R L Starr Architects Pty Ltd v Blue Mountains City Council

[2004] NSWLEC 609

Land and Environment Court

of New South Wales

CITATION:	R L Starr Architects Pty Ltd v Blue Mountains City Council [2004] NSWLEC 609
PARTIES:	APPLICANT R L Starr Architects Pty Ltd RESPONDENT Blue Mountains City Council
FILE NUMBER(S):	10510 of 2004
CORAM:	Murrell C
KEY ISSUES:	Development Application :- Erection of a two-storey commemrcial development - retention of current dwelling as dental practice - weight to be given to draft LEP
LEGISLATION CITED:	Environmental Planning and Assessment Act Blue Mountains Local Environmental Plan
CASES CITED:
DATES OF HEARING:	08-09/09/2004
EX TEMPORE JUDGMENT DATE :	09/09/2004
LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES:	APPLICANT Mr C McEwan, barrister SOLICITORS Fisher Chapman RESPONDENT Mr J Robson, barrister SOLICITORS McPhee Kelshaw

JUDGMENT:

THE LAND AND
ENVIRONMENT COURT
OF NEW SOUTH WALES

Murrell C

9 September 2004

10510 of 2004 R L Starr Architects Pty Ltd v
Blue Mountains City Council

JUDGMENT

1 This is an extempore judgment for an appeal under s 97 of the Environmental Planning Assessment Act against Blue Mountains City Council’s refusal of a development application for the property known as No. 86 Railway Parade, Leura. The proposal, in summary, is for the erection of a two storey commercial development at the rear of the existing dwelling house containing three shops with commercial space on the first floor level. The development application is also for the retention of the dwelling house on the subject site and the provision of 12 parking spaces.

2 By way of background, it is noted that council granted development consent in August 2002 for the use of the dwelling house as a dental surgery and it is also noted that the amended plans to which council raised no objection, now show the dwelling house at the front of the property to be used as a dental practice for one practitioner. In this regard, the intensity has been reduced as it was originally proposed that there be two dental practitioners. The original development application to which council granted consent in August 2002 had provision for nine car parking spaces. The subject development application has provision for 12 car parking spaces.

3 The subject site is on the northern extremity of the Leura town centre and the Leura town centre is contained within the streets of Megalong Street, Grose Street, Railway Parade and Leura Mall. The subject property, together with all the properties to the south on Railway Parade, are proposed to be zoned for village housing under the draft plan. The existing house is the beginning of the residential dwellings fronting Railway Parade.

4 It is noted that many of the dwellings in the area of the subject block that I have described contain commercial or semi-commercial uses, such as medical practitioners, massage health studios etcetera.

5 The Leura Mall area has a parking area within the block that I have described which has access from Megalong Street to the parking area that services the retail premises that front the Leura Mall. There are a number of laneways, pedestrian paths within the block that I have described and at the rear of the subject site, there is what is known as Post Office Lane. There has been a recent development along the laneway that provides for further commercial retail uses at the rear of what was the old post office.

6 It is also noted that the dwelling house next door to the subject property at No. 87 is proposed to be listed as a heritage item. It is also noted that currently, Nos. 86 and 87 are within a heritage conservation area, although it is proposed that this be deleted in the draft LEP.

7 The provisions of the draft LEP have been most important during these proceedings. The first issue is whether in fact the Court should give determinative weight to the draft LEP, in that the proposed development will be prohibited under the draft LEP, once it is made. It is noted that there is a savings provisions within the draft LEP, such that developments are to be considered as if the plan was exhibited but not made on the finalisation of that plan. The savings provision is contained at cl 6 subcl (4). It is also noted that the draft LEP has been through an extensive process in terms of its plan making. The council referred the plan, the draft plan, to the department in December 2003 and the matter has proceeded to the stage where a S 69 report is in the course of preparation.

8 The plan has also been referred to the Parliamentary Counsel and the evidence to the Court is that this document, which is in excess of 450 pages, has been not approved at this point in time, but there are few outstanding matters with respect to Parliamentary Counsel’s consideration of it and it would appear that the Parliamentary Counsel, the minor points to be resolved do not relate to the development of this site or the zoning or the provisions of the plan in respect of the subject land. It is noted that the plan preparation of the draft LEP has been most extensive. It was the subject of a commission of inquiry and in that regard, the council has assisted the Court in understanding the basis and rationale for the plan.

9 It is noted that the subject site is currently zoned under the LEP No. 4 for Blue Mountains and it is zoned 3A, General Business, wherein the proposed commercial uses and shops, retail shops, are permissible under the current zoning. However, the Court has given significant weight to the draft plan. It was submitted on behalf of the council that the Court should give determinative weight to the draft plan. However, in doing so I must consider the whole of the plan. In my assessment, based on the judgments that have been handed up to the Court, which I have read, in terms of the regime or principles that I should consider in a draft plan and the weight that one should give to it, I must also have regard to the whole of the plan - that is a holistic reading including regard to the broad objectives of the plan. I am of the opinion that the proposed development is one that will not be an aberration or antipathetic to the provisions of the plan and I will provide greater detail when I go through the provisions of that plan.

10 In consideration of whether a draft plan is to be given determinative weight, one must also assess whether in fact the proposed development will be anomalous or anti-pathetic to the overall provisions and objectives or planning intent of the draft plan. I am satisfied that whilst the plan is certain and imminent in terms of the evidence that has been provided to the Court, I am of the opinion that approval of the proposed development would not undermine the provisions of that plan and that the proposed development would sit comfortably in the context of the draft plan.

11 It is noted that the draft plan does provide for a zone boundary adjustment and whilst I agree with the council that the provision in cl 34 with respect to the 20 m zone boundary adjustment would not apply to this development application, nonetheless, in terms of the intent of the plan, it does provide some insight into the fact that zone boundaries are not seen as ‘fixed fences’ as such and that one must have regard to the adjoining boundaries. That is, the interface between zones is recognized in this plan by not only the zone boundary adjustment provision at cl 34, but also one must have regard to the fact that consent shall not be granted to a development on land that adjoins land in another zone, unless the development proposed to be carried out does not compromise achieving the objectives of the adjoining zone and the consent authority is satisfied that sufficient consideration has been given to the measures proposed to reduce any adverse impact on the development on land within that adjoining zone. (I have just read cl 13 subcl (2) of the plan).

12 Also, cl 13(1) requires consent shall not be granted, unless the development complies with the zone objectives and that the subject site is zoned “Village Housing” under the draft plan and consent should not be granted, unless development proposed to be carried out complies with the provisions that apply to the land as specified in the relevant village within Sch 1.

13 Just to comment on the zone objectives; it is noted that the zone objectives, as pointed out by the council, are ones that relate to housing. The proposed development is one that will not provide for housing as such and the relevance of the zone objectives must be considered in the context of the total plan as well. And in this regard, I move to the provisions of the plan in terms of the Leura Village that provides for an assessment in terms of the specific objectives for the village housing in Leura.

14 The plan provides for consideration to be given to the precincts in terms of the descriptions and in terms of the desired future use. In terms of this particular precinct which is the eastern edge precinct, consent shall not be granted to development within the precinct, unless it complies with the precinct objectives in achieving the precinct vision and the building envelope of the precinct and is consistent with the design considerations within this division. In terms of the desired future character, it is noted that defining the eastern edge of the Leura village centre, this precinct serves as a transition between the retail core and adjacent residential areas. It accommodates a mix of land uses, including lower order commercial and smaller home based employment activities. New development reflects the mix of residential and commercial uses. However, new development is consistent with the predominantly residential streetscape which is characterised by one and two storey scale development.

15 There are also a number of precinct objectives and a building envelope, as well as a building setback.

16 The proposed development does not comply with the minimum side boundary setback of 2 m. The proposal has, on its eastern edge, a relatively small setback nearing nil setback and the site coverage of the proposed development is consistent with the provision contained within cl 3 of the precinct on site coverage, in that it does not exceed 50% of the total allotment in terms of site coverage. The proposed development is some 35%.

17 The Blue Mountains Draft Plan, as I said, has gone through a most extensive and comprehensive consideration by the council and an exhibition process and it is one that the Court must not take lightly. It is well founded, but at the same time, in terms of this development, I must have regard to the fact that the proposal would not be antipathetic to its provisions and importantly, I am also of the opinion that it will sit comfortably with the juxtaposition of the two zones. The proposal from Railway Parade will meet council’s requirements in terms of residential development being maintained on Railway Parade. Heritage was not raised as an issue and it was agreed between the experts that this is not an issue in the proceedings. However, it is a matter that I must have consideration to in terms of the existing provisions of the LEP 4, as the site is in a conservation area and I also must have regard to the fact that the adjoining property at No. 87 as a heritage item. Standard heritage provisions are contained in the plan and I must be satisfied that the proposed development will not impact adversely or significantly such as to warrant refusal. In that regard, I am satisfied that the proposal, based on the evidence of the experts, is satisfactory in this regard as well.

18 It is noted that in the consideration of the zoning of Nos. 86 and 87, that they were identified as being (reading from council’s Exhibit 15 on the submissions on the draft LEP – in response to submissions made for 86 and 87, it is noted that as a result of Commissioner Carlton’s recommendation to consolidate the village town centre of Leura, the zoning of all lots in the business centre was examined) more related to the residential properties neighbouring them than part of the retail core. Both lots form part of a residential streetscape and contain large houses set in substantial gardens which sets them apart from the developed commercial centre. For this reason, these lots have been included in the village housing zone that acts as a transition between the retail core and the residential areas further east. It should be noted that there remains scope to achieve a commercial return from property zoned “village housing” as permissible uses include home employment and refreshment rooms, along with any existing use rights that apply and in terms of understanding the zoning of the subject site, I am satisfied that the proposed development is not inconsistent with what is envisaged in this regard.

19 The proposal represents a satisfactory resolution, in my assessment, of the interface between the village town centre zone and the village housing zone, in that the rear of this property will relate to the village town centre and in fact, it will provide an active frontage to the village town centre where it adjoins Post Office Lane, as opposed to presenting as a fence, as it currently does. When viewed from Railway Parade, the proposed development will basically read as the existing residential house. Yes, the two storey development at the rear of the site will be visible, but it is not one that would detract from the residential character of the area which is one of the aims in zoning the subject site “village housing”.

20 The other issues that were raised during the proceedings relate to car parking on the site and the manoeuvrability, or rather, the effectiveness of the driveway in terms of allowing cars to pass on the site. In this regard, the experts conferred. The experts that gave evidence to the proceedings with respect to traffic and parking are: Mr Hazell for the applicant and Mr Price; and Mr Roberts for the council. As a result of their joint statements and their conferencing, the Court notes that there is general agreement with respect to the number of car parking spaces that should be provided on this site and that is 14. There was some discussion about the s 94 plan. It is noted that there is a s 94 plan that pertains to the Leura area and there is a contribution that is required for shortfall of parking. The applicant has agreed - and indeed, it is appropriate - that the 14 spaces - that is, 12 on site with a contribution for two spaces - be provided and in this regard a condition is proposed.

21 With respect to the driveway, it was noted that the original approval for the dental practice in fact did allow for vehicles to pass on the site and indeed, the Court supports the principle of this being accommodated on the site because it would be an undesirable precedent to allow the driveway without a passing bay and in that regard, the amended plan was put forward to the Court which also retains a tree on the site to allow the passing of a vehicle, such that this can be contained on site without external impacts to the road system.

22 With respect to the setback to No. 87, I have had regard to the comments of the council’s consultant planner, Mr Kennan, in this regard and also the comments of the applicant’s expert town planner, Ms LaidIaw. I am satisfied that there will be no adverse impact created by the proposal with a minimal setback to No. 87 and it will not impact on the heritage significance of that dwelling. In its context the proposed development, having regard to the proposal addressing Post Office Lane, I am satisfied that the reduced setback, is appropriate in the circumstances.

23 At the end of the proceedings, there was disagreement with respect to the drainage issue. The drainage issue is one that has not been resolved. However, the parties have agreed to a condition which would require the council’s proposal to be implemented if the applicant cannot otherwise satisfy the council with respect to the drainage and in that regard, the condition is framed in these terms and is acceptable to the council.

24 This appeal is one that has been case managed. It is noted that there were a number of issues originally raised when the appeal was lodged with the Court. However, many of those issues have been resolved by an amendment or discussions with the experts. The applicant has also submitted that there be a condition in the consent which is agreed to by the council, such that the consent for the dental surgery be surrendered when the commencement of works in respect of this development consent are commenced.

25 The draft LEP, it is noted, re-zones a total of five properties from town centre to village housing. They are three internal lots and Nos. 86 and 87. In terms of the economic impact of the development, this was not raised in itself as an issue. It is noted that the council purposefully has contained the Leura town centre. The council has had studies undertaken with respect to the viability of centres and the amount of land zoned for the village town centre. And in this regard, it is noted that there was a proposal that the village town centre be expanded by some three times the size that it now appears in the draft plan and this may have had consequences for the town centre. However, the commercial development of the rear part of this lot I am satisfied will not impact on the viability of the existing centre. Council clearly has visions for vitality and vibrancy of its centres and containment of such centres supported by village housing and I am satisfied that the proposed development will not undermine those objectives.

26 In terms of the proposed development and the active frontage to Post Office Lane, it is noted that for the actual Leura town centre itself, that the laneways be active with surveillance of those laneways. There was some dispute about the relevance of this provision to this proposal, given that council had demarcated the zone boundary and that the subject site be in the village housing zone. I am satisfied, however, that the address of this particular proposal to Post Office Lane can only assist in providing or supporting council’s overall vision for its town centre of Leura and I am satisfied that this proposal is consistent with the draft LEP and supports the draft LEP in many respects, even though the future zone is for housing.

27 In appeals such as this, it is important that the Court give serious consideration to council’s future vision as articulated in its local environmental draft plans. As to whether I give determinative weight to the draft plan in my assessment, determinative weight plan also includes consideration of whether the proposal will be an aberration in terms of when the draft plan is finally gazetted and I am satisfied that this subject proposal and the merits of this proposal currently before the Court are such that it warrants approval.

28 The village housing zone, it is noted, in the draft plan is also called a transitional zone for transitional zones it is important that the interface of the zones be considered and as I also stated, whilst this is not one which would allow for the zone boundary adjustment, it does allow for a respectful resolution of that zone boundary interface.

29 The proposal cannot be seen as a precedent or one that undermines the overall aims and objectives and overall vision contemplated in council’s draft plan.

30 On the basis of my assessment, the orders of the Court are:

1. The appeal in respect of the property known as No. 86 Railway Parade, Leura, is upheld.

2. The development application submitted to the Blue Mountains City Council, and as amended, to use the existing dwelling as a surgery for one dentist and to erect a two storey building at the rear containing 3 shops at ground floor and commercial office space above and to provide 12 parking spaces is determined by the granting of approval subject to the conditions contained in Annexure “A”.

3. The exhibits except for Exhibits B, C, M and 16 are returned.

___________________
J S Murrell
Commissioner of the Court
rjs

Annexure ‘A’

Conditions of Consent

R and L Starr Architects v Blue Mountains City Council

86 Railway Parade, Leura

1. Confirmation of relevant plans

To confirm and clarify the terms of consent, the development consisting of a dental surgery for one dentist in the existing dwelling and the construction of a two storey building at the rear containing 3 shops at ground level and commercial office space above and the provision of 12 parking spaces on site shall be carried out in accordance with the plans prepared by Richard Starr Architect numbered 01A, 02D, 03A and LP01A (the latter being subject to the works depicted in plan 02D that show a passing bay in front of the dental surgery) and accompanying supportive documentation, except as otherwise provided or modified below by the conditions of this consent.

2. Period of development consent

Physical commencement of the use is required within a two year period from the date of this consent. Should this not occur, the development consent will lapse.

3. Surrender of Consent

Development consent X02/0255 is to be surrendered to Council prior to the commencement of works pursuant to this consent.

4. Construction certificate (building)

A construction certificate is required prior to the commencement of any site or building works. This certificate can be issued either by Council as the consent authority or by an accredited certifier.

5. Building Code of Australia

All building work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

6. Certificates from authorities

Early contact with these authorities is recommended

To ensure satisfactory effluent disposal and utility services are provided, you are required to submit to Council a compliance certificate from:

a) Sydney Water

- A Section 73 Compliance Certificate

7. Access for persons with a disability

Detailed plans of access and facilities for persons with a disability are to be submitted to the PCA for consideration and/or approval prior to the release of the Construction Certificate. The details must include the materials of access pathways, entry door and fit out of the facility.

8. Advertising sign

To protect the visual amenity of the neighbourhood and city, signage shall be limited to the details included with the application. Illumination is to be minimised so as to ensure no adverse impact on traffic flow or adjoining properties. Flashing signs are not permitted. The maximum size of the advertising sign shall be 0.75m2.

9. Use of public space

To avoid conflict with the use of public space adjoining the site no materials, goods or advertising structures shall be stored, placed or displayed any where outside the building and property boundaries.

10. Engineering Conditions Internal

a) All vehicles are required to enter and leave site in a forward direction.

b) The size of vehicles visiting the site is to be restricted to the following:

· B85 design car as per AS 2890.1/1993 with the exception of delivery vehicles visiting the site in accordance with Condition 11.

c)

I. The grade of the access driveways from the invert of kerb and gutter in Railway Parade to the road boundary is to be no steeper than 5% (1:20) as per AS 2890.1/1993.

II. All car parking areas and driveways to conform to AS 2890. Clearance height to be in accordance with AS 2890 and BCA.

d) The driveway shall have a width of 5.5m at the front of the site, as depicted on plan 02D to provide a passing bay (which shall be constructed of pervious materials to Council’s reasonable satisfaction and in keeping with the garden.

e) There shall be twelve (12) car parking spaces (including one (1) disabled space) provided on the site, as depicted in the plans identified in Condition 1. In addition, the applicant shall make a car parking contribution of $8516.00 for two (2) car parking spaces, in accordance with Section 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. (Note: The contribution requirement is imposed due to a two (2) space shortfall in the car parking that is to be provided on the site.)

f) The car parking spaces are to be maintained for use in association with the development. The car parking spaces are to be line marked and signposted in accordance with the Council’s Development Control Plan No 29 – Car Parking.

g) The provision of kerbs and formation of access driveways and car parking areas in the development site, together with any necessary drainage, retaining walls and works to make the construction effective.

h) All parking bays are to be marked and delineated.

i) Absorption trenches are to be designed for the anticipated wheel loads.

j) The drainage and car park construction is to be supervised and certified by a drainage engineer.

k) Before the issue of the occupation certificate, a written certificate by a drainage engineer is to be submitted to Council certifying that the completed works have been carried out to approved details by I Hayes and Associates and the conditions of this consent.

11. Delivery vehicles

Delivery vehicles shall not enter the site other than between the hours of 7am to 8.30am and 6pm to 8pm Monday to Saturday. There shall be no deliveries on Sundays.

12. Access for persons with a disability

To ensure access and facilities for disabled people are provided, a statement from the applicant or owner is required certifying that the development complies with the provisions of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992; the Australian Standard AS1428 and Council’s Access and Mobility Policy . This statement is to form part of the construction certificate documentation.

13. Engineering Conditions External

a)

I. For the driveways across the Railway Parade footpath, new heavy duty asphaltic-concrete layback and apron crossings are to be constructed. This construction is to include any necessary work to make the construction effective including transition of the footpath and internal driveway, the adjustment of public utilities and regrading the driveway across the footpath to facilitate quick entry/exit movements and prevent scraping of vehicles.

II. The minimum driveway width at the road boundary and kerb & gutter alignment shall be in accordance with AS 2890.1/1993.

14. Engineering Conditions General

a) All internal and external engineering works required by this development are to be in accordance with Council’s Specification for Engineering Works for Subdivisions and Developments Part 1 Design and Part 2 Construction (Development Control Plan No. 31). The design and construction is to include any additional works to make the construction effective.

b) Safety devices such as signs, barricades, barriers, warning lights, etc. shall be placed where works affect Council roads and shall be in accordance with Australian Standard 1742 – “Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices” and RTA Manual – “Traffic Control at Work Sites 1998. Details prepared by a qualified person shall be submitted to Council for its approval.

The contractor shall submit to Council the names of proposed traffic controllers with a signed declaration that they are appropriately trained in the duties of traffic controllers and RTA accredited.

All damage caused by construction traffic is to be made good by the applicant.

c) Any relocation or alteration of public utilities or any existing services made necessary as a result of this development is to be carried out at no cost to Council and with satisfactory arrangements being made with the authority concerned and a certificate of clearance obtained from each relevant authority.

d) An on-site meeting is to be arranged with Council’s Supervising Engineer prior to commencement of any work in Council’s Road for the purpose of pre-construction meeting. The appropriate inspection fee is to be paid prior the meeting.

e) All contractors working in the road reserve shall be covered for worker’s compensation insurance and public liability insurance to the amount of $10million. The policy shall specifically indemnify Council from all claims arising from the execution of the works. Written evidence of this insurance shall be supplied to Council’s Supervising Engineer at the pre-construction meeting.

f) The payment to Council of a maintenance bond to the value of five (5) percent of the engineering construction or a minimum of $2,000, whichever is the greater, to guarantee the safety of the public, environmental protection and maintenance during construction in Council’s Road and for (6) months after construction is completed to Council’s Engineer’s satisfaction. The bond is to be paid prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

g) The provision of scour protection and sediment control measures.

15. Site stormwater system

All stormwater runoff from impervious areas of the site are to be collected and drained by an underground stormwater system. The stormwater system is to be designed by a qualified person and endorsed by a chartered civil engineer with NPER registration for a 1 in 20 years ARI, 5 minutes duration storm and in accordance with ARR 1987. Provision shall be made for an emergency overland flow path capable of conveying all surcharge flows up to and including the 1 in 100 years ARI storms to street 023.

16. On site detention

1.

An on site detention system to restrict post-development discharges from the site to pre-development discharges for all storms up to and including the 1:100 year ARI storm shall be provided.

The on site detention system shall be designed to incorporate the following:

a. All habitable and garage floor levels are to be located a minimum 300 mm and 100 mm above the 1 in 100 year ARI top water levels.

b. An emergency overflow facility capable of safely conveying all storms up to and including the 1 in 100 year ARI storm to the public road.

c. Allowable storage depth shall be:

§ Car parks—0.2 metres maximum.

§ Landscaped areas—0.6 metres maximum. Depth greater than 0.6 metres is permissible subject to the installation of pool type fencing surrounding the detention area.

§ Underground tanks—0.8 metres minimum depth.

Engineering plans prepared by a qualified person and endorsed by a chartered civil engineer with NPER registration together with certification verifying the above requirements have been met shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority for approval prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

17. On site detention positive covenant

To ensure the on site detention system is satisfactorily maintained, a covenant under Section 88E of the Conveyancing Act, 1919 shall be prepared and registered over the subject land.

The terms of the 88E Instrument with positive covenant shall include, but not be limited to, the following:

a. The Proprietor of the property shall agree to be responsible for keeping clear and the maintenance of all pits, pipelines, trench barriers and other structures.

b. The Proprietor shall agree to have the on site stormwater detention facilities (OSD) inspected annually by a competent person.

c. The Council shall have the right to enter upon the land referred to above at all reasonable times to inspect, construct, install, clean, repair and maintain in good working order all pits, pipelines, trench barriers and other structures in or upon the said land which comprise the OSD or which convey stormwater from the said land and recover the costs of any such works from the Proprietor.

d. The registered Proprietor shall indemnify the Council and any adjoining landowners against damage to their land arising from the failure of any component of the OSD or failure to clean, maintain and repair the OSD.

The applicant shall bear all costs associated in the preparation of the subject 88E Instrument. The working of the Instrument shall be submitted to and approved by Council prior to lodgement at NSW Land and Property Information. Proof of lodgement with NSW Land and Property Information shall be submitted to Council prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate .

18. Onsite Drainage

1. In relation to the options presented on the plan prepared by Ian Hayes and Associates numbered 2004118 dated 11/6/04 Sheet 1 of 1, Council approves subject to this condition of the consent, option as marked “A” subject to:

a) All on site drainage is to be piped through the onsite detention system.

b) Discharge from the site/ODS system is to be piped from the site to Councils drainage system in Grose Street via the laneway (at the rear of the site) and Councils Car Park.

c) Minimum pipe size is to be 375mm diameter.

d) Location of the pipe is to be subject to engineering details in consultation with Councils engineer.

2. Alternatively, if option as marked “B” is to be pursued, the option would need to be supported by detailed hydraulic calculations demonstrating to Council’s reasonable satisfaction, that the catchment and its downstream infrastructure has the capacity to accept the additional flow and/or that a pipe having a diameter of less than 375mm would be appropriate for use for the purpose and in the locations proposed. The hydraulic calculation and catchment assessment would need to be prepared by a chartered civil engineer with NPER registration and would be subject to:

a) All on site drainage is to be piped through the onsite detention system.

b) Discharge from the site/ODS system is to be piped from the site to Councils drainage system in Grose Street via the laneway (at the rear of the site) and Councils Car Park.

c) Location of the pipe is to be subject to engineering details in consultation with Councils engineer.

19. Hours of operation – dental surgery

The hours of operation of the dental surgery are limited to 8am to 6pm Monday to Friday.

20. Employees – dental surgery

There shall be no more than one (1) dentist, two (2) receptionists and one (1) secretary employed in the dental surgery on the site at any one time.

21. Trees adjacent to parking bay

The applicant shall prune and maintain the trees in the front garden, immediately adjacent to the passing bay depicted on plan 02D, to make the use of the passing bay practicable but in such a way as to minimise any damage to those trees, to the reasonable satisfaction of the Council’s Tree Management Officer.

_______________________

J S Murrell
Commissioner of the Court
Ljr/rjs

Failure to comply with the terms of this consent constitutes a breach of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act, 1979, and may result in action being taken by Council to remedy the breach. This action may include the issue of a Penalty Infringement Notice or institution of legal action.