defer the application as follows:

That Development Application No.06/1079-1 for alterations and additions - s.96 (1A) application to modify the consent to dwelling house at No.1 Passy Avenue, Hunters Hill, be deferred for a General Purpose Committee site inspection and further consideration before the next Ordinary Meeting of Council.

1. SUMMARY

Reasons for Report

The original application for the partial demolition and alterations and additions to the existing dwelling house, the construction of a new swimming pool pavilion, fencing and landscaping was approved by Council at its Ordinary Meeting of 11 December 2006. Based on Council’s delegations, the Section 96 application is required to be referred back to Council for its determination.

Issues

The re-siting of the garage, kitchen, lounge, cinema and maids quarters to the north-western quarter and the extension of that portion of the existing building forward to Passy Avenue (some 1.5 metres).




This is to provide for a reversion to the proposed building layout and form as first submitted to Council as the development application on 2 June 2006. This was subject of amended plans submitted on 22 November 2006, as based on discussions with Council officers

Objections

Two (2) objections were received raising concerns about landscaping at the rear and bulk, scale and proximity to premises to the north.

Recommendation

The application for modification by way of amended plans and conditions is recommended for refusal on the basis that the requested alterations are not justifiable, will cause amenity problems for the adjoining neighbours and will set an undesirable precedent.

2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL

The proposed modifications to the development consent No.06/1079 dated11 December 2006 are requested as follows: • To extend the northern front wing 1.825 metres closer to the street alignment i.e. to

a minimum of 1.846 metres and a maximum of 3.038 metres from the street. • To delete the skillion roof section from the front of the western elevation of the

northern wing and replace it with a hipped section of roof. • To provide a bedroom in the additional floor space at the front upper section of the

northern wing. 3. DESCRIPTION OF SITE & LOCALITY

The subject site is situated on the eastern side of Passy Avenue, between Ambrose Street and Woolwich Road. The allotment is legally referred to as Lot M DP 445399.

The site is roughly rectangular in shape and has a total site area of 4,172.68 square metres and a frontage of 75.87metres. The site slopes down to the rear.

Currently standing on the subject site is a two-storey and part cellar dwelling with two single-storey forward projecting wings to the sides of the dwelling and a glasshouse attached to its northern side. There is an existing kidney-shaped swimming pool to the rear of the house and on the northern boundary.

There is a large open landscaped area to the rear of the dwelling along with a swimming pool to the north of the rear of the dwelling. There are many significant trees around the perimeter of the site.

A 1.8m high masonry fence is sited on the street alignment with vehicular access via wrought iron gates at the southern end of the frontage.

A public pathway adjoins the south and east (rear) boundaries of the site and links Passy Avenue with Garrick Avenue.

Surrounding development generally consists of dwelling houses of single-storey and two- storeys in height. To the south of the site, abutting the public pathway, is a series of garages and sheds at the rear of dwellings fronting Woolwich Road.

The site is located within Conservation Area No.1 and has a local heritage listing.




4. PROPERTY HISTORY

Development approval (DA06/1079) was granted, subject to conditions by Council on 11 December 2006, to carry out partial demolition as well as alterations and additions to the existing dwelling house, new swimming pool pavilion, fencing and landscaping. Historically, the ‘kitchen’ and the ‘stable’ wings were extended towards the Passy Avenue alignment in the 1970s. The Waterboard map of 1936 shows the two wings in their original location on the site. The north or ‘kitchen’ wing at that time was set back a minimum of approximately 10 metres from the Passy Avenue alignment. 5. STATUTORY CONTROLS 5.1 Relevant Statutory Instruments Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 Local Environmental Plan No.1 (as amended) Zone: Residential 2(a3) Conservation Area: Yes Foreshore Scenic Protection Area: Yes SREP (Waterways) No Development Control Plan: Yes Listed Heritage item: Yes Contributory Building: No Adjoins contributory item No Vicinity of Heritage Item: Yes 6. POLICY CONTROLS DCP No.15 applies. 7. REFERRALS 7.1 Comments from external Approval Bodies Not applicable. 7.2 Health & Building Not applicable. 7.3 Heritage The s.96 proposal was referred to Council’s Conservation Advisory Panel (CAP) meeting of 18 July 2007 and it stated that:

the proposal before the CAP is essentially a revision to a scheme …..but that the design was amended in order to attract the support of Council’s planners in the process of the previous application.

The Conservation Advisory Panel, at its meeting on 18 July 2007 found the design supportable. As before, the Panel determined that the concerns of the subject proposal were planning issues rather than a heritage issue.




The Heritage Adviser on 29 November 2006 reported that he found the amendments to the “north wing” (i.e. set further back and the skillion section at the front) to be generally in accordance with those agreed to by the Conservation Advisory Panel previously in sketch form. He also stated: In my view the amendments will reduce the impact of the bulk of the proposal, and given that it will be

seen against a background of the main two storey building of “Passy” when viewed from the north west, and in general, should not give rise to adverse impacts on the item, nor on the character of the conservation area and streetscape.

At the CAP meeting of 20 September 2006, it reported:

The Panel considered proposed design amendments to the development application proposal currently before Council. These included:

Proposed reconfiguration of the “northern wing”- discussions had been had between Council’s planners

and Jennifer Hill of Architectural Projects with a view to reducing the perceived potential impacts of bulk on the streetscape of this element of the proposal. An amended design sketch was considered by the CAP. This entailed a greater setback of in the order of 1.2 metres from the street frontage, reduction in the width of part of the building adjacent the northern boundary and the reconfiguration of the roof. A single storey skillion section, approximately 4-5 metres deep is to be presented to the street, with asymmetrical gables beyond.

In examining this proposal, the Panel considered the proposed greater setback to the street frontage to

be beneficial, but expressed a preference for the paired and bridged hips, as previously proposed. It is considered that the “northern” wing will be seen against a ground of the main building in views from the north-/ north-west, and that, in terms of visual impact , would be relatively benign.

7.4 Public Works and Infrastructure No objection from Council’s Assistant Design and Development Engineer subject to conditions as set out in the recommendation. 7.5 Landscaping This matter was referred to Council’s consultant Landscape Architect who did not raise issue with the landscape proposal as the building work and hence the landscaping were the same as originally applied for, but subsequently amended. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UNDER S.79C & S.96(1A) The relevant matters for consideration under section 79C and 96(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 are assessed under the following headings: 8.1 Assessment under Section 96 of the Environmenta l Planning and Assessment

Act 1979

This proposal is assessed under Section 96(1A) of the Act as the potential impact must be considered in relation to the original consent.

The provisions of s.96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, require Council to be satisfied that the development to which consent as modified relates is substantially the same development for which consent was originally granted.

It is considered that the development to which the consent, as proposed to be modified, relates is substantially the same development as the modifications relate to the original approved works.




No Construction Certificate has been issued and no unauthorised work has been carried out on the premises. 9. STATE INSTRUMENTS / LEGISLATION 9.1 SEPPs Not applicable to this s.96 application. The original development application was subject of an SEPP No.1 objection which was accepted by Council. 9.2 REPs Not applicable to this s.96 application. 9.3 Other Legislation Not applicable. 10. HUNTERS HILL LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN NO.1 10.1 Aims and Objectives of Hunters Hill Local Envi ronmental Plan No.1 and Zone The proposal is permissible with consent under the Residential 2(a3) zone and complies with the relevant statutory controls of Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan No.1. 10.2 Statutory Compliance Table Complies, with the exception of height, which was subject of an SEPP No.1 objection, which was accepted by Council with the original development approval. 10.3 Site Area Requirements Not applicable in this s.96 application. 10.4 Residential flat buildings and low-rise multi- unit housing-density and garden

area controls Not applicable in this case. 10.5 Height of Buildings Subject of a SEPP No.1 objection as accepted by Council in the original development approval. 10.6 Garden Area The garden area will be 74.4% for this proposal, thus complying with the 50% minimum requirement of the LEP. 10.7 Integrated Housing Development Not applicable in this case. 10.8 Foreshore building lines Not applicable to this s.96 application.




10.9 Foreshore Scenic Protection Area Not applicable to this s.96 application. 10.10 Other Special Clauses/Development Standards Not applicable. 11. DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO STATUTORY CONTROLS No relevant draft amendments pertaining to this application. 12. DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS PLANS Development Control Plan No.15 – Residential Development applies to this development. In particular, the provisions relating to the planning policy and development controls relating to height and front setbacks have not been given compliance. It is considered that the development when viewed from the street will not be compatible with the character and scale of residential development in the immediate vicinity – see objective 3.1.b. It is considered that the development will not be compatible with the height, bulk and scale of the existing and desired future character of the residential area as set out under objective 7.1.1.(b). It is also considered that the setback of alterations and extensions to the existing dwelling in this case will not respect the characteristic pattern of setbacks in the locality nor preserve the identity of the Municipality established by its townscape of pre-1930s buildings as set out under objective 7.2.1.a. Further, it is considered that the proposal will not preserve and enhance the streetscape as set out under objective 7.2.1.e. 12.1 Other DCPs, Codes and Policies

No other relevant documents.

13. THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT

There are no likely detrimental effects as a result of this s.96 application subject to compliance with the conditions of the consent as to be modified. 14. SUBMISSIONS

The proposed s.96 application was notified in accordance with Council’s Development Control Plan for a period of ten (10) days commencing on the 31 May 2006. Within the specified time period two (2) submissions were received. Copies of the submission are attached to the report. NOTIFICATION REQUIRED YES NUMBER NOTIFIED 24 SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED Name & Address of Respondents

SUMMARY OF SUBMISSIONS

Greg & Rachel Gleeson 7 Garrick Avenue Hunters Hill 2110

Issues with existing trees and shrubs relative to the new fencing as approved earlier by Council

T. McKirdy 3 Passy Avenue Hunters Hill 2110

The approved setback to Passy Avenue should not be reduced as it will provide for a building of greater bulk to their outlook and that of the streetscape.




• The trees and shrubs along the rear boundary should be protected Comment: This is not a matter for this S.96 application as Council approved the development and that part is not subject of this S.96 application. The discussions between the parties should be able to overcome the residents’ concerns about the construction of the new fence on the rear boundary. • The extension of the northern wing towards the stre et will increase the bulk of

the building and create a streetscape issue Comment: The siting of the building relative to the street for the northern wing was arrived at through discussions with Council’s planning staff. This was to ensure that the development would not be too bulky in relation to the street and would better maintain a building line relative to the new dwelling house to the north. It was also argued that new building work so close to the street alignment would create an undesirable precedent. The objection raised by the neighbour is agreed with in that the proposed change will have a detrimental impact on the streetscape by the introduction of a new element. 15. THE PUBLIC INTEREST The proposed changes sought are the same as those originally submitted to Council with the development application. Those elements of the development were unacceptable to Council officers from a planning viewpoint and remain unacceptable for the same reasons. The proposal has therefore been assessed in terms of the public interest. Having regard to the relevant matters for consideration under s.79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and based on the standards and objectives in Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan No.1, the application for modification is not considered acceptable for reasons as set out in the recommendation. CONCLUSION The proposal has been assessed having regard to the relevant matters for consideration under Section 79C and Section 96(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan No.1. For the reasons outlined in this report, it is considered that the proposed modifications will have a detrimental impact on the amenity of the adjoining residents as well as on the streetscape and, accordingly, the modification sought under s.96(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 is recommended for refusal. FINANCIAL IMPACT

There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget or forward estimates. RECOMMENDATION That Development Application No.06/1079-1 for the alterations and additions - s.96 (1A) application to modify the consent to dwelling house at No.1 Passy Avenue, Hunters Hill, be refused for the following reasons:




1. The proposal will be contrary to the provisions of objective 3.1 b. of Development Control Plan No.15 in that the development when viewed from the street will not be compatible with the character and scale of residential development in the immediate vicinity.

2. The proposal does not meet the objectives 7.2.1a and 7.2.1.e for front setbacks

under Development Control Plan No.15. 3. The proposed alterations to the approved north wing do not meet the objective

7.1.1(b) of the development controls for height as set out in the Development Control Plan No.15.

4. The development would create an undesirable precedent for minimal building lines

in the Hunters Hill Local Government area. 5. It would be likely to cause injury to the amenity of the adjoining residents to the north

in that it provides for a building extension of greater bulk than previously approved by Council and is not what adjoining neighbours would reasonably expect for this part of the development.

6. The proposal would not be in the public interest.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Locality Map 2. Proposed Plans 3. Submissions




ITEM NO : 2

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION NO : 05/1095-1

PROPOSAL : ALTERATIONS & ADDITIONS TO MARIST SISTERS COLLEGE BUILDINGS - SECTION 96(1A) MODIFICATION

PROPERTY : 64-66A WOOLWICH ROAD, WOOLWICH

APPLICANT : GLANVILLE ARCHITECTS

OWNER : TRUSTEES OF THE CONGREGATION OF THE MARIST SISTERS

DATE LODGED : 12 SEPTEMBER 2006 & 1 AUGUST 2007

BUSINESS PROGRAM : DEVELOPMENT & ENVIRONMENT

REPORTING OFFICER KERRY SMITH

FILES : 1760/66A & DA05/1095-1 1. SUMMARY

Reasons for Report

The original application was determined by Council at its Ordinary Meeting of 26 June 2006. A S.96 application was submitted and referred to Council on 28 May 2007 at which it was deferred for further information. Based on Council’s delegations, the section 96 application is required to be referred back to Council for its determination.

Issues

Four conditions are sought to be deleted or modified.

Submissions

One objection was received.

Recommendation

The application is recommended for approval in relation to two of the conditions for reasons that the request is reasonable and will not set an undesirable precedent. The fourth condition is to be retained as it is based on Council’s policy for security deposits.




2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL

The proposed modifications to the development consent No.05/1095 dated 5 October 2006 are as follows: • To delete condition No.1 which requires completion of the works within two years

after commencement.

• To delete (or modify) condition No.117, which requires the payment of a bond of $5,000 against protection of Council’s stone kerbs and other infrastructure at the frontage.

• To delete condition No.119, which requires the ‘Performance facility’ to treated as a Place of Public Entertainment, as defined, and compliance be given to the relevant Parts of the Building Code of Australia.

Based on the reasons given by Council for its last deferment of the modification application, the applicant, the Catholic Education Office and its legal advisers submitted details on 13 August 2007 as follows: • With regard to condition No.1 , the applicant has submitted a plan, which shows the

timings of the various major building works proposed for the site. The new library and music wing with the partial demolition of the existing ‘Marcellin

House’ is to be constructed in the 2007/2008 year. Major alterations and additions to the existing ‘Chavoin House’ building, to be

constructed in the 2007/2008 year. All site and infrastructure works, including the Energy Australia sub-station to be

constructed in the 2007/2008 year. The major alterations and additions to the existing ‘Chanel House’ building to be

constructed ‘at some future time’. The new drama wing and the new art wing are to be constructed ‘at some future

time’. The new elevator and associated works in the existing staff and administration

building are to be constructed ‘at some future time’.

The works set down to be completed ‘at some future time’ have been identified in the letter as to be commenced within five (5) years of the date of operation of the development consent and to be completed within eighteen (18) of their commencement.

• The bond of $5,000 as required by condition No.117 has been paid. However, the

applicant still requests that this condition be deleted. • The applicant requires condition No.119, relating to the ‘place of public

entertainment’, to be deleted. The original submission to Council included the proposed deletion of condition No.8. The applicant subsequently wrote to Council advising that they did not require that this condition be deleted and they had, in fact, paid the stipulated security deposit.




3. DESCRIPTION OF SITE & LOCALITY

The subject site is situated on the northern side of Woolwich Road between Gladstone Avenue and Northumberland Street.

The site is relatively large and is comprised of six (6) lots. The site slopes down to the north towards the Lane Cove River with a fall of approx. 25 metres from the north (street level) at reduced level 35.79 down towards the rear of the property at reduced level 31.42.

The premises are used as a Catholic high school with various school buildings and play/ assembly areas.

Adjoining to the west is a seniors living complex. To the east are single dwelling houses. To the north is foreshore crown land fronting the Lane Cove River. Opposite Woolwich Road to the south is Weil Park.

4. PROPERTY HISTORY

As stated above, Council at its Ordinary meeting of 26 June 2006, issued a deferred development consent for partial demolition and major alterations and additions to the school buildings including a new three-storey library wing, subject to compliance with pre-conditions and conditions. Following compliance with the pre-conditions, a formal development consent was issued by Council on 5 October 2006, subject to compliance with 127 conditions. A Section 96(1A) application for modification of four (4) of the original conditions, as referred to above, was lodged with Council on 12 September 2006. This application was referred to Council on 12 February 2007 at which it resolved that the matter be deferred to allow Council to meet with the owner/architect and objectors to address the objections raised, in particular, Condition No.1 of the previous consent. A conciliation conference was held at the Council chambers on 13 March 2007 involving representatives of the applicant, Council and the surrounding residents. A further report on the S.96(1A) application was submitted to Council on 28 May 2007 at which it was deferred to allow the applicant to submit further information regarding amendment to No.1 and to be considered at a further meeting of Council. 5. STATUTORY CONTROLS 5.1 Relevant Statutory Instruments Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 Local Environmental Plan No.1 (as amended) Zone: Special Uses (School) 5(a) Conservation Area: Yes Foreshore Scenic Protection Area: Yes SREP (Waterways) Yes Development Control Plan: No Listed Heritage item: Yes Contributory Building: No Vicinity of Heritage Item: Yes, Nos.22 & 24 Vernon Street




6. POLICY CONTROLS No specific DCP applies. 7. REFERRALS 7.1 Comments from external Approval Bodies Not applicable. 7.2 Health & Building Not applicable. 7.3 Heritage Not applicable in relation to the proposed modifications. 7.4 Public Works and Infrastructure No objection from Council’s Assistant Design and Development Engineer 7.5 Landscaping/Trees Officer Not applicable to this application. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UNDER S.79C & S.96(1A) The relevant matters for consideration under section 79C and 96(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 are assessed under the following headings: 8.1 Assessment under Section 96 of the Environmenta l Planning and Assessment

Act 1979

This proposal is assessed under Section 96(1A) of the Act as the potential impact must be assessed.

The provisions of s.96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, requires Council to be satisfied that the development to which consent as modified relates is substantially the same development for which consent was originally granted.

It is considered that the development to which the consent as modified relates is substantially the same development as the modifications relate to the original approved works and will have minimal environmental impact.

In relation to condition No.1 , it is considered that in the circumstances of this case, it is reasonable to delete or modify such a condition requiring completion of the works within two (2) years of commencement. The reasons for such change are that the development is being carried out for an institutional group and is a large scale multi-million dollar works program that will necessarily have to be staged due to the funding arrangements established for such works to be carried out.




In relation to condition No.117 which requires the payment of a bond in the sum of $5,000 for the protection of Council’s stone kerbs and other infrastructure at the frontage, it is considered that this condition should remain as a valid condition which has already been complied with by the applicant by way of the payment. The remaining total public infrastructure protection for Council is covered by the security deposit as required to be paid under condition No.8 which remains unchanged. In relation to condition No.119 , which refers to the ‘Performance Facility’ being used as a Place of Public Entertainment, as defined, it is considered that this condition should be deleted as the ‘Performance Facility’ will only be used for school purposes and the ‘public’ will not be charged for admission to such area within the school complex. 9. STATE INSTRUMENTS/LEGISLATION 9.1 SEPPs Not applicable to this s.96 application. 9.2 REPs Not applicable to this s.96 application. 9.3 Other Legislation Not applicable. 10. HUNTERS HILL LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN NO. 1 10.1 Aims and Objectives of Hunters Hill Local Envi ronmental Plan No.1 The proposal is permissible with consent under the Special Uses (School) 5(a) zone and complies with the relevant statutory controls of Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan No.1. 10.2 Statutory Compliance Table Not applicable to this s.96 application. 10.3 Site Area Requirements Not applicable in this s.96 application. 10.4 Residential flat buildings and low-rise multi- unit housing-density and garden

area controls Not applicable in this case. 10.5 Height of Buildings No change to the height of buildings as approved. 10.6 Garden Area Not applicable in this case.




10.7 Integrated Housing Development Not applicable in this case. 10.8 Foreshore building lines Not applicable to this s.96 application. 10.9 Foreshore Scenic Protection Area Not applicable to this s.96 application. 10.10 Other Special Clauses/Development Standards Not applicable. 11. DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO STATUTORY CONTROLS No relevant draft amendments pertaining to this application. 12. DEVELOPMENT CONTROLS PLANS Development Control Plan No.15 – Residential Development and Development Control Plan No.21 – Commercial Development do not apply to this site. 12.1 Other DCPs, Codes and Policies

No other relevant documents.


There are no likely detrimental effects as a result of this s.96 application. 14. SUBMISSIONS

The proposed S.96 application was notified in accordance with Council’s Development Control Plan for a period of ten (10) days on the 19 September 2006 and was re-exhibited on 14 August 2007. Within the specified time period (1) submission was received. A copy of the submission is attached to the report. NOTIFICATION REQUIRED YES NUMBER NOTIFIED 17 (14 August 2007) SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED Name & Address of Respondents


RA & VJ Kaplan 68b Woolwich Road Hunters Hill

• Requires clarification of timing and construction time of second stage building works.

• Ensure that funding is in place before commencement of new works

• Clarification of timing of building works Comment: This is quoted above from the submission to Council by the Catholic Education Office, Sydney. Those details have been incorporated in the recommendation.




• Ensure funding is in place before commencement of w orks Comment: It is considered that this is not a matter for Council under the provisions of S.79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. It would be a private matter for discussion between the applicant and the neighbour. 15. THE PUBLIC INTEREST

The proposed changes sought as a matter of practice are generally considered acceptable only within Council’s policy provisions and would have no unreasonable environmental impacts. The proposal has been assessed in terms of the public interest; having regard to the relevant matters for consideration under S.79C of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979. Following compliance with the relevant development standards and objectives in Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan No.1, the application is considered acceptable. 16. CONCLUSION The proposal has been assessed having regard to the relevant matters for consideration under Section 79C and Section 96(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan No. 1. It is considered that Condition 117 has to remain in place (and it has been paid), Condition 119 can be deleted and Condition 1 can be modified for reasons set out above and as set out in the recommendation. For the reasons outlined in this report, it is considered that the proposed modifications will not have a detrimental impact on the amenity of the residents of adjoining residential properties nor on the streetscape and, accordingly, the modifications sought under s.96(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 are recommended for approval in part and refusal in part, subject to conditions. FINANCIAL IMPACT There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget or forward estimates. RECOMMENDATION That the s.96 application to modify the consent of Development Application No.05/1095 for the alterations and additions and partial demolition to the high school at Nos.64-66a Woolwich Road, Woolwich, be approved as consent No.05/1095-1 Condition No.117 is to remain unchanged, Condition No.119 is to be deleted and Condition No.1 is to be amended to read as follows:- 1. The works set forth in the plans and specifications as approved under this consent

relating to- (a) the new library and music wing and the alterations and additions to

‘Chavoin House’ are to have construction commenced in the 2007/2008 financial year and be completed within two (2) years of commencement

(b) all infrastructure works to be completed during the 2007/2008 financial year period.




(c) The new art wing, the new drama wing and the major alterations and additions to ‘Chanel House’ and the provision of a lift to ‘Perroton House’ are to be commenced within five years of the date of the original development consent and to be completed within eighteen (18) months of commencement of work.

ATTACHMENTS 1. Locality Map 2. Proposed Plans 3. Submission by Applicant 4. Submission by Objector




ITEM NO : 3 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION NO : 06/1068 PROPOSAL : DEMOLISH EXISTING HALL & CONSTRUCT

ADDITIONS TO CHURCH FOR A NEW HALL, MEETING ROOMS, FOYER, OFFICE & AMENITIES.

PROPERTY : 93A PITTWATER ROAD, HUNTERS HILL APPLICANT : UNITING CHURCH IN AUSTRALIA OWNER : THE UNITING CHURCH IN AUSTRALIA BOARD OF

FINANCE AND PROPERTY DATE LODGED : 4 MAY 2006, 8 NOVEMBER 2006 & 28 AUGUST 2007 BUSINESS PROGRAM : DEVELOPMENT AND ENVIRONMENT REPORTING OFFICER : KERRY SMITH

FILE : 1575/93A & DA06/1068 1. SUMMARY

Reasons for Report

The proposal resulted in one (1) objection received in response to the neighbour notification process. The proposal also involves the adjoining public car parking land owned by Council to be used in conjunction with the church.

Issues

• Rear fence replacement

• Tree removal

• Usage of additions

• Access over adjoining public land.

Objections

One (1) objection was received.




Recommendation

The application is recommended for a approval because it:

1. involves access to Council’s car park

2. is permissible under the zoning

3. complies with the relevant planning objectives contained in Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan No.1 and Development Control Plan No.21.

4. is appropriate

5. will not have adverse effects on the amenity of residents of adjoining properties and, as such, is justified. 2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL It is proposed to demolish the existing single-storey church hall sited at the southern end of the site and construct a new part one and part two-storey hall, sited in approximately the same position as the existing hall, however extending north to be attached to the existing contemporary church on site and also extending to the north-east. The new extension would comprise the following: Ground floor plan • Chapel, foyer with glazed entrance to the church, kitchen, hall, two meeting rooms,

men and women toilets, disabled toilet, storerooms and a rear balcony off the northernmost meeting room at the rear. At the front of the church will be a vestry and future office.

Lower ground floor plan • Meeting room (‘Kids Club’) with entry from the rear, storeroom, disabled toilet,

shower and five (5) rainwater tanks with associated pipes and pump. Site Works • Off-street parking to the south-western corner of the subject site, adjoining Pittwater

Road. The area allows the provision for four (4) parking spaces and one (1) disabled space.

• A new metal 1.8metres high metal fence and sliding access gate to the northern

side boundary fence. The sliding gate provides access from the adjoining council carpark.

• A disabled ramp is sited to the north-eastern corner of the site, adjoining the

northern, side boundary fence and in close proximity to the access point from the council carpark.

• Landscaping/paving works to the front and rear of the site.




Projected weekly usage Day Times Use Attendance Monday 3.00pm-6.00pm Dance group 30 persons (aged 6-20) Tuesday 1.00pm-2.00pm

3.00pm-6.00pm 7.00pm-9.00pm

Monthly fellowship Dance group Church council

10 persons 11 30 persons (aged 6-20) 12 persons

Wednesday 1.00pm-2.00pm 3.00pm-6.00pm 6.00pm-8.00pm

Adult fellowship Kids club Weight watchers

10 persons 20-25 children Up to 60 persons incl. 35 that stay for the full period

Thursday 3.00pm-6.00pm Dance group 30 persons (aged 6-20) Friday 3.00pm-6.00pm Dance group 30 persons (aged 6-20) Saturday 8.00am-3.00pm

8.00am-3.00pm 2.00pm-6.00pm 6.00pm-10.00pm

Monthly markets Annual Church fete + occasional social events Weddings (several per year) Occasional ancillary Church uses (several per year)

Up to 60 persons

Sunday 9.00am-12 noon Church services 60 persons The application was accompanied by the Statement of Environmental Effects, a traffic and parking assessment report, an acoustic report, an access audit, sustainable water usage calculations and a landscape plan 3. DESCRIPTION OF SITE & LOCALITY

The site is located on the eastern side of Pittwater Road between Ryde Road and Princes Street. The site is comprised of two allotments being Lots 1 and 2 in DP 311342. Both sites have a frontage of 15.24 metres (total 30.48metres to Pittwater Road). Existing on the subject site is a single-storey church, being the Boronia Park Uniting Church, an older building to the south of the church, being the former church building, which is now being used as a church hall and a building attached to the rear of the church hall, which accommodates the amenities for the premises. A semi-circular driveway is located in the front setback area and informal car parking is available for up to six (6) cars in a stacked arrangement next to the driveway. The land slopes slightly from the front of the site (RL51.04-51.44), down to the rear of the site (RL48.80- 49.40). The property has a site area of 1635.09 square metres. The subject site is located at the southern end of the Boronia Park shopping centre, which is clustered around the intersections of Pittwater Road, Princes Street and Thompson Street. The shopping centre contains a variety of retail and business premises of varying architectural styles and of varying heights. A Council public carpark is situated behind the row of shops and adjoins the subject site to the north-eastern end of the site. A three-storey residential flat building adjoins the subject site to the south. One and two-storey dwelling houses are to the east of the subject site fronting Earl Street. A single-storey weatherboard shop adjoins the subject site to the north.




4. PROPERTY HISTORY

No recent DA or Building Application history. The Conservation Advisory Panel considered the concept in September 2003, which was followed by a site inspection with advice to consider the heritage impact of the proposed demolition. Council’s Heritage Adviser then reported on 4 February 2004 that a “Research and Record” document be provided to Council in accordance with the NSW Heritage Office guidelines for the recording of Items of Local Significance. Preliminary consultation meetings took place on 23 April 2003 and 16 November 2005 with Council’s DCU. It was recorded that 8 car parking spaces had to be provided. 5. STATUTORY CONTROLS 5.1 Relevant Statutory Instruments Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 Local Environmental Plan No.1 (as amended) Zone: 5(a) Special uses (church) Conservation Area: No Foreshore Scenic Protection Area: No SREP (waterways): No Development Control Plan: No. 21- Commercial Development (as a guide) Listed Heritage item: No Contributory Building: No Adjoins a contributory item Yes Vicinity of Heritage Item: No 6. POLICY CONTROLS

Development Control Plan No.21- Commercial Development (As a guide) 7. REFERRALS

7.1 External Approval Bodies

None applicable. 7.2 Health & Building

The proposal is to comply with the relevant provisions of the BCA. The proposal will be subject to conditions to require the applicant submit a BCA report showing compliance with the relevant provisions for Class 9a buildings (Place of Assembly). 7.3 Heritage

The proposal is not a listed heritage item nor is it in a conservation area.

In 2003, representatives of the church attended a preliminary consultation meeting with the Conservation Advisory Committee which confirmed that retention of the building was not necessary and the demolition of the church hall only required the preparation of a photographic record of such building. This was confirmed in a report by Council’s Heritage Adviser.




7.4 Public Works and Infrastructure

Council’s Assistant Design and Development Engineer has raised no objection to the proposal subject to conditions. In the memo from the Senior Town Planner dated 28 February 2007 to the Manager of Public Works and Infrastructure, it was stated that a shortfall of car spaces existed as a result of this development. It sought a cost estimate for the upgrade of the adjoining public car park for the option of a S.94 contribution in lieu of off-street parking or similar such condition. A design was prepared by Council many years ago for the redevelopment of the adjoining land off Princes Street as a public car parking area. The Manager Public Works and Infrastructure then advised by memo dated that based on their estimate for the car park works, a pro rata cost was supplied to the applicant as a basis for discussion to cover the shortfall of car spaces on the land subject to negotiations between parties to follow. This matter is addressed in further detail below. 7.5 Parks & Landscape

Council’s Landscape Adviser has no objection to the proposed works, subject to compliance with conditions as set out in the recommendation. 7.6 Community Services Council’s Community Services Coordinator has reviewed the application and its support documentation and her recommendations, which are in support of the proposal, are incorporated in the recommendation. These comments are based on the terms of the Access Audit as provided by the applicant. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UNDER S.79C

The relevant matters for consideration under section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 are assessed under the following headings: 9. STATE INSTRUMENTS / LEGISLATION

9.1 State Environmental Planning Policie s (SEPPs)

Not applicable. 9.2 Regional Environment Plans (REPs)

Not applicable. 9.3 Other Legislation

None applicable.




10. HUNTERS HILL LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN NO.1

10.1 Aims and Objectives of Hunters Hill Local Envi ronmental Plan No.1 and Zone

The proposal is permissible with consent under Zone 5(a) Special uses (Church) and complies with the relevant statutory controls of Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan No.1. 10.2 Statutory Compliance Table

The following table illustrates whether or not the proposed development complies with the relevant statutory controls of Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan No.1. Compliance with Current Statutory Controls

Proposed Control Compliance

HEIGHT Ceiling

6.7 metres

7.2 metres

Yes

Storeys 2 storey 2 storeys Yes 10.3 Site Area Requirements

The proposal complies with these requirements. 10.4 Residential flat buildings and low-rise multi- unit housing-density and garden

area controls

Not applicable. 10.5 Height of Buildings

The height of the proposal, being 6.7metres and two storeys in height is acceptable as it would comply with the maximum of 7.2metres/no more than two storeys height limit as prescribed by Clause 15 of the Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan No.1. 10.6 Garden Area

Not applicable, as clause 16A of LEP No.1 does not apply to development in Zone 5(a) Special uses (Church). 10.7 Integrated Housing Development

Not applicable. 10.8 Foreshore building lines

Not applicable.

10.9 Foreshore Scenic Protection Area

Not applicable. 10.10 Other Special Clauses / Development Standards

None applicable.




11. DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO STATUTORY CONTROLS

No relevant draft amendments pertaining to this application. 12. DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS

As the site is located within a 5(a) Special Uses (Church) zone, it does not have a specific development control plan with which to assess the application. Notwithstanding this, for the purposes of assisting in the assessment the application, it is considered that Development Control Plan No.21-Commercial Development should be used as a guide as the development site is located to the southern end of the commercial/business strip and the existing use would be considered to be more commercial than residential.

12.1 Development Control Plan No.21 – Commercial Development The proposed works would satisfy the planning policy objectives stipulated under Part 3 of DCP No.21.

Part B.1 Site Layout

The proposed works would not be contrary to any of the design requirements stipulated under Part B.1 of the DCP No.21.

Part B.2 Streetscape

It is considered that the proposed design satisfies the design requirements stipulated under Part 2 of DCP No.21. The construction of a new part one and part two-storey hall, sited in approximately the same position as the existing hall, however extending north to be attached to the existing church on site and also extending to the north-east, would minimise any adverse impacts with regard to building bulk, as its scale and height would be less than that of the existing church hall on site being demolished.

The proposed alterations and additions would also provide for increased landscaping area, in particular to the open space fronting the street. This would bring an improvement to the character of the streetscape character as well as access.

The single-storey effect of the additions to the church, when viewed from the street, is of a lesser scale than that of adjoining development, in particular with that of 3-storey residential flat building to the south of the subject site.

The general use of materials, colours and architectural features, in particular to the front façade would result in a development that would complement the commercial strip to the north along Pittwater Road.

In general, the proposal would add to the visual quality of the streetscape and would reinforce the function of the street, enhance the amenity of the buildings and would be sensitive to the built form, landscape and environmental conditions of the locality. It would therefore give compliance to the objectives under Part 2 of the DCP, relating to streetscape.

Part B.3 Height

The height requirements are the same as per LEP No.1. Refer to “Height” under “(1)(A)(I) – The Provisions Of Any Environmental Planning Instrument”.




Part B.4 Setbacks

Part 4 of DCP No.21 states that front setbacks should be consistent with the established building alignment of the street. The proposal indicates the construction of an extension in front of the existing church. The existing front setback of the development is 14.6metres.

The proposed front setback as a result of the extension would be 10.3metres. Notwithstanding this reduction in the front setback, it is considered that the proposal is satisfactory as the front setback would be greater than the established commercial buildings north of the site that are all built to Pittwater Road alignment and will be sited further back than the residential flat development adjoining to the south of the subject site, (which is set back 7.5metres from the street frontage).

With regard to side boundary setbacks, Part 4 states that setbacks can vary from nil to 0.9 metres for commercial development and be 1.5metres for the residential components in mixed-use developments. The proposal indicates a southern, side boundary setback of 2.04metres and a northern side boundary setback of 3.5metres to 5.2metres. These setbacks are considered to be satisfactory as they are well in excess of the numerical requirements of the DCP.

Part 4 of DCP No.21 requires a rear boundary setback of not less than 4 metres. It should be noted that residential properties adjoin the subject site to the rear. In pre-DA discussions with the applicant, Council staff requested that the rear boundary setback be a minimum of 6 metres to provide a satisfactory buffer from the residential development. The proposal indicates a rear boundary setback of 9.4metres, which comfortably complies with the rear boundary setback controls.

Notwithstanding, the compliance with the numerical requirements with Part 4 of DCP No.21, it is considered that the proposal would comply with the objectives stipulated under this section. That is, it would provide for an attractive streetscape by improving upon the existing building by virtue of the design incorporating modulation through vertical and horizontal setbacks to the facade of the proposed development.

Part B.5 Density

The only objective under Part 5 of the DCP that could relate to this development states ‘to ensure that appropriate density that respects surrounding residential amenity and landscape character’. The general density of a development can be assessed under context and setting. The setting of the site is dominated by land uses, which front Pittwater Road, including the adjoining three-storey residential unit development to the south and the Boronia Park shops to the north. The proposed density of the development of the church site is considered to be of a scale that provides an appropriate transition between commercial land uses to the north and residential flat development to the south. The scale and bulk of the development, being a determining indicator of density is considered to be satisfactory as it is less than that of the adjoining development within its vicinity when viewed from Pittwater Road. The proposed alterations and additions are considered to be an appropriate fit contextually with the development of the commercial area in this section of Pittwater Road. Notwithstanding the proposal being consistent with the adjoining development with respect to floor space ratio, it is considered that the proposal has a density that respects the surrounding residential amenity and landscape character. The proposal would not unreasonably impact upon the amenity of the residents and occupiers of the adjoining properties, in particular the residential premises to the east, being No.18 and 20 Earl Street.




Part B.6 Landscaping

The DCP states that a minimum of 20% of the site area must be landscaped open space. This would result in a landscaped area of 327 square metres. The proposal indicates a landscape area of 386.51 square metres, which exceeds such minimum landscape requirement.

Notwithstanding the compliance with the numerical requirement, the proposal would also comply with the objectives stipulated under Part 6 of DCP No.21, being that development is to complement the landscape character of the surrounding locality. The landscaping works reflect the natural attributes of the surrounding locality.

The proposed landscape plan has been deemed acceptable by Council’s Landscape Consultant and is considered that it will bring an improvement to the minimal existing landscaping on the site. Part B.7 Private Open Space

Not applicable as this section solely relates to private open spaces within residential development.

Part B.8 Access and Parking

The numerical requirements for commercial development that could pertain to this development under Part 8 of the DCP No.21, have been subject of discussions for agreement between the parties which would satisfy this requirement.

In the applicant’s Statement of Environmental Effects, it is stated that their Traffic and Parking Assessment shows that five (5) off-street carparking spaces have been provided on site. That is, the proposal will be deficient in off-street parking

Separate to the above and in the absence of a specific parking provision in the DCP for a church or a church hall, other Councils in the metropolitan area have parking requirements for such specific uses being 1 space per 10 fixed seats and / or 1 space per 18 sqm. The former would not apply as there are no additional seats for the church and the latter could be applied to the additional floor space for the hall (over and above that of the existing hall to be demolished).

The Property Services of Uniting Resources by letter dated 24 August 2007 states to the effect that the Uniting Church will pay Council a contribution towards free of charge public car parking on the adjoining site. The payment will be made at Construction Certificate and will be dedicated to the construction of this car park. The Council will agree that the car park must at all times remain free of charge to church users.”

The church then set out a series of conditions based on their providing access over their site via a right-of-way, or similar instrument, all of which are suitable to Council.

Part B.9 Solar Design and Energy Efficiency

The submitted shadow diagrams for the development indicate the following for mid winter:

• At 9.00am, the northern façade of the adjoining property to the south, being No. 93 Pittwater Road, will be partially overshadowed;

• At 12noon, only a small portion at the lower section of the northern façade of No. 93 Pittwater Road, will be affected.

• At 3.00pm, the northern façade of No. 93 Pittwater Road will not be affected.




The extent of overshadowing to the adjoining property to the south would be minimal and would satisfy the design requirements and objectives stipulated under Part 9 of DCP No.21.

Rainwater tank capacity proposed for this development is 17,000 litres, which will bring about a 50% reduction in mains water usage. It will also serve as an effective on-site stormwater detention system. Such collected water will be utilized for the indoor toilets, basins and kitchen sinks. It will also be utilised for the irrigation of the landscaped areas of the site.

Pervious pavers will be used for the parking area at the front of the site which will reduce stormwater runoff from the site.

Part B.10 Heritage

As stated previously within the body of the report, the proposed works were referred to Council’s Heritage Advisor who raised no objection to the proposal.

Part B.11 Privacy

The proposed alterations and additions to the existing church, due to its positioning of window openings, separation from adjoining properties and orientation is considered to provide for the reasonable privacy of the adjoining dwellings and their outdoor spaces. The possible exception to this would be the proposed balcony to the northern side elevation, off the meeting room, however, the balcony would not directly overlook adjoining residential properties, as it opposes the council carpark. There is the rear private recreational open space of the adjoining property to the north-east, being No.22 Earl Street, that adjoins the carpark to the east. A row of proposed landscaping within the subject site to the common boundary would act as a screen, negating any potential overlooking from the balcony. The southern, side elevation does not have any openings, accordingly not being able to impact upon the amenity of the residential flat building to the south with regard to aural and visual privacy.

It is considered that the proposal would satisfy the design requirements and objectives under Part 11 of DCP No.21.

Part B.12 Safety and Security

This section relates to the residential components of shop top development. Notwithstanding this, it is considered that the proposal would comply with the objectives under Part 12 of DCP No.21, as the proposal would provide personal and property security for visitors and enhance perceptions of community safety.

Part B.13 Site Facilities

The proposed garbage enclosure sited externally to the western end of the driveway access ramp would ensure ease of access and minimal noise and odour impact. The area is easily accessible by residents and workers from the commercial premises. There is no application for a food shop and therefore limited potential exists for nuisances. It is considered that the proposal is considered to satisfy the objectives and design requirements under Part 13 of DCP No.21.

12.2 Other DCPs, Codes and Policies

There are no other such controls applying in this case.





The proposed alterations and additions to the church are considered not to unreasonably impact upon the amenity of the adjoining properties or the Pittwater Road streetscape. As stated within the body of the report, the proposal would comply with the numerical requirements and objectives under DCP No.21 which is used as a guide. There would be no impact upon the natural and built environment within the vicinity of the subject site as a result of the proposed works. Furthermore, there would be no social and economic impacts to the locality as a result of the proposed works. 14. SUBMISSIONS

The proposed development was notified in accordance with Council’s Development Control Plan for a period of ten (10) days on the 18 May 2006. Within the specified time period one (1) submission was received. Copy of the submission is attached to the report. NOTIFICATION REQUIRED YES NUMBER NOTIFIED 18 SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED Name & Address of Respondents


C & S Whitnall 20 Earl Street Hunters Hill

• Issues with the dilapidated nature of the existing common boundary fencing

• Noise concerns from the proposed doors and windows to the rear elevation

• Are the existing Jacaranda trees to the eastern edge of the church grounds being removed?

• Any additional usage as a result of the proposed works, in particular in the evenings and the weekend

The main issues of concern outlining the objections are discussed below: • The dilapidated nature of the common boundary fenci ng Comment: This is a private matter between parties under the Dividing Fences Act. • Noise to be generated to the rear of the site Comment: This matter is addressed as a condition of consent.

• Retention of existing Jacaranda trees along the eas tern boundary

Comment: The landscape plan shows these trees to be retained with a condition to protect them during demolition and building work.

• Additional usage at evenings and weekends

Comment: The applicant has provided details of usage, days, times and person numbers which becomes part of the overall approval of Council.




15. CONCLUSION

The proposal has been assessed having regard to the relevant matters for consideration under section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, including the public interest, Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan No.1 and Development Control Plan No.21 to be used as a guide. For the reasons outlined in this report, it is considered that the proposed development would not unduly impact upon the amenity of the occupiers of adjoining properties and accordingly, is recommended for approval. The requirements to be satisfied as the pre-condition are arrangements to be entered into between Council and the applicant in relation to the utilisation of the adjoining Council car park, pedestrian and possible vehicular access thereto and the offer to carry out some paving to satisfy the needs of the development, which is deficient a number of off-street car parking spaces. FINANCIAL IMPACT

There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report. RECOMMENDATION That Development Application No. 06/1068 for the demolition of the church hall and the carrying out of alterations and additions to the existing church for use as foyer, chapel, hall, meeting rooms and amenities at No.93A Pittwater Road, Hunters Hill be approved , subject to conditions:

Special Conditions 1. The development being carried out in accordance with plans prepared by Graeme

Scott Architect, Drawing Nos.17502 DA1, DA4 and DA5 as received by Council on 8 November 2006, DA2 as received by Council on 4 May 2006, DA3 as received by Council on 5 October 2006 and landscape plan prepared by Sally Roberts Gardens Drawing LD 0.1 as received by Council on 12 October 2006, except where amended by conditions of consent.

2. Provide tree protection measures specific for the subject site, prior to the release of

the Construction Certificate. The tree protection measures shall be prepared by an Arborist with a minimum qualification (using the Australian Qualifications Framework) of NSW Level 4 or above in Arboriculture.

3. The tree protection measures shall be implemented prior to any demolition,

excavation or construction works commencing on site. The Arborist shall also inspect the site at regular intervals throughout the development period to ensure the specifications for tree protection are maintained. A site log shall record the details of these inspections.

4. A photographic record being carried out in accordance with the Heritage Office

Guidelines and being submitted to Council prior to the demolition of the church hall. 5. The finishes and colours shall be implemented on the works in accordance with the

Materials selections and Exterior finishes schedule as received by Council on 4 May 2006 with such details being incorporated in the Construction Certificate.

6. The shower door having an 850mm clear door opening.




7. The door into the unisex accessible sanitary facility adjacent to Meeting Room C having a length dimension of 1450mm, a hinge side dimension of 50mm and a latch side dimension of 510mm.

8. The inward swing door into shower room off Meeting Room C having a length

dimension of 1240mm, a hinge side dimension of between 145mm and 660mm, a latch side dimension of between 240mm and 660mm.

9. The moveable dias being 200mm high to allow a 1:14 slope on the 2800mm ramp. 10. The stairs comply with AS1428.1 and Hunters Hill DCP 23, clause 12. 11. The doors to the ambulant user cubicles being 700mm wide. 12. The door and internal circulation space in the separate shower adjacent to the

unisex accessible sanitary facility being widened to comply with AS1428.2 and Hunters Hill DCP 23 clause 22 and 23.

13. Details of disposal of stormwater overflow from the lower ground floor rainwater

storage tanks as well as from the new paved areas being submitted to Council for approval prior to the issuing of the Construction Certificate.

14. The redundant vehicle crossover at the Pittwater Road frontage being reconstructed

as a full kerb with turf landscaping. 15. A demolition, excavation and construction traffic plan and a materials handling plan

being submitted to Council for approval prior to the issuing of Construction Certificate.

16. A 1.8m high lapped and capped paling fence being erected at the applicant’s cost

on the northern boundary (with the exception of the pedestrian and sliding gates proposed for access) adjacent to the public car park.

17. The hours of operation of the church being restricted generally to between 8.00am

and 10.00pm Saturdays and between 9.00am and 12 noon Sundays and the church hall being restricted to between 1.00pm and 9.00pm Mondays to Fridays without further approval of Council.

18. Noise attenuating works being provided for in the Construction Certificate plans and

specifications based on the recommendations of Bassett Acoustics as set out in their report No.SA0368-GG-A1 dated 4 August 2005 as received by Council on 4 May 2006.

19. Suitable arrangements being made between Council and the applicant for the

creation of a right-of-way in favour of Council over that strip of land between Council owned car park and the Pittwater Road alignment as set out in paragraph 4 of the applicant’s letter dated 24 August 2007. Such document and conditions relating thereto are to be registered prior to release of the Construction Certificate. All legal and survey costs to be at the applicants expense.

20. The payment of moneys to Council prior to the release of the Construction

Certificate based on the details as set out in paragraph 2 of the applicant’s letter dated 24 August 2007 with such proportion of public car parking land being shared and available free of charge to the applicant and their visitors.




Standard Conditions A1, A3, A4, B1, B2, B7 ($8,400), C1 – C8, C34 – C36, C39, C39, C49, D1, D2, PE1, S1 & W1.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Locality Map 2. Proposed Plans 3. Submission




ITEM NO : 4

SUBJECT : SUBREGIONAL STRATEGY

BUSINESS PROGRAM : FORWARD PLANNING

REPORTING OFFICER : MARIO MAJARICH

FILE : 770/85

SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to advise Council of the contents and implications of the draft Inner North Subregional Strategy recently placed on exhibition by the Department of Planning (see letter from Department of Planning dated 10 July 2007) BACKGROUND During 2005, the State Government released a Regional Plan for Sydney called City of Cities: A Plan for Sydney’s Future (or Metropolitan Strategy). This plan suggested an additional 1.1 million people by the year 2031. The plan was broken down to detailed subregional plans, the intention being to prepare more detailed aims and directions for each . Detailed plans have recently been released for each of the subregions including the North East (Manly, Pittwater and Warringah), the East (Botany Bay, Randwick, Waverley and Woollahra) and Inner North subregion, consisting of the this LGA-Hunters Hill, together with North Sydney, Lane Cove, Mosman, Ryde and Willoughby. All other subregional strategies are to be released by the end of the year. The aims of the subregional plans are intended to: • Identify the future role of centres (towns, villages and neighbourhoods) as well as

corridors • Provide a forum for Councils to allocate housing and employment capacity targets. • Provide for balanced growth among LGAs • Focus coordinated State agency involvement and asset management • Ensure sufficient investment in regional facilities The Inner North subregion has been identified as providing a target of an additional 30,000 dwellings and an additional employment capacity of 60,000 jobs. The subregional Strategy has been on exhibition at the Council and at the Department of Planning. It is also available on the Department’s web site and Council has provided a link to this. Comments have been invited and submissions can be made by post, fax, email or on the web site up to the closing date of 17 September 2007.




SUB-REGIONAL STRATEGY CONTENTS The following are relevant extracts from the Strategy that consists of seven subject areas or sub-strategies. These are: • Economy and Employment • Centres and Corridors • Housing • Transport • Environment, Heritage and Resources • Parks, Public Places and Culture • Implementation and Governance Taking each of these strategies in turn: Economy and Employment The key direction is to plan for an additional 60,000 jobs in the subregion (over and above the resident workforce of 145,000 (in 2001). Other key directions are to strengthen existing industry clusters and protect strategic employment lands (Hunters Hill does not have any), and to “expand knowledge assets and encourage innovation”. Hunters Hill is nominated as having a potential of an additional 300 jobs. Victoria Road mentioned as having potential as an “Employment Corridor”. How to “expand knowledge assets and encourage innovation” is not addressed. Centres and Corridors The key directions relating to Centres and Corridors seem largely to relate to the North Sydney and Macquarie Park Corridor. Little is said of the Victoria Road corridor. Gladesville is defined as a “village”, being “a strip of shops and surrounding residential area within a 5 to 10 minute walk which includes a small supermarket, hairdresser, take-away food shops, and contains between 2,100 and 5,500 dwellings.” Parts of Victoria Road are intended to be developed as an “Enterprise Corridor” providing uses such as furniture and car showrooms, car washes, retailing, offices and light industrial. (such a corridor is defined as an “area which provides low cost accommodation for a range of local and regional services, including start-up offices, light industrial, showrooms etc….which benefit from high levels of passing traffic…over 50,000 vehicles per day”. It is noted that “the NSW Government will work with Hunters Hill, and Ryde Councils to consider the potential for parts of the road to be zoned as Enterprise Corridor in order to support local economic development”.




Housing The key directions are to: • To support a diverse workforce and population with more housing opportunities. • Increase housing choice as part of the housing target. • Plan for 30,000 new dwellings. • Enable communities to ‘age in place’. This is the central issue of the document. Hunters Hill has been allocated a target of some 1200 additional dwellings to the year 2031 (out of a total target for the subregion of 30,000 new dwellings.) The Department of Planning expects councils to provide for a greater range and density of housing in their principal Local Environmental Plans. Aims are to review targets within 5 years, redevelop existing apartments with increased densities, around centres (villages and town centres), provide additional self-care housing for seniors or people with disabilities, and generally provide a mix of housing. Within the same chapter of the document, aims are that local centres should be renewed to improve economic viability and amenity, Department of Housing stock should be redeveloped and regenerated, and planning mechanisms are to be used to provide more affordable housing whilst improving the design quality of new development. Transport Key directions relevant to Hunters Hill are: • To integrate transport and land use opportunities • Manage traffic and improve key corridors • Manage growth of commercial vehicle movements Apart from the first, these directions are largely within the jurisdiction and responsibility of the Ministry of Transport, and the RTA. Environment Heritage and Resources Key directions are to: • Protect the natural environment of the subregion • Protect the cultural and heritage elements of the subregion • Manage all development sustainably. In the introduction to the subregion, Hunters Hill is “acknowledged as Australia’s oldest garden suburb. It contains a large number of parks and reserves (over 65 hectares) and a significant proportion of the Local Government Area has been granted conservation status in recognition of the unique character and identity”.




And again on Page 89:

Hunters Hill is noted for its prominent stone villas and boundary walls erected largely in the 1860s and 1870s, although the majority of the heritage items are of later periods and are in a range of materials. Residential development within Hunters Hill is characterised by extremely high quality properties which foreshadowed the principles of the garden Suburb. Hunters Hill has two conservation areas that cover almost half the total area of the municipality, reflecting the unique aesthetic and historic character of the area.

Parks, Public Places and Culture The key directions identified are: • Ensure equitable access to parks and public places for all residents in the subregion • Ensure open space areas and facilities are managed sustainably to cater for

residents and visitors to the subregion • Ensure opportunities exist for all residents to pursue cultural activities in the

subregion. Implementation and Governance The key directions are to: • Align subregional and local planning with strategy aims • Improve state involvement in strategic places and projects • Inform state investment priorities • Ensure stakeholder involvement • Consider funding, pricing and project delivery This section is somewhat repetitive and having little substance. It seems largely to apply to established and major projects and the responsibilities of State Government agencies rather than to encourage any new urban redevelopment undertaking relevant to Hunters Hill. Comments on the “Housing” chapter Hunters Hill is the smallest and one of the oldest Local Government Areas in Sydney, extensively subdivided and developed over the last 150 years. A large portion of Hunters Hill is designated as a conservation area, with many houses listed as “heritage” items. The LGA’s topography, foreshore and scenic preservation areas act as constraints to further urban development or redevelopment. (As the Department seems to recognise and acknowledge in the quoted paragraphs above). The only areas capable of providing some additional housing are the Hunters Hill Village and the Gladesville Town Centre/Victoria Road corridor and this can only be achieved through rezoning. Additional infrastructure will be required to ensure that the residential and environmental standards of the locality are maintained and improved however and this needs to be further assessed and quantified. The Minister has written to Council (see letter dated 11 June 2007, attached) and noted Council’s statement that not more than 800 additional dwellings can reasonably be accommodated over the next 25 years, however the figure of 1200 has been used for the purpose of the Subregional strategy and is still clearly the target which is set by the Government.




The following summarises the number of dwellings noted in each LGA within the Inner North Sub Region and the increase expected for each area in absolute and percentage terms: LGA Dwellings Additional % increase LGA land Area (ha) Hunters Hill 4,247 1,200 28% 576 Lane Cove 11,356 3,900 34% 1,056 Mosman 10,342 600 6% 870 North Sydney 26,373 5,500 21% 1,050 Ryde 35,556 12,000 34% 4,065 Willoughby 23,461 6,800 29% 2,255 It will be noted that Hunters Hill is the smallest LGA in land area yet is required to sustain growth (in percentage terms) almost equal to many others having much larger land areas. To provide additional numbers is a fairly simplistic objective which can be achieved by rezoning, and thus redevelopment with increased dwelling densities. To do this well however, and meet appropriately acceptable environmental and community amenity guidelines and standards is more complex and challenging. The “leafy sandstone” peninsula which is a distinguishing feature of the area will be under significant treat if the target dwelling numbers of 1200 additional dwellings are to be accommodated. Comments to Department of Planning It is intended to provide a submission on the Subregional Strategy to the Department of Planning. The main issues to be addressed relate to: Additional dwelling and population targets proposed have been carried out without the benefit of detailed studies. The figures are purely theoretical and arbitrary. The urban development difficulties facing this Local Government Area are real and challenging. Constraints include the restricted and small size of the area, its landform and geography being largely surrounded by water, its extensive heritage items and significant conservation and foreshore protection areas. The only available locations within which additional dwellings could be introduced to this LGA are the Hunters Hill Village and the Gladesville Town Centre. Development within each of these can only be implemented if current draft LEPs are expeditiously exhibited, assessed and presented for approval and subsequently gazetted. An implementation strategy should include a review of the response to stage 1 (Hunters Hill Village) and stage 2 (Gladesville Town Centre) of the comprehensive Local Environmental Plan being prepared and the demand and take-up rate for housing and commercial activity in each of these two areas. Additional dwelling growth over the period up to 2031 will impact upon the capacity of roads, pedestrian and cycle routes to handle the population increase generated. Improved public transport facilities such as additional buses, transport shelters and parking structures at strategic nodes will be required. The existing amenity of each of the two areas (Hunters Hill Village and the Gladesville Town Centre/Victoria Road corridor is poor. Each area has been identified as requiring additional areas of public domain, improved pedestrian movement and recreation.




Additional public car parking will be required if improvements to convenience and specialist shopping and facilities in concurrence with the redevelopment of suitable housing and commercial precincts. The management of open spaces and conservation areas; a commitment to energy and water policies that protect our environment and natural resources; the cultivation and promotion of cultural activities similarly will require all support and funding commitment from the community and from governmental agencies. The embellishment of public spaces and implementation of new public domain areas; their landscaping; the improvement of pedestrian systems; the construction of new cycleways; bus shelters; the undergrounding of power lines and removal of power poles; improved and safer road crossings; these aims and directions can only be carried out with additional funding. To quote one of the objectives within the report (page 79) under the broad aim to “Improve operational management of existing transport networks”:

State Government and local government to develop and implement coordinated packages of road safety, traffic, intersection, lane capacity, local amenity and car parking, maintenance, and public transport service improvements for major corridors such as Military Road and Victoria Road.

There is recognition that there are issues to be addressed. The remediation of these cannot be undertaken without a commitment for funding to implement these works. FINANCIAL IMPACT There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report. There will certainly be a cost however to Council if additional funding is not provided to State agencies and Local Authorities to carry out the works required in parallel to additional housing and commercial development and urban renewal being undertaken.

RECOMMENDATION

That a submission be prepared on the basis of the above comments and sent to the Department of Planning.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Letter dated 11 June 2007 from Minister for Planning 2. Letter dated 10 July 2007 from Department of Planning




ITEM NO : 5

SUBJECT : DELEGATED AUTHORITY


REPORTING OFFICER : STEVE KOUREPIS

FILE : 200/10

Development Application No. DA07/1082 Zone 2(a1) Construction Certificate No. N/A Notification Yes Applicant Diana Tucker Value $52,000 Premises 48 Bonnefin Road, Hunters Hill Garden Area 55% Classification (BCA) 10(a) Date lodged 21.06.07 Assessing Officer Shahram Zadgan Determination

Date 21.08.07

Proposal New carport Determination Approval

Development Application No. DA 07/1047 Zone 2(a1) Construction Certificate No. N/A Notification Yes Applicant Mr. P & Mrs M Holmgren Value $220,000 Premises 6 Augustine Street, Hunters Hill Garden Area 54% Classification (BCA) 1a, 10b Date lodged 19.04.07 Assessing Officer Shahram Zadgan Determination

Date 23.08.07

Proposal Demolition of existing lean-to and construction of two storey addition, new swimming and landscaping

Determination Approval

Development Application No. DA07/1005 Zone 2(a1) Construction Certificate No. CC07/7007 Notification Yes Applicant Christopher White Value $2000 Premises 25 Princes Street, Hunters Hill Garden Area 85% Classification (BCA) 10b Date lodged 16.01.07 Assessing Officer Shahram Zadgan Determination Date 24.08.07 Proposal Paving to the rear of dwelling Determination Approval

Development Application No. DA06/1187 Zone 2(a1) Construction Certificate No. N/A Notification Yes Applicant Domus Homes Value $450,000 Premises 16 Aston Street, Hunters Hill Garden Area 56.5% Classification (BCA) 1a & 10b Date lodged 6.12.06

& 18.6.07 Assessing Officer Kerry Smith Determination Date 27.8.07 Proposal Alterations and additions to dwelling house and two storey

additions plus swimming pool/spa, landscaping and rainwater tank Determination Approval




FINANCIAL IMPACT

There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report.

RECOMMENDATION That the report be received and noted.

Development Application No. 06/1081-1 Zone 2(a2) Construction Certificate No. N/A Notification No objectionsApplicant Jennifer Buffier Value $120,000 Premises 11 Dick Street, Henley Garden Area 50% Classification (BCA) Class 1a Date lodged 14.08.07 Assessing Officer Shahram Zadgan Determination Date 31.08.07 Proposal Alteration & additions – s96 Determination Approval

Development Application No. DA05/1125-1 Zone 2(a2) Construction Certificate No. N/A Notification Yes Applicant Kenneth & Terry Hall Value $150,000 Premises 30 The Point Road, Woolwich Garden Area 26% Classification (BCA) 1a Date lodged 1.05.2007 Assessing Officer Shahram Zadgan Determination Date 29.08.2007Proposal Alterations & additions – s96 application Determination Refusal Reasons Not substantially the same development, impact on privacy

Development Application No. DA04/1182-1 Zone 2(a1) Construction Certificate No. N/A Notification Yes Applicant Gwen McDermott Value $300,000 Premises 5 Centenary Avenue, Hunters

Hill Garden Area 53%

Classification (BCA) 1a Date lodged 22.06.07 Assessing Officer Shahram Zadgan Determination

Date 13.08.07

Proposal Alterations & additions to existing building, new parking area – 96 application

Determination Approval

Development Application No. DA06/1161 Zone 2(a2) Construction Certificate No. N/A Notification Yes Applicant Vaughan Milligan

Development Consulting Value $550,000

Premises 11 Crown Street, Henley Garden Area 60% Classification (BCA) 1a, 10a Date lodged 02.11.06 Assessing Officer Shahram Zadgan Determination Date 31.08.07 Proposal Demolish existing dwelling & construct new two storey dwelling Determination Refusal Reasons Bulk and scale, out of character with the area, impact on streetscape




ITEM NO : 6

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


RECOMMENDATION

That the report be received and noted.

E

Public Works & Infrastructure

E – Public Works & Infrastructure

4236 – 10 September 2007

Index 1. Tree Preservation Order – Approvals/Refusals 1 .........................................

David Innes MANAGER

PUBLIC WORKS & INFRASTRUCTURE

REPORT OF PUBLIC WORKS & INFRASTRUCTURE

Meeting 4236 – 10 SEPTEMBER 2007 E1


ITEM NO : 1

SUBJECT : TREE PRESERVATION ORDER - APPROVALS / REFUSALS

BUSINESS PROGRAM : RECREATION & PARKS - ENVIRONMENT MANAGEMENT - URBAN AMENITY

REPORTING OFFICER : PHIL SUTTON

FILE : 785/03

Address Date Received

Work Requested and Reason Given

Cnr. Ady & Alexandra Street Hunters Hill (1020/56)

2 Aug 07 Willow gum (located near the north-west corner of the building planted in the narrow side passage) – The tree is causing damage to the Memorial Hall and retaining wall. Approval for removal is granted on condition that at least three replacement trees be planted within the site as noted in the report by Apex Tree and Garden Experts dated 14 March 2007.

5 Serpentine Road Hunters Hill (1650/5)

15 Aug 07 Cedrus (located north west boundary) – Tree is in very poor condition. Application for removal is approved. Cheese tree (located north west boundary) – has 70-80% dieback and is in severe decline. Application for removal is approved. Willow gum (located northern side) – Tree is in poor condition due to thrip infestation. Application for removal is approved.

10 Prince Edward Parade Hunters Hill (1580/10)

15 Aug 07 Pittosporum x 2 (located rear garden, western boundary) – The trees are being suppressed by other trees nearby. Weed species. Application for removal is approved. Eucalyptus (located rear garden, western boundary) – The tree is virtually dead, most likely a fungal infection. Application for removal is approved. Cedrus (located rear garden) – No damage to pool. The tree roots will deflect off concrete and take the line of least resistance through the soil. Application for removal is refused.

70 Barons Crescent Hunters Hill (1065/70)

15 Aug 07 Waterhousia x 2 (located side boundary) – The trees are in poor condition due to previous lopping. Application for removal is approved.




23 Auburn Street Hunters Hill (1050/23)

17 Aug 07 Crab apple (located front garden) – Tree is badly damaged by borer. Application for removal is approved. Juniperus (located front garden) – The tree is being suppressed by larger street tree. Application for removal is approved.

Clarkes Point Reserve (1852 Pt.4)

27 Aug 07 Acacia binervia (located Clarkes Point Reserve) – The tree is cantilevered over and being suppressed by larger growing trees. Application for removal is approved. The site is to be re-landscaped.

4 Avenue Road Hunters Hill (1060/4)

28 Aug 07 Cypress x 2 (located front garden, low side) – Trees are overmature and dying. Application for removal is approved. Note: Five other Cypress trees along the front boundary are virtually dead and may be removed.

Substation 831 Note Street Hunters Hill (1545)

28 Aug 07 Melaleuca (located front of substation) – Tree is located on top of high voltage cabling. Application for removal is approved on condition at least one suitable replacement tree with a minimum mature height of at least 6 metres is planted.

9 Makinson Street Gladesville (1445/9)

28 Aug 07 Alder (located front garden) – Insufficient space for the tree as it is located too close to dwelling. Application for removal is approved. Pittosporum (located rear boundary, adjacent to shed) – Weed species. Application for removal is approved.

24 The Point Road Woolwich (1685/24)

28 Aug 07 Cypress trees (located rear garden) – Poor specimens. Application for removal is approved on condition at least 3 replacement trees with a minimum mature height of at least 5 metres are planted. Celtis (located front garden) – Weed species. Tree is damaging heritage stone wall. Application for removal is approved.

66A Woolwich Road Woolwich (1760/64)

3 Sep 07 Camphor laurel (located front boundary, near entrance) – Tree is in extremely poor condition. Application for removal is approved.

FINANCIAL IMPACT There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report.

RECOMMENDATION That the report be received and noted.

G

Customer & Community Services

G – Customer & Community Services

4236 – 10 September 2007

Index 1. Proposed Skate Area at Gladesville Reserve 1

…………………………………………… Margaret Kelly

COMMUNITY SERVICES MANAGER

REPORT OF CUSTOMER & COMMUNITY SERVICES

Meeting 4236 – 10 September 2007 G1


ITEM NO : 1

SUBJECT : PROPOSED SKATE AREA - GLADESVILLE RESERVE

BUSINESS PROGRAM : YOUTH SERVICES

REPORTING OFFICER : MARGARET KELLY

FILE : 860/01

BACKGROUND INFORMATION Council undertook a study of youth needs, in particular the issues surrounding recreational facilities in June 2003 as part of the preparation of the Hunters Hill Social Plan 2005-2009. The majority of young people consulted wanted more things for young people to do in the area, after school, on weekends and in the school holidays. They requested dances, places for bands to play, organised gatherings of young people, movies in the park and fun events in the school holidays. They also expressed a need for additional recreational facilities most notably a multipurpose facility, courts, skateboard area and swimming pool. The multipurpose concept varied but included courts, skateboard area, cycle and BMX tracks. Courts included basketball, netball and tennis. The three most popular youth recreational facilities requested by young people were: • Basketball courts • Cycle paths • Skateboard ramps

Council has been working since the adoption of the Social Plan to increase the range of recreational activities available to young people in the area. Skate Days using mobile ramps have been run twice per year in the April and October school holidays. These have recently included skateboard lessons and have proved very popular with over 100 skaters attending. Young skaters have been requesting, for a number of years, that Council consider the construction of a permanent skate facility. The number of young families in the area is continuing to increase. The interest in skateboard riding amongst young people and the demand for a facility continues to be strong. TYPE OF FACILITY Investigations have been undertaken into the construction options available. Prefabricated concrete ramps installed onto a flat concrete or asphalt base is preferred at this stage. This will provide a “street skating” style facility. The facility would be small, designed to meet the needs of local residents. The size of the concrete pad would be approximately 20mx20m. It is essential that users are included in the design of the facility. A good design will cater for a range of skill levels and provide challenges for both beginning and intermediate skaters. It will also be used by scooters and BMX bikes. Once a suitable site is selected, concept plans would need to be developed. Safety is a key consideration in the design so that the risks to users are minimised and ongoing maintenance is important to prevent injury.

REPORT OF CUSTOMER & COMMUNITY SERVICES

Meeting 4236 – 10 September 2007 G2


LOCATION OF FACILITY/SITE ASSESSMENT A skate facility requires a safe location, with acceptable noise and other social impacts and minimal conflicts with adjacent users. It must also be accessible for young people. Possible sites in Boronia Park and other sites in Gladesville Reserve have been assessed for their suitability against the selection criteria. The location assessed as most suitable is the eastern side of Gladesville Reserve, opposite Riverside Girls High School. The location of the facility is identified in the attached map. The site would allow informal surveillance of the facility, is accessible by both bus and cycle route and is 400m away from residences further along Huntley’s Point Road. COST The likely cost of a small facility would be approximately $100,000. This would include the cost of the prefabricated modules, design work, concrete pad, earthworks and surrounds. Council has $50,000 available from Section 94 funds to contribute to the facility. Council has also applied for $15,000 from the Department of Sport and Recreation capital facilities grant. Additional funds will however be required. COMMUNITY CONSULTATION A meeting was held on 3 April 2007 with skateboarders to discuss the need for a permanent facility in Hunters Hill. Ten skaters and their families attended and they supported the need for a permanent facility. It was agreed that it did not need to be large but that it did need to be well designed and Gladesville Reserve was the preferred location. A number of comments were made about the design of a facility and help was offered. It has been suggested that the Council website could be used for young people to register their interest in the possibility of a skate area. A link on the home page will be created and young people will be able to leave their contact details and any suggestions they have. The Plan of Management of Gladesville Reserve does not identify an area for a skate facility. It is necessary for an amended Plan of Management for Gladesville Reserve, identifying the site for a skate facility, to be prepared and placed on public exhibition for twenty-eight days. Submissions will be invited from the community on the amended Plan of Management for Gladesville Reserve.


RECOMMENDATION 1. That the proposed site, on the eastern side of Gladesville Reserve, be adopted as a

possible site for a skate facility.

2. That an amended Plan of Management for Gladesville Reserve be prepared and placed on public exhibition for twenty-eight days and that submissions be invited from the community on the amended Plan.

ATTACHMENTS Map of Gladesville Reserve

H

General Manager

H – General Manager

4236 – 10 September 2007

Index 1. Payment of Fees & Expenses & the Provision of Facilities to Councillors 1 2. Naming of Ferry Wharves 3 3. Local Government Reform 4 .........................................

Barry Smith GENERAL MANAGER

REPORT OF GENERAL MANAGER Meeting 4236 – 10 SEPTEMBER 2007 H1


ITEM NO : 1

SUBJECT : PAYMENT OF FEES & EXPENSES & THE PROVISION OF FACILITIES TO COUNCILLORS

BUSINESS PROGRAM : COUNCIL MANAGEMENT & SUPPORT

REPORTING OFFICER : BARRY SMITH

FILE : 200/04: 200/03 : 200/12

Council’s policy was last reviewed and adopted at Ordinary Meeting No.4226 held 26 February 2007 (Min. No.51/07). Section 252 of the Local Government Act requires Council to adopt a policy within 5 months after the end of each year. 252 Payment of expenses and provision of facilities

(1) Within 5 months after the end of each year, a council must adopt a policy concerning the payment of expenses incurred or to be incurred by, and the provision of facilities to, the Mayor, the Deputy Mayor (if there is one) and the other councillors in relation to discharging the functions of civic office.

Should the policy be substantially amended, Section 253 details the processes that must be followed to vary the policy.

253 Requirements before policy concerning expenses and facilities can be adopted or

amended

(1) A council must give public notice of its intention to adopt or amend a policy for the payment of expenses or provision of facilities allowing at least 28 days for the making of public submissions.

(2) Before adopting or amending the policy, the council must consider any submissions made within the time allowed for submissions and make any appropriate changes to the draft policy or amendment.

(3) Despite subsections (1) and (2), a council need not give public notice of a proposed amendment to its policy for the payment of expenses or provision of facilities if the council is of the opinion that the proposed amendment is not substantial.

(4) Within 28 days after adopting a policy or making an amendment to a policy for which public notice is required to be given under this section, a council is to forward to the Director-General:

(a) a copy of the policy or amendment together with details of all submissions received in accordance with subsection (1), and

(b) a statement setting out, for each submission, the council’s response to the submission and the reasons for the council’s response, and

(c) a copy of the notice given under subsection (1).

(5) A council must comply with this section when proposing to adopt a policy each year in accordance with section 252 (1) even if the council proposes to adopt a policy that is the same as its existing policy.

Council should also be aware that the following is now a requirement of the Annual Report process that must be concluded by November each year.



428 (f) the total amount of money expended during the year on mayoral fees and councillor fees, the council’s policy on the provision of facilities for use by councillors and the payment of councillors’ expenses, together with a statement of the total amount of money expended during that year on the provision of such facilities and the payment of such expenses.

Given that the last policy review was in February this year it is suggested that the current policy is simply re-affirmed, unless Council has amendments that it wishes to consider. FINANCIAL IMPACT There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report.

RECOMMENDATION That the Payment of Fees and Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors Policy be reaffirmed.

ATTACHMENTS

Policy No.CORP.S.12 Payment of Fees and Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors.



ITEM NO : 2

SUBJECT : NAMING OF FERRY WHARVES

BUSINESS PROGRAM : ASSET MANAGEMENT


FILE : 370/36

Correspondence has been received from NSW Maritime, inviting comment from Council on the naming of ferry wharves. NSW Maritime proposes to erect new identification, information and directional signs on wharves and wishes to ensure that stakeholder interests and preferences are taken into account. Any new identification signage will require the formal approval of the Geographical Names Board and signs erected on Council land will require consent. Council has three wharves affected by this request: 1. Huntleys Point (Huntleys Point Road) 2. Hunters Hill (Alexandra Street) 3. Woolwich (Valentia Street) As indicated on the attached schedule, NSW Maritime proposes no changes to the existing naming conventions for the three wharves. FINANCIAL IMPACT There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report.

RECOMMENDATION That Council advise NSW Maritime that it has no objections to the proposed naming conventions for Huntleys Point (Huntleys Point Road), Hunters Hill (Alexandra Street) or Woolwich (Valentia Street) wharves.

ATTACHMENTS

NSW Maritime schedule “Commuter ‘On-Wharf’ Signage Suggestions”.



ITEM NO : 3

SUBJECT : LOCAL GOVERNMENT REFORM



FILE : 200/23

Summary The Local Government and Shires Associations of NSW has written to Council and provided their positions on all 49 recommendations of the Independent Inquiry into the Financial Sustainability of NSW Local Government. The attached table outlines the Associations’ positions on the recommendations and the work already underway to respond to the Inquiry. The Associations generally welcomed the inquiry’s findings and recommendations. The Associations’ positions table outlines the next steps forward and should form the basis for continued work by the Local Government sector in NSW as a whole. The support of councillors and councils in promoting this work is critical and the Associations are seeking Councils support in calling for a whole-of-government response and the establishment of a reform implementation fund. Background In July 2007, after about one year of work, the Strengthening Local Government Task Force provided to the Associations, its positions and actions on all 49 recommendations of the Independent Inquiry into the Financial Sustainability of NSW Local Government. The Associations endorsed these positions and actions on 5 July 2007 and subsequently submitted them to the NSW Government for a whole-of-government response. Positions and actions have mainly been developed by the task force’s five expert working groups: 1. Intergovernmental Relations and Community Relations; 2. Financial Management; 3. Corporate Governance and Performance Measurement; 4. Resource Optimising and Capacity Building; and 5. Promoting Local Government Leadership. The work of the task force and its working groups was guided by principles including: • The positions and actions should be sectoral ones including all key Local

Government stakeholders; • Stakeholders should work together in partnership; • Existing initiatives should be recognised and actively promoted in order to not

duplicate efforts; and • Deliberations should be consensus based, open and transparent.



To facilitate this sectoral response the task force comprised key local government stakeholders, including the Presidents, Executive members and the Secretary General of the Associations, the Presidents of the Local Government Managers Australia (LGMA), NSW Division, and the Institute of Public Works Engineering Australia (IPWEA), NSW Division, Associate Professor Graham Sansom, Director of the University of Technology Sydney’s Centre for Local Government, and, as a permanent observer, the Deputy Director General of the Department of Local Government. Working groups comprised a wide range of experts and professionals from the Local Government sector, social, environmental and community groups, government departments and businesses. The task force contributed to and promoted the other important initiatives such as the Department of Local Government’s Integrated Planning and Reporting Project, the asset management position paper prepared by the Department of Local Government and the NSW Infrastructure Task Force, the Strategic Alliance Network, Local Government Procurement, the LGMA Good Practice Toolkit, and the national Infrastructure Financial Management Guidelines currently being developed by the National Asset Management Strategy (NAMS) Committee. The task force widely consulted throughout NSW via workshops and roundtables and established a comprehensive program website (www.StrengtheningLG.lgsa.org.au). Priority issues The priority issues identified in the positions table include: Intergovernmental Relations: The inquiry recognised the importance of good intergovernmental relations and recommended the signing of an intergovernmental agreement. The Associations are also committed to working closely with the State Government on the implementation of the State Plan, which will guide the delivery of services in NSW over the next 10 years. To be successful, the State Plan must be delivered locally. This can only be achieved if the State Government, individual agencies, and councils all work together horizontally and vertically at the local level. The signing of an intergovernmental agreement would strengthen relationships at the local level, help clarify mutual roles and responsibilities, and send a strong message to the Local Government sector that the State Government wants to work closely with it. Integrated Planning and Reporting: The current review of the strategic and financial planning and reporting system for councils presents an important opportunity to change the current, integration-lacking planning and reporting requirements and establish a new, integrated strategic planning framework that focuses on outcomes for the community and links State and Local Government priorities. While work is well underway, much more needs to be done to reduce red tape and integrate the plans of state agencies into the process. Asset Management: The inquiry found that only 20 per cent of councils have adequate asset management systems and practices in place. It is critical that all councils adopt asset management systems with consistent asset accounting practices. This will enable them to better assess priorities and trade-off and make decisions that most effectively and efficiently use council’s asset portfolio and can be funded over the long term from council resources. Improving asset management systems and practices should be closely linked to the integrated planning and reporting review and the Associations will continue to work with the Department of Local Government to address these issues.



Resource Sharing: The Associations support resource sharing and with the Department of Local Government are jointly hosting the Strategic Alliance Network Conference in August 2007 to further promote resource sharing initiatives including Local Government Procurement and the LGMA Good Practice Toolkit. Rate Pegging and Financial Assistance Grants: The inquiry recommended that the Commonwealth and the State Government increase grant funding for infrastructure, and that as a trade-off for councils implementing longer term strategic and financial planning, rate pegging should be removed. The Associations strongly support these recommendations and are actively promoting long term strategic and financial planning and reporting. Reform Assistance: The priority issues and activities outlined above represent the biggest changes to NSW Local Government in decades. The successful implementation of these structural, financial and administrative reforms will depend on a reform implementation program financially supported by the State Government. Council has recognised the impact of a number of these priority issues by adopting a long-term strategic plan and a total asset management plan, both of which are reflected in Councils long-term budget. Council is also heavily involved in resource sharing through its membership of NSROC and the General Manager is a member of the Executive of the Strategic Alliance Network.


RECOMMENDATION That Council acknowledge and endorse the Associations’ positions on the 49 recommendations of the Independent Inquiry into the Financial Sustainability of NSW Local Government and call on the Minister for Local Government to coordinate a whole-of-government response and establish a reform implementation fund.

ATTACHMENTS

LGSA Positions on the Recommendations of the Local Government Inquiry.

SUPPLEMENTARY REPORT OF GENERAL MANAGER

Meeting 4236 – 10 SEPTEMBER 2007 H7


ITEM NO : 4

SUBJECT : MODIFICATIONS TO COLLINGWOOD STREET RESERVE BOATSHED



FILE : 1843 & 1125/6

Council considered a proposal put forward by an adjoining owner for the modification and sharing of use of the Collingwood Street Reserve Boatshed and resolved as follows: Min. No. 266/06 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Quinn, seconded Clr Lin that:

1. Council agrees to the proposal in-principle, subject to written confirmation from Mr. Pryke that he will meet all costs associated with the proposed project.

2. Council advise Mr. Pryke that should the project proceed to completion, Council is prepared to enter in to a long-term lease or licence agreement for use of a portion of the boatshed, subject to the provisions of the Community Land Management Act.

3. TLB Engineers be engaged by Council to undertake the works outlined in the attached proposal.

4. The matter be further reported to Council upon conclusion of the works outlined in the consultants brief.

The conditions outlined in the resolution have been met, works outlined in the consultants brief completed and TLB Engineers have provided final plans and details of the proposal. The next step in the process is to lodge a development application with NSW Maritime Authority for which owners consent (in this case the Council), is required. The proposal will provide significant additional facilities to those available at present to the community. These include: 1. A disabled access ramp to DDA standards. 2. Pontoon access for pick-up and set-down of both able and disabled. 3. A retaining wall to stop erosion of the Collingwood Street Reserve. 4. Dinghy storage facilities. 5. Complete refurbishment of the existing boatshed. Attached to this report are copies of the proposed works for Council consideration.




FINANCIAL IMPACT There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report as the proponent has agreed to meet all costs associated with the project.

RECOMMENDATION 1. That Council grant landowners consent to the proposal and a development

application be lodged.

2. Subject to NSW Maritime approval of the proposal, a draft lease, or licence, be prepared for use of a portion of the boatshed by Mr. Pryke.

ATTACHMENTS

Plans for proposed works



ITEM NO : 1




FILE : 200/04: 200/03 : 200/12





amended















ATTACHMENTS




ITEM NO : 2




FILE : 370/36



ATTACHMENTS




ITEM NO : 3




FILE : 200/23









ATTACHMENTS





ITEM NO : 4




FILE : 1843 & 1125/6














ATTACHMENTS




ITEM NO : 1




FILE : 200/04: 200/03 : 200/12





amended















ATTACHMENTS




ITEM NO : 2




FILE : 370/36



ATTACHMENTS




ITEM NO : 3




FILE : 200/23









ATTACHMENTS





ITEM NO : 4




FILE : 1843 & 1125/6














ATTACHMENTS




ITEM NO : 1




FILE : 200/04: 200/03 : 200/12





amended















ATTACHMENTS




ITEM NO : 2




FILE : 370/36



ATTACHMENTS




ITEM NO : 3




FILE : 200/23









ATTACHMENTS





ITEM NO : 4




FILE : 1843 & 1125/6














ATTACHMENTS




ITEM NO : 1




FILE : 200/04: 200/03 : 200/12





amended















ATTACHMENTS




ITEM NO : 2




FILE : 370/36



ATTACHMENTS




ITEM NO : 3




FILE : 200/23









ATTACHMENTS





ITEM NO : 4




FILE : 1843 & 1125/6














ATTACHMENTS


J

Committees

J – Committees

4236 – 10 September 2007

Index 1. Minutes of the Hunters Hill Senior Support Group Meeting held 20 August 2007 1 2. Minutes of the Conservation Advisory Panel Meeting held 15 August 2007 3 3. Minutes of the Public Transport & Traffic Advisory Committee Meeting held 21 August 2007 9 4. Minutes of the Hunter’s Hill Council Event Committee Meeting held 14 August 2007 13 5. Minutes of the Woolwich Village Working Party Meeting held 8 August 2007 17 ………………………………………………… ………………………………………………… Margaret Kelly Barry Smith COMMUNITY SERVICES MANAGER GENERAL MANAGER

………………………………………………… ………………………………………………… Greg Patch Adrian Black HERITAGE ADVISER COMMUNITY EVENTS CO-ORDINATOR

………………………………………………… David Innes MANAGER PUBLIC WORKS & INFRASTRUCTURE

REPORT OF COMMITTEES Meeting 4236 – 10 September 2007 J1


ITEM NO : 1

SUBJECT : MINUTES OF THE HUNTERS HILL SENIOR SUPPORT GROUP MEETING HELD 20 AUGUST 2007

LOCATION : GLADESVILLE ROAD COMMUNITY CENTRE

BUSINESS PROGRAM : AGED AND DISABILITY SERVICES

REPORTING OFFICER : MARGARET KELLY

FILE : 580/06

The meeting opened at 10.00am.

PRESENT

Joan Lloyd Gil Wahlquist Graham Percival Janice Poynton Derry Gai Betty Benjamin Lynette Knight Margaret Kelly Community Services Manager, Hunter's Hill Council APOLOGIES Elva Stonham Shirley George Robyn Hogan 1. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Moved Betty Benjamin, seconded Robyn Hogan that the Minutes of the previous meeting held 18 June 2007 be confirmed.

2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST There were no declarations of interest. 3. BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES

3.1 Bus Meeting Gil Wahlquist reported that he attended a consultation meeting about bus services. Hunters Hill was very well represented. We have been asked to provide ideas on how services in Hunters Hill could be improved and Gil Wahlquist sought suggestions. The meeting suggested more 505 buses, especially later in the day and small buses.



Committee Resolution: Resolved Gil Wahlquist, seconded Derry Gai that the State Transit Authority be asked to examine use of small buses on the Hunters Hill/Gladesville routes. 3.2 Gladesville Library Festival

The Gladesville Library Festival was successful with a varied program of activities held to promote the library to residents of the Municipality. 3.3 Gladesville Road Pedestrian Crossing Margaret Kelly to seek advice as to the progress of the options regarding a pedestrian crossing. Focus needs to be on the safety, so we are seeking action to improve the safety for older pedestrians on Gladesville Road.

3.4 Active Mind Active Body A subcommittee has met to plan the Active Mind Active Body Day, which will be held on Tuesday 9 October 2007at Gladesville RSL Club. It will commence at 9.15am and finish by 1.00pm. The day is being organised by the Senior Support Group, Gladesville Community Aid, Department of Health and Hunter’s Hill Council.

4. TREASURER’S REPORT Current balance in the bank account is $1,381.76

It was agreed that changes to the banners could be paid for out of Senior Support Group funds.

Committee Resolution:

Resolved Betty Benjamin, seconded Graham Percival that the Treasurer’s Report be received.

5. INFORMATION SHARE All groups present gave a report of their activities. 6. NEXT MEETING

The next meeting of the Hunters Hill Senior Support Group will be held on Monday 15 October 2007 at 10.00am at the Gladesville Road Community Centre, 44 Gladesville Road, Hunters Hill.

The meeting closed at 11.45am. FINANCIAL IMPACT There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report.

RECOMMENDATION That the minutes be received and noted.



ITEM NO : 2

SUBJECT : MINUTES OF THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY PANEL (CAP) MEETING HELD 15 AUGUST 2007

LOCATION : COUNCIL CHAMBER


REPORTING OFFICER : GREG PATCH

FILE : 205/13

The meeting opened at 6.00pm.

PRESENT

Sue Hoopmann Mayor, Hunter’s Hill Council Clr Annabel Croll Hunter’s Hill Council Tony Coote Hunters Hill Trust Representative Robyn Christie National Trust Representative Brian McDonald Architect – RAIA Member Steve Kourepis Manager, Development & Environment, Hunter’s Hill Council Greg Patch Heritage Adviser, Hunter’s Hill Council APOLOGIES Paul Fletcher Architect – Community Representative 1. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Moved Brian McDonald, seconded Tony Coote that the Minutes of the previous meeting held 18 July 2007 be confirmed.

2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

There were no declarations of interest 3. INTERVIEWS WITH APPLICANTS

3.1 99 Woolwich Road, Woolwich The Panel was addressed by Mr & Mrs Millar. The proposal is to make alterations and additions to an existing Schedule 6 listed property at 99 Woolwich Road, Woolwich, by way of an additional bay window element under an existing verandah to the rear of the premises. Members of the Panel discussed the proposal with the applicants and questioned whether the proposed bay window would be waterproof, being built under the verandah. It was explained that the verandah deck has been waterproofed in the past, and there is no issue with this.



In considering the proposal, the CAP raised no objections to the proposed works on heritage grounds. Committee Resolution : That the Manager, Development & Environment, be advised that CAP considers the proposal to be supportable. 3.2 19 Prince Edward Street, Gladesville

Marke Hegerty, the owner, addressed the Panel. Mr Hegerty explained that the proposal had been re-designed since CAP last reviewed the proposal, deleting the previously proposed upper floor and increasing the rearward single storey component. The matter of which walls are original and which are new or to be demolished was discussed. Mr Hegerty explained that the original walls to the front portion of the cottage had been virtually completely stripped out, and the question with regard to the support of the roof framing would be satisfied by the proposed new internal partition layout. The treatment of the southern sleep-out area was discussed. This is to become the entrance to the house (which is currently to the northern wall), and members of the panel were of the view that more or the existing structure and expression of the “porch”-like arrangement should be retained. It was noted that the southern rear extension is to be cantilevered out over the vehicular manoeuvring area – the legibility and appearance of this arrangement was considered to be contrary to the overall presentation of the cottage to the street, although it was noted that the relative levels are such that it may not be particularly legible. Site coverage/Garden Area was questioned – as to whether the proposed extension would reduce the garden area below that required. This is considered a heritage matter insofar as the “houses-set-within-their-own-gardens” is a fundamental aspect of the character of Hunters Hill. It was also concluded that the replacement windows would be more appropriate as “triple-sash” casement windows, not double-hungs and a fixed glazed panel as shown to the street façade. Committee Resolution : That the Manager, Development and Environment be advised that CAP considers the proposal to require further detailed design, and the Panel looks forward to reviewing an amending proposal.

3.3 46 Huntleys Point Road, Huntleys Point

The Panel was addressed by Mesdames Sobdinov and the architect, Luigi Roselli. CAP members had visited the site in mid-December 2006 to inspect the existing cottage, which is a listed Sch. 7 “Contributory Building” under the Hunters Hill LEP. It was concluded that the building has been so altered as to have lost its “contributory” characteristics, and demolition is not opposed, per se.



In considering the proposal, the members of the Panel expressed a range of views. Some were concerned at the somewhat idiosyncratic expression and material usage, and the inherently Modern inspired nature of the design. Examples of recent works in Mosman that are of a similar architectural expression to the design of the proposal were shown to the Panel by way of photographs and the palimpsest of an example to a Mosman Good Design Award was also circulated. Some concern as to the impact of the proposed garage arrangement on the streetscape of Huntleys Point Road was raised – the detailing of the gate/tilting panel door was explained to the Panel by Mr Roselli, and once the fact that the door is to be setback from the street slightly was pointed out, the resistance to this aspect of the proposal lessened. The second dwelling facing Keeyuga Road was discussed in terms of it being two storey rather than single storey as required by Council’s planning guidelines. It was concluded that a single storey “integrated house” is more appropriate in a conventional rear yard-type arrangement. The fact that the subject property has two street frontages goes some way to justifying the proposed two storey configuration, as does the topography of the site. Committee Resolution : That the Manager, Development and Environment be advised of the Panel’s in-principle support for the proposal, subject to further elucidation of the architectural expression of the proposal.

3.4 1A John Street, Hunters Hill

Don Wallace of Noel Bell Ridley Smith and Partners presented the proposal to CAP. The Panel expressed its appreciation of the fact that works are proposed to the existing ramshackle timber cottage, and the design of the proposed additions were considered in the light of the potential reconstruction/refurbishment of the differentiating characteristics of the cottage. Mr Wallace explained that there is sufficient original fabric and evidence to virtually “pattern reconstruct” the missing element of the cottage to return it to some semblance of its original presentation. Details of the connections, roof shapes and external materials to the proposed additions were discussed at length. It was considered that the proposed gambrel to the roof of the “pavilion” to be placed adjacent to the cottage would be best dispensed with. The connection “link” like element was thought to be too “heavy” and should be made thinner and the junction with the skillion to the rear of the existing cottage considered further. It was also advised that the rear corner (NW) of the cottage would be better left “free”, which would necessitate relocating the link, or pushing the whole addition further back towards the rear of the site. In general terms, it was considered an appropriate approach, and once the detail matters are resolved, should be an eminently supportable proposal. Committee Resolution : That the Manager, Development and Environment be advised of the Panel’s general support for the proposal and its comments with regard to matters of design.



3.5 24 Woolwich Road, Hunters Hill

There were no representatives of the applicant present, so the Panel considered the proposal in their absence. The proposal entails substantial upper floor additions to the existing house and incorporation of the loft over the carport/garage. The Panel was of the view that the proposed works have the potential to impose excessive bulk on the existing house and to give rise to adverse affects on the setting of St. Peter Chanel Church to the rear across Futuna Street. Adverse impacts on the Conservation Area and the streetscape of Woolwich Road. It was considered that a better understanding of the proposal would be gained through a site visit.

Committee Resolution : That the Manager, Development and Environment be advised of the Panel’s initial comments in relation to the excessive bulk and character of the proposal and its desire to view the site.

3.6 11 The Point Road, Woolwich

The Panel was addressed by the Architect, Colin Filmer.

Mr Filmer explained that the owners require additional accommodation and storage areas, and a better resolved entrance to the place off The Point Road. Given the fact that the original grounds have been subdivided and the house has a relatively formally composed east façade, the area best looked at in terms of additions is the street-facing portion of the house. On this basis, an addition that more or less “fills” in the double-fronted portion facing the street is proposed, with an attic storage area lit by a gablet. The entrance is proposed to what was formerly a vehicular entrance, and the owner seeks to have a “lych-gate” like element to state the entrance. Minor alteration and additions are also proposed to the west side of the garage structure. The Panel was of the view that the proposed alteration and additions to the house itself are appropriate and should not overly distort the presentation of the house, and have adverse impacts on the streetscape. The lych gate was considered inappropriate as there appears to be no historical evidence to suggest that there was a lych gate associated with the property, and such elements will have an adverse impact on the streetscape if supported and proliferate. The garage works were considered to have minimal potential impacts.

Although not part of the application, a lessening of the height of the fence/wall to The Point Road was also considered desirable in terms of facilitating greater visual connectivity between the street and the garden of the property.



Committee Resolution : That the Manager, Development and Environment be advised of the Panel’s comments with regards to the proposed lych gate and general support for the proposal otherwise.

4. GENERAL BUSINESS

4.1 5 Ambrose Street, Hunters Hill CAP reviewed the proposed alterations and additions and considered that, on the face of it, the proposed dormers would give rise to adverse impacts on the adjoining heritage item and on the conservation area in general. It was considered, however, that the proposal would be better assessed through a site visit, and a viewing should be had prior to the next meeting of CAP. 4.2 7 Woolwich Road, Hunters Hill

The proposed alterations/amendments to the consent (chiefly to the tennis court pavilion and configuration adjustments to new fenestration elements) were considered to have little potential heritage impact, and are supportable. It was noted that there is an incongruous amount of supporting information by way of reports and statements, given the extent of amendments. 4.3 4 North Parade, Hunters Hill

The Panel was requested to review proposed s96 amendments to the alterations and additions to the above property. In examining the documentation, the members of CAP found the drawings to be inadequate in terms of representing the nature and extent of the works. From what could be ascertained, however, it was concluded that the proposed amendments are not supportable, and that further and clearer information is required for the Panel to make a proper determination. 4.4 15 Kareelah Road, Hunters Hill

The Panel reviewed the proposed alterations and additions, chiefly to the roof configuration, and deck/stairs to the rear (with internal layout rationalisation) in light of its preliminary consultation advice. It was found that the proposal had been amended in line with the discussions, and that the proposal is fully supportable by CAP. 4.5 8 Joubert Street, Hunters Hill

CAP considers this proposal to be outside its conservation and heritage consideration, as it is to land outside the conservation areas, and is an allotment which was subdivided off a Schedule 7 item. As a general observation, it was noted that the proposed “integrated housing” development appears to be excessively bulky, an overdevelopment of the site, and could potentially be read as three storey from some viewpoints.



5. NEXT MEETING The next meeting of the Conservation Advisory Panel will be held on Wednesday 19 September 2007 at 5.30 pm for a 6.00pm meeting start in the Council Chamber.

Site visits to 24 Woolwich Road and 5 Ambrose Stree t prior to the meeting. The meeting closed at 8.00pm. FINANCIAL IMPACT There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report.




ITEM NO : 3

SUBJECT : MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC TRANSPORT & TRAFFIC ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING HELD 21 AUGUST 2007


BUSINESS PROGRAM : TRAFFIC & PARKING – TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT – URBAN AMENITY

REPORTING OFFICER : DAVID INNES

FILE : 205/12

The meeting commenced at 6.00pm. PRESENT Clr P Astridge Chair Clr S Hoopmann Mayor, Hunter’s Hill Council A Sharp R Love D Innes Manager Public Works & Infrastructure, Hunter’s Hill Council APOLOGIES Clr R Sheerin Hunter’s Hill Council B Ho J Burton 1. CONFIRMATION OF PREVIOUS MINUTES

Moved A Sharp, seconded R Love that the Minutes of the previous meeting held 17 July 2007 be confirmed.

2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST There were no declarations of interest. 3. BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES There was no business arising from the Minutes. 4. 51 Ryde Road (on-site inspection)

A site inspection was carried out to check whether there is adequate sight distance

past the bus shelter to allow for vehicles exiting 51 Ryde Road.



Committee recommendation: The issue is to be referred to the Local Traffic Committee to consider relocation of

the bus shelter/stop. Moved A Sharp, seconded R Love.

5. Woolwich Pier Hotel - Parking

A request was received by the hotel to change the parking restriction times outside the hotel to 8 pm rather than 9 pm weekdays, and earlier on Saturday and Sunday.

Committee consideration: The request was considered to be reasonable. The Committee requests that the bus times be confirmed and reported to the next meeting.

Committee recommendation: That the Manager PW&I report the bus times at the hotel to the next meeting.

6. Road Safety Officer

A request was received asking if Hunter’s Hill Council has a Road Safety Officer and what education programs we are currently running with regard to young drivers. Committee consideration: It is acknowledged that Council does not have a Road Safety Officer. However, Council has participated in road safety programs run by local service organisations.

Committee recommendation: That Manager PW&I write to Hunters Hill Rotary to investigate any current programs

by Rotary. 7. Crown Street – “No Stopping” sign

The survey results were considered. The Committee agreed with the proposal to install the “no stopping” signs.

Committee recommendation: That the installation of “no stopping” signs in Crown Street be referred to the Local Traffic Advisory Committee for concurrence.

8. Gladesville Road – Parking Restrictions

An update of the outcome from the Hunters Hill Local Traffic Advisory Committee meeting held 16 August 2007 was given.

Committee advised: The Committee was advised that the Local Traffic Committee approved the

proposed parking restrictions in Gladesville Road.



9. Boronia Park Traffic Management

An update of the outcome from the Hunters Hill Local Traffic Advisory Committee meeting held 16 August 2007 was given. Committee advised: The Committee was advised of the outcome of the Local Traffic Advisory Committee’s consideration of the traffic issues in Boronia Park. The Manager PW&I advised that a separate report will be submitted to Council for finalising a management plan.

10. Gladesville Road – Pedestrian Platform

Update of outcome from Hunters Hill Local Traffic Advisory Committee meeting held 16 August 2007. Committee advised: The Committee was advised of the outcome of the Local Traffic Advisory Committee consideration of the installation of a raised pedestrian platform on the off-ramp to Burns Bay Road. The Committee requested that the Manager PW&I investigate the timing of the pedestrian phases of the traffic signals in this location.

11. GENERAL BUSINESS

11.1 Safety fence Victoria Road. The Mayor requested that Council write to the RTA regarding any proposals to extend the safety fence in Victoria Road at Gladesville shops, requesting that Council and the Chamber of Commerce be consulted if there is a proposal. 11.2 Woolwich Road – bus shelter The Mayor requested that the bus shelter in Woolwich Road at Gladstone Street be modified to improve sight distances for passengers waiting in the shelter. 11.3 Pittwater Road – Boronia Park shops – parking arrangements Clr Astridge requested that Manager PW&I investigate the parking arrangements in Pittwater Road at the Boronia Park shops. 11.4 Pittwater Road/Ryde Road – traffic signals pha sing Clr Astridge requested that Council write to the RTA to consider the adjusting of the phasing of the traffic signals at Pittwater Road and Ryde Road to include a dedicated “right hand” phase from Pittwater Road to Ryde Road, eastbound. 11.5 Church Street intersection – traffic signals Clr Astridge requested that the traffic signal loops in Church Street be relocated to improve the efficiency of the intersection.



12. NEXT MEETING The next meeting of the Public Transport and Traffic Advisory Committee will be held on Tuesday 18 September 2007 at 6.30pm in the Hunter's Hill Council Chamber.

The meeting closed at 7.30pm. FINANCIAL IMPACT There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report.




ITEM NO : 4

SUBJECT : MINUTES OF THE HUNTER’S HILL COUNCIL EVENT COMMITTEE MEETING HELD 14 AUGUST 2007


BUSINESS PROGRAM : COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

REPORTING OFFICER : ADRIAN BLACK

FILE : 205/35

The meeting opened at 5.30pm.

PRESENT

Clr. Annabel Croll Hunter’s Hill Council Rick Retas Community Representative Graham Mitchell SES Shomaes Norouzi Bahai Community Allan Rouse Hunters Hill High School Adrian Black Community Events Coordinator, Hunter’s Hill Council APOLOGIES

Clr Sue Hoopmann Mayor, Hunter’s Hill Council Const. Darren Jenkins Gladesville Police 1. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

Moved Rick Retas, seconded Annabel Croll that the Minutes of the previous meeting were true and correct and that they be confirmed.

2. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

There were no declarations of interest

3. BUSINESS ARISING FROM THE MINUTES

Listed in General Business.

4. GENERAL BUSSINESS

MOOCOOBOOLA FESTIVAL

4.1 Site Layout

It was thought that the new site layout was good and worked well. It allowed for the food court to be connected to the staged entertainment. Next year it could be considered to cover over the long jump sand pit.



4.2 Thank you Letters

Thank you letters should be sent to thank Mark Warren (MC), the entertainment and MG Car Club for participating on the day.

4.3 MC

It was thought that the MC, Mark Warren was very good and should be invited back.

4.4 Kites

It was thought that it would have been a good day for kites and perhaps should be considered for future years or other events.

4.5 Attendance at Festival

It was thought that the attendance at the Festival was good and up on previous years. It was also thought that people tended to stay longer perhaps due to the entertainment.

4.6 TWT

The Weekly Times had mistakenly placed a headline stating that the Festival would occur on Sunday. Allan Rouse reported that approximately 50 people turned up on Sunday.

4.7 Indigenous Performer

The ‘Acknowledgement to Country’ and traditional Koori performance was conducted by Glen Doyle. Glen has been involved with the Festival for several years. It was thought that he was very good.

4.8 Kids Alley

Annabel Croll has put forward the idea of creating a ‘Kids Alley’ that brought together all related stalls, rides and activities such as the Circus Playground. The ‘Kids Alley’ would then be a feature of the Festival.

4.9 Health Regulations

There was some concern about Food Stallholders not following all of the Temporary Food Vendors health regulations, in particular the wearing of gloves during food handling. Adrian Black stated that futures years should see great effort put into ensuring that food vendors comply and are aware of mandatory health regulations.

4.10 Council Marquee

There was some concern that the Council Marquee had not been properly erected. Adrian Black stated that he would ask the staging hire company to put the Council Marquee up in future years to ensure that it was properly and safely erected.



4.11 Plastic Toys

Plastic guns and cap guns do not fit in with the spirit of Moocooboola and can annoy, and scare patrons of the Festival. It was decided to ban all sales of these items from the Festival. Stronger monitoring of the products for sale and otherwise needs to be undertaken.

4.12 Site Traffic Management

Adrian Black stated that there does need to be stronger control over the gates on the Festival site to avoid safety concerns. SES has manned the gates in the past.

4.13 Shuttle Bus service

The shuttle bus service was well used. Future years should maintain and develop this service with greater advertising of the shuttle bus.

4.14 Toilets

It was thought that for convenience and accessibility that an appropriate number of portable toilets should be hired next year.

4.15 Deliveries

The disabled portable toilet was delivered to the site earlier than arranged and proved inconvenient. Stronger communication with all equipment hire companies needs to be undertaken.

4.16 Tarban Creek Group

The Tarban Creek Group sent a letter of thanks to Annabel Croll for helping to organise access to the E- Waste Collection.

4.17 The Grand Parade

It was felt that the participation in the Parade was at an all time low. Rick Retas reported that when the Parade crossed the overpass it was more popular; this may be due to the fact of visibility to a greater audience. Adrian Black also put forward that Saturday morning might not be the best time due to sporting and other commitments. Adrian Black also put forward that he would investigate the possibility of returning to the old route. It was also stated that other local parades, such as the Easter parade, walk across the overpass.

4.18 Advertising

It was thought that the advertising and promotion was good this year but to enhance this Allan Rouse put forward that greater use of banners on both sides of Fig Tree Bridge walkway and Gladesville Bridge walkway would further advertise the event.

4.19 The Festival Name

Rick Retas put forward that Moocooboola does not truly reflect the event and place and that it should be called Hunters Hill Festival. Adrian Black agreed with Rick’s comments but suggested that the event has such a history that it cannot be changed. However in the interest of “Place Building” that a slight alteration such as “Moocooboola – Hunters Hill Festival” might clarify the event.



4.20 Wine

The sale of wine was discussed during this year’s festival process, unfortunately this is not permitted by the Department Of Education and Training (DET). There was some confusion over wine tasting which had happened in the past and happened again this year. Allan Rouse reported that the Deputy Principal, Michael Murphy was further investigating the policies and exceptions of DET. However at this point there is not to be wine tasting in future years. All agree that wine tasting and the sale of a glass of wine with lunch would be nice.

4.21 Rides and School Fundraiser

The rides at Moocooboola run on 20-25% return on income generated by the vendors to Council. Adrian Black felt that the vendors had not provided an accurate account of the days takings and that it would always be difficult to properly access the correct income. Adrian Black suggested that the rides might make a good fundraiser for Hunters Hill High School and that they may be able to man a ticketing booth and collect the income to ensure that the correct amount remains in the Hunters Hill community. Adrian Black believes regardless that a simple fundraiser should be found for the school as it is on their land and Public School funding is limited. Further discussion will take place over the coming year.

4.22 Day Change

It was thought that a Sunday might prove to be a better day for families, in general, to attend and participate in Moocooboola. Further discussion is needed and a decision made prior to the end of the year.

5. NEXT MEETING

The next meeting of the Hunter’s Hill Council Event Committee will be held on Tuesday 23 October 2007 at 6.00pm in the Hunter’s Hill Council Chamber. This meeting will begin planning the next major events – Carols by Candle Light and Australia Day.

Please note the change of date and time due to conflict with the scheduled Art and Craft Committee Meeting.

FINANCIAL IMPACT


RECOMMENDATION

That the minutes be received and noted.



ITEM NO : 5

SUBJECT : MINUTES OF THE WOOLWICH VILLAGE WORKING PARTY MEETING HELD 8 AUGUST 2007


BUSINESS PROGRAM : COUNCIL MANAGEMENT & REPORT


FILE : 205/01

The meeting opened at 5.15pm. PRESENT Charles Fitzhardinge Bill Ierace Peter Snowden Clr. Susan Hoopmann Mayor, Hunter's Hill Council Clr. Annabel Croll Hunter's Hill Council Clr. Simon Frame Hunter’s Hill Council Barry Smith General Manager, Hunter's Hill Council Steve Kourepis Manager, Development & Environment, Hunter's Hill Council David Innes Manager, Public Works & Infrastructure ALSO PRESENT Nick Hollo Acting Executive Director, Sydney Harbour Federation Trust Daniel Sealy Sydney Harbour Federation Trust Craig Watson Project Manager – Cockatoo Island, Sydney Harbour Federation

Trust Jessica Sartor Community Liaison Officer, Sydney Harbour Federation Trust APOLOGIES Shaughn Helliar Woolwich Pier Hotel Barbara Dorsch Resident Austin Driscoll Resident Sean Langmann Woolwich Dock (Murlan Noakes) David Kellett Woolwich Dock (Murlan Noakes) 1. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

RESOLVED on the motion of B. Ierace, seconded C. Fitzharding that the minutes of the previous meeting held 11 July 2007 be confirmed.



2. WOOLWICH VILLAGE ACTION PLAN

RESOLVED on the motion of B. Ierace, seconded C. Fitzhardinge that the report be received and noted.

3. WOOLWICH VILLAGE PROPOSED URBAN DESIGN

RESOLVED on the motion of B. Ierace, seconded P. Snowden that the report be received and noted.

4. NEXT MEETING

The next meeting of the Woolwich Village Working Party will be held on Wednesday 12 September 2007 at 5.00pm in the Council Chamber.

The meeting closed at 6.15pm. FINANCIAL IMPACT There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report.


M

General Business

M – General Business

4236 – 10 September 2007

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

Barry Smith GENERAL MANAGER

REPORT OF GENERAL BUSINESS Meeting 4236 – 10 September 2007 M1


ITEM NO : 1

SUBJECT : MEETINGS - VARIOUS COMMITTEES OF COUNCIL

BUSINESS PROGRAM : MANAGEMENT & COUNCIL SUPPORT


FILE : 205/01

PURPOSE DATE TIME LOCATION

Hunters Hill – Le Vesinet Friendship Committee 12.09.07 7.30pm Council Chamber Public Transport & Traffic Advisory Committee 18.09.07 6.30pm Council Chamber Conservation Advisory Panel 19.09.07 5.30pm Council Chamber Ordinary Meeting of Council No. 4237 24.09.07 7.30pm Council Chamber Access Advisory Committee 04.10.07 12.30pm Council Chamber Hunters Hill Senior Support Group 15.10.07 10.00am 44 Gladesville Road Art & Craft Advisory Committee 16.10.07 5.30pm Council Chamber Children’s Services Committee 23.10.07 12.30pm Council Chamber Hunter’s Hill Council Event Committee 23.10.07 6.00pm Council Chamber Gladesville Joint Library Advisory Committee 31.10.07 5.30pm Gladesville Library School Principals Liaison Committee 07.11.07 12.30pm Small Hall Playground Working Party 07.11.07 7.30pm Council Chamber Sustainability & Biodiversity Advisory Committee 14.11.07 6.00pm Small Hall Gladesville Road Community Centre Management Committee

06.12.07 2.45pm 44 Gladesville Road

Young in Art Working Party TBA 3.30pm Council Chamber Hunters Hill Local Traffic Advisory Committee TBA 9.30am Council Chamber Bushland Management Working Group TBA 2.00pm Council Chamber Finance & Strategy Committee TBA 5.00pm Small Hall Local Place Names Committee TBA 9.30am Council Chamber Note: Details relating to Working Parties will be included as the meetings are arranged.

FINANCIAL IMPACT

There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report. RECOMMENDATION

That the report be received and noted.

ordinary meeting no. 4236 · 2020. 12. 22. · 4236 – 10 september 2007 index a – confirmation...

Documents