maitland city council ordinary meeting agenda

MAITLAND CITY COUNCIL

ORDINARY MEETING AGENDA

27 JULY, 2004

ORDINARY MEETING AGENDA 27 JULY, 2004

Page (i)

TABLE OF CONTENTS

ITEM SUBJECT PAGE NO 1 INVOCATION.............................................................................................. 1

2 APOLOGIES ............................................................................................... 1

3 DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTEREST ......................................... 1

4 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING....................... 1

5 BUSINESS ARISING FROM MINUTES...................................................... 1

6 MAYORAL MINUTE.................................................................................... 2

6.1 OLYMPIC ATHLETES ................................................................. 2

7 PUBLIC ACCESS ....................................................................................... 3

8 WITHDRAWAL OF ITEMS AND ACCEPTANCE OF LATE ITEMS OF BUSINESS .................................................................................................. 3

9 ITEMS FOR INFORMATION....................................................................... 4

9.1 CORRESPONDENCE ANALYSIS............................................... 4

9.2 COUNCILLOR MOTIONS............................................................ 6

9.3 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS - JUNE 2004 .................. 12

9.4 LOCAL GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION OF NSW - ELECTION OF 2004 EXECUTIVE ............................................. 23

9.5 STATUS REPORT ON CAPITAL WORKS PROJECTS............ 29

10 OFFICERS REPORTS .............................................................................. 34

10.1 GENERAL MANAGER............................................................... 34

10.2 FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION........................................... 35

10.2.1 STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS AS AT 30 JUNE 2004.......... 35

10.2.2 COUNCILLORS PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT................. 38

10.2.3 SPECIAL RATE APPLICATION - KYLE STREET AND GARDINER ROAD, RUTHERFORD .......................................... 40

10.3 SERVICE PLANNING AND REGULATION............................... 42


Page (ii)

10.3.1 041358 EXTENSION TO AIRCRAFT HANGAR LOT 732 DP 713772, 252 PYWELLS ROAD, LUSKINTYRE RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL ........................................... 42

10.3.2 AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 6 RAWORTH RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION................................. 57

10.3.3 AMENDMENT TO MAITLAND LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN - SITE SPECIFIC REZONING PROPOSALS, THORNTON NORTH ................................................................. 61

10.3.4 AMENDMENT TO MAITLAND LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 1993 - THORNTON NORTH ............................................ 69

10.3.5 SECTION 356 DONATIONS ...................................................... 74

10.3.6 TRANSFER OF RESPONSIBILITY-MANAGEMENT RESPONSE TO ALGAL BLOOMS............................................. 80

10.3.7 FISHERY CREEK CATCHMENT GROUP REQUEST............... 82

10.3.8 ACCESS TO HUNTER RIVER - LUSKINTYRE BRIDGE........... 84

10.3.9 BED AND BREAKFAST ROAD SIGNAGE FEES ...................... 89

10.3.10 CLOSURE OF WINDERS LANE RAIL LEVEL CROSSING....... 91

10.3.11 METFORD ROAD RAIL CROSSING ROADWORKS ROAD CLOSURE .................................................................................. 94

10.3.12 LAND ACQUISITIONS - RIVERBANK PROJECT - CENTRAL MAITLAND ................................................................................. 96

11 NOTICE OF MOTION/RESCISSION......................................................... 99

11.1 MULCHING FACILITY NOTICE OF MOTION SUBMITTED BY CLR ARCH HUMPHERY ..................................................... 99

11.2 TAREE AVENUE - NETBALL COURTS NOTICE OF MOTION SUBMITTED BY CLR HENRY MESKAUSKAS .......101

11.3 DA-031787 DEMOLITION OF DWELLING AND ERECTION OF MEDIUM DENSITY HOUSING LOT 1, DP 10725, 28 EURIMBLA STREET, THORNTON AND LOT 2, DP 520629, 32 EURIMBLA STREET THORNTON NOTICE OF RESCISSION – SUBMITTED BY COUNCILLORS TONY KEATING, WENDY WHITE AND DAVID POWER ...................103

12 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE ............................................................129

13 URGENT BUSINESS ...............................................................................129

14 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE................................................................130


Page (iii)

14.1 CENTRAL MAITLAND MARKETING AND PROMOTION .......130

14.2 MAITLAND GAOL ....................................................................131

14.3 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW .......................................132

14.4 LAND AND ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEALS - COMPENSATION FOR LAND ACQUISITIONS - RIVERBANK PROJECT ...........................................................133

14.5 TENDERS FOR THE SUPPLY AND DELIVERY OF CONCRETE PIPES AND ASSOCIATED DRAINAGE PRODUCTS – 2004/2005..........................................................134

15 CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS FROM COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE ...135

16 CLOSURE................................................................................................135


PRESENT

1 INVOCATION

2 APOLOGIES

3 DECLARATIONS OF PECUNIARY INTEREST

4 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES OF PREVIOUS MEETING

• The minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held 13 July 2004 be confirmed.

5 BUSINESS ARISING FROM MINUTES

Page 1


6 MAYORAL MINUTE

6.1 OLYMPIC ATHLETES

File No: 35/16

Author: Peter Blackmore Mayor

It is with pleasure that I put this Mayoral Minute to Council congratulating our talented local sports people who have been selected to participate in the 2004 Olympic Games to be held in Athens. The names of the local Olympians are: Joshua Ross (Athletics) Olivia Gollan (Cycling) Martin Kelly (Judo) Rebel Morrow (Equestrian) Sammie McLeod (Reserve Equestrian) Heath Ryan (Reserve Equestrian) I offer to these athletes the best wishes on behalf of the Council and residents of the City of Maitland.

RECOMMENDATION THAT:

1. Council offer its best wishes to the local Olympians on behalf of the City of Maitland.

2. All efforts be made to hold a Civic Welcome for the athletes upon their return from the Olympic Games in Athens.

Page 2


7 PUBLIC ACCESS

8 WITHDRAWAL OF ITEMS AND ACCEPTANCE OF LATE ITEMS OF BUSINESS

Page 3


9 ITEMS FOR INFORMATION

9.1 CORRESPONDENCE ANALYSIS

File No: 35/61

Responsible Officer: Graeme Tolhurst Group Manager Finance & Administration

Author: Matthew Ryan Corporate Documents Coordinator

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report contains valuable information in relation to Council’s outstanding correspondence. The report is a valuable management tool within the organisation and provides information in relation to adherence to the guidelines for replying to correspondence.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT the information contained in this Report be noted.

REPORT DOCUMENT FLOW TOTAL Number of Documents Received June 2004 2204

TOTAL Number of Documents Sent June 2004 1683 Note 1: The figures shown above relate to all documents received and sent by Council and include all property applications and items for information.

ACTIONABLE DOCUMENTS OUTSTANDING TOTAL Outstanding Over 30 Days 31/5/2004 75

PLUS Actionable Items Received June 2004 13

LESS Outstanding Items Actioned June 2004 31

TOTAL Number of Outstanding Documents Over 30 Days 30/6/2004 57

Note 2: Many of the documents received by Council are dealt with by formal processes, such as Development Applications. Council processes will trigger the necessary action, whether it is a response to a developer or result of a tender. These items are not included in this table.

This table relates to documents that do not have a formal process and therefore acts as a safety net for actionable correspondence.

Page 4


CORRESPONDENCE ANALYSIS (Cont.)

ACTIONABLE DOCUMENTS BY CATEGORY

• Approvals 17

• Customer Service Requests 2

• General 37

• Works/Projects 0

• Rating 1

TOTAL Outstanding Over 30 Days 30/6/2004 57 Note 3: This table is a further dissection of the actionable documents. The full implementation of the Electronic Document Management System will provide an enhanced reporting facility.

Page 5


9.2 COUNCILLOR MOTIONS

File No: 35/61

Responsible Officer: David Evans General Manager

Author: David Evans General Manager

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The following report details the current status of Councillor Motions/Urgent Business/Questions without Notice which are currently being actioned by Council Officers.


REPORT See attached report.

Page 6


COUNCILLOR MOTIONS (Cont.)

Page 7



Page 8



Page 9



Page 10



Page 11


Page 12

9.3 KEY PERFORMANCE INDICATORS - JUNE 2004

File No: 35/37

Responsible Officer: Brad Everett Group Manager Service Planning and Regulation

Author: Leanne Harris Manager Corporate Planning

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report provides Council with information in relation to performance against key indicators.


REPORT This report provides regular monthly data against a set of core key performance indicators. These types of indicators align broadly with Council’s adopted Key Focus Areas and together provide an overall snapshot of activity in the Maitland Local Government Area. The aim of such reporting is to present the data in an informative and easily understood manner, so that Council can easily determine trends and / or anomalies that may require action. It is also intended that this type of reporting will provide an opportunity to highlight any key issues of particular importance to Council. Performance Indicator: Approval Statistics Approval statistics provide an indication of the level of building and development activity in the LGA, as well as the efficiency and effectiveness of our processing systems. Data is presented showing trends over the last twelve months for the number of applications (DAs and CCs) lodged with Council, the number approved and the number that remain outstanding. Median days and the estimated value of development and construction is also presented.


Key Performance Indicators - June 2004 (Cont.)

Page 13

For the 12 month period of July 2003 through to June 2004, the average monthly number of lodged Development Applications was 173 and the average monthly number of applications approved was 175. In June 2004, there were 203 applications approved. There were 153 new applications lodged in June which is significantly lower than the twelve month average. As a result the number of applications on-hand has dropped sharply to 314. The Median Processing Times for Development Applications in June 2004 has risen slightly to 18 days and is now slightly above the average Median Days for the twelve month period which is 16.5 days. The Local Government Association of NSW recently released a publication on Local Government processing times. The findings were based on a survey of 56 Councils and concluded that 27 days to process a DA, which had been correctly submitted, seemed fair and reasonable. For the 12 (twelve) month period July 2003 to June 2004, the average monthly number of lodged Construction Certificates was 157 and the average monthly number of approved Construction Certificates was 157. In June 2004, there were 175 Construction Certificates approved, slightly higher than the monthly average, however 138 Construction Certificates were lodged, this being lower than the monthly average. The number of applications currently on-hand has risen slightly to 191. The Median Processing Times for Construction Certificates in June 2004 has dropped to 11 days and is below the 12 month average which is 13 days.



DAs - On-Hand, Lodged & Approved Applications

100

120140

160180

200220

240

270280290300310320330340350360370

Lodged 185 161 173 218 174 154 135 171 211 152 189 153

Approved 189 182 156 211 186 165 124 164 214 157 142 203

On-Hand 327 306 323 330 318 307 318 325 322 317 364 314

J 03 A S O N D J04 F M A M J

Trendline - Approved

DAs - Median Processing Times

0

5

10

15

20

25

Calendar Days 20 18 18 16 15 19 21 13 11 13 17 18


Trend Line

Page 14

DAs - Median Processing Times

0

5

10

15

20

25

Calendar Days 20 18 18 16 15 19 21 13 11 13 17 18


Trend Line

DAs - Estimated Value of Development

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

$'00

0s

Estimated Value $16,121 $20,980 $18,869 $26,291 $22,045 $16,557 $25,566 $13,630 $21,963 $11,991 $10,483 $24,572


DAs - Estimated Value of Development

$0

$5,000

$10,000

$15,000

$20,000

$25,000

$30,000

$'00

0s

Estimated Value $16,121 $20,980 $18,869 $26,291 $22,045 $16,557 $25,566 $13,630 $21,963 $11,991 $10,483 $24,572




Page 15

CCs - On-Hand, Lodged & Approved Applications

0

50

100

150

200

250

0

50

100

150

200

250

Lodged 147 140 176 200 163 133 138 170 177 135 169 138

Approved 146 150 138 209 174 151 111 166 182 145 135 175

On-Hand 188 178 216 207 196 178 205 209 204 194 228 191


Trendline - Approved

CCs - Median Processing Times

02468

1012141618

Calendar Days 16 14 15 14 12 12 16 10 8 10 13 11


Trend Line

CCs Estimated Value of Construction

$0

$2,000

$4,000

$6,000

$8,000

$10,000

$12,000

$14,000

$16,000

$18,000

$'00

0s

Estimated Value $13,564 $10,627 $6,881 $15,318 $12,065 $10,564 $8,977 $11,235 $14,529 $10,130 $7,673 $12,958




Page 16

Performance Indicator: Consolidated Development Services Income Actual consolidated year to date (YTD) Development Services Income for June 2004 exceeded the June YTD vote by $286,000. There have been three quarterly review adjustments this year increasing the consolidated Development Services Income YTD vote by a total of $587,000.

YTD CONSOLIDATED DEVELOPMENT SERVICES INCOME

$0

$500

$1,000

$1,500

$2,000

$2,500

$ 00

0's

Actual YTD $193 $382 $563 $792 $964 $1,188 $1,325 $1,549 $1,746 $1,920 $2,119 $2,269

Vote $121 $242 $563 $684 $805 $1,188 $1,309 $1,430 $1,620 $1,741 $1,862 $1,983

J 03 A S O N D J 04 F M A M J



Page 17

Performance Indicator: Patronage of Community Services Patronage at Council’s libraries, art gallery, visitor centre, and childhood immunisation clinics are displayed graphically below to more clearly identify trends of usage at the various facilities. Overall patronage trends at Council’s libraries for the months April to June 2004 inclusive are similar to the patronage trends for the corresponding period last year. Total patronage for all libraries for the three months April to June 2004 inclusive was 1.6% lower than the corresponding period last year. The same comparison but on an individual library basis reveals the following comparisons: City 14% lower East Maitland 1% lower Rutherford 137% higher Thornton 0.9% lower

LIBRARY VISITORS

0

2,000

4,000

6,000

8,000

10,000

12,000

14,000

16,000

18,000

9,384 9,305 8,579 8,296 7,980 7,183

4,468 3,946 3,827 4,205 3,937 3,960

Ruth 628 919 775 690 1,866 2,957

2,117 2,915 2,746 2,330 2,687 2,693

16,597 17,085 15,927 15,521 16,470 16,793

Apr 2003 May 2003 Jun 2003 Apr 2004 May 2004 Jun 2004

Library Visitors

City

East

Thorn

Total



Page 18

The tremendous increase in the Art Gallery patronage for the month of April 2003 was due primarily to Steamfest celebrations, and this indicates the strength of Maitland’s tourism economy. The relocation of the Art Gallery to the new Cultural Precinct, however, places the Art Gallery off the Steamfest trail, resulting in a substantially lower attendance figure for April 2004 compared to April 2003. Patronage for June 2004 shows a continuing increase in visitation numbers to the new gallery compared to the same period last year.

ART GALLERY VISITORS

0

500

1,000

1,500

2,000

2,500

3,000

3,500

4,000

3,533 442 580 973 1,561 1,012


Art Gallery Visitors



Page 19

The Maitland Visitor Information Centre enquiries for the month of June reflected the quieter winter period with a total of 4,539 enquiries. During this time efforts of the Visitor Information Centre go into planning for the Morpeth Jazz Festival, membership and the development of co-operative marketing activities. Total enquiries for 2004 to the end of June were 34,318. For the first time we are also able to include the number of visitors to the website www.hunterrivercountry.com.au. Figures for June were 764 visitors who made 3,921 page impressions within the site.

VISITOR INFORMATION CENTRE ENQUIRIES

0

1,000

2,000

3,000

4,000

5,000

6,000

7,000

6,327 3,872 3,331

1,838 911 938

Mail 487 182 270

0 0 764

Apr 2004 May 2004 Jun 2004

Personal

Telephone

Internet

http://www.hunterrivercountry.com.au/



Page 20

The childhood immunisation clinic pattern has remained relatively constant over the last three months. The slight decrease in April was as a result of the School and Easter Holiday periods.

IMMUNISATION ATTENDANCES

0

20

40

60

80

100

120

16 23 17 18 20 12

54 47 25 21 29 26

27 24 16 10 14 16

97 94 25 49 63 54


Immunisation Attendances

Thornton

Rutherford

Town Hall

Total

Performance Indicator: Rates Collections As at 30th June 2003, 6.2% of rates levied for the 2002 / 2003 year remained uncollected. (In comparison, as at 30th June 2002, 7.74% of the rates levied for the 2001 /2002 year remained uncollected). The graph below shows the reductions achieved per month in the percentage of rates in arrears. The percentage of rates in



Page 21

arrears at the end of June 2004 is below the percentage of rates in arrears at the end of June 2003 indicating improved efficiency in the rates recovery function. Remaining arrears continue to be pursued through Council’s debt recovery agency and by Council’s debt recovery officer. Please note that arrears figures do not include current financial year rates that remain uncollected.

Percentage of 2002/2003 Rates in Arrears

1.50%

2.00%

2.50%

3.00%

3.50%

4.00%

4.50%

5.00%

5.50%

6.00%

Fin Year 2002 5.95%5.22%4.57% 4.01%3.73%3.46%3.24%2.99%2.73% 2.54%2.31%2.21%

Fin Year 2003 5.03%4.47%3.92% 3.46%3.16%2.96%2.70%2.50%2.25% 2.09%1.91%1.77%

Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May June

Performance Indicator: Food Premises Inspections The number of Food premises inspections over the last 12 months is graphically presented below. The average number of monthly food premises inspections for this period was 50. The 57 inspections completed in June 2004 was slightly above this average. For the period July 2003 to June 2004 there have been two (2) Notice Orders issued under the Local Government Act for repair and maintenance type work, and four (4) Clean Up Notices issued under the Food Act. There have been no prosecutions undertaken for this period.



Page 22

FOOD PREMISES INSPECTIONS

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

Number 49 77 57 64 72 28 26 26 48 31 43 72 49 57

M 03 J J A S O N D J 04 F M A m J


Page 23

9.4 LOCAL GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION OF NSW - ELECTION OF 2004 EXECUTIVE

File No: 91/1


Author: Phil Freeman Manager Accounting Services

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents information in relation to the 2004 Election of the Executive Committee of the Local Government Association of NSW.


REPORT The State Electoral Office has forwarded information, nomination forms and supporting documents for the purposes of conducting the 2004 election of the Executive Committee of the Local Government Association of NSW. The Association is the peak representative body of councils within NSW. The positions that comprise the Executive Committee are: President (1) Treasurer (1) Vice-Presidents (2 – 1 Country / 1 Metropolitan) Committee Members (20 – 10 Country / 10 Metropolitan) Nomination Forms and Statutory Declarations in support of candidature are attached for the information of Councillors, and are available from the General Manager’s office should nomination be of interest to any Councillor.


LOCAL GOVERNMENT ASSOCIATION OF NSW - ELECTION OF 2004 EXECUTIVE (Cont.)

Page 24



Page 25



Page 26



Page 27



Page 28


Page 29

9.5 STATUS REPORT ON CAPITAL WORKS PROJECTS

File No: 122/813

Responsible Officer: Brad Everett Group Manager, Service Planning and Regulation Wayne Cone Group Manager, City Works and Services

Author: Richard Minter

Manager Consulting and Contracts

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council has a range of Capital Works Projects which are undertaken in house by the City Works and Services Group and externally by contract construction groups. A report on the status of major construction works and projects within the 2004/2005 Capital Works Program and the final projects in the 2003/2004 program are submitted for Council's information.


REPORT CONSULTING AND CONTRACTS 1. High Street East Maitland Drainage Improvements

A tender for the construction of Stage 1 of the East Maitland drainage improvement programme works was negotiated and awarded to Kerroc Constructions Pty Ltd. Gas main and water main relocations were previously completed with drainage construction works now also complete. Total project budget was $140,000.

2. Bus Shelters

The construction of new bus shelters at Elgin Street and Maitland Post Office have been completed by Ron Cant. Pre-fabricated shelters for Maitland Hospital and Metford TAFE have been installed with a final shelter to be installed shortly at Mitchell Drive, Greenhills. The total project budget is $155,000.

3. CBD Western Entry


STATUS REPORT ON CAPITAL WORKS PROJECTS (Cont.)

Page 30

Landscape improvement works at the western CBD entry have been completed with the extension of the right turn lane in High Street now complete. The trial removal of the traffic lights at the St Andrews Street intersection, for a three month period has commenced with a report to be presented to Council following the completion of the trial.

4. East Maitland Branch Library

A new branch library is being constructed at East Maitland in Garnett Road. The total project budget is $1,850,000 with the project contractor being R T Parker Pty Ltd. Construction works are on track to be completed in September with brickwork and internal works currently under way.

5. Highway Landscaping

A Council initiative for improved landscaping of the New England Highway has been adopted with a budget of $20,000 available. Landscape design for the highway median area near Maitland Pool has been completed with discussions underway with the RTA regarding the landscape proposal and seeking any available funding from the RTA to supplement the works.

6. Melbourne Street Improvement Stage 3 Council has allocated $80,000 for the implementation of Stage 3 improvement

works in Melbourne Street, East Maitland. The works were proposed to include the installation of six (6) decorative street lights along the centreline of the road between the highway and Lawes Street, however the Local Traffic Committee have raised concerns in relation to components of the project. Further investigation regarding the project and the works proposed is underway along with any impact the Third River Crossing project may have on the proposed works.

7. Maitland Town Hall Improvements An allocation of $100,000 has been made for improvement works at Maitland

Town Hall. Works on the Paterson Room and the male toilets upgrade have been completed. New curtains have been supplied and installed. As such, the project is now complete.

8. Maitland Riverside Precinct The Maitland Riverside Precinct project includes paving, lighting and

landscaping works along the levee in Central Maitland. A tender for the project has been awarded to Scenic Art Afloat with preliminary project works underway and final approval from DIPNR currently being sought. The total project budget is $1,500,000 with works due to be complete by December.

9. Demolition Morpeth Common Cottage



Page 31

Quotations have been received from demolition companies for the demolition and removal of the Morpeth Common Cottage. An archival study of the building is about to commence with demolition to follow completion of the study. Works are due to be complete in mid August.

10. Waste Depot Leachate Line The construction of a 120m long sewer leachate line has recently been

completed at the Mt Vincent Waste Depot. The line is to bypass leachate to ponds at the waste depot and allow future connection of leachate to the sewer system. The total costs of the works were $31,000.

11. Kyle Street/Gardiner Road Improvements Council has allocated an amount of $2,150,000 to the reconstruction of Kyle

Street and Gardiner Road at Rutherford, subject to State Government approval of a special business contribution levy. Final review of the design and the preparation of a construction specification is currently underway with tenders able to be called around September.

CITY WORKS & SERVICES The status of the construction projects within the 2004/2005 Rolling Works Program, as of 15 July 2004, is as follows. 1. Roads to Recovery

1.1 Chelmsford Drive -Metford Full width road reconstruction between Bedford Street and Schanck Drive commenced in late May as part of 2003/2004 program. The initial section from Schanck Drive has been reconstructed and is ready for the final asphaltic concrete seal, in early August. Work is progressing on the second stage with an expected completion date in mid September. The total project estimate is $593,000.

2. New Works - Urban

2.1 Morpeth Road, Raworth The construction of 500 metres of Morpeth Road east of Jenna Street will commence in mid July with the placement of stormwater drainage pipelines. The expected completion date is late September with the estimated cost of the project at $455,000.

2.2 Rous Street, East Maitland



Page 32

The intersection of Rous Street and Adelaide Street is to be reconstructed with work to commence in mid July. The project will take approximately 4 weeks to complete at an estimated cost of $41,000.

3. Reseal - Rural Roads

Preparation works for resealing on the following rural roads will commence in mid July: - Hinton Road, Phoenix Park - Anambah Road, Anambah The total value of the 2004/05 rural reseal program is $236,000.

4. Reseal - Urban Roads

Preparation work for resealing has commenced on the following urban roads: - Airlie St, Ashtonfield - Allan St, Lorn - Armagh Cl, Ashtonfield - Arnold Cr, Thornton - Bangalay Cl, Woodberry - Bronwyn Cl, Thornton - Brunswick St, East Maitland - Chisholm Rd, East Maitland - Debell Pl, Metford - Edward St, Morpeth - Ferraby Dr, Metford - Fieldsend St, East Maitland - Galway Bay Dr, Ashtonfield - Garrie Cl, Thornton - Glenwood Dr, Thornton - Government Rd, Thornton - Grant St, East Maitland - Holford Cr, Thornton - Ingrid Cl, Thornton - Kildare Cl, Ashtonfield - Kirkman Cl, Thornton - Lawson Ave, Woodberry - Lawson Ave, Woodberry - Lord Howe Dr, Ashtonfield - Melaleuca Dr, Metford - Michael Hill Ave, Woodberry - Monaghan Ct, Ashtonfield - Moriarty Ave, Ashtonfield - Murphy Ct, Ashtonfield - Pacific Cr, Ashtonfield - Samoa Cl, Ashtonfield - Schank Dr, Metford - Sharkies La, Lorn



Page 33

- Singleton Ave, Thornton - South Seas Dr, Ashtonfield - Streeton Dr, Metford - Thomas Coke Dr, Thornton - Tralee Cl, Ashtonfield - Turtle Ave, Ashtonfield - Westerman Cl, Thornton - Woodbine Cl, Woodberry The actual resealing works will commence in October when air and road surface temperatures are optimum for resealing. The total value of the 2004/05 urban reseal program is $915,000.

5. Additional Projects

5.1 Queens Wharf Carpark and Footpath, Morpeth Work in nearing completion on the construction of a carpark for vehicles and boat trailers adjacent to the boat ramp. The construction of a concrete footpath will commence in mid July and is expected to take 3 weeks to complete. The estimated cost of both projects is $56,000.

6. Mt Dee Bridge Repairs

Rectification works are progressing on the Mount Dee Bridge. The works are expected to be completed in late August at an estimated cost of $83,000.

7. Brough House Repairs

General carpentry, plumbing and painting repairs are currently being undertaken on Brough House in readiness for its handover back to the National Trust in August. The approximate cost of the repairs will be $50,000.


10 OFFICERS REPORTS

10.1 GENERAL MANAGER

No reports

Page 34


Page 35

10.2 FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION

10.2.1 STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS AS AT 30 JUNE 2004

File No: 82/2

Responsible Officer: Graeme Tolhurst Group Manager - Finance and Administration

Author: Stephen Burgess Compliance Accountant

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Local Government (Financial Management) Regulation 1993, Section 19(3)(b) requires Council to report on its investments.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT the report be received and noted.

REPORT Inv. No.

Institution Int. Rate

Date Invested

Term (Days)

Maturity Date

Amount $

971c Macquarie Diversified Treasury Fund++

5.580% 31/08/01 ## When required

1,524,005.37

972b Deutsche Cash Plus Fund++

6.140% 31/08/01 ## When required

2,627,139.72

1145c Taurus Funding Pty Ltd

6.635% 15/04/04 91 15/07/04 1,000,000.00

1159d Savings & Loans Credit Union

8.280% 15/06/04 90 13/09/04 1,500,000.00

1162c Investec Bank Australia Ltd

6.043% 2/06/04 92 2/09/04 500,000.00

1164c CBA Shield CDO - Alexander

6.478% 3/06/04 93 4/09/04 500,000.00

1112e The Rock Building Society

8.330% 30/04/04 91 30/07/04 500,000.00

1113e The Rock Building Society

8.330% 30/04/04 91 30/07/04 500,000.00

1131d Holiday Coast Credit Union

8.760% 17/04/04 91 17/07/04 500,000.00


STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS AS AT 30 JUNE 2004 (Cont.)

Inv. No.

Institution Int. Rate

Date Invested

Term (Days)

Maturity Date

Amount $

1134b Bendigo Bank Ltd 7.010% 19/04/04 183 19/10/04 300,000.00

1136c Australian Central Credit Union Ltd

7.930% 30/04/04 94 2/08/04 1,000,000.00

1137b High Yield Fixed Interest Securities

6.865% 8/04/04 91 8/07/04 1,500,000.00

1169b Greater Building Society Limited

7.270% 27/05/04 92 27/08/04 1,000,000.00

1176b Herald Ltd – Tungsten AA-

6.980% 21/06/04 91 20/09/04 1,500,000.00

1177b Maitland Mutual Building Society**

6.510% 11/06/04 92 11/09/04 2,000,000.00

1178b Wide Bay Australia Credit Union

7.180% 15/06/04 92 15/09/04 500,000.00

1180b Northern Inland Credit Union

8.730% 23/06/04 92 23/09/04 500,000.00

1191a Maitland Mutual Building Society

5.620% 19/05/04 49 7/07/04 1,000,000.00

1192a Balmoral AA 6.775% 4/06/04 94 6/09/04 1,500,000.00

1194 Shield AA

(Commonwealth Bank of Aust)

5.670% 24/03/04 92 24/06/05 1,000,000.00

1198 Maitland Mutual Building Society

5.620% 21/05/04 54 14/07/04 500,000.00

1199 Illawarra Mutual Building Society

5.610% 25/05/04 57 21/07/04 400,000.00

1200 Bankwest 5.570% 1/06/04 57 28/07/04 1,200,000.00

11am Local Government Financial Service – 11am

5.150% 19/11/03 ## When

Required

1,550,000.00

TOTAL $24,601,145.09++ Investments held by Funds Managers. As investments are managed on a daily basis, interest rates have been calculated on a % per annum. ## These funds are not held on a fixed term. The funds are redeemed as and when required. ** Subordinate note – interest rate reviewed on the 11th of each quarter.

Page 36


STATEMENT OF INVESTMENTS AS AT 30 JUNE 2004 (Cont.)

As a Comparison:

Investments held as at the end of last month (ie. 30/05/04) were $24,558,439.19 Investments held this time last year (ie. 30/06/04) were $19,291,179.01

All funds invested in accordance with Council’s Investment Policy.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS This matter has no direct financial impact upon Council’s adopted budget or forward estimates.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS This matter has no specific policy implications for Council.

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS The above sums have been invested in accordance with:

• Section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993. • The regulations pertaining to the Local Government Act 1993. • Council’s Investment Policies

Page 37


Page 38

10.2.2 COUNCILLORS PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT

File No: 35/51


Author: Graeme Tolhurst Group Manager Finance & Administration

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Councillor Power has requested to attend three training sessions being (1) Financial Skills for Local Government (2) Know Your Planning Legislation (3) Media Skills. Council’s Policy for Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors allocates all Councillors $3,000 to provide for professional development of Councillors. It is recommended that councillor Power attend the three training courses.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT Councillor Power attend the following training courses and the courses be funded from Councillor Power allocation under the “Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors”

(1) Financial Skills for Local Government (2) Know your Planning for Local Government (3) Media Skills

REPORT The Policy for Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors allocates an annual amount of $3,000 for each Councillor to attend professional development and or participation at relevant conferences. Councillor Power has requested to attend the following training sessions at a total cost of $1188.00:- (1) Financial Issues for Local Government (2) Know Your Planning Legislation (3) Media The cost of attending these training sessions including travel and accommodation will be met by Councillor Powers allocation under the Policy. It is recommended that council authorise the participation by Councillor Power at these training courses.


COUNCILLORS PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT (Cont.)

Page 39

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The cost of attending these courses will be met form the allocation for Councillors.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS This recommendation is as per the policy of “Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors”.

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS There are no statutory implications under the Local Government Act 1993 with this matter.


Page 40

10.2.3 SPECIAL RATE APPLICATION - KYLE STREET AND GARDINER ROAD, RUTHERFORD

File No: 117/41/1


Author: Graeme Tolhurst Group Manager Finance & Administration

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY An application was made to the Minister for Local Government for a Special Rate for the area around Kyle Street and Gardiner Road, Rutherford. The Special Rate was to be for 10 years to repay a loan to cover 40% of the proposed costs for the works, being $2.15 million. The Minister for Local Government has advised Council to consider alternative funding options other than a rate increase.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT:

1. The report be received and noted.

2. A further report be presented to Council on options for undertaking the proposed works.

REPORT The Management Plan for 2004/05 included proposed works at Kyle Street and Gardiner Road, Rutherford. These works would be funded 60% from Council and 40% from a proposed Special Rate over 10 years. The works were expected to cost approximately $2.15 million. The letter from the Minister has set out the following regarding the application: “The Council’s application has been considered carefully, however, the Minister has advised that Council needs to consider alternative funding options other than a rate increase that causes the Council to exceed its permissible income limit. The Minister is concerned that an excessive increase in rates, without adequate support of the affected ratepayers is not appropriate. The Council should pursue its program within its current financial resources, reviewing expenditure priorities and initiating necessary savings and productivity measures where necessary. Accordingly, the Minister has not approved of the Council’s application to increase general income by more than the 2004/05 general valuation plus catch-up and crown land income adjustment.”


SPECIAL RATE APPLICATION - KYLE STREET AND GARDINER ROAD, RUTHERFORD (Cont.)

Page 41

Following the letter from the Minister for Local Government, a further report will be presented to Council, outlining options available to Council to undertake the proposed works.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The refusal from the Minister for Local Government to approve this Special Rate will require Council to adjust its Management Plan, specifically the Budget section. This will be addressed when the report to Council is finalised.




Page 42

10.3 SERVICE PLANNING AND REGULATION

10.3.1 041358 EXTENSION TO AIRCRAFT HANGAR LOT 732 DP 713772, 252 PYWELLS ROAD, LUSKINTYRE RECOMMENDATION: APPROVAL

File No: 041358 Attachments: Site Plan

Development Plan Public Submissions

Responsible Officer: Stephen Punch Manager Development Services Author: Tracey Le Brun Town Planner Applicant: Hill Top Planners Proposal: Extension to Aircraft Hangar Location: Lot 732 DP 713772, 252 Pywells Road,

Luskintyre Zone: 1(a) Prime Rural Land

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Development consent is sought from Council for Extension to Aircraft Hangar at Lot 732 DP 713772, 252 Pywells Road, Luskintyre. The subject land is zoned 1(a) Prime Rural Land under Maitland Local Environmental Plan, 1993. The proposed hangar is ancillary to the existing use of the site as an Aerodrome and is not inconsistent with the objectives of the zone. The likely impacts identified from the proposal range from visual impacts, fire safety, airfield operations and Pywells Road. These impacts are to be managed by time in respect to zincalume weathering and tree planting. The operation of the aerodrome is restricted in operation in accordance with development consent No. 94057 issued on 10 March 1995. The issue of fire protection is considered to require submission of a fire assessment report for approval prior to issue of the Construction Certificate. Partial upgrading of Pywells Road is proposed over the 2004-2005 financial year. The development was publicly exhibited and one submission was received. The issues raised in the submission range from aerodrome operation, adequacy of information provided, Pywells Road, saturation point of aerodrome, visual impacts and lifestyle/rural area impacts. Details on the issues are addressed under Section 79C(1)(d) below. The development has been assessed under the relevant heads of consideration in Section 79C(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and it is recommended for approval subject to attached draft conditions of consent, and, the


041358 Extension to Aircraft Hangar Lot 732 DP 713772, 252 Pywells Road, Luskintyre (Cont)

provision of a fire assessment report for approval prior to issue of the Construction Certificate.


1. Development Application 041358 for Extension to Aircraft Hangar on Lot 732 DP 713772, 252 Pywells Road, Luskintyre be approved, subject to the conditions of consent set out in the attached schedule.

2. The applicant provide a fire assessment report of the entire building from a suitably qualified person in relation to the provision of fire protection, necessary fire equipment and options available for approval to the Group Manager Assets Services and Planning prior to issue of the Construction Certificate.

REPORT

INTRODUCTION The subject land is located at Lot 732 DP 713772, 252 Pywells Road, Luskintyre with a secondary frontage on Luskintyre Road. The site has been used as an airfield since 1977 and retains a dwelling and several hangars, outbuildings and an amenity block, and a grassed runaway. The subject land sits within a rural landscape characterised by a mix of agriculture (stables, vineyards and a dairy), rural industry (cellar door sales and warehousing of wine products, and, winery) and rural tourist accommodation and rural dwellings. The land is partially affected by the 1955 flood inundation. (Refer to Attachment 1 for Site Plan.) The land is zoned 1(a) Prime Rural Land under Maitland Local Environmental Plan 1993 and has an approximate area of 88.6 hectares.

BACKGROUND The subject land has been operating as an airfield since 1977. In 1988, the landowner lodged a development application to obtain approval for activities occurring on the land since 1977. Council approved the continuation of use of Luskintyre Airfield in 1988 subject to the following conditions (summarised):

• Aviation operations be restricted to the shareholders of Knockfin HoldingsPty Ltd for private use in their aeroplanes for commuting, flying related to agricultural pursuits on the property and recreational flying of Tiger Moth Aeroplanes;

• Flying and/or shows limited to four events per annum, with Council notified at least 4 weeks prior to the event so as to permit notification of adjoining property owners of the event with costs borne by the applicant; and,

• Airfield operations to minimise disturbance to amenity of surrounding rural areas and landowners.

Page 43



Since the release of the 1989 approval, the airfield has had a history of resident opposition relating to the level of flying and associated activities, specifically:

• Number of flights; • Use of the airfield by non-shareholders; • Type of flying, ie. Stunt flying; and, • Commercial use of the airfield for joy flights and charter flights.

Resident opposition resulted in legal action between the main complainant and the landowner in the Supreme Court. The Court directed that a new development application be lodged at Council to clarify the terms of the existing approval and to redefine the operational limits of the airfield. The new development application was lodged in 1994,to provide clarification of the existing consent and to obtain approval for an expanded range of activities. Twenty-two submissions received out of at total of twenty-eight submissions received from public exhibition objected to the proposal. A report on the matter went to a Council meeting on 13 December 1994. The main issues raised in the submissions ranged from flight numbers, aircraft noise, compatibility of the airfield in the rural context and impacts on agricultural productivity. The position that aircraft noise impacted on livestock particularly horses or that the use of the airfield had adverse impacts on agricultural productivity and property devaluation could not be substantiated. Information on the general parameters for the use of the airfield was provided. The matter was deferred until the next available meeting to permit consideration of further information. The matter went back to Council in 1995, and, included both consideration of three other submissions raising similar concerns as above and concerns regarding imprecise conditions of consent. Amended conditions resulted which clarified conditions of consent. A Deferred Commencement Consent was issued by Council for the purposes of commuting to/from the land, recreational flying and uses ancillary, and special events subject to conditions of consent including surrender of the 1989 consent, and, amendments to the consent. The consent became active in 1995. Other main features of the consent are summarised below:

• Activities on/from the aircraft landing area are to be restricted to maintenance, construction and flying of aircraft in the custody of the owner(s) and invited guests but not to exceed 140 takeoffs per week with the takeoff limit not applying to Air Shows and fly-ins;

• Definitions list; • Helicopter movements (landings/takeoffs) not exceeding seven per week; • Recreational flying not to generate noise above what was described in a Boise

Report in the Statement of Environmental Effects (SEE) in vicinity to existing dwellings;

• Hours of flying described in the SEE not to apply to aircraft movements associated with commuting to/from the land;

• A log be kept for a year recording all takeoffs from the land. Council reserved the right to reinstate this requirement if the consent was breached;

Page 44



• Air Shows and fly-ins limited to four events per annum with Council advised in writing of events so as to permit resident notification and costs borne by the land owner; and,

• A prohibition on joy flights and charter flights from the land. In 2002, a development application was lodged at Council for erection of a hangar to be used to house five (5) aircraft that was stored on-site under cramped conditions in other hangars. The application was publicly exhibited and Council received a total of three submissions of objection, one being received outside the exhibition period. The issues raised in the submissions were similar to the above, basically a concern that airfield operations including traffic movements and aircraft numbers would increase and be characterised by commercial or business operations, and, detrimentally impact on the amenity of the rural land. An approval was issued from Council in 2002, subject to standard conditions of consent and a requirement that the applicant continue to comply with all conditions imposed on development consent No. 94057 issued 10 March 1995 pertaining to airfield operations. The consent was amended in 2003 subject to tree planting, to replace colourbond cladding with zincalume due to the delicate nature of the stored aeroplanes and the low heat transmission ability of the zincalume. This current application is for an extension to a hangar to house an additional aeroplane was lodged in 2004.

PROPOSAL The proposal involves an extension to a hangar to be used for the storage of one (1) vintage Tiger Moth aeroplane. The extension has an estimated area of 150.4m2 and a height of five (5) metres. The extension is to be constructed of zincalume. Plan elevations indicate that two door openings with sliding doors are proposed. No substantive mechanical or restoration activities are to be undertaken in the hangar. The aeroplane in the hangar will operate no more than ten times per annum. The extension is to be located a minimum of 300 metres from Pywells Road. Refer to Attachment 2 for the Development Plan. Refer to Attachment 2 for the Development Plan.

PLANNING ASSESSMENT The proposal has been assessed under the relevant matters for consideration detailed in Section 79C(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 as follows:

Section 79C(1)(a)(i) provisions of any environmental planning instrument

Local Environmental Plan The subject land is zoned 1(a) Prime Rural Land under Maitland Local Environmental Plan 1993. The proposed development is not agriculture-related and considered to be ancillary to the approved use of the site as an aerodrome as detailed in the 1995 development consent and therefore permissible in the zone with Council consent. The proposal is not considered to be inconsistent with the relevant zone objective, as follows.

Page 45



1(a) Prime Rural Land d) To control development that could:

i) have an adverse impact on the rural character of the land in the zone;

ii) create unreasonable or uneconomic demands for the provision or extension of public amenities and services: or

iii) be subjected to physical limitations such as erosion hazard, bushfire risk and flooding.

The land is zoned 1(a) Prime Rural land under the Maitland LEP and has been used as an airfield for an estimated 27 years, rather than for agricultural purposes. The proposal is non-agricultural and no substantiation has been recorded at Council to determine the activity as being detrimental to agricultural productivity. The structure is not considered to affect rural character or require the provision or extension of public amenities and services. The lands is partially affected by the 1955 flood inundation, however, Council maps indicate that this extension will be located outside the flood affected area. The land is largely cleared being represented by pasture grasses and not characterised as being a bushfire risk. The land is not an erosion hazard (d).

Regional Environmental Plan The proposal is not inconsistent with the objectives and recommendations of the HREP.

State Environmental Planning Policies Not Relevant. Section 79C(1)(a)(ii) any draft environmental planning instrument that is or has been placed on public exhibition Not Relevant. Section 79C(1)(a)(iii) any development control plan Development Control Plan (DCP) 29 Hunter River Floodplain Management and DCP 37 Advertising/Notification of Development Applications, apply to the proposal. The development application was placed on exhibition in accordance with DCP 37. A written submission was received which is addressed under Section 79C(1)(d) below. Under DCP 29, the land is partially affected by the 1955 flood inundation, however, the shed extension is not located on land affected by flooding. Section 79C(1)(a)(iv) the regulations (to the extent that they prescribe matters for the purposes of this paragraph) Not Relevant.

Page 46



Section 79C(1)(b) the likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impacts in the locality The proposal is considered satisfactory in terms of the size and appearance of the extension. The extension has an estimated area of 150.4m2 and is to be constructed of zincalume, the materials are consistent in colour and profile with the existing shed. The original approval of the shed, DA 021034/CC 03-377 was amended in 2003 to permit the use of zincalume, required for preservation purposes of stored vintage aircraft. The visual impacts associated with the extension will be managed by zincalume weathering, and, by tree planting in accordance with a Tree Planting Plan prepared by Dewsnap Landscape Design dated April 2003. The issue of fire safety and provision of appropriate fire services has been raised by Council’s Building Surveyor. An earlier building assessment of the existing building, reference DA 021034/CC 030377 indicated that the existing hangar had been classified as a Class 10(a) building (under the Building Code of Australia) due to the proposed use of the building for private storage of aircraft, and, the private use of the airfield. The current proposal to extend the hangar, will result in the building exceeding 500m2 in floor space and change the building’s classification to where a requirement exists for the provision of fire hydrants. Given the isolation of the building and the associated absence of availability of mains water supply, the provision of fire hydrants is not possible. However, it is considered that some form of on-site water storage and fire fighting equipment should be provided if the building’s classification is to remain unchanged. It is recommended that a fire assessment report be prepared by a suitably qualified person for approval prior to approval of the Construction Certificate component of this proposal. The building is to be located as part of a cluster of similar structures on the land albeit on the eastern edge of the cluster. The proposed extension is located in vicinity to land affected by the 1955 flood inundation, however, the setback indicated will locate the extension outside flood affected land. Plan elevations indicate that two door openings with sliding doors proposed on the western elevation. No openings are located in the eastern elevation facing Pywells Road therefore noise associated with use of this extension will relate to the eastern elevation only. The aeroplane in the hangar will operate no more than ten times per annum. Any accedence of air traffic movements as limited by approved operations on the site would be addressed by Council’s enforcement section. Refer to BACKGROUND above for details. The use of the extension for storage, with no substantive mechanical or restoration activities undertaken in the hangar, is not considered likely to detrimentally impact on surrounding land. This current proposal to store one aircraft is not expected to significantly increase traffic movements on Pywells Road. However, it is acknowledged that visitor activity as part of a general visit to the site during Air Shows and fly-ins would result in increased activity on Pywells Road. The majority of Pywells Road is of rural type being narrow width and partially bituminised (with patching) or of gravel construction to the south. However, traffic entering Pywells Road from Knockfin Road off Luskintyre Road (to the north) will traverse an upgraded section of road up to 305

Page 47



Pywells Road upgraded as part of Council’s road maintenance schedule for 2003-2004. Future plans involve an extension of this sealed section up to the entrance of the Luskintyre Road within the 2004-2005 financial year, which should encourage traffic to enter the site via Knockfin Road to the north. The development on balance, as proposed is not considered to be of detriment to the locality or the environment. Section 79C(1)(c) the suitability of the site for the development The site is currently approved as an airfield and has hangars located in a cluster on the land. The proposed extension is to be attached to an approved hangar located on the eastern edge of this cluster. The extension will be similar in appearance and use to the existing hangar with access to utility services as required. Limitations on the operation of the airfield exist over the land which are considered adequate to address local concerns regarding the potential intensification of the site. The extension will not be located on land affected by the 1955 flood inundation. The part of the land on which the extension is to be located is not identified as being of bushfire hazard. No remnant vegetation will be affected by the proposal. No significant flora or fauna values affected. Knockfin Road up to 305 Pywells Road from Luskintyre Road has recently undergone an upgrading. The extension of that upgrading up to the entrance of the Luskintyre Road is envisaged over the 2004-2005 financial year. The site is considered suitable for the development. Section 79C(1)(d) any submissions made in accordance with this act or the regulations

Public Submissions The development application and accompanying information were placed on public exhibition for a period of 14 days from 29 April 2004 to 13 May 2004. As a result of the notification process, a total of one (1) submission was received and are provided as Attachment 3 this report. The main issues raised by the objector are summarised below and comment provided:

Information adequacy

Planner's Comment This concern raised relates to the level of information provided within the development plan and the Statement of Environmental Effects relating to the entire site and other users of the airfield. It is considered that sufficient information has been provided by the applicant for Council to assess the proposal for the extension to the hangar. The operation of the airfield is approved under the development consent for DA No. 94057 issued on 10 March 1995 relating to airfield operations. It is intended that the operational controls within DA 94057 be confirmed in relation to the proposed approval of this extension to a hangar, this is considered an appropriate measure for control of use of the hangar extension.

Condition of Pywells Road

Page 48

Planner's Comment



The condition of Pywells Road has been raised in the submission as a matter of concern. As discussed earlier in the report, Council has recently upgraded Knockfin Road onto part of Pywells Road to 305 Pywells Road over 2003-2004. Future plans involve an extension of this sealed section up to the entrance of the Luskintyre Road within the 2004-2005 financial year, which should encourage traffic to enter the site via Knockfin Road to the north. It is acknowledged that the remainder of Pywells Rad as it currently exists, is of a rural-type being narrow width and partially bituminised (with patching) or of gravel construction. This current proposal to store one aircraft is not expected to significantly increase traffic movements on Pywells Road.

Saturation point of airfield reached

Planner's Comment The aeroplane in the hangar will operate no more than ten times per annum. Any accedence of air traffic movements as approved under development consent No. 94057 issued on 10 March 1995 would be addressed by Council’s enforcement section. Refer to BACKGROUND above for details.

Visual impacts

Planner's Comment A concern regarding visual impacts and impacts on rural views has been raised in a submission received from public exhibition. It is to be noted, that the airfield has been located on the land since 1977 and been characterised by large hangars for the storage of aircraft. The hangar extension adds an estimated area of 150.4m2 onto the existing hangar area of 520m2 with a five (5) metre height and is to be constructed of zincalume. The height and materials proposed are consistent with both the size of the existing building and its use being storage of aircraft. The existing building is consistent with the existing cluster of buildings on the land used for airfield operations. A temporary visual impact will result from the use of new zincalume sheeting, however, this material will have its high reflectivity weathered over time by the elements. The zincalume is required due to the delicate nature of the stored aeroplanes and the low heat transmission ability of the zincalume. The concern regarding visual impacts will be mitigated over time by zincalume weathering and tree planting around the perimeter of the hangar.

Impact on lifestyle and rural area

Planner's Comment A concern regarding impact on lifestyle and the rural area has been raised. It has been noted above that the airfield has been located on the land since 1977, and, that large hangars are characteristic of airfields typically used for aircraft storage. The operation of the airfield is limited by an existing approval, ref. DA 94057, which is to be extended in the draft consent over this proposal. It is considered that the re-application of operations limitations stipulated in DA 94057 is adequate to ensure that impacts on lifestyle and the rural area are minimised from the subject proposal for an extension to an aircraft hangar.

Page 49



Section 79C(1)(e) the public interest This proposal is not considered to be detrimental to the public interest, however, it is noted that the airfield historically and up to present day remains of concern to residents in the locality.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS This matter has no direct financial impact upon Council's adopted budget or forward estimates.


STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS Statutory implications relating to assessment of the subject application have been addressed in the body of the report

CONCLUSION An assessment of the application has been carried out under Section 79C(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 as amended. The proposed extension being an aircraft hangar is ancillary to the approved use of the site as an airfield, and, is not inconsistent with zone objectives. The materials and openings of the extension are consistent with the existing building and the cluster of development on the subject land. In addition, tree planting is required to be carried out in accordance with an approved plan. Knockfin Road onto Pywells Road to 305 Pywells Road has currently been upgraded, and, future plans over the 2004-2005 financial year indicate that further upgrading is proposed in vicinity to the entrance to the Luskintyre Airfield. Limitations on airfield operations in development consent No .94057 issued on 10 March 1995 are to be re-applied in relation to the current proposal. It is proposed that the development be approved subject to a fire assessment report being submitted to Council for approval prior to release of the Construction Certificate. The issues raised in the submission of objection received from public exhibition are considered appropriately addressed by draft conditions of consent where applicable, including the re-application of limitations on the airfield operations in DA 94057. Further upgrading of Pywells Road in vicinity of the entrance to the airfield from 305 Pywells Road (located to the north) is proposed in Council’s maintenance schedule for 2004-2005. The proposed development is considered satisfactory in terms of the relevant matters for consideration under the Act and the development application is recommended for approval subject to attached draft conditions of consent, and, the submission of a fire assessment report to Council for approval prior to issue of the Construction Certificate.

Page 50



SCHEDULE OF CONDITIONS COMPLIANCE Reason: The following condition(s) have been applied to confirm and clarify the terms of

Council’s Approval. 1 The applicant shall comply with all conditions within this schedule prior

to occupancy of the proposed development. 2 The proposed development is to be carried out strictly in accordance

with the plans and documentation submitted with the application and any amendments to those plans arising through conditions to this consent.

3 The applicant shall comply with all conditions within this schedule prior to occupancy of the proposed development. On completion of the development an appointment should be made with the Council’s Customer Service Centre for an inspection to ensure that all conditions have been satisfactorily complied with prior to occupancy.

4 The applicant shall continue to comply with all conditions imposed on development consent No. 94057 issued on 10 March 1995.

CARPARKING Reason: The following condition(s) have been applied to ensure the provision of adequate parking

facilities constructed to a suitable standard commensurate with the demand likely to be generated by the proposed development.

5 All parking and loading/unloading bays, truck docks, driveways and

turning areas are to be maintained clear of obstructions and under no circumstances are to be used for the storage of goods or waste materials.

LANDSCAPING Reason: The following condition(s) have been applied to ensure that adequate provision is made

for the landscaping of the site in association with the proposed development, to enhance the external appearance of the development, and to ensure that existing and proposed landscaped areas are appropriately maintained.

6 The perimeter of the shed extension is to be planted with trees

consistent with the Tree Planting Plan prepared by Dewsnap Landscape Design dated April 2003 prior to occupation of the building addition and the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

7 Trees that do not thrive shall be immediately replaced with advanced species.

GENERAL PROVISIONS Reason: The objectives of the following conditions is to draw to the attention of the applicant and

owner their responsibilities to comply with various provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations, 2000, Local Government Act 1993; Regulations; Building Code of Australia and Local Policies relating to building construction and maintenance.

Page 51



8 All aspects of the building design shall comply with the applicable

performance requirements of the BCA for a Class 10a building so as to achieve and maintain acceptable standards of structural sufficiency, safety (including fire safety), health and amenity for the ongoing benefit of the community. Compliance with the performance requirements can only be achieved by: a) complying with the deemed to satisfy provisions, or b) formulating an alternative solution which:

i) complies with the performance requirements, or ii) is shown to be at least equivalent to the deemed to satisfy

provision, or c) a combination of a) or b).

9 All excavations and backfilling must be executed safely, in accordance with appropriate professional standards and be properly guarded and protected to prevent them from being dangerous to life or property.

10 All demolition works are to be carried out in accordance with Australian Standard AS 2601-1991.

SITE CONSIDERATIONS Reason: The objectives of the following conditions is to provide for a safe and healthy

environment for the occupants of the allotment and to maintain an adequate level of safety and cleanliness for the local environment.

11 All building refuse on this building site shall be stored in such a manner

so as not to cause a nuisance to adjoining properties. 12 A sign must be erected in a prominent position on the work:

(i) stating that unauthorised entry to work site is prohibited, and (ii) showing the name of the person in charge of the work site and a

telephone number at which that person may be contacted during work hours.

Any such sign is to be removed when the work has been completed. This condition does not apply to: (i) building work carried out inside an existing building, or (ii) building work carried out on premises that are to be occupied

continuously (both during and outside working hours) while the work is being carried out.

13 Approved toilet facilities are to be provided, at or in the vicinity of the work site at the rate of one toilet for every 20 persons or part of 20 persons employed at the site. The provision of toilet facilities in accordance with this Clause must be completed before any other work is commenced.

Page 52



14 The site is to be cleared of all building refuse and spoil immediately after completion of the building/structure.

STANDARD BUILDING CONDITIONS Reason: The objectives of the following conditions is to draw to the attention of the applicant and

owner their responsibilities to comply with various provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations, 2000, Local Government Act 1993; Regulations; Building Code of Australia and Local Policies relating to building construction and maintenance.

15 BEFORE ANY WORK COMMENCE At least two days before any site works, building or demolition begins, the applicant must:

a) Ensure that a “Construction Certificate” issued by an accredited Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) is obtained prior to commencing any construction works, and

b) Where Council is not the PCA, submit to Council a “Notice of Appointment” of the PCA at least two (2) days prior to the commencement of construction works.

16 Where Council is the PCA the applicant shall submit to Council a “Notice of Commencement” at least two (2) days prior to the commencement of construction works.

17 Before any site works, building or demolition begins, the applicant must: a) notify Council of the name, address, phone number and licence

number of the Principal Building Contractor and, where applicable, Home Owners Warranty Insurance details, and

b) erect signage at the front of the property with the PCA’s and Principal Contractor's name, and contact number, site address and the number given by the Council to the application for the development approval, and

c) provide temporary on-site toilet facilities if access to existing toilets is not adequate, and

d) protect and support any neighbouring buildings and land, and e) protect any public land or place from obstruction, inconvenience

or damage due to the carrying out of the development, and f) prevent any substance from falling onto any public land or place,

and g) provide suitable and adequate measures to restrict public access

to the site and building works, materials and equipment, and h) pay any Section 94 contributions if required by a contributions

plan applying to the land, and i) comply with any other conditions prescribed by the Environmental

Planning & Assessment Regulation.

Page 53



Note: Various items do not impose a requirement on an applicant where complied with by the builder.

SITE MANAGEMENT 18 Run-off and erosion controls must be implemented before construction

to prevent soil erosion, water pollution or the discharge of loose sediment on surrounding land, as follows: a) divert uncontaminated run-off around cleared or disturbed areas,

and b) erect a silt fence to prevent debris escaping into drainage systems

or waterways, and c) prevent tracking of sediment by vehicles onto roads, and d) stockpile topsoil, excavated material, construction and

landscaping supplies and debris within the site. In particular, no building materials, refuse or spoil shall be deposited on, or be allowed to remain on, Council's footpath.

19 Removal or disturbance of vegetation and topsoil must be confined to within 3 metres of the proposed building.

DEMOLITION 20 Any demolition works authorised by the certificate are to be carried out

in accordance with AS 2601 - 1991 ‘The Demolition of Structures’ and comply with any Council policy on waste management.

DRAINAGE 21 The completed building is to have a drainage system so that:

a) the land surrounding any structure is graded to divert surface water to the street, and is clear of existing and proposed structures and adjoining premises, and

b) if the water drains to the rear of the property, it is collected and drained via a gravity system to a Council stormwater line or disposed of in a manner consistent with Council's soil and water management policy.

22 All excavated and/or filled areas are to be retained or battered and suitably drained so as to prevent any subsidence of the area and are to be constructed so as to deny any flow of water into or around the building or neighbouring buildings or onto neighbouring land. Where a retaining wall is planned for this purpose and such wall exceeds 1.0m in height at any part from finished ground level, plans and specifications for this construction SHALL BE CHECKED AND APPROVED BY THE PCA BEFORE WORK ON THE RETAINING WALL COMMENCES. Plans and specifications for retaining walls greater than 1.0m in height MUST BE CERTIFIED BY AN ACCREDITED CERTIFIER.

Page 54



Note: The submission of a separate Development Application is not required where a retaining wall has been indicated on the approved plans and is associated with this approval.

HOURS OF WORKS 23 Any building work must be carried out between 7.00am and 6.00pm

Monday to Fridays, and 7.00am to 5.00pm Saturdays, with no work permitted on Sundays or public holidays that may cause offensive noise.

CONSTRUCTION WITHIN BOUNDARIES 24 The owner of the property is to ensure that any structure, including a

retaining wall, is constructed: a) to meet the setback requirements of the approved plans, and b) so as to be clear of any boundary line and wholly within the

confines of the lot, and c) so as to be clear of any easement/s located within the allotment

other than as may be approved on the stamped plans and specifications.

CONSTRUCTION WORKS 25 All building work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions

of the Building Code of Australia and in a professional and tradesperson like manner.

26 The proposed development is to be carried out strictly in accordance with the plans and documentation submitted with the application and any amendments to those plans arising through conditions to this consent.

GENERAL 27 The owner and applicant should note that the issue of this development

consent does not amount to a release, variation or modification by Council of any covenant or ‘restriction as to user’ applicable to this property and that any action taken by the applicant in accordance with the consent which results in any loss or damage by way of breach of the covenant will not be the responsibility of Council.

AT THE COMPLETION OF WORKS 28 The site is to be cleared of all building refuse and spoil immediately after

completion of the building/structure. 29 The development or any portion of the development SHALL NOT BE

USED OR OCCUPIED UNTIL an "Occupation Certificate Application" has been received and determined by the PCA and an Occupation or Interim Occupation Certificate has been issued. Note: where Council is the PCA responsible for issuing the Occupation Certificate, the required fee and all associated information and certifications must accompany the application for the certificate. To ensure occupation or use of the development can occur in a timely fashion, the occupation certificate application should be submitted at the

Page 55



same time as the final mandatory critical stage inspection is being requested.

30 THE APPLICANT SHALL COMPLY WITH ALL OF THE CONDITIONS WITHIN THIS SCHEDULE PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY OR USE OF THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT.

ADVISORY NOTES: A It is the Applicant's responsibility to ensure compliance with any

applicable requirements of the Federal Disability Discrimination Act, 1992 (DDA) and it should be noted that compliance with the Building Code of Australia may not necessarily meet the requirements of the DDA.

B The use of any building/s associated with this development consent shall not be changed from the BCA classification approved of to that of another BCA classification unless the change of use has been approved under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.

Page 56


Page 57

10.3.2 AMENDMENT TO DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN 6 RAWORTH RESIDENTIAL SUBDIVISION

File No: 103/49

Attachments: DCP Map Draft DCP Map Public Submissions Supplementary Submission Post-notification

Responsible Officer: Stephen Punch Manager Development Services

Author: Tracey Le Brun Town Planner

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council resolved at its Approvals & Regulatory Committee Meeting dated 12 August 2003 to prepare and exhibit for twenty-eight (28) days proposed changes to “Development Control Plan No. 6 Raworth – Residential Subdivision”. The proposed changes seeks to preclude re-subdivision of the “Lifestyle” allotments located in the northern part of the Morpeth Manor Residential Estate to retain a visual transition between Closebourne (a State Heritage Item) and Morpeth House (a Regional Heritage Item), and, standard sized residential allotments located to the south in the Morpeth Manor Residential Estate. The draft DCP was placed on public exhibition from Monday 17 May 2004 to Monday 21 June 2004. Two (2) submissions were received from public exhibition indicating support of the draft DCP amendment. A supplementary submission was received post-notification, requesting that Council add an additional area of land in the Morpeth Manor Residential Estate, comprising Canterbury Drive, Howe Place and land owned by Rofiza Pty Ltd as part of the land to be precluded from re-subdivision. A total of three (3) submissions were received at Council. As a result of the submissions received, it is recommended that both the submissions and the request for additional land to be included within a draft amendment to the DCP be noted. And, a draft amendment be prepared accordingly for public exhibition for a period of twenty-eight (28) days with the results to be returned to Council for consideration.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT in relation to the Draft Development Control Plan for Amendment to Development Control Plan 6 Raworth Residential Subdivision:


Amendment to Development Control Plan 6 Raworth Residential Subdivision (Cont)

Page 58

1. Council resolve to place the Draft Development Control Plan (incorporating any required alterations by Council) on public exhibition for a period of twenty-eight (28) days;

2. A further report shall be submitted to Council at the completion of the exhibition period for Council to consider any submissions and to determine whether to adopt the draft development control plan in its exhibited form.

REPORT

BACKGROUND In 2002, Council resolved to adopt amendments to the DCP 6 Raworth – Residential Subdivision. The adoption of the draft DCP, resulted in confirmation of a defined area on the DCP Map of land within the Morpeth Heritage Conservation Area as being classified Residential (Heritage). This land adjoins Closebourne, a State Heritage Item, and Morpeth House, a Regional Heritage Item, located on an adjoining property to the north. This land is also described in the DCP as “Lifestyle” Allotments. The existing DCP 6 Map also identifies land of “Potential Visual Impact” currently subdivided as Howe Place. Refer to Attachment 1 for the DCP Map. The DCP 6 Raworth – Residential Subdivision in its adopted form, specific to this proposed amendment, provides advice regarding Council’s subdivision requirements in the Morpeth Manor Residential Estate, including the land described as “Lifestyle” Allotments. As a result of water servicing constraints within the estate, a maximum permissible lot yield for subdivision of 238 allotments (in the entire Estate) was stated. The effect in relation to the land to be affected by the proposed amendment being that until the water servicing constraints were overcome, further re-subdivision of the larger “Lifestyle” lots would not be possible. Council has received verbal advice from the Hunter Water Corporation that these constraints are in the process of being overcome, and, that on the basis of recent upgrades/amplifications there is no restrictions on the density of development below Reduced Levels 28 metres. Therefore, an increase in density is possible subject to Council consent on a number of allotments defined as “Lifestyle” Allotments due to existing contour levels. Note, the large allotments described in DCP 6 as “Lifestyle“ Allotments received were labelled in DA 013003 Residential Subdivision -107 Allotments by the landowner Rofiza Pty Ltd. DCP 6 as it currently exists, also provides development guidelines over land located in the Morpeth Heritage Conservation Area. It is to be noted that the “Lifestyle” Allotments are located within the Heritage Conservation Area. The guidelines, relate to heritage design, and provide provisions to be incorporated when considering site layout, building form, materials and colours of any proposed building in the Morpeth Manor Estate. Council resolved at its meeting of 12 August 2003, to prepare and exhibit Draft Development Control Plan (DCP) 6 Raworth – Residential Subdivision to preclude re-subdivision of the “Lifestyle” Allotments in Morpeth Manor Residential Estate.



Page 59

PROPOSAL The proposed amendment relates to a removal of a sentence which indicates that should servicing constraints be overcome in the medium and long term, further subdivision of the larger “Lifestyle” lots may be permissible under the Provisions of the Maitland Local Environmental plan 1993. This statement, is proposed to be replaced with: The “Lifestyle” allotments located in the northern part of the estate serve as a visual transition between Closebourne (A State Heritage Item) and Morpeth House (a Regional Heritage Item), and, standard sized residential allotments located to the south in the Morpeth Manor Residential Estate. The re-subdivision of the “Lifestyle” Allotments is not permitted by Council. Refer to Attachment 2 for a copy of the Draft DCP Map. Note, the Map identifies the following matters:

• Land covered by DCP 6 Raworth; • “Lifestyle” Allotments subject to the proposed amendment to DCP 6 Raworth:

and, • Land located in Howe Place, Canterbury Drive and property owned by Rofiza

Pty Ltd.

PUBLIC EXHIBITION A total of three (3) submissions were received from public exhibition. Two submissions were received during public exhibition indicating support for the proposed draft amendment to DCP 6. Refer to Attachment 3 for a copy of the letters. A supplementary submission received post-notification, has requested that Council add an additional area of land in the Morpeth Manor Residential Estate, comprising Canterbury Drive, Howe Place and land owned by Rofiza Pty Ltd as part of the land to be precluded from re-subdivision. The writer (who is the main developer of the Morpeth Manor Residential Estate) has provided additional information (within Attachment 4) in support of a request to have this additional land added to the proposed amendment to be precluded from re-subdivision. Refer to Attachment 2 to identify where this additional land is located, comprising Canterbury Drive, Howe Place and land owned by Rofiza Pty Ltd. The writer has identified that Howe Place is highlighted as an area of “Potential Visual Impact” on the DCP 6 Map and provided information of previous discussions with Council of an intention to develop further “Lifestyle” land on land previously owned by Milton and the writer. Historic information provided by the writer indicate the potential impacts of the land designated as an area of “Potential Visual Impact” (Howe Place) are considered to be associated with the setting of Closebourne, an Item of State Heritage Significance. The writer has also confirmed an intention to create additional “Lifestyle Allotments” on land currently still under ownership.




Page 60

POLICY IMPLICATIONS Upon finalisation of a development control plan, it becomes a policy of the Council. Under the provisions of section 79C(1)(a) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, it is a matter for consideration in the evaluation of a development application.

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS The statutory implications for preparation of a DCP under the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 (as amended) have been addressed in the body of this Report. The draft plan was exhibited for a period of 28 days in accordance with the provisions of the EP&A Act and the EP&A Regulation. It is proposed to re-exhibit the draft DCP identifying the additional land proposed to be covered by the proposed amendment.

CONCLUSION The submissions received supported the proposed amendment. An additional submission received post-notification has requested that Council include additional land, in vicinity to land affected by the proposed amendment, that will be precluded from re-subdivision. It is recommended that the draft DCP be re-exhibited for an additional twenty-eight (28) days and that all affected landowners be contacted for comments. At the completion of the exhibition, a Report will be referred to Council detailing any submissions received and recommending any amendments to be made to the draft document prior to the formal adoption of the development control plan.


Page 61

10.3.3 AMENDMENT TO MAITLAND LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN - SITE SPECIFIC REZONING PROPOSALS, THORNTON NORTH

File No: RZ04001, RZ04002, RZ04003, RZ04004

Attachments: Site Specific Rezoning Proposal locations

Responsible Officer: Peter Cameron Manager City Strategy

Author: Monica Gibson Strategic Planner

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Council has received seven (7) proposals to rezone land at Thornton North for residential development in accordance with the Maitland Urban Settlement Strategy and Thornton North Master Plan. All rezoning proposals are located within Category 1 areas, as identified in the Settlement Strategy. Preliminary assessment has been completed for four (4) of these proposals, with sufficient resolution of the principal planning issues affecting the sites in question to progress with the preparation of a draft Local Environmental Plan (LEP) and consultation with key government agencies. The preparation of a draft LEP for these sites does not pre-empt development staging in Thornton North, which will be determined by Council based on the Settlement Strategy and consideration of the outcomes of infrastructure planning. However, preparing the draft LEP will allow the planning process for the sites to proceed, avoiding unnecessary delays in the amendment of Maitland Local Environmental Plan 1993. It will also facilitate constructive consultation with the Roads & Traffic Authority, Department of Mineral Resources and the Department of Environment & Conservation pursuant to Section 62 of the EPA Act, on key issues affecting the Thornton North area. This includes RTA expectations in relation to transport infrastructure and DMR/DEC expectations in relation to clay buffers. As discussed in the separate report on Thornton North in this agenda, the preparation of a draft LEP at this stage does not pre-empt development outcomes at Thornton North. Detailed planning policy will be developed concurrently in consultation with landowners and the community, in the form of a development control plan (DCP) for the Thornton North area. It is therefore proposed that Council commence consultation with state government agencies immediately with the aim of exhibiting a draft LEP for specific sites in conjunction with a draft LEP for Thornton North, a draft developer contributions plan and a draft development control plan.


AMENDMENT TO MAITLAND LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN - SITE SPECIFIC REZONING PROPOSALS, THORNTON NORTH (Cont.)

Page 62

The consultation process recommended by this report is a formal requirement under Section 62 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. Consultation with key stakeholders, including the local residential and Thornton community was undertaken during the preparation of the Thornton North Master Plan and the adopted Master Plan incorporates objectives and provisions raised by the community. Following the formal Section 62 consultation, a further report will be presented to Council to consider the draft LEP and its public exhibition. The community will have the opportunity to comment during this time.


1. Pursuant to Section 54 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Council resolve to prepare a draft Local Environmental Plan to rezone part of Lot 463 & 464 DP 870019, Lot 64 DP 651132, Lot 469 DP 881116, Lot 12 DP 603613, Lots 1-5 DP 783438 and Lot 14 DP 1062707, to 2(a) Residential, as shown in Attachment 1.

2. Council consult with relevant State Government agencies and other parties regarding the draft local environmental plan in accordance with Section 62 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

3. A separate report be presented to Council prior to the concurrent exhibition of a comprehensive draft local environmental plan for Thornton North and a site specific draft Local Environmental Plan providing the community with an opportunity to review and comment on the draft local environmental plan.

REPORT

Site Specific Rezoning Proposals This report relates to the following properties, as shown in Attachment 1.

• Part of Lot 463 & 464 DP 870019, • Part of Lot 64 DP 651132, • Part of Lot 469 DP 881116, • Part of Lot 12 DP 603613, • Part of Lots 1- 5 DP 783438, • Part of Lot 14 DP 1062707

Together these properties form part of the Category 1 Investigation Area at Thornton North, as adopted by Council in the Maitland Urban Settlement Strategy (2004). A preliminary review of rezoning applications for each of the sites has been undertaken and the key issues are summarised in this report. The proposed development is generally in accordance with the Thornton North Master Plan and it is



Page 63

therefore proposed to commence the process to rezone these sites to Residential 2(a) under Maitland Local Environmental Plan 1993. The subject land would be subject to the provisions for Thornton North, as separately reported to Council in this agenda and it is intended that Council will only proceed to exhibition of a site specific amendment, concurrently with exhibition of the comprehensive provisions for Thornton North. The principal purpose of this report is to enable Council to proceed with consultation with state government agencies on key issues and to ensure that there are not unnecessary delays at later stages. The boundaries shown in Attachment 1 are therefore approximate in some cases, and will be determined more accurately following consultation. Other rezoning applications have been lodged for Category 1 Investigation Areas, however a number of planning issues need to be addressed prior to preparing a draft LEP for these areas. The preparation of a draft LEP for the subject properties does not pre-empt the development staging plan proposed in the Thornton North LEP. Flora and fauna The four subject sites are primarily cleared of native vegetation with some remnant scattered trees or small clumps of trees on the site, particularly in the gully areas. Comprehensive investigations failed to identify the presence of rare, threatened or significant flora species on the subject lands. Land adjoining the proposed development area north of Somerset Park has been identified in State Environmental Planning Policy No 14 as a significant wetland (commonly known as Woodberry Swamp). The vegetation within the low-lying areas has been described as “Disturbed Freshwater Wetland Complex” following LHCCREMS classification. This wetland area provides significant habitat and foraging potential for local wetland-dependant fauna species. Given the local and state significance of the wetland area, there are a number of specific recommendations within the Threatened Species Assessment Report to protect the vegetation and habitat from degradation. Primarily these recommendations require stormwater management for the catchments containing the wetlands and revegetation buffers adjoining the wetland fringe, both of which can be addressed through development conditions. No change is proposed to the current zoning within the limits of Woodberry Swamp. The recent decision of the Scientific Committee to list the Lower Hunter Spotted Gum Ironbark Forest as a preliminary Endangered Ecological Community is likely to have some effect on development in the general Thornton North area. However, no remnants of this vegetation community are present on the subject properties. Threatened bat species have been recorded on the subject properties (Southern Myotis, East Coast Freetail-bat, Eastern Bent-wing Bat, Yellow-bellies Sheathtail-bat) as foraging species, with some limited roosting habitat in scattered remnant trees.



Page 64

Recommendations in the threatened species assessment reports suggest retention of hollow bearing trees and revegetation of gullies and drainage lines to provide habitat for threatened bat species. Farm dams scattered across the subject lands may provide habitat for the endangered Green and Golden Bell Frog. However, none were encountered during detailed site investigations. Targeted surveys during optimal conditions (spring or summer after a major rain event) will be necessary prior to any development that will disturb the habitat potential. Most of the farm dams occur in areas below the 1 in 100 year flood event, hence they are in areas that are unlikely to be disturbed. A breeding pair and fledgling of the White-bellied Sea-Eagle was observed nesting in a tree on land to the immediate north of Lot 12. The White-bellied Sea-Eagle is listed as a migratory species in the Commonwealth Environment Protection Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999. A 100-metre buffer zone is recommended as protection for this species, and provisions to this effect will be included in any development control plan affecting this site. This recommendation is considered to be sufficient protection for the nest tree and the habitat for the Sea-Eagle. Native vegetation is limited on the subject lands and there are large areas of better quality remnant vegetation in the immediate vicinity. A low number of threatened species have been recorded and it is considered that adequate protection and control of threatened species, habitats or communities can be provided in the development of the subject land. Therefore, the rezoning of the land for residential use is not precluded. Flooding Flooding from the Hunter River and local catchments affects each of the subject sites and this has been investigated to determine the extent of flooding in events up to and including extreme flood events. The sites are located on the flood fringe and in extreme events flooding affecting the sites will have low velocity (backwater flooding). Some areas will become high hazard flood fringe in extreme events due to floodwater heights exceeding 1 metre. An extreme flood assessment prepared for the sites concludes that there are some areas of nominated high hazard but that such flooding would be very infrequent, with low flows, long warning times and adequate evacuation routes to higher ground. It is recommended that Council’s Floodplain Management Committee and the State Emergency Service (SES) have the opportunity to comment on the rezoning proposals. Road Infrastructure It is recognised in the Thornton North Master Plan that the existing local and regional traffic infrastructure in Thornton will require augmentation to cater for new urban areas. The preparation of a draft local environmental plan will facilitate initial consultation with the Roads & Traffic Authority.



Page 65

Drainage Infrastructure Council has therefore commissioned the preparation of a developer contributions plan and support studies for the Thornton North area by Parsons Brinckerhoff. This includes a Stormwater Drainage study, with the aim of retaining pre-development flows to downstream areas. Preliminary outcomes from the studies by Parsons Brinckerhoff suggest that the subject land will not be significantly constrained due to the need for infrastructure. The existing system of dams along the unnamed watercourse through the subject land is likely to be utilized in stormwater detention and water quality. More detailed controls relating to stormwater management will be contained in the development control plan for Thornton North. Council has consulted with the Hunter Water Corporation to ensure that the general staging of development can be satisfactorily serviced with water and sewerage infrastructure. It is proposed to further consult with Hunter Water Corporation along with other service providers as an outcome of the recommendation in this report. Clay Extraction Operations Two clay quarries are located in the Thornton North study area with additional quarries operating to the south-west of the study area. These quarries are protected in the Maitland Local Environmental Plan 1993 under the clay conservation area provisions, and also by a Ministerial Direction in the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (Section 117). The Thornton North Master Plan identified a nominal 500 metre buffer around the clay extraction areas in the Thornton North area in keeping with the Section 117 Direction, with the intention that more detailed investigations would be undertaken with rezoning applications to determine the required extent of buffers. The applicants of the two western rezoning applications have undertaken more detailed investigations regarding the necessary buffer between extraction activities and residential land use. The applicants conclude that dust and noise issues would affect a relatively small part of the subject land, with approximately 70 dwellings requiring noise attenuation measures. Building design and construction changes have therefore been proposed to ameliorate noise up to 5dBA above the intrusion criterion (nominated as 45dBA). It is proposed use this information to commence consultation with the Department of Mineral Resources, Department of Environment & Conservation and quarry operators, in order to determine the appropriate separation to residential land surrounding the quarry. It should be noted that the boundaries of areas shown in Attachment 1 coincide with property boundaries and Category 1 investigation areas at this stage, so as not to pre-empt the outcomes of this consultation. Site Contamination



Page 66

Preliminary site contamination assessments were prepared for three of the four subject sites. Previous land uses have resulted in some areas of low level contamination (oil staining, existing dwellings and structures, dumped car bodies) that should be remediated prior to any urban development. Small areas of burial pits (poultry) and waste disposal (building and household waste) on two of the sites will also require remediation, with more detailed investigations during the development and construction phase required to ascertain the likelihood of other similar sites. Based on the findings of the three sites, it is not considered likely that the fourth site will be limited by site contamination (long history of grazing land uses, no dwellings or structures on site). A preliminary site contamination report will be required prior to any development on this site. Heritage Aboriginal heritage assessments were prepared for each of the subject sites and artefacts occurred (or were considered likely to occur) on each site. The assessments conclude that there are no Aboriginal heritage constraints to the proposed residential rezoning. However, further investigation and site works may be necessary during development phases to recover artefacts or conserve any regionally significant heritage sites. One isolated find of 19th century glass, ceramics and nails was located on Lot 464 DP 870019 and a permit will be required to remove these items. No other non-indigenous heritage was identified within the study area. Of particular importance when preparing the Thornton North Master Plan was the protection of Aboriginal heritage landscapes, an approach supported by the National Parks & Wildlife Service (NPWS) and the local Aboriginal community. A variety of landscapes, including some of the identified Aboriginal heritage sites, will be retained within the open space and recreation corridors transecting the subject properties and the Thornton North area. Consultation with NPWS and the local Aboriginal community will be undertaken during the preparation of the draft LEP for the subject properties. Commercial Development The Thornton North Master Plan identifies a commercial site, primary school and central village on part of the subject land. An assessment of retail market potential was prepared by the applicant to identify the appropriate size, location and staging for the commercial development. The findings of the retail assessment conclude that the future resident population of Thornton North would support a neighbourhood retail centre, which is in accordance with Council’s policy on retail hierarchy. The anticipated floor space for the neighbourhood retail centre would be approximately 4,000m2, including a medium sized supermarket (2,500m2), 17 specialty shops and 200m2 of non-specialty shops (medical, post office, banks). In



Page 67

total, the area required for this retail floor space would be 1.5 hectares (including car parking and landscaping). As the commercial centre will support a new and growing community, the economic viability of the centre would not occur until around 2012, with commercial development likely to be established in 2010 in order to capture market share. The existing Thornton Shopping Centre is located on a 1.5ha site, and has a medium sized supermarket (1,500m2) and 15 specialty shops. The relationship of a new commercial area with the existing centre is a key consideration and Council has therefore commissioned an independent review of the retail assessment, which will take place during the next phases of the rezoning process. Given that commercial development is unlikely to occur before 2010, it is not appropriate to create a commercial zone within the subject lands at this time. The development control plan for the site will however, identify the most suitable location for the commercial area, based on the information from the retail market assessment and the independent review. Any development of the subject land will need to be in accordance with the development control plan and the Thornton North Master Plan, therefore the commercial precinct will not be used for residential development.

Effect of Existing Planning Laws, Policies and Strategies The proposed draft LEP is consistent with State planning policies and strategies and Council’s own strategies and policies.

Section 62 Consultation Council intends to specifically consult with the following public agencies prior to a formal exhibition of a draft LEP:

• Department of Primary Industries – NSW Mineral Resources (DMR) • NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) • Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) • RailCorp • Hunter Water Corporation (HWC) • Department of Environment and Conservation – National Parks and Wildlife

Service (NPWS) • Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources (DIPNR) • Department of Education and Training (DET) • Mindaribba Local Aboriginal Land Council • Maitland Floodplain Management Committee • State Emergency Service (SES) • PGH

The consultation process recommended by this report is a formal requirement under Section 62 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act. Consultation with key stakeholders, including the local residential and Thornton community was undertaken during the preparation of the Thornton North Master Plan and the adopted Master Plan incorporates objectives and provisions raised by the community.



Page 68

Following the formal Section 62 consultation, a further report will be presented to Council to consider the draft LEP and its public exhibition. The community will have the opportunity to comment during this time.

CONCLUSION It is recommended that Council proceed with the preparation of a draft local environmental plan for the subject sites to facilitate consultation with key stakeholders. It is proposed that a further report be submitted to Council prior to exhibition. The preparation of a draft LEP at this stage does not pre-empt development outcomes at Thornton North. Detailed planning policy will be developed concurrently in consultation with landowners and the community, in the form of a Development Control Plan for the Thornton North area.


POLICY IMPLICATIONS The recommended draft Local Environmental Plan is expected to be consistent with the Thornton North Master Plan, which was adopted by Council in December 2003.

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS The statutory process for preparing an amendment to the Maitland Local Environmental Plan 1993 is detailed in Part 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and will be followed for the purpose of Council’s assessment of this proposal.


Page 69

10.3.4 AMENDMENT TO MAITLAND LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 1993 - THORNTON NORTH

File No: 103/106

Attachments: Thornton North draft LEP area

Responsible Officer: Peter Cameron Manager City Strategy

Author: Monica Gibson Strategic Planner

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to progress the planning of proposed residential development areas at Thornton North, to the next stage. It is proposed to prepare a comprehensive amendment to Maitland Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 1993, to require that certain matters are satisfactorily addressed prior to the release of land for residential development. The purpose of this draft Local Environmental Plan is to ensure satisfactory arrangements are made for the provision of major infrastructure along with the preparation of a development control plan, prior to the release of residential land within the Thornton North area. It would also require consideration of the Thornton North Master Plan and that new development only occur in accordance with an adopted staging plan. The preparation of the draft local environmental plan for Thornton North will signal to the development industry, State government agencies and the community, that Council is committed to the preparation of appropriate planing policies and the provision of necessary infrastructure. It will also enable Council to formally commence consultation with key government agencies, such as the Roads and Traffic Authority, pursuant to Section 62 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979. It is recommended in a separate report in this agenda that Council resolve to prepare a draft LEP for some of the Category 1 land at Thornton North. As detailed in that report, the draft LEP would ultimately rezone land to residential, in accordance with the Master Plan, but only after resolution of key issues in consultation with State Government agencies. Detailed planning policy will be developed concurrently in consultation with landowners and the community, in the form of a Development Control Plan for the Thornton North area.



AMENDMENT TO MAITLAND LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 1993 - THORNTON NORTH (Cont.)

Page 70

1. Pursuant to Section 54 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Council resolve to prepare a draft local environmental plan to create provisions in the Maitland Local Environmental Plan 1993 for urban development at Thornton North.

2. Council consult with relevant State Government agencies regarding the draft local environmental plan in accordance with Section 62 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

REPORT Council prepared the Thornton North Master Plan following the identification of land at Thornton North in the Maitland Urban Settlement Strategy. The Thornton North Master Plan involved community and government agency consultation, together with environmental and infrastructure studies. It was adopted by Council on 9 December 2003. The Master Plan identifies the likely development potential for the entire Thornton North site, and recommends that development commence on two separate fronts. Other matters considered in the Master Plan include the establishment and retention of vegetation and riparian corridors, operational requirements for the existing clay extraction activities, and infrastructure augmentation required to support the development of more than 3,500 residential allotments. In order to ensure logical and sequential development at Thornton North, priority areas were identified in the Maitland Urban Settlement Strategy as Category 1 Investigation Areas. Generally these areas have the lowest environmental and infrastructure constraints (i.e. relatively cleared of native vegetation and in close proximity to existing urban areas or sewerage infrastructure). Amendments are required to the Maitland Local Environmental Plan 1993 to rezone land for residential, open space, environment protection and recreation purposes, prior to development occurring. A development control plan (DCP) is also necessary for the area to establish provisions for subdivision and dwelling design in accordance with the policy objectives from the Master Plan. Council has received a number of site-specific rezoning applications for Category 1 land at Thornton North and has undertaken a preliminary assessment of the information submitted with those applications. Work has commenced on a draft DCP and a developer contributions plan is being prepared by Council to make provision for community facilities, infrastructure works and open space requirements. Council is therefore progressing towards the implementation of the Thornton North Master Plan on a number of different fronts, including the comprehensive amendment to Maitland LEP 1993 that is proposed in this report.

Local Environmental Plan for Thornton North It is proposed to prepare a draft Local Environmental Plan (LEP) to apply to the whole of the Thornton North area, as shown in Attachment 1. The draft LEP will



Page 71

create a new division in the Maitland Local Environmental Plan 1993 that will require Council to consider an adopted development control plan and developer contributions plan prior to determining any release of land for residential development within the identified Thornton North area. The new LEP clause will also require consideration of the provisions of the Thornton North Master Plan and compliance with a staging plan, based on investigation areas identified in the Maitland Urban Settlement Strategy. The purpose of this comprehensive LEP for Thornton North is to ensure satisfactory arrangements exist for the provision of major infrastructure and a detailed development control plan is adopted prior to the release of residential land. Further amendments will be necessary to create a residential zoning, and it is proposed that these amendments would occur in a staged manner. A separate report is presented to Council on site-specific rezoning applications with this agenda. A similar approach using detailed planning provisions for large land releases has been undertaken by Councils in western Sydney, where significant local and regional infrastructure is required as a result of the new residential release areas. The Councils in question have designed LEP provisions in consultation with relevant State Government agencies and Council can therefore draw on the experience of these Councils. The recommendation with this report is intended to allow Council to commence consultation with the State government to introduce similar planning provisions for the Thornton North area. It is also intended to provide confidence within the local community and State government, that Council will not be releasing residential land until a detailed policy framework and infrastructure plan is in place. It is proposed that Council commence consultation with state government agencies immediately with the aim of exhibiting a draft LEP for Thornton North in conjunction with a draft developer contributions plan and development control plan. Some of the specific matters to be addressed by the draft LEP are considered below. Road Infrastructure The Thornton North Master Plan indicates that improvements are required to local and regional transport infrastructure to cater for the population growth expected at Thornton North. The Roads & Traffic Authority (RTA) has identified necessary infrastructure upgrades including improvements to the Weakleys Drive interchange and Raymond Terrace Road. In addition, local road infrastructure upgrades have been identified for Haussman Drive, Government Road and Thornton Road. An improved crossing over the Hunter rail line at Thornton and improvements to Metford Railway Station, have also been proposed by State government agencies. Council is preparing a developer contributions plan and will be consulting with the RTA and other state government agencies in the context of the overall requirements for developer contributions in the Thornton North area. It is already clear that transport infrastructure at Thornton North will be expensive and that the issue of affordability will be a key issue.



Page 72

As detailed in a separate report in this agenda, Council is also ready to commence consultation with State Government agencies regarding rezoning applications for Category 1 lands at Thornton North. In the absence of a Developer Contributions Plan, the proposed LEP amendment in this report will demonstrate that Council is committed to the establishment of a plan for timely contributions from developers towards major infrastructure. The draft LEP for Thornton North will introduce a new clause in the LEP that will permit the zoning of land to residential development, yet restrict the release of land for urban development until arrangements have been made for the provision of infrastructure. Design and Development Issues The Thornton North Master Plan makes recommendations for development control and design matters, including the location of higher density housing, design of a central road, principles for stormwater management and identification of sites for detailed urban design. These policy matters are proposed to be addressed in a development control plan (DCP). Under the provisions of Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, a DCP needs to be considered prior to determining any development application on land to which the policy applies. A DCP is to be prepared for the Thornton North area, and it is recommended that the draft LEP contain a specific provision requiring the adoption of a DCP for Thornton North prior to any development application being determined. The LEP may also specify matters that the DCP must contain, including:

• Stormwater management • Access and movement routes • Landscaping details • Management of native vegetation, including threatened species and habitats • Bushfire management • Clay buffers • Design matters for significant sites, including land adjoining Timberlane estate,

village centre, higher density residential areas and sites of Aboriginal heritage. It is appropriate that the DCP applies to the whole of the Thornton North area to provide consistency, with site-specific details or requirements for different precincts within Thornton North. This would allow the developer some flexibility in the design and appearance of their area, yet comply with the overall objectives and aims of Council’s policy.

Effect of Existing Planning Laws, Policies and Strategies The proposed draft LEP is consistent with State planning policies and strategies and Council’s own strategies and policies.

Section 62 Consultation Council intends to specifically consult with the following public agencies prior to a formal exhibition of a draft LEP:



Page 73

• Department of Primary Industries – NSW Mineral Resources (DMR) • Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) • RailCorp • Hunter Water Corporation (HWC) • Department of Environment and Conservation – National Parks and Wildlife

Service (NPWS) • Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources (DIPNR)

CONCLUSION The purpose of the draft LEP is to introduce broad planning provisions into the Maitland Local Environmental Plan to support appropriate development at Thornton North and it is therefore necessary to consult with a range of government agencies regarding the purpose of the draft LEP.


POLICY IMPLICATIONS The recommended draft Local Environmental Plan is consistent with the Thornton North Master Plan, which was adopted by Council in December 2003.

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS The statutory process for preparing an amendment to the Maitland Local Environmental Plan 1993 is detailed in Part 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and will be followed for the purpose of Council’s assessment of this proposal.


Page 74

10.3.5 SECTION 356 DONATIONS

File No: 10/5

Responsible Officer: Brad Everett Group Manager, Service Planning and Regulation

Author: Judy Jaeger Manager Community and Recreation Services

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents to Council a recommendation of the general community applications for financial assistance under Section 356 of the Local Government Act, 1993. Council can provide exemptions from waste disposal charges at the Mount Vincent Waste Depot to charitable organisations, also under Section 356.


1. Council approve of the allocations of funds under Section 356 of the Local Government Act, 1993 as recommended in this report

2. Where practical, goods/items be provided to the applicant in lieu of a cheque

3. A Ward Councillor make the presentation of goods or cheque to the applicant

REPORT Applicants for financial assistance under Section 356 of the Local Government Act have been invited and thirty two (32) applicants were received with the total of requests for financial assistance being $215,642. The applications have been assessed using the criteria outlined in the Section 356 Donations Policy reviewed and adopted by Council in February, 2002. The objective of the policy is: "To assist local community groups with pursuits that benefit the overall community in terms of social welfare, cohesion or image, through financial or in-kind support or through the discounting of fees." Local organisations applying for assistance under Section 356 shall be: • Non profit and community based • From incorporated bodies or organisations • Located or provide service in Maitland LGA


SECTION 356 DONATIONS (Cont.)

Page 75

• Meeting or will meet a clear need and avoid unnecessary duplication • Seek to develop a capacity to attract alternative funding sources • Not eligible for and not previously received funding from State or Federal

Government or other sources for the same purpose for which Council funds are sought

• Current or proposed services/activities • Non-recurrent in nature Each application was also assessed to determine if funding from other sources is more appropriate. Application from organisations were assessed to ensure the maximum benefit for the general community, keeping in mind the limited funds available for distribution. It is recommended that the following Section 356 donations be made: No. Applicant Project

Details 03/04 Grant 04/05 Sought 04/05

Recommended 1.

Maitland Hospital Pink Ladies

Uniforms

Nil

$2,750.00

$2,750.00

2.

Maitland Multiple Sclerosis Support Group

Ongoing support

$500.00

$500.00

$500.00

3.

Girl Guides Association, East Maitland

Installation of security grills for windows

Nil

$4,000.00

$4,000.00

4.

Bolwarra/Largs Girl Guides

Furniture and equipment for hall

Nil

$2,000.00

$2,000.00

5.

Scouts Australia - Lower Hunter District

Hall repairs and refurbishment

Nil

$3,000.00

$3,000.00

6.

Hunter Animal Watch Inc.

Provision of subsidised pet desexing program

$2,000.00

$3,000.00

$3,000.00

7.

Dreams Inc.

Venue costs for Town Hall for one function

Nil

$615.00

$615.00

8.

Maitland Squadron Air League

Refurbishment of building, purchase of trophies, equipment & office supplies

Nil

$5,500.00

$4,000.00

9.

Maitland Show Society

Maitland Showgirl

$1,000.00

$2,000.00

$2,000.00



Page 76

10.

Maitland Photographic Association Inc.

Purchase of medals for competition winners

Nil

$1,000.00

$1,000.00

11. Maitland Repertory Society

Waiver CBD Construction Levy

$927.80 $1,217.85 $1,217.85

12. Maitland Masonic Lodge

Waiver CBD Construction Levey

$272.90 $358.15 $358.15

TOTAL:

$24,441.00

The above twelve (12) applications recommended for assistance total $24,441. In applications this year, priorities have been given to those organisations funded for the first and/or second time over a four (4) year period ensuring that funding does not become recurrent in nature. Council also allocates annually, funding to musical groups and events. Three (3) applications have been received with the total requests for financial assistance being $106,200. In this year's Management Plan, an allocation of $10,000 has been allowed for this category and it is recommended that the following Section 356 Donations be made. No. Applicant Project

Details 03/04 Grant 04/05 Sought 04/05

Recommended 1.

City of Maitland Pipes and Drums Inc.

Purchase of instruments and equipment

$4,000.00

$100,000.00

$4,000.00

2.

Maitland City Brass Band Inc.

Upgrading instruments and uniforms

$4,000.00

$5,000.00

$4,000.00

3.

Maitland City Choir

Hire of Town Hall for 2 concerts

Nil

$1,200.00

$1,200.00

TOTAL:

$9,200.00

Under its Section 356 Donations Policy, Council can provide exemptions from waste disposal charges at the Mount Vincent Waste Depot to charitable organisations. Only one (1) application has been received for this category, therefore the following level of exemptions from waste disposal charges for the 2004/2005 financial year is recommended. No. Applicant 03/04 Grant 04/05 Sought 04/05

Recommended 1.

Presbyterian Church

$100.00

$100.00

Recommended $100.00



Page 77

The above recipients are considered the most appropriate of the applications given the limited resources available to Council. This does not however detract in any way from the need or validity of applications not recommended for assistance. Applications excluded from the list of recommended recipients are listed below: No. Applicant Project

Details 03/04 Grant 04/05 Sought 04/05 Not

Recommended 1.

BISCHOFF, Aaron John

Maintenance of vintage fire engine fleet

Nil

$871.00

Does not meet criteria

2.

Largs School of Arts

Construction of a new security fence

Nil

$2,000.00


3.

Thornton Park Junior Soccer Club Inc.

Provision of additional lights at Alan & Don Lawrence Oval

Nil

$11,000.00


4.

Lochinvar Rural Fire Brigade

Upgrade building and replace equipment

Nil

Not supplied


5.

Croyle Medical - Margo Asimus

Conference attendance in Parish

Nil

$2,700.00


6.

Thornton Park Tennis Club

Replace artificial surface on existing courts

Nil

$12,000.00


7.

Thornton Child Care & Pre School Centre Association

Landscape improvements, inc. levelling and retaining walls

Nil

$70,000.00

Outside resources of Section 356

8.

Kookaburra Korner Early Education Centre Inc.

Kitchen refurbishment

Nil

$30,000.00


9.

Maitland Family Day Care Scheme

Purchase vehicle

Nil

$29,000.00


10.

Largs School of Arts

Construction of new amenities block

Nil

$5,000.00


11.

Red Cross Coffee Shop

Telephone rental

Nil

$600.00




Page 78

12.

Maitland Region Society of Artists Inc.

Conduct art competition and exhibition

Nil

$1,000.00


13.

Christian Outreach Centre - Maitland

Shine Celebration and carols

$1,000.00

$3,000.00


14.

Metford Community Baptist Church

Carols by Candlelight

$1,000.00

$1,000.00


15.

St Michael's Mighty Midgets

Refurbishment of hall

Nil

$6,000.00


16.

Rutherford Public School P & C Association

Improve environmental appearance of school

Nil

Not supplied


17.

Metford Child Care Centre

Replace existing doors with doors with viewing windows

Nil

$5,000,.00


18.

Maitland Nursery School

Purchase 2 refrigerators and replace walk boards for outdoor area

Nil

$3,000.00


19.

East Maitland Preschool Association Inc.

Replace existing garden sheds with larger shed

Nil

$3,530.00


20.

Hunter Valley Special Tenpin Bowlers Inc.

NSWTBA State Championships for people with a disability

Nil

$2,000.00


21.

Maitland Uniting Church Munch program

Provision of nutritional meals for disadvantaged people

$2,000.00

$2,000.00


FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS The recommended allocations for assistance under Section 356 are within the provisions of the 2004 - 2005 budget.

POLICY IMPLICATIONS Applications have been determined in accordance with Council's Section 356 Donations Policy.



Page 79

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS Council's Section 356 Donations Policy is consistent with the requirements of this section of the Local Government Act (1993).


Page 80

10.3.6 TRANSFER OF RESPONSIBILITY-MANAGEMENT RESPONSE TO ALGAL BLOOMS

File No: 99/5/1

Attachments: Letter from Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources. Contents Section of Guidelines For Management Response to Marine and Freshwater Algal Blooms, July 2004

Responsible Officer: David Simm Manager Environmental Programs

Author: David Simm Manager Environmental Programs

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents details of a recent transfer of responsibilities for the care of certain water bodies from the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources (DIPNR) to Council, in respect to the management of blue-green algal blooms, which may occur from time to time. In the case of Council two such water bodies have been identified within the published Guidelines prepared by DIPNR, namely Telarah and Rathluba Lagoons. The “Guidelines for Management Response to Marine and Freshwater Algal Blooms: For Application in the Lower Hunter North Coast, Hunter Valley and Central Coast” came into effect on the 1st July 2004. By formally adopting the guidelines and instituting the identified risk management responses, Council will be well placed to demonstrate its discharge of responsibilities under the Civil Liability Act, 2002 in respect to duty of care and negligence.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT Council adopt the process of managing risks associated with algal blooms as outlined within the “Guidelines for Management Response to Marine and Freshwater Algal Blooms in the Hunter Region”(July 2004), for water bodies identified under its care and control.

REPORT Council was recently advised by the Department of Infrastructure, Planning and Natural Resources that as of the 30th June 2004 and as a result of organisational changes to DIPNR, they would no longer be coordinating responses to algal blooms


Transfer of Responsibility-Management Response to Algal Blooms (Cont.)

Page 81

in the Hunter. Responsibilities for duty of care transfers to the relevant agency responsible for the water body in which the bloom occurs. For Maitland City Council two bodies of water have been identified that it will now assume responsibility for in the event of algal blooms. Telarah and Rathluba Lagoons are specifically identified within the published guidelines as Councils responsibility. A third locally susceptible water body at Walka Waterworks is also identified. The duty of care for Walka however passes to both its Trust and the Department of Lands. Up until this most recent advice the responsibility for the management of outbreaks of potentially harmful algal blooms has rested with the DIPNR through a coordinating committee. Council’s role has been that of a support agency and a notifying body. That role has effectively changed to that of a management organisation with a duty of care to adequately respond to suspected outbreaks to protect the community and environment. The guidelines published and forwarded by DIPNR as part of their notification of transfer of responsibility provide a risk management framework that should be adopted and implemented by responsible organisations so as to be able to demonstrate a proper duty of care. The consequences of blue-green algal blooms need to be properly managed so that in the event of their occurrence the risk to human health and the environment is minimised. By following the risk assessment procedures together with regular observation and community feedback the transfer of responsibility to Council for the nominated sites should be appropriately managed.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Costs involved with this transfer of responsibility will generally be contained within existing budgets, in terms of human resources to manage and respond. It is expected that some costs will be incurred in the production of appropriate notification signage and advertisements of outbreaks. Potential cost sharing with other affected agencies will be explored.




Page 82

10.3.7 FISHERY CREEK CATCHMENT GROUP REQUEST

File No: 55/4

Attachments: Letter of request

Responsible Officer: David Simm Manager Environmental Programs

Author: Amanda Burns Community Support Officer

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report is prepared to outline to Council the Fishery Creek Catchment Group request to undertake Landcare activities on parkland located on the corner of Mt Dee and Cessnock Roads. The group was formed recently for the purpose of improving the natural environment of Gillieston Heights. Group members propose to undertake plantings of local native vegetation on the site to enhance aesthetic appeal, biodiversity and habitat potential.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT Council approve the proposal from the Fishery Creek Catchment Group to undertake strategic plantings of local native plants in the parkland located on the corner of Mt Dee and Cessnock Roads, in close consultation with the relevant council officers.

REPORT The newly established Fishery Creek Catchment Group is a project under Maitland Region Landcare. The group proposes to undertake plantings of local native seedlings in the parkland on the corner of Mt Dee and Cessnock Roads. Planting activities will aim to enhance the areas aesthetic appeal and increase biodiversity and habitat for local bird species. It is anticipated that the park will act as a gateway to Maitland from Kurri Kurri and the greater wine growing areas of the Hunter and would introduce Maitland as a ‘green’ city to travellers. Councils Community Support Officer has investigated issues relating to traffic site lines and long-term park maintenance, conducting site inspections with the relevant council officers. Councils Asset Engineer from the Asset and Infrastructure Division has determined that strategic planting within park boundaries will not interfere with site lines of incoming or exiting traffic. Strategic planting was also discussed on-site with Councils Resource and Tree Services Co-ordinator from City Works and Services. A design for planting was determined that would not interfere with councils current maintenance regime of the park.


Fishery Creek Catchment Group Request (Cont.)

Page 83

Community consultation with surrounding residents has been undertaken and no negative feedback was received. Those contacted are satisfied with the proposal, with some residents expressing a desire to be involved in on-ground works.





Page 84

10.3.8 ACCESS TO HUNTER RIVER - LUSKINTYRE BRIDGE

File No: 140/5


Author: Grant Wood Infrastructure Planning Engineer

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The area under the Luskintyre Bridge has been the subject of numerous complaints and requests dating back to 1993 by the neighbouring property owners. The requests have been primarily for Council to restrict public access to the Hunter River from the eastern side of the bridge to minimise anti social behaviour at this location. Council considered a report on the matter and resolved that an inspection with residents be held An on site inspection was held together with a meeting with local residents who had an opportunity to raise specific concerns. An outcome of the meeting was that property boundary issues and ownership had implications on options to manage the area and Council would further investigate these issues. Preliminary investigations by Council to date have indicated that the land and Hunter River beneath the bridge is a combination of road and Crown Land. Crown land is managed by the Department of Infrastructure Planning and Natural Resources. The issue for Council is to weigh up the public access to the river against the impacts on the local residents of the anti social behaviour and impacts on the environment. This report recommends as an interim measure that the area be fenced off for a period of 12 months and a review of public access to the Hunter River over the whole LGA be carried out to allow the implementation of a permanent solution to the access problems at Luskintyre Bridge.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT

1. Council make application to the RTA for consent to close off public

access, for a period of 12 months to the area under Luskintyre Bridge by means of fence and a locked gate allowing access for Council, RTA and DIPNR.

2. Funding for this work to be provided from sources identified at the September review.


Access to Hunter River - Luskintyre Bridge (Cont.)

Page 85

3. A review be undertaken of existing public access sites to the Hunter River with a further report to be submitted to Council within 12 months.

REPORT The area under the Luskintyre Bridge has been the subject of numerous complaints and requests dating back to 1993 by the neighbouring property owners. The requests have been primarily for Council to restrict public access to the Hunter River from the eastern side of the bridge to minimise anti social behaviour at this location. In 1993 Council resolved not to take action on this matter (Council Meeting 22/6/93). The matter has been raised with Council officers a number of times since 1993 with the same request, the latest being to the Local Traffic Committee in March 2004. At the Council Meeting of 27 April, 2004 Council resolved that:

1. The matter be deferred until an on site inspection can be arranged 2. Council Officers bring back a Management Safety Report on control issues 3. Identify all landowners concerned

An on site inspection was held together with a meeting with local residents who had an opportunity to raise specific concerns. An outcome of the meeting was that property boundary issues and ownership had implications on options to manage the area and Council would further investigate these issues. Preliminary investigations by Council to date have indicated the following. The original road plan identifying Luskintyre Road, R422B (dated 1902) shows the road reserve and the property boundaries extending to the banks of the Hunter River. There is a view among the community that the property boundaries extend to the midpoint of the river. From investigations to date however it appears that the property boundaries on the western side of the river are the high water mark of the river (as identified in 1902). The property boundaries on the eastern side appear to be the top of the high bank of the river. Based on these findings it is considered that the Hunter River at this location, between its banks (high water mark on the western edge and the top of the high bank on the eastern side) is not private property or public road, but is in fact Crown land. The only conclusive way to determine the extents of the property and road reserve boundaries is to undertake a full title search of each property, the relevant road plans, parish maps and a full detailed survey on site. At this stage this is not considered necessary. Crown Land The Department of Infrastructure Planning and Natural Resources manages Crown land on behalf of the Crown, under the auspices of the Crown Lands Act, (1989). The Crown Lands Act (1989) dictates what the land (in this instance the Hunter River) can be used for. In particular the principles of the Crown Lands Act (1989) states:



Page 86

“Principles of Crown land management

For the purposes of this Act, the principles of Crown land management are: (a) that environmental protection principles be observed in relation to the management and administration of Crown land, (b) that the natural resources of Crown land (including water, soil, flora, fauna and scenic quality) be conserved wherever possible, (c) that public use and enjoyment of appropriate Crown land be encouraged, (d) that, where appropriate, multiple use of Crown land be encouraged, (e) that, where appropriate, Crown land should be used and managed in such a way that both the land and its resources are sustained in perpetuity, and (f) that Crown land be occupied, used, sold, leased, licensed or otherwise dealt with in the best interests of the State consistent with the above principles.”

Items (c) and (d) are of particular interest as they relate to public use of crown land. Council does not have the authority under the Crowns Land Act (1989) to restrict access to Crown lands. Any restriction of access to this Crown Land (the Hunter River) may transgress the principles of the Crowns Land Act (1989). Roads Act Other legislation that is also relevant is the Roads Act, (1993). Section 115 of the Roads Act states in part that:

“Roads authority may regulate traffic in connection with road work etc (1) A roads authority may regulate traffic on a public road by means of

barriers or by means of notices conspicuously displayed on or adjacent to the public road.

(2) The power conferred by this section may be exercised by the RTA for

any purpose but may not be exercised by any other roads authority otherwise than:

(a) for the purpose of enabling the roads authority to exercise its

functions under this Act with respect to the carrying out of road work or other work on a public road, or

etc

Section 115 of the Roads Act (1993) therefore only allows a roads authority (in this instance, Council) to regulate traffic for the purpose of road works. The Act does allow the Roads and Traffic Authority to regulate traffic for other purposes. Therefore Council does not have the authority under the Roads Act (1993) to regulate traffic for the purpose of restricting access to adjoining lands.



Page 87

Section 116 of the Roads Act does allow Council to make application to the RTA for consent to erect a barrier to regulate traffic on a public road for purposes other than those in Section 115. This requires advertising of the application for a period of 28 days specifying what action is being proposed and advising that any person is entitled to make a submission to the RTA Options The stakeholders in this matter are

• Council as the roads authority and community representative • Local residents and property owners • General public and wider community • Roads and Traffic Authority as the authority responsible for the Luskintyre

bridge • Department of Planning Infrastructure and Natural Resources (DIPNR) as the

Crown land authority The issue for Council is to weigh up the public access to the river against the impacts on the local residents of the anti social behaviour and impacts on the environment. To close the road at this location would restrict many legitimate users of the river. Closure would require fencing and a gate at the eastern end immediately adjacent to the bridge and would prevent all access to the river. Alternatively to allow pedestrian access with suitable parking facilities would require extensive fencing under the bridge, installation of bollards and is unlikely to completely prevent elements of anti social behaviour from occurring. Access for the community to the Hunter River in the Maitland LGA is restricted because of private property ownership, lack of constructed roads and public information. At present there are four reasonably well known points of access to the Hunter River

• Morpeth - Queens wharf area with formal car parking, boat launching ramp and jetty

• Maitland - Central Maitland levee improvement works currently under construction

- Lorn including car parking, tables and paths • Melville Ford - unimproved access • Luskintyre Bridge - unimproved access

There are obvious recreational opportunities for the Melville Ford and Luskintyre river areas however this is a medium to longer term action. The short term issue to be addressed is the anti social behaviour. The more remote location of Luskintyre makes it an attractive area for undesirable activities. It is considered that as an interim measure (say 12 months) a fencing of the access is the best course of action to manage this behaviour. In conjunction with this work it is recommended that a review of the public access to the Hunter River in the Maitland



Page 88

LGA be undertaken. This review could be carried out over the next 12 months, which will also provide an opportunity to monitor the success of the access restriction. It is recommended that Council make application to the RTA for consent to close off public access, for a period of 12 months to the area under Luskintyre Bridge by means of fence and a locked gate allowing access for Council, RTA and DIPNR. Subject to the success of this application a further report will be brought back to Council on the river access review and on the status of anti social behaviour in the vicinity of the bridge.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS This item has not been funded in Council's adopted budget or forward estimates. The estimated cost of the fencing work is approximately $10,000. It is recommended that funding for this work to be provided from sources identified at the September review.


STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS Council does not have the authority under the Roads Act (1993) to restrict use to adjoining lands. Similarly one of the key principles of the management of Crown Land under the Crown Lands Act (1989) states that the public access and use of Crown Land should be encouraged. Council can however make application to the RTA under Section 116 of the Roads Act for consent to erect a barrier.


Page 89

10.3.9 BED AND BREAKFAST ROAD SIGNAGE FEES

File No: 140/5



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report is to adopt a fee for the purchase and erection of signage in the local road network, identifying the location of “Bed and Breakfast” (B&B) style accommodation establishments. Typically the signage is located on the nearest intersection to the B&B establishment. Council resolved to implement a system of signs identifying the location of B & B accommodation establishments at the B & B proprietor’s expense at its meeting of 25 May 2004.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT Council adopt a fee of $200 for the purchase and erection of a standard sign to identify the location of a “Bed and Breakfast” establishment.

REPORT At the Council meeting of 25 May 2004, Council considered a report on the establishment of a system of signage to allow a consistent approach to the placement of directional signage blades for Bed and Breakfast style accommodation establishments. Council resolved to implement a system of signs identifying the location of B & B accommodation establishment’s proprietor’s expense at its meeting of 25 May, 2004. Placement of the sign will be the responsibility of Council with all costs to met by the B & B establishment. Future replacement of the blades is also to be at the B &B establishment’s expense. Section 610D of the Local Government Act (1993) requires Council, in determining the amount set for a fee, to take into consideration the cost to Council of providing the service. The proposed fee will be advertised for a period of 28 days. The proposed fee for the purchase and erection of each sign is $200. Each double sided, reflective sign costs approximately $64 to produce. Post, brackets, bolts and rapid set concrete totals approximately $100. A nominal cost of $36 for labour has been allowed for, bringing the total to $200.


Bed and Breakfast Road Signage Fees (Cont.)

Page 90





Page 91

10.3.10 CLOSURE OF WINDERS LANE RAIL LEVEL CROSSING

File No: 222/631


Author: Chris McGrath Asset Engineer

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Winders Lane level crossing has been the subject of several reports to Council. The last report on 25 May 2004 resolved that Council did not have any objections in the closure of the rail crossing subject to the provision of access to Property No 206 Winders Lane and Property No 176 Old North Road and that discussion on the matter be conducted with the respective owners. This report set outs the results of discussions held with the above owners and the Rail Infrastructure Corporation.


1. Council advise the Rail Infrastructure Corporation that it has no objection to the closure of the Winders Lane Rail Level crossing subject to RIC being responsible for all costs associated with the closure including

• The construction of a new access road from Old North Road to existing entry to 206 Winders Lane as detailed in this report at no cost to council

• The construction of a gravel cul de sac turning area at the termination of Winders Lane on the north side of the rail line

2. The future maintenance of the access road from Old North Road to the entrance of No 206 Winders Lane is to be the sole responsibility of the owners of No 206 Winders Lane, Lochinvar.

3. The road be constructed in the current existing Winders Lane road reserve and be available for access to the northern part of the property 176 Old North Road, Lochinvar.

REPORT On the 3rd December 2004 Council resolved that in conjunction with the Rail Infrastructure Corporation (RIC) public comment be sought on the closure of the


Closure of Winders Lane Rail Level Crossing (Cont.)

Page 92

Winders Lane rail level crossing. The outcome of this public consultation was reported to Council on 25 May 2004 where Council resolved that

1. Council advise the Rail Infrastructure Corporation that it has no objection to the closure of the Winders Lane rail level crossing subject to access to Property No 206 Winders Lane and Property No 176 Old North Road being achieved as detailed in this report. (ie the 25th May report)

2. Council commence discussions with the owners of Property No 206 winders Lane and 176 Old North road regarding property access.

3. A further report be submitted to Council on the outcome of the access discussions.

Consultation Discussions and an on-site meeting were held with the owners of 206 Winders Lane, a representative from the Rail Infrastructure Corporation (RIC) and Council Officers. The property owners indicated that that the closure of the level crossing would be acceptable if a suitable access is constructed. Their preferred access option was off Winders Lane. This would require the upgrading of Winders Lane from Old North Road to the property entrance. The owners indicated that they would be prepared to maintain the road. The constraints of the existing location of the residence, property access, outbuildings, sheds, and a Dog Kennel business limit the access options to the use of Winders Lane as indicated above. Discussions with the owner of No 176 Old North Road have confirmed that access to that property is also required off Winders Lane. However this would only be on an irregular basis. Access Road The above proposal is considered acceptable from Councils perspective. It is proposed that the access road would be provided with the following provisions

• As the proposed closure of the level crossing is an initiative of the RIC, the total cost of constructing the access road to be the responsibility of RIC.

• The access road is to be constructed on the existing Winders Lane road

reserve from Old North Road to the entrance to No 206 Winders Lane.

• Winders Lane south of the railway remain open as a “no through road” with the condition that the road is not maintained by Council.

• The level crossing is to be closed and fenced by RIC at RICs cost.

• The construction of the access road is to be a rural standard gravel road

approximately 4 metres wide, with minimum 150 mm gravel pavement, appropriate drainage and of a length to reach the existing drive access to 206


Closure of Winders Lane Rail Level Crossing (Cont.)

Page 93

Winders Lane (approx. 400 metres). The remaining road section to be left for access to cattle loading yards.

• The future maintenance of the access road to be the sole responsibility of the

main beneficiaries, being currently the owners of 206 Winders Lane.

• The constructed access road to be kept open for access to the rear of property No. 176 Old North Road for the owners of said land.

The estimated cost to construct the access road is $35,000.

CONCLUSION As a result of successful negotiation on property access with the owners of No 176 and No 206 as detailed above, it is recommended that Council advise the Rail Infrastructure Corporation that Council does not have any objections in the closure of the rail crossing subject to the provision setout above.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS There are no financial implications for Council

POLICY IMPLICATIONS There are no policy implications for Council

STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS There are no statutory implications for Council


Page 94

10.3.11 METFORD ROAD RAIL CROSSING ROADWORKS ROAD CLOSURE

File No: 140/5



EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Rail Infrastructure Corporation (RIC) has commenced the construction of the new rail underpass for the Metford Road rail crossing. RIC have advised that construction of the new road requires the closure of Metford Road for a period of approximately 5 weeks from the end of October.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT Council approve the road closure of Metford Road between Raymond Terrace Road and Fieldsend Street from late October for a period of approximately 5 weeks for the purpose of new road construction for Metford Road.

REPORT The Rail Infrastructure Corporation and their contractors ARENCO and Daracon are constructing a new rail underpass for the Metford Road rail crossing. The concept design originally proposed to utilise a sidetrack on the northern side of the rail line to enable Metford Road closure to be minimal. However upon the survey setout it became apparent that the position of the sidetrack conflicted with the eastern batter of the proposed new road and also a power pole. The power pole and the batter have a separation of only 3m which makes the safe construction of a sidetrack impossible. Council officers have met with RIC, ARENCO and Daracon representatives on site to determine the best approach for construction whilst minimising disruption to affected motorists. It was put to ARENCO that construction of the new road and its link to Metford Road near the Raymond Terrace Road roundabout could be undertaken in stages by constructing one lane at a time. This option was ruled out as each construction stage would cause further unacceptable delays and would constitute a significant safety hazard. Construction of the new road west of Metford Road will commence in September (comprising Stage 1). However the tie ins to the roundabout at Raymond Terrace Road will require closure of Metford Road for approximately 5 weeks from late October for Stage 2. RIC and ARENCO originally proposed to close Metford Road for a period of three and a half months, being the duration of the road works.


Metford Road Rail Crossing Roadworks Road Closure (Cont.)

Page 95

However in meetings both at Council and on site it was proposed to reduce any road closure to a minimal period that only involves the critical tie ins with existing road infrastructure. Road closures for road works fall under Section 115 of the Roads Act, 1993. This closure is to be advertised to notify the public of the closure. It also proposed to conduct a letter drop to affected stakeholders to advise of the road closure, its duration and alternate routes. The contractor will also be responsible for the placement of warning signs advising of the road closure prior to the construction date.





Page 96

10.3.12 LAND ACQUISITIONS - RIVERBANK PROJECT - CENTRAL MAITLAND

File No: 103/4/14

Responsible Officer: Brad Everett Group Manager Service Planning & Regulation

Author: Henry Wilson Project Officer

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report deals with the additional costs associated with the land acquisitions for the Riverbank Project in Central Maitland.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT the additional costs associated with the land acquisitions, as outlined in this report, be included as an additional expenditure item in the Service Planning & Regulation budget for 2004/05

REPORT The 2001/02 Budget provided an amount of $200,000 from the Economic Development Fund for the compulsory acquisition process associated with the proposed Riverbank project. This amount was based on written advice provided by Council’s valuer (including land acquisition and necessary survey/legal costs). The acquisition process involved survey, title searches, preliminary valuations, legals etc. The process involved some 30 properties, including Crown land, most of which were Old System titles. The preparation of the requisite survey plan of the area to be acquired was a difficult and lengthy process, which, together with other necessary administrative requirements, resulted in the formal application to the Minister for the Governor’s approval to the compulsory acquisition not being lodged until April 2002. The complexity of the application also resulted in a delay in processing by the Department of Local Government with approval not being received by Council until 30 June 2003 in spite of efforts by many people to have the approval finalised. Since the approval was obtained the matter has proceeded promptly in accordance with the requirements of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991. Compensation for the various parcels of land acquired, as determined late 2003 by the Valuer General, has been offered and settled with all but 6 of the affected landowners who have lodged, or reserved rights to lodge, appeals to the Land & Environment Court. The current status of these appeal matters and proposed


LAND ACQUISITIONS - RIVERBANK PROJECT - CENTRAL MAITLAND (Cont.)

Page 97

Council action in relation thereto is the subject of a separate report to the Committee of the Whole later in this agenda. The original budget allocation for this part of the project was $200K and was based upon initial assessment of the likely compensation, survey and legal costs in 2001. Preliminary valuation advice indicated compensation levels above $150k. Since 2001 the costs associated with the project have been impacted upon by a number of factors. These have included – - complexity of survey - difficulties with title searches and confirmation of ownerships. - increases in land values - plan registration delays with LPI - NSW - time elapse in the approval process - increase in legal and processing costs as a result of above EXPENDITURE TO 30 JUNE 2004 The project has been running over three budget periods with expenditure as follows – 2001/02 $ 50,499 2002/03 $ 10,196 2003/04 $ 249,973 ________________________ Total $310,668 FURTHER COSTS. These will be legal costs yet to come (abt $8,000) and the outcomes of the outstanding appeals to the Land and Environment Court which are difficult to quantify in dollar terms All up the total cost with all matters finalised could be in the order of $350,000 - $360,000 requiring a further sum of $150k to be approved. The possible source of this level of additional funding has been investigated with the objective of not having to revert to the Economic Development Fund. PROPOSED FUNDING ARRANGEMENTS A full review of avenues of potential funding has been undertaken within the Service Planning and Regulation budget for 2003/04. Based upon fairly firm projected outcomes, particularly in the areas of additional income from fees, it is anticipated that the bulk of the funds required to finalise the land acquisitions for the Riverbank Project could be accommodated from this source and the overall result for 2003/04. It may be necessary for Council to consider the allocation of extra funding dependant upon the outcome of the Land & Environment Court appeals referred to earlier in this report.


LAND ACQUISITIONS - RIVERBANK PROJECT - CENTRAL MAITLAND (Cont.)

Page 98

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS Subject to Council approval the required funding could be accommodated within the budget as outlined above.




11 NOTICE OF MOTION/RESCISSION

11.1 MULCHING FACILITY NOTICE OF MOTION SUBMITTED BY CLR ARCH HUMPHERY

File No: 61/15


Clr Arch Humphery has indicated his intention to move the following Notice of Motion at the next Ordinary Meeting of Council on 27 July 2004, as follows: That: a report be brought to Council on the following:

1. The provision of a free mulching facility at weekends for residents to recycle their green waste.

2. The preferred location of the service 3. The cost implications or savings of such an initiative 4. Whether a trial period could be conducted to establish demand.

Supporting Notes; Council unanimously supported the Community Refit Programme promoted by Energy Australia and Hunter Water conserving energy and reducing the consumption of water. This initiative is about conserving the highest household water usage area namely the garden, it is about community education explaining the benefits of mulching as a water saving device in the garden, it is about recycling green waste to save money on tipping charges and payments to State Government for landfill its about residents taking their green waste to the mulcher and taking home mulch for their garden. In a period of extreme drought with dam levels through out the state at a critical level with some council areas having severe water restrictions with a total ban on garden watering Maitland Council can take the lead in a critical area of conservation recycling and cost saving.

COMMENT BY GROUP MANAGER SERVICE PLANNING & REGULATION

Page 99

As part of the adoption of the 2004/05 Management Plan by Council a Strategic Review of Waste Management practices is to be developed.


NOTICE OF MOTION SUBMITTED BY COUNCILLOR Clr Arch Humphery (Cont.)

Services such as green waste processing options will form part of the service outcomes of such a strategic review. As with all identified options costing, logistics and community demand will be identified and decisions on priority implementation of all identified options will be presented as part of such strategic review. It is anticipated that the Strategic Plan and outcome actions will be completed within the later half of 2004.


POLICY IMPLICATIONS This matter has no direct Policy Implications for Council.


Page 100


Page 101

11.2 TAREE AVENUE - NETBALL COURTS NOTICE OF MOTION SUBMITTED BY CLR HENRY MESKAUSKAS

File No: 101/13/1

Responsible Officer: Brad Everett Group Manager Service Planning & Regulatory

This Notice of Motion was deferred at the meeting of 13 July 2004 because of the absence of Clr Meskauskas at this meeting. Therefore Clr Henry Meskauskas has indicated his intention to move the following Notice of Motion at the next Ordinary Meeting of Council on 27 July 2004, as follows: That: Council name the netball courts in Taree Avenue, Telarah, after Mrs Vi Denny-Bowtell. Comment: Mrs Denny-Bowtell has worked tirelessly as a volunteer for Western Suburbs Netball Club for the past 30 years. During this time she has also served as a member of the Maitland City Council Telarah Recreation Board. It is a privilege to put forward Vi Denny-Bowtell’s name for this honour.

COMMENT BY GROUP MANAGER Council from time to time receives proposals regarding the naming or renaming of parks and recreation areas including reserves and sporting fields. Whilst Council has a policy position on road and locality naming, no such policy exists for the naming of public reserves. A draft policy is currently being developed and will be presented to Council in the near future. In principle, Mrs Denny-Bowtell’s contribution to netball is acknowledged and it would be appropriate to seek comment and support from the Maitland Netball Association Inc. prior to a final decision being made by the Council. Maitland Netball Association Inc. has over 2000 members, some of which have contributed to netball over long periods of time in localities within the City. An approach to Maitland Netball Association Inc. will ensure that Council is consistent in its approach to the naming of recreation areas.




NOTICE OF MOTION SUBMITTED BY COUNCILLOR Clr Henry Meskauskas (Cont.)

Page 102



Page 103

11.3 DA-031787 DEMOLITION OF DWELLING AND ERECTION OF MEDIUM DENSITY HOUSING LOT 1, DP 10725, 28 EURIMBLA STREET, THORNTON AND LOT 2, DP 520629, 32 EURIMBLA STREET THORNTON NOTICE OF RESCISSION – SUBMITTED BY COUNCILLORS TONY KEATING, WENDY WHITE AND DAVID POWER

File No: DA 03-1787

Attachments: Council Report 13 July 2004


Clr Tony Keating, Clr Wendy White and Clr David Power have submitted the following Notice of Rescission, as follows: “We, Councillors Tony Keating, Wendy White and David Power give Notice of Rescission of the following resolution of Council passed on 13 July 2004. THAT: DA 03-1787 for Demolition of an existing dwelling and Erection of Medium Density Housing - Eighteen (18) Dwellings and Boundary Adjustment on Lot 1 DP 10725, 28 Eurimbla Street, Thornton and Lot 2 DP 520629, 32 Eurimbla Street, Thornton be approved, subject to the conditions of consent set out in the attached schedule with the inclusion of an additional condition in relation to footpath construction.

80. Footpaths to be constructed in accordance with Council’s standards for residential purposes. Footpath is to be 1.2m wide, 125mm deep and reinforced with F72 mesh with 40mm cover and concrete strength of 20Mpa on 50mm of sand or roadbase material. Footpaths in new subdivisions are to be constructed on 100 mm of compacted roadbase material.”


DA-031787 DEMOLITION OF DWELLING AND ERECTION OF MEDIUM DENSITY HOUSING LOT 1, DP 10725, 28 EURIMBLA STREET, THORNTON AND LOT 2, DP 520629, 32 EURIMBLA STREET THORNTON (Cont.)

Page 104

Notice of Rescission

DA-031787 DEMOLITION OF DWELLING AND ERECTION OF

MEDIUM DENSITY HOUSING LOT 1, DP 10725, 28 EURIMBLA STREET,

THORNTON AND LOT 2, DP 520629, 32 EURIMBLA STREET THORNTON

Council Report 13 July 2004

Meeting Date: 27 July 2004

Attachment No : 1

Number of Pages : 23



Page 105

031787 Demolition and Erection of Medium Density Housing - EIGHTEEN (18) Dwellings and boundary adjustment at Lot 1 DP 10725, 28 Eurimbla Street, Thornton and Lot 2 DP 520629, 32 Eurimbla Street, Thornton RECOMMENDATION: Approved File No: 031787 Attachments: (3) Locality Plan

Development Plans Public Submissions

Responsible Officer: Stephen Punch Manager Development Services Author: Tracey Le Brun Town Planner Applicant: Thornton Developments Pty Ltd Proposal: Demolition and Medium Density Housing -

Eighteen (18) Dwellings and Boundary Adjustment

Location: Lot 1 Section L DP10725 and Lot 2 DP 520629,

28-32 Eurimbla Street, Thornton Zone: 2(a) Residential

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Development consent is sought from Council for Demolition of an existing cottage and Erection of Medium Density Housing - Eighteen (18) Dwellings and Boundary Adjustment at Lot 1 DP 10725, 28 Eurimbla Street, Thornton and Lot 2 DP 520629, 32 Eurimbla Street, Thornton. The subject land is zoned 2(a) Residential under Maitland Local Environmental Plan, 1993. Demolition and Medium Density Housing and Boundary Adjustment are permissible forms of development in the 2(a) Residential Zone with Council consent and are not inconsistent with the objectives of the zone. The proposal was placed on public exhibition from 22 May 2003 to 5 June 2003 and Council is in receipt of six (6) submissions of objection. The issues raised in the submissions relate to urban density, stormwater drainage, traffic congestion, overshadowing, overlooking and privacy, property devaluation, private covenants, noise, parking, pedestrian safety, open space and play areas, and replacement of old dwelling with units. These issues are addressed under Section 79C(1)(d) below.



Page 106

Potential impacts from the development include traffic, urban density, visual effects and stormwater drainage. These issues have been adequately addressed in section 79C(1)(b) below and in draft conditions of consent where appropriate. The proposal has been assessed with regard to relevant Section 79C Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 heads of consideration, and, is recommended for approval subject to attached draft conditions of consent.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT: DA 03-1787 for Demolition of an existing dwelling and Erection of Medium Density Housing - Eighteen (18) Dwellings and Boundary Adjustment on Lot 1 DP 10725, 28 Eurimbla Street, Thornton and Lot 2 DP 520629, 32 Eurimbla Street, Thornton be approved, subject to the conditions of consent set out in the attached schedule.

REPORT

INTRODUCTION The subject land is located at Lot 1 DP 10725, 28 Eurimbla Street, Thornton and Lot 2 DP 520629, 32 Eurimbla Street, Thornton. (Refer to Attachment 1 for the Site Plan.) Lot 1 Section L DP 10725, 28 Eurimbla Street, Thornton has secondary frontage on Railway Avenue/Edwards Avenue. The subject land has a combined area of 6393m2, comprising 4047m2 at 28 Eurimbla Street, and, 2346m2 at 32 Eurimbla Street, Thornton. Each existing allotment contains a residential dwelling with improvements. Vehicle access for each dwelling is currently from Eurimbla Street. A roundabout is located on the corner of Eurimbla Street and Railway Avenue. The land is zoned 2(a) Residential under the Maitland Local Environmental Plan 1993.

PROPOSAL The proposal involves the demolition of an existing dwelling and improvements at Lot 1 Section L DP 10725, 28 Eurimbla Street, Thornton. In addition, a boundary adjustment is proposed between 28 and 32 Eurimbla Street, Thornton. An existing dwelling and improvements located at 32 Eurimbla Street, Thornton is to be retained on a smaller lot that will result from the boundary adjustment. The existing lots will change in shape and size in the following manner, 28 Eurimbla Street will increase in size to 5526.3m2 and 32 Eurimbla Street will decrease in size to 1136.7m2. The demolition and the boundary adjustment is associated with a medium density housing proposal to erect eighteen (18) two storey residential dwellings with attached garages. Units 2-8 and 11-18 inclusive have ground floor decks while units 1-8 and 11-18 inclusive have upper storey balcony treatments. Each dwelling has two bedrooms only and a single car garage. In addition, additional parking for residents (5 spaces) and visitors (5 spaces) is proposed within the development.



Page 107

The development plan indicates that access will be one-way through the development with a separate entry and exit point off Railway Avenue/Edwards Avenue. Landscaping is proposed within the development, in respect to private areas, and, an open space area with barbeque and a shelter located near the additional parking areas central to the site. (Refer to Attachment 2 for the Development Plan.)

PLANNING ASSESSMENT The proposal has been assessed under the relevant matters for consideration detailed in Section 79C(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 as follows:

Section 79C(1)(a)(i) provisions of any environmental planning instrument

Local Environmental Plan The subject land is zoned 2(a) Residential under Maitland Local Environmental Plan 1993. The proposed development is defined under the LEP as “Medium Density Housing”, Boundary Adjustment and Demolition which is a permissible land use in the 2(a) Residential zone with Council consent. The proposal is not considered to be inconsistent with the zone objectives, as follows. 2(a) Residential Zone

a) To provide for housing and associated facilities in locations of high amenity and accessibility.

b) To enable development for purposes other than residential only if it is compatible with the character of the living area and has a domestic scale and character.

c) To ensure that the development does not create unreasonable demands, in the present or in the future, for the provision or extension of public amenities or services.

The development is residential in purpose (b), and, is proposed to be located within an existing, older residential area within walking distance of core retail land, community facilities and services including a train station. The site is considered to be an area of high amenity and accessibility (a). The issue of a demand on public amenities and services will be addressed by requiring a Section 94 monetary contribution to be paid to Council prior to issue of the Construction Certificate (c).

Regional Environmental Plan The proposed development is considered consistent with the objectives and recommendations of the HREP.

State Environmental Planning Policies Not Relevant.



Page 108

Section 79C(1)(a)(ii) any draft environmental planning instrument that is or has been placed on public exhibition Not Relevant. Section 79C(1)(a)(iii) any development control plan Development Control Plan (DCP) 33 Subdivisions, DCP 22 Lower Hunter Urban Housing, DCP 31 Energy Efficiency and DCP 37 Advertising and Notification of Development Applications apply to the subject land. DCP 33 Subdivisions The proposal involves a boundary adjustment only with no new allotments created. The existing allotments are to change in shape and size with 28 Eurimbla Street will increase in size to 5526.3m2 and 32 Eurimbla Street will decrease in size to 1136.7m2. Each allotment is in excess of the minimum 450m2 area permitted for residential subdivision. No changes are proposed to the existing frontages, however, the length of 32 Eurimbla Street will decrease to 46.33 metres and the width of 28 Eurimbla Street will increase half-way down the allotment from 45 metres to 69.6 metres. The subject land has full access to all utility services and access to public roads. The proposed boundary adjustment is considered satisfactory under DCP 33. DCP 22 Lower Hunter Urban Housing The development is considered satisfactory under the DCP as a result of revised plans (dated May 2004) received at Council. However, minor plan amendments are required, and, it is proposed that they be addressed as draft conditions of consent:

• The use of mid-level vegetation or dense vegetation is to be deleted from the landscape plan and replaced by low and high level plant species with details provided to Council for reference;

• A wash tap is to be provided for wash down purposes and drainage to connect to the sewer in relation to the bin storage areas;

• Elevation details on the shelter and barbeque area and the location and treatment of the units mail boxes, are to be provided to Council for consideration prior to issue of the Construction Certificate; and,

• Amended plans to be provided detailing the location of the clothes drying areas or written confirmation on each unit’s use of an electric dryer.

DCP 31 Energy Efficiency The applicant has confirmed that each dwelling conforms with the minimum requirement for a 3.5 star rating. The hot water systems for the dwellings will be required to have a minimum of 3.5 star rating. Energy efficiency is considered adequately addressed in the development. DCP 37 Advertising and Notification of Development Applications



Page 109

The development was publicly exhibited from 22 May 2003 to 5 June 2003. A total of six (6) submissions were received which are discussed under Section 79C(1)(d) Public Submissions below. Section 79C(1)(a)(iv) the regulations (to the extent that they prescribe matters for the purposes of this paragraph) Not Relevant. Section 79C(1)(b) the likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impacts in the locality The main issues of relevance to the proposed development are urban density, traffic and access, parking, stormwater drainage, visual impacts, public facilities and public services, and safety by design principles. Urban Density The proposed development is of higher density than surrounding residential development in the immediate locality, which is characterised by single, detached dwellings and a vacant residential allotment located at 24/26 Eurimbla Street. However, it is noted that fifteen (15) units are erected at 50 Eurimbla Street. The development is an example of urban consolidation which seeks to consolidate urban development in existing urban areas for effective use of existing public facilities and services, commercial and retail areas, and public transport. On that basis, while this development is significantly higher in density than adjoining residential development, it is not inconsistent with location in the 2(a) Residential zone. Traffic and Access The development has been assessed with regard to traffic and access impacts associated with the development and its location on the corner of Eurimbla Street and Railway Avenue/Edwards Avenue at Thornton. The volume of traffic generated by the development is not considered to have a significant impact on the surrounding road network. The location of one-way entry/exit driveway access onto Railway Avenue/Edwards Avenue is acceptable subject to a proposed central median being extended to a point six metres beyond the northern edge of the southern access with “No Right Turn” signage being installed opposite the driveway and “Keep Left” signage installed at the start of the median. “No Stopping” kerbside/roadside restrictions are to be installed on both the north side of Eurimbla Street over the development frontage to the roundabout to a point 9.5 metres east of the prolongation of the Edwards Street boundary, and, a length of six metres on the north side of both entry/exit driveways into Edwards Avenue. “Stop” restrictions are to be installed at the car park exits into Edwards Street. The internal circulation within the development has been assessed and is considered acceptable subject to adequate signposting and delineation of the circulating movement in the car park, including “Entry Only” and “Exit Only” signage at the car park entry and exits as appropriate. Lighting for the car park and car park accesses is required to be provided in accordance with Australian Standards requirements. In



Page 110

addition, a signposting and pavement plan is to be provided for approval prior to issue of the Construction Certificate. The issues of traffic and access including internal access arrangements are considered adequately addressed subject to the matters discussed above and other relevant matters attached to the draft conditions of consent being satisfactorily addressed prior to issue of the Construction Certificate. Parking The revised development plan and detail provided by the applicant indicates that adequate parking in the form of eighteen (18) single detached garages has been provided for the two bedroom dwellings in the development and five (5) car spaces for visitors with an extra space provided in excess of the required four (4) visitors car spaces under DCP 22. Five additional parking bays for residents have been provided in a central common area within the development. All of the units except Units 1 and 15 have the capacity for stack parking in front of each garage, and, it is recommended that two (2) of the extra common car bays be marked individually solely for use by the occupants of Units 1 and 15. The issue of parking is considered adequately addressed by the revised plans and the imposition of the controls listed. Storm Water Drainage The development plan indicates that roof water from Units 1 to 12 inclusive is to be disposed directly into the gutter. Roof water from the remaining units are to be disposed directly into the top of an on-site detention tank and an emergency flowpath is proposed to be located in a common open space area between Units 15 and 16. A leaf screen is to be situated at the outlet of the pit to capture leaves and litter. The pipe to the pit is to be sized to accommodate the 100 year flow to the on-site detention tank. An engineering assessment of the proposal requires that appropriate conditions of consent be applied in relation to the following matters:

• Inter-allotment drainage be provided along the south-eastern boundary of the development to permit drainage from Eurimbla Street into the drainage reserve at the rear of the development. A drainage easement is to be created and supported by an 88B Instrument. A plan showing all drainage lines is to be provided to Council for information purposes;

• The provision of a stormwater drainage detention system designed to Council’s Standards to reduce developed discharges to pre-development levels for all storms up to and including the 1 in 100 year event;

• The design, installation and maintenance of stormwater overflow, discharge and dispersal into the drainage reserve with the design being approved by Council prior to issue of the Construction Certificate;

• Stormwater runoff is to be collected and disposed to Council’s drainage system or by means of an inter-allotment drainage system; and,

• The provision of a sediment and erosion control plan to Council with the installation of such on site during site works.



Page 111

The controls listed above are considered adequate to address the issue of storm water drainage in relation to the development. Visual Impacts The proposed development is significantly different from adjoining residential development in its visual appearance as a result of urban density and design characteristics indicated in the development plan. Revised plans have been received at Council which are generally satisfactory, however, the following design amendments are required to be addressed to soften the visual appearance of the development on the intersection of Railway Avenue/Edwards Avenue and Eurimbla Street, and, internal to the development.

• The use of mid-level vegetation or dense vegetation is to be deleted from the landscape plan and replaced by low and high level plant species with details provided to Council for reference;

• A wash tap is to be provided for wash down purposes and drainage to connect to the sewer in relation to the bin storage areas;

• Elevation details on the shelter and barbeque area and the location and treatment of the units mail boxes, are to be provided to Council for consideration prior to issue of the Construction Certificate; and,

• Amended plans to be provided detailing the location of the clothes drying areas or written confirmation on each unit’s use of an electric dryer.

Public Facilities and Public Services The issue of the provision or augmentation of public facilities and public services is adequately addressed by the imposition of a condition of consent requiring that a Section 94 monetary contribution be provided in relation to sixteen (16) dwellings prior to issue of the Construction Certificate. It is to be noted that an existing dwelling will be retained at 32 Eurimbla Street, and, the existing dwelling located at 28 Eurimbla Street is to be demolished. Due to the 2(a) Residential zoning on 28 Eurimbla Street, a dwelling entitlement already exists on the land with no further contribution required to the Section 94 monetary payment. Safety by Design An assessment of the development against safety by design principles identifies that Units 6-18 inclusive provide natural surveillance opportunities within the development from the unit’s frontage as a result of the location of these dwellings in rows. Additional resident parking and visitor parking is located centrally within the development at the common open space area and is also subject to natural surveillance. Internal lighting (vandal proof) for the common parking area and car park accesses to Australian Standard requirements are recommended. The rear of Units 11-18 inclusive back onto a drainage reserve which provides an opportunity for access to the rear of the units. However, it is to be noted that the fall of the land makes these units viewable to residents of Westerman Close, and, balcony treatments provide a surveillance opportunity for the occupants of Units 11-18 inclusive to note crime activity. Hiding opportunities as a result of landscaping may be



Page 112

minimised by limiting the use of mid-level vegetation or dense vegetation which could screen viewing corridors. The issue of safety by design is considered reduced by the imposition of controls as discussed. Section 79C(1)(c) the suitability of the site for the development The land is located in an existing, older residential area with access to all relevant utility services including sewer, water and power. The development will have access from public roads and is located within walking distance from public transport, public facilities and services, and core retail/commercial land. The subject land is located within an area of high amenity and accessibility. The road network is considered adequate to carry traffic generated from the development, however, a central median is to be constructed and extended on Railway Avenue/Edwards Avenue with signage to restrict access into the development. In addition, “No Stopping” kerbside/roadside restrictions are to be installed on the north side of Eurimbla Street over the frontage from the existing roundabout to a distance of 9.5 metres east along Railway Street/Edwards Avenue. The subject land backs onto a drainage reserve, and, appropriate conditions of consent have been applied in relation to stormwater drainage to ensure that the development does not have a detrimental impact on this area. No significant remnant vegetation or flora/fauna values are affected by the development. The site is considered suitable for the development. Section 79C(1)(d) any submissions made in accordance with this act or the regulations PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS The development application and accompanying information were placed on public exhibition for a period of 14 days from 22 May 2003 to 5 June 2003. As a result of the notification process, a total of six (6) submissions were received and are provided as Attachment 3 in this report. The main issues raised by the objectors are summarised below and comment provided: High urban density causing environmental impacts Planner's Comment An issue has been raised from public exhibition that the urban density of the development will result in environmental impacts, specifically drainage, sewer, noise and traffic. The proposal has been assessed with regard to the environmental impacts listed. It is noted that a drainage reserve exists at the rear of Units 11 to 18 inclusive. Storm water drainage is considered adequately addressed by requiring inter-allotment drainage, a storm water drainage detention system where appropriate (if the site cannot be drained to the street), and other appropriate conditions of consent. The development is not considered a significant traffic generator, however, conditions of consent have been applied in relation to internal and external access arrangements. A Section 50 Certificate is required to be obtained from the Hunter Water Corporation prior to issue of the Construction Certificate which is considered adequate to address the issue of sewer capacity. Noise generated from the development is expected to be residential in nature apart from traffic noise on the



Page 113

public roads. Construction noise will be temporary. The environmental impacts raised are considered adequately addressed by conditions of consent where appropriate, and, discussed in greater detail underneath. Storm water drainage Planner's Comment Submissions received at Council have raised concerns regarding stormwater drainage and flooding associated with the drainage reserve located at the rear of Units 11-18 inclusive. The subject land is not affected by the 1% Flood Standard adopted by Council. The plans submitted by the applicant have indicated that the site is to be either drained to the street or drained to an on-site detention tank. Leaf and litter controls are to be implemented with the tank. And, an emergency flowpath is to be located between Units 15 and 16. It is proposed to require that inter-allotment drainage be provided for those lots unable to drain to the street. A drainage easement is to be created for this purpose and a stormwater drainage detention system to be provided which is designed to reduce developed discharges to pre-developed discharges for all storms up to and including the 1 in 100 year event. Stormwater overflow, discharge and dispersal to the drainage reserve is to be approved by Council, and to be designed, installed and maintained to ensure that no erosion/scouring of water flow occurs in the reserve. Lastly, a sediment and erosion control plan is required to be prepared and installed during site works. These controls are considered adequate to address the issue of potential flooding on the lower parts of the subject land, and, stormwater drainage from the development. Existing traffic congestion exacerbated by proposal Planner's Comment Council’s Infrastructure Engineer has made an assessment of a Traffic Study submitted by the applicant. An analysis of the roundabout at the intersection of Railway Avenue/Edwards Avenue and Eurimbla Street indicates that in the year 2013 the overall performance of the is satisfactory with the intersection operating at a Level of Service “A”. The volume of traffic generated by the development is not considered to have a significant impact on the surrounding road network. The position of the proposed entry/exit driveway access on Edwards Avenue is acceptable subject to the construction of a central median being extended to a point six metres beyond the northern edge of the southern access with “No Right Turn” signage being installed opposite the driveway and “Keep Left” signage installed at the start of the median. “No Stopping” kerbside/roadside restrictions are to be installed on both the north side of Eurimbla Street over the development frontage to the roundabout to a point 9.5 metres east of the prolongation of the Edwards Street boundary, and, a length of six metres on the north side of both entry/exit driveways into Edwards Avenue. “Stop” restrictions are to be installed at the car park exits into Edwards Street. The provision of “Entry Only” and “Exit Only” signage at the car park entry/exits and a signposting and pavement plan is also to be provided. The issue of traffic congestion is considered adequately addressed subject to the matters discussed above and other relevant matters attached to the draft conditions of consent being satisfactorily addressed prior to issue of the Construction Certificate. Overshadowing Planner's Comment



Page 114

A concern has been raised from a resident on Westerman Close regarding overshadowing of a backyard. Properties located in the west or north such as on Westerman Close shall not be affected during Summer or Winter due to the north orientation. An assessment of the development indicates that that no significant overshadowing shall occur on other adjoining land as a result of the northern orientation of the subject land, setbacks on the public roads and road widths, the stepping back of the development from the corner of Railway Avenue/Edwards Avenue, the staggering of detached unit clusters and the broken rooflines associated with the clusters. The existing dwelling located at 32 Eurimbla Street is not considered affected by overshadowing. The dwelling located at 34 Eurimbla Street is not affected by overshadowing due to its location at the front of the allotment, however, minor overshadowing is expected to occur at the rear of the land. The issue of overshadowing is not considered significant and adequately addressed by the development plan. Privacy and overlooking Planner's Comment The issues of impact on privacy and overlooking are related and are thus addressed together. These issues have been raised in letters from Westerman Close, Edwards Avenue and Eurimbla Street received as a result of public exhibition. This issue relates to the two storey development and balcony treatments in the proposal. 26 Eurimbla Street and 6 Edwards Avenue are separated by road widths from the land and any viewing from windows in the upper storey is expected to be minor given the general nocturnal occupation of that part of the dwellings, and, the location of the living areas on the ground floor of each dwelling. In addition, no direct viewing into the backyard of 6 Edwards Avenue is possible given the location of that dwelling at the front of the lot. The remaining properties on Westerman Close have backyards that adjoin a drainage reserve in between the land subject to the development. The upper storey of the dwellings in the development are not comprised of living rooms therefore the use of the balconies or viewing from windows will be limited and not have a significant impact on adjoining Westerman Close. Property devaluation Planner's Comment The issue of property devaluation has been raised as a result of public exhibition. The proposed development is significantly higher in density to surrounding development. However, no information is available to suggest that approval of this development will result in the devaluation of adjoining property. Private covenants Planner's Comment The matter of private covenants has been raised from public exhibition. Council is not bound by private covenants and able to determine development applications in accordance with the requirements of the Maitland Local Environmental Plan 1993. Noise Planner's Comment The issue of noise from the development and existing traffic noise has been raised in two submissions received from public exhibition. The increase in density of residential



Page 115

development proposed on the land is likely to result in higher noise levels from the site than currently experienced from the subject land, which is characterised by one dwelling per allotment. Noise levels resulting from the development is not considered likely to be beyond permitted EPA levels for residential development. However, it is noted that traffic levels will increase on Railway Avenue/Edwards Avenue and add to existing traffic noise experienced in the area. The issue of traffic noise was raised in one submission to Council located at the roundabout intersection of Railway Avenue/Edwards Avenue/Eurimbla Street. This issue of traffic noise is problematic due to the development of the Somerset Park Estate to the north and future plans for land release in Thornton North. The roundabout intersection also receives traffic from Taylor Avenue and the older residential areas of Thornton, and, Eurimbla Street. The issue of existing traffic noise and an addition to the noise from the proposed development is acknowledged, however, the majority of traffic causing noise is associated with the Somerset Park Estate and other residential areas discussed, and, therefore should not be considered an impediment to issuing an approval for the development. Parking impacts Planner's Comment The revised plans submitted to Council provide adequate parking for the residents without recourse to stack parking, and, visitors to the site. However, an assessment of private driveway access lengths into garaging indicates that the majority of the dwellings apart from Units 1 and 15 are of sufficient width to permit stack parking for residents/visitors if required. It is to be noted that a total of five (5) additional residents car spaces are provided in a common parking area. It is considered prudent to mark two of the extra residents car spaces for the sole use of Units 1 and 15 to facilitate site amenity. In addition, five (5) visitors car spaces are also provided in the common parking area which is one space in excess of requirements. To ensure that on-street parking does not result on the Edwards Avenue/Eurimbla Street frontage in vicinity of the intersection, “No Stopping” restrictions kerbside/roadside restrictions are to be installed on both the north side of Eurimbla Street over the development frontage to the roundabout to a point 9.5 metres east of the prolongation of the Edwards Street boundary, and, a length of six metres on the north side of both entry/exit driveways into Edwards Avenue. The imposition of controls as discussed is considered sufficient to address concerns raised about parking impacts from the development. Pedestrian safety Planner's Comment A concern has been raised regarding pedestrian safety and potential impacts between motor vehicles and pedestrians as a result of the “poor” condition of the footpaths. This has been raised as an issue that could result due to traffic movements from the site. An assessment of the development has resulted in traffic controls on Edwards Street to control movement in and out of the site, and, restrict parking on the street in vicinity to the roundabout intersection. The location of the roundabout intersection will also restrict traffic movement from the site due to other road users (in motor vehicles). Council has a works program which may be used for footpath upgrading if required. The issue of pedestrian safety is considered adequately addressed by the development, however, an assessment on the condition of



Page 116

footpaths in the immediate area is recommended for both existing users and the future occupants of the proposed development. Open Space and play areas Planner's Comment A concern has been raised about the provision of open space and play areas for future occupants of the development. The development has satisfied the objectives and performance criteria for useable open space and met the minimum requirements for the provision of useable open space outlined in Development Control Plan 22 Lower Hunter Urban Housing. The development plan indicates that a common open space area with a barbeque is to be located centrally within the development. The augmentation, upgrading or provision of open space and recreation in the area and over the City has been addressed by requiring that applicant pay a Section 94 monetary contribution to Council for additional dwellings on the land prior to issue of the Construction Certificate. It is to be noted that this land is also within walking distance of public land zoned 6(a) Public Recreation located on Taylor Avenue in Thornton. The issue raised is considered adequately addressed in the development plan and by conditional consent. Replacement of existing old dwelling by units Planner's Comment The proposal will result in the demolition of an old dwelling located at 28 Eurimbla Street, however, the dwelling is not listed as being of heritage significance in the Maitland Local Environmental Plan 1993. Medium Density Housing is permissible with consent in the 2(a) Residential zone and therefore Council may consider approval of the development on merit subject to it complying with relevant standards and legislation. Section 79C(1)(e) the public interest The provision of varying sized residential development is considered within the local public interest.



STATUTORY IMPLICATIONS Statutory implications relating to assessment of the subject application have been addressed in the body of the report

CONCLUSION An assessment of the application has been carried out under Section 79C(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 as amended.



Page 117

The proposal is defined as Demolition, Medium Density Housing and Boundary Adjustment, which are permissible with consent and consistent with zone objectives. Likely impacts from the development are considered adequately addressed by revised plans before Council and appropriate conditions of consent. Issues raised as a result of public exhibition are considered to be adequately addressed by revised plans and appropriate conditions of consent, however, it is acknowledged that the proposal is of higher density than surrounding residential development generally in the area, and, that existing traffic movements have increased both traffic movements and noise on Railway Avenue/Edwards Avenue. This matter of traffic noise and an increase in traffic movements is expected to increase particularly in the context of future land release associated with Thornton North. An assessment of the condition of footpaths in the immediate area is also recommended as part of Council’s works program. The proposed development has been assessed with regard to relevant Section 79C Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 heads of consideration and is recommended for approval subject to attached conditions of consent



Page 118

SCHEDULE OF CONDITIONS COMPLIANCE Reason: The following condition(s) have been applied to confirm and clarify the terms of Council’s Approval.

1 The applicant shall comply with all conditions within this schedule prior to occupancy of the proposed development. 2 The proposed development is to be carried out strictly in accordance with the plans and documentation submitted with the application and any amendments to those plans arising through conditions to this consent. 3 The proposed development is to be carried out strictly in accordance with the Plans Revised May 2004 prepared by F. Torbica Architect submitted with the application, and any amendments to those plans arising through conditions to this consent. 4 The proposed boundary adjustment is to be endorsed by Council prior to issue of the Construction Certificate. 5 The proposed central median in Edwards Avenue is to be extended to a point six (6) metres beyond the northern edge of the southern access with No Right turn signage installed in the median opposite the driveway and Keep Left signage installed at the start of the median. The median is to be a 600 mm wide concrete designed and constructed to Councils requirements. 6 “No Stopping” kerbside/roadside restrictions are to be installed on: a) the north side of Eurimbla Street over the frontage of the development with the No Stopping to commence at the roundabout and terminate at a point 9.5 metres east of the prolongation of the Edwards Avenue property boundary. b) for a length of 6 metres on north side of both entry exit driveways in Edwards Avenue. 7 “Stop” restrictions are to be installed at the car park exits into Edwards Street. 8 Internal lighting (vandal proof) for the car park and car park accesses shall be installed to Australian Standard requirements. 9 Adequate signposting and delineation of the circulating movement in the carpark is to be provided including Entry Only Exit Only signage at the car park entry exits as appropriate. 10 The applicant is to provide for Council approval prior to the issue of the construction certificate a signposting/pavement marking plan. 11 Footway crossings on entry/exit driveways on Edwards Avenue are to be flared to an eight (8) metres width at the kerb. CARPARKING



Page 119

Reason: The following condition(s) have been applied to ensure the provision of adequate parking facilities constructed to a suitable standard commensurate with the demand likely to be generated by the proposed development.

12 The provision of on-site parking in accordance with Council's Car Parking Policy adopted 14th October, 1986. For the subject application the required car parking has been assessed at a minimum of eighteen (18) residents car spaces and four (4) visitor’s car spaces. A total of twenty-two (22) car spaces are required. 13 The additional residents car parking in the common area is to be marked on the pavement. One space each is to be marked for the sole use of the occupants of Units 1 and 15. 14 An amended car park plan is to be provided which modifies one (1) of the visitor car spaces to accommodate parking for the mobility impaired. The minimum dimensions are 3.8 metres width by 5.4 metres in length. 15 All driveways, parking areas and vehicular turning areas are to be constructed of bitumen sealed gravel pavement or a higher standard. 16 All parking and loading/unloading bays, truck docks, driveways and turning areas are to be maintained clear of obstructions and under no circumstances are to be used for the storage of goods or waste materials. 17 All parking and loading bays shall be permanently marked out on the pavement surface, with loading bays being clearly indicated by means of appropriate signage. LANDSCAPING Reason: The following condition(s) have been applied to ensure that adequate provision is made for the landscaping of the site in association with the proposed development, to enhance the external appearance of the development, and to ensure that existing and proposed landscaped areas are appropriately maintained.

18 The landscaped area of the development is to be maintained at all times in accordance with the approved landscape plans. DESIGN Reason: The following condition(s) have been applied to ensure that:

i) Buildings are constructed in a manner which has regard for the constraints affecting the subject land.

ii) Buildings are constructed of suitable materials with respect to their function and location and that colour schemes and restoration works are appropriate and retain the integrity of existing structures.



Page 120

19 All service pipes and vents shall be concealed within the external walls of the development. Access panels are to be provided as per the requirements of the relevant authorities. 20 The provision of external clothes hoists/clothes lines at the rate of 10 lineal metres per unit located and screened. This feature is to be marked on plans submitted as part of the Construction Certificate OR The provision of mechanical clothes dryers in each unit. 21 The use of mid-level vegetation or dense vegetation is to be deleted from the landscape plan and replaced by low or high level plant species with details provided to Council for reference. 22 A wash tap is to be provided for wash down purposes and drainage to connect to the sewer in relation to the bin storage areas. 23 Fencing of the courtyard areas are to be 1.8 metres in height. 24 Elevation details on the shelter and barbeque area and the location and treatment of the units mail boxes, are to be provided to Council for consideration prior to issue of the Construction Certificate. 25 The external colour scheme is to be amended to include the revised colour detail received 10 June 2004. UTILITY SERVICES Reason: The following condition(s) have been applied to ensure that adequate utility installations are provided to the site to serve the development and to satisfy the requirements of the various servicing authorities.

26 Consultation with and compliance with the requirements of the Hunter Water Corporation. Documentary evidence from the Hunter Water Corporation shall be submitted to Council prior to the release of the Construction Certificate. 27 Consultation and compliance with the requirements of the following authorities: (i) Energy Australia (ii) Telstra (in particular, their requirements for Pre Provisioning Confirmation prior to commencement of construction work). CONTRIBUTIONS/FEES Reason: The following condition(s) have been applied to ensure that:

i) Where the proposed development results in an increased demand for public amenities and services, payment towards the cost of providing these facilities/services is made in accordance with Councils adopted contributions plan prepared via the provisions of section 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.

ii) Council's administration expenses are met with respect to the processing of the application.



Page 121

28 The payment of a monetary contribution in accordance with Council's policy adopted on the 1st September, 1995 for the Provision of public amenities and services within the Maitland Local Government Area as follows:- City Wide 1. Community Amenities & Services $13,424.00 2. Recreation & Open Space $5,216.00 3. Cycleway $1,232.00 6. Urban Roads $512.00 8. Administration $1,536.00 East Sector 2. Recreation & Open Space $5,760.00 TOTAL $27,680.00 NOTE: The above rates are effective from 1st January 2004, and will be subject to inflation adjustment, calculated as at the date of payment. The method of adjustment shall be based on the Implicit Price Deflator (Total Public Gross Fixed Capital Expenditure) as published by the Australian Bureau of Census and Statistics. The above payment is to be made prior to release of the Construction Certificate. 29 A final survey plan endorsement fee applicable at the time of release of plans

shall be paid to Council prior to the release of the plan. (currently $165.00) CONTRIBUTIONS/DRAINAGE Reason: The following condition(s) have been applied to ensure that where the proposed development results in an increased demand for drainage infrastructure, payment towards the cost of providing these facilities/services is made in accordance with either an adopted policy of Council or Councils adopted contributions plan prepared via the provisions of section 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.

30 A Drainage Plan Checking Fee of $619.00, based on Council’s current Fees and Charges Schedule, must be paid prior to issue of the Construction Certificate. GENERAL PROVISIONS Reason: The objectives of the following conditions is to draw to the attention of the applicant and owner their responsibilities to comply with various provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations, 2000, Local Government Act 1993; Regulations; Building Code of Australia and Local Policies relating to building construction and maintenance.

31 It is the Applicants responsibility to ensure compliance with the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act, 1992 (DDA). Note: Compliance with the Building Code of Australia does not necessarily meet the



Page 122

requirements of the DDA. 32 A construction certificate is to be obtained prior to commencing construction works. The construction certificate application is to include detailed plans and specifications for the construction of the building/structure. 33 All aspects of the building design shall comply with the applicable performance requirements of the BCA for a Class 1(a) building so as to achieve and maintain acceptable standards of structural sufficiency, safety (including fire safety), health and amenity for the ongoing benefit of the community. Compliance with the performance requirements can only be achieved by: a) complying with the deemed to satisfy provisions, or b) formulating an alternative solution which: i) complies with the performance requirements, or ii) is shown to be at least equivalent to the deemed to satisfy provision, or c) a combination of a) or b). 34 All building work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia. 35 The building must comply with the Category 1 fire safety provisions applicable to the proposed new use. 36 The owner should note that the issue of this development consent does not amount to a release, variation or modification by Council of any covenant applicable to this property and that any action taken by the applicant in accordance with the consent which results in any loss or damage by way of breach of the covenant will not be the responsibility of Council. 37 Proposed structure is not to be located on or over the boundary line of the subject allotment. 38 The building shall be set out by a registered surveyor. A Survey Certificate shall be submitted indicating the location of the footprint of the building relative to the boundaries of the lot and where applicable other buildings. 39 The development or any portion of the development shall not be used or occupied until an “Occupation Certificate Application” has been received and determined by Council and an Occupation or Interim Occupation Certificate has been issued. Occupation certificate applications must be accompanied by the required fee and all associated information and certifications. To ensure occupation or use of the development can occur in a timely fashion, the occupation certificate application should be submitted at the same time as the final inspection is being requested. 40 Copy of the approved plans and specifications and consent shall be kept on the site at all times during construction. 41 The maximum gradient of the driveway to garage, carport and/or carparking area shall not exceed 1 in 5. This gradient commences at the footpath level of the front boundary. 42 (1) Building work that involves residential building work (within the meaning of the Home Building Act, 1989) must not be carried out unless the principal certifying



Page 123

authority for the development to which the work relates: (a) in the case of work to be done by a licensee under that Act: (i) has been informed in writing of the licensee's name and contractor licence number, and (ii) is satisfied that the licence has complied with the requirements of Part 6 of that Act, or (b) in the case or work to be done by any other person; (i) has been informed in writing of the person's name and owner-builder permit, or (ii) has been given a declaration, signed by the owner of the land, that states that the reasonable market cost of the labour and materials involved in the work is less than the amount prescribed for the purposes of the definition of owner-builder work in Section 29 of that Act, and is given appropriate information and declarations under paragraphs (a) and (b) whenever arrangements for the doing of the work are changed in such a manner as to render out of date any information or declaration previously given under either of those paragraphs. (2) A certificate purporting to be issued by an approved insurer under Part 6 of the Home Building Act, 1989 that states that a person is the holder of an insurance policy issued for the purposes of that Part is, for the purposes of this clause, sufficient evidence that the person has complied with the requirements of that part. 43 All excavations and backfilling must be executed safely, in accordance with appropriate professional standards and be properly guarded and protected to prevent them from being dangerous to life or property. 44 The proposed building works are to be constructed clear of the existing easement. 45 The applicant is required to submit to Council Notice of Commencement at least two (2) days prior to the commencement of construction works. 46 The applicant is required to submit to Council Notice of Appointment of the Principal Certifying Authority at least two (2) days prior to the commencement of construction works. 47 The requirements of the Hunter Water Corporation with regard to construction works over or adjacent to a sewer main are to be adhered to. 48 Inspections are required to be carried out at the following stages of the construction. Continuation of any further works is to be suspended until a satisfactory inspection has been carried out and a compliance certificate issued. a) The site if: i) any filling is disclosed; ii) it is excavated to a depth of more than 600mm, or any other unusual or abnormal conditions or circumstances are encountered. b) Footings - after trenches are formed and reinforcing steel is laid and fixed and prior to pouring concrete.



Page 124

c) Slabs - after site is formed, reinforcing steel is laid and fixed prior to pouring concrete. d) Floor Framing - after erection of bearers and joists and installation of termite control method and prior to placement of flooring materials. e) Frame - when construction has reached lockup stage with external cladding and roof material fixed but prior to fixing any internal linings or insulation. f) Wet Area Flashing - after application of an approval product but prior to its covering. Alternatively a certificate of installation may be submitted to Council from an approved flashing installer after its application but prior to calling for a final inspection. g) Stormwater Drains - after laying pipe work but prior to drains being covered. h) Final - on completion of all works BUT prior to occupation/use. NOTE: Minimum 24 hours notice will be required prior to each inspection. All inspections must be booked with Council by 3.00pm on the day before the inspection is required. Facsimile requests for inspections will not be accepted. The approved fee must be paid for the inspections. Inspection bookings can be made by telephoning the Council on (02) 4934-9700 in during normal office hours. 49 Unless otherwise approved by Council in writing; all building work associated with this approval shall be carried out between 7.00am and 6.00pm Monday to Fridays and 7.00am to 5.00pm on Saturdays with no work permitted on Sundays or Public Holidays that may cause offensive noise. 50 The residential dwellings and hot water systems must conform to a minimum 3.5 star rating with confirmation provided prior to issue of the Construction Certificate. 51 A final plan of survey and three (3) copies shall be submitted to Council for endorsement by the Council. SITE CONSIDERATIONS Reason: The objectives of the following conditions is to provide for a safe and healthy environment for the occupants of the allotment and to maintain an adequate level of safety and cleanliness for the local environment. 52 All excavated an/or filled areas are to be retained or battered and suitably drained so as to prevent any subsidence of the area and constructed so as to deny any flow of water into or around the building or neighbouring buildings or onto neighbouring land. Where a retaining wall is planned for this purpose and such wall exceeds 1.0m in height at any point from finished ground level, plans and specifications of the construction SHALL BE APPROVED BY COUNCIL BEFORE WORKS COMMENCE. Plans and specifications of retaining walls greater than 1.0m in height MUST BE CERTIFIED BY A PRACTICING PROFESSIONAL ENGINEER. Note: The submission of a separate Development Application is not required for a retaining wall associated with this approval and indicated on the approved plans. 53 All building refuse on this building site shall be stored in such a manner so as not to cause a nuisance to adjoining properties. 54 If an excavation extends below the level of the base of the footings of a



Page 125

building/structure on an adjoining allotment of land, the person causing the excavation to be made. i) Must preserve and protect the building/structure from damage, and ii) If necessary, must underpin and support the building/structure in an approved manner, and iii) Must, at least 7 days before excavating below the level of the base of the footings of a building/structure on an adjoining allotment of land, give notice of intention to do so to the owner of the adjoining allotment of land and furnish particulars of the excavation to the owner of the building/structure being erected or demolished. The owner of the adjoining allotment of land is not liable for any part of the cost of work carried out for the purposes of this condition, whether carried out on the allotment of land being excavated or on the adjoining allotment of land. (Includes a public road and any other public place). 55 If the work: i) is likely to cause pedestrian or vehicular traffic in a public place to be obstructed or rendered inconvenient, or ii) involves the enclosure of a public place a hoarding or fence must be erected between the work site and the public place. If necessary, an awning is to be erected, sufficient to prevent any substance from, or in connection with, the work falling into the public place. The work site must be kept lit between sunset and sunrise if it is likely to be hazardous to persons in the public place. Any such hoarding, fence or awning is to be removed when the work has been completed. 56 A sign must be erected in a prominent position on the work: (i) stating that unauthorised entry to work site is prohibited, and (ii) showing the name of the person in charge of the work site and a telephone number at which that person may be contacted during work hours. Any such sign is to be removed when the work has been completed. This condition does not apply to: (i) building work carried out inside an existing building, or (ii) building work carried out on premises that are to be occupied continuously (both during and outside working hours) while the work is being carried out. 57 Approved toilet facilities are to be provided, at or in the vicinity of the work site at the rate of one toilet for every 20 persons or part of 20 persons employed at the site. The provision of toilet facilities in accordance with this Clause must be completed before any other work is commenced. 58 The site is to be cleared of all building refuse and spoil immediately after completion of the building/structure. 59 No building materials, refuse or spoil is to be deposited on or be allowed to remain on Council's footpath.



Page 126

60 Suitable and adequate measures are to be applied to restrict public access to the site and building works, materials and equipment. 61 The applicant is required to notify Council in writing prior to commencing building operations, of any existing damage to kerbing and guttering and/or footpath paving the absence of such notification shall signify that no damage exists and that the applicant will be liable for the cost of the reinstatement of any damage to kerbing and guttering or footpath paving which may be necessary after completion of the building operation. 62 Where a lot has frontage to existing concrete foot paving or a cycle path within the footpath, the location of the proposed vehicular driveway access is to be identified and the concrete paving removed over the width of the access. Access to the site by construction traffic will only be permitted at this location. Any damage to the remainder of the footpaving/cyclepath is to be reinstated by the property owner to Council's satisfaction. TRAFFIC/ROADS/FOOTPATH Reason: The following condition(s) have been applied to ensure that the surrounding road system, footpaths, access/egress and internal parking and maneuvering areas are designed and constructed to a standard adequate to service the proposed development.

63 Concrete kerb laybacks are to be constructed in accordance with Council's Standard Drawing SD50. Light Duty concrete kerb laybacks are to be constructed to the units in Eurimbla Street. Laybacks serving the internal roads from Edwards St are to be doubly reinforced with two layers of F72 mesh. The minimum thickness of such laybacks shall be 150mm. The top layer of reinforcement shall have 25mm clear cover to the top. The bottom layer of reinforcement shall have 50mm clear cover to the bottom. Only ready mixed concrete of 28 day compressive strength, not less than 32Mpa shall be used. Finish shall be plain concrete broomed finished unless some other finish has been specified in the Development Application. 64 Light Duty vehicular footpath crossings, to the units in Eurimbla Street, shall be

constructed as full width concrete slabs in accordance with the design criteria contained in Maitland City Council Standard Drawings SD68, SD77 and SD78. Concrete shall be 100mm thick, reinforced with F72 mesh with 25mm clear cover to the top. Only ready mixed concrete of 28 day compressive strength, not less than 20Mpa shall be used. Finish shall be plain concrete broomed finish unless some other finish has been specified in the Development Application.

65 Heavy duty vehicular footpath crossings, serving the internal roads to Edwards St, shall be constructed as full width concrete slabs in accordance with the design criteria contained in Maitland City Council Standard Drawings SD77 and SD78. Concrete shall be 150mm thick and doubly reinforced with two layers of F72 mesh. The top layer of reinforcement shall have 25mm clear cover to the top. The bottom layer shall have 50mm clear cover to the bottom. Only ready mixed concrete of 28 day compressive strength not less than 32Mpa shall be used. Finish shall be broom finished plain concrete only, unless some other finish has been specified in the Development Application.

66 Barricades and lights are to enclose the whole of the vehicular crossing work areas, and are to be maintained for the duration of the work. Adjacent footpath



Page 127

areas are to be kept clear of debris etc. at all times and in a safe condition for pedestrian access.

67 Where concrete has been poured, the works shall be closed to traffic for seven days after the pour. After completion of works, and removal of formwork, the adjacent footpath shall be trimmed or filled along the edges of the works to an even grade of 1(V) to 4(H) maximum. Concrete surfaces shall be broom finished plain concrete only, unless some other finish has been specified in the Development Application. All edges and dummy joints finished with a 75mm edging tool. The kerb layback and footpath crossing slab shall not be integral, but be separated by a full depth bitumen impregnated joint filling strip.

68 Prior to issue of a Construction Certificate and consent under the Roads Act for works within the existing public road, fully detailed engineering plans shall be approved by Council. Council will conduct “critical stage inspections” during construction. The appropriate fees for these services shall be paid prior to issue of the Construction Certificate for these works.

69 Prior to issue of the Subdivision or Occupation Certificate, all works shall be carried out in accordance with the Construction Certificate and Council's standards.

70 A traffic control plan for works on the existing public road reserve shall be submitted to and approved by Council prior to the commencement of construction.

71 Existing gutter inverts no longer required are to be sawcut full depth, removed and replaced with full section concrete kerb and gutter for the full length of the gutter invert and the road shoulder and footpath reinstated.

DRAINAGE & SEDIMENT/EROSION CONTROL Reason: The following condition(s) have been applied to ensure that:

(i) Adequate sediment/erosion control structures are provided to prevent siltation of existing drainage systems and waterways;

(ii) Stormwater internal and external to the proposed development site is controlled to minimise the risk of flooding to upstream and downstream properties; and

(iii) Due regard is given to the development of flood liable land or land in the vicinity of flood liable land.

72 An Interallotment Drainage Line (IAD) is to be constructed along the south

eastern boundary of the development to provide drainage from the Eurimbla Street residual lot to the drainage reserve at the rear of the development. An easement is to be created to Drain Water (Desirably 1.5m wide, minimum 1.0m wide) over the drainage line in favour of the Lot benefited. All newly created easements are to be suitably described in an 88b Instrument. A plan showing the location of all stormwater drainage lines is to be submitted to Council for future reference.

73 A stormwater drainage detention system is to be provided to the development. The system is to be designed to reduce developed discharges to



Page 128

predeveloped discharges for all storms up to and including the 1:100 year event. A Drainage Plan Checking Fee of $619, based on Council’s current Fees and Charges Schedule, must be paid prior to issue of the Construction Certificate.

74 Stormwater overflow, discharge and dispersal to the drainage reserve shall be designed, installed and maintained so as to ensure that no erosion or scouring of water flow occurs on the reserve. Such design shall be submitted for Council approval prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

75 Stormwater runoff from large impervious areas, driveways and roof areas is to be collected and disposed of to Council's drainage system or an appropriate inter-allotment drainage system in accordance with Council's publication "A Guideline for Stormwater Drainage Design". Where sealed internal driveways areas, greater than 30 square metres, discharge stormwater across the Council footpath then grated surface drains must be constructed across the property boundary line to the requirement of Council.

76 The site and its surrounding environs are to be protected from the effects of sediment and erosion by the application of generally accepted sediment and erosion control principles. In this respect, a sediment and erosion control plan shall be submitted to Council for reference, and site controls shall be established in accordance with that plan certified by a practising Engineer or suitably qualified person, must be submitted to Council prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. Council must also receive Certification that the site controls are in place, prior to the commencement of works. STANDARD PROVISIONS Reason: The objective of the following conditions is to draw to the attention of the applicant and owner their responsibilities to comply with various provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act; Regulations; Building Code of Australia and Local Policies relating to building construction and maintenance.

77 Where the proposed development involves the disturbance of any existing survey monuments, those monuments affected will need to be relocated by a Surveyor registered under the Surveyors Act. A plan showing the relocated marks will then be required to be lodged as a matter of public record at the Land Titles Office. 78 An occupational health and safety plan is to be submitted to and approved by Council prior to the commencement of construction. Construction within the existing road reserve must not take place without the occupational health and safety plan being adhered to. 79 Provision of a distinguishing number approved by Council and clearly visible from the street.


12 QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

13 URGENT BUSINESS

Page 129


14 COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

14.1 CENTRAL MAITLAND MARKETING AND PROMOTION

File No: 137/816


Author: Roger Stephan Executive Manager Economic Development and Marketing

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to consider the future marketing and promotion of the Maitland Central Business District.

OFFICER'S RECOMMENDATION THAT Council move into Confidential Session to discuss this item under the terms of the Local Government Act 1993 Section 10A(2), as follows:

(c) information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business

Page 130


14.2 MAITLAND GAOL

File No: 60/2


Author: Roger Stephan Executive Manager Economic Development and Marketing

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The purpose of this report is to inform Council of recent investigations in relation to the ongoing management of the Maitland Gaol and to seek endorsement for the future directions outlined in this report.


(c) information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business

Page 131


Page 132

14.3 ANNUAL PERFORMANCE REVIEW

File No: E10430

Responsible Officer: Clr Peter Blackmore Mayor

Author: David Evans General Manager

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report calls for the Council’s nomination of a Councillor to participate in the annual performance review of the General Manager.


(a) personnel matters concerning particular individuals


Page 133

14.4 LAND AND ENVIRONMENT COURT APPEALS - COMPENSATION FOR LAND ACQUISITIONS - RIVERBANK PROJECT

File No: 103/4/14


Author: Henry Wilson Projects Officer

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report updates Council and proposes a strategy to address appeals lodged with the Land and Environment Court and other current matters relating to land acquisitions for the Riverbank Project.


(g) advice concerning litigation, or advice that would otherwise be privileged from production in legal proceedings on the grounds of legal professional privilege


Page 134

14.5 TENDERS FOR THE SUPPLY AND DELIVERY OF CONCRETE PIPES AND ASSOCIATED DRAINAGE PRODUCTS – 2004/2005

File No: 137/1004

Responsible Officer: Wayne Cone Group Manager City Works & Services

Author: Ian Wakem Manager Civil and Building Works

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This report presents the results of a tender called by Hunter Councils for the supply of and delivery of steel reinforced concrete pipes & associated drainage products for participating Councils for the period 1 July 2004 to 30 June 2005. This tender is called to ensure competitive prices and supply rates of concrete pipes and associated products are available to participating Councils.


(d)(i) commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed: prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it


Page 135

15 CONSIDERATION OF ITEMS FROM COMMITTEE OF THE WHOLE

16 CLOSURE