Case Study Report: Development Application DA-1127/2022

1. Introduction

This paper aims at analyzing the Development Application DA-1127/2022 lodged by Ultra Design and Engineering Pty Ltd to the Liverpool City Council. The application includes the removal of the current structures and the construction of a two storey Childcare Centre with basement car parking at the properties located at 115 Wonga Road and 83 Hill Road, Lurnea. The proposed development aims at meeting the need for childcare services in the area while providing space for up to 100 children and 20 car spaces in the basement.

During the assessment phase, the proposal faced a number of concerns and arguments. Some of them were the lack of clarity and missing information in the application materials like the number of car parking spaces and the lack of swept path plans that define the movement of vehicles. There were also issues regarding environment, including acoustic and contamination issues that were noted. In addition, the proposal was also considered to be in conflict with the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan and other State Environmental Planning Policies and Guidelines.

Public outcry was also an issue that hindered the application process as residents raised worries on privacy, traffic congestion, and the overall aesthetics of the area. Even when the council sought additional information from the applicant, the responses provided were often inconclusive and failed to address some important questions. In the end, all these factors forced the Liverpool City Council to advise against the approval of the development application stating that the proposed childcare center was not in the public interest. This case study demonstrates the issues with development approval process and underlines the significance of documentations and involving all parties involved.

2. Context of the Project

Development application DA-1127/2022 has been submitted by Ultra Design and Engineering Pty Ltd to the Liverpool City Council, which outlines the proposed demolition of existing structures and construction of a two-storey childcare centre with basement car parking at 115 Wonga Road and 83 Hill Road, Lurnea. This project is being proposed because there is a demand for childcare services within the local community, and this project is expected to serve up to 100 children. However, the proposal has faced certain problems and concerns that are why it is crucial to analyze the context of the project.

Site Description and Location

The subject site comprises two lots: Lot 47 and corner lot 48, DP 215696 with the total area of approximately 1138. 2 square meters. The site is located at the intersection of Wonga Road and Hill Road in Lurnea, a suburban area that is mainly composed of low to medium density residential dwellings. The surrounding region is characterized by a number of one and two-story residences with some developments of multi-unit buildings. The site is located to the east of Philips Park and is conveniently situated close to Lurnea Public School, specifically 177 meters to the west. The industrial developments in Prestons are located approximately 390 meters to the east of the subject site.

Significant Features and Constraints

The site is quite level and is generally rectangular in plan with the total area of 40 592m2 and it has the primary frontage of 41. 466m along Wonga Road and secondary frontage of 12. 929m along Hill Road. The existing structures on the site are a single-storey dwelling and detached garage on Lot 47 and a single-storey dwelling with secondary dwelling on Lot 48.

Some challenges include; Environmental and health issues that may pose a threat to the site. The area is likely to be affected by floods given that it is in close contact with Maxwells Creek. Moreover, there are some average salinity levels and contamination factors that should be avoided. There is no heritage items or Aboriginal heritage sites on the site and there are no significant vegetation or threatened species habitats on the subject site. Conditions which would apply include standard conditions regarding bushfire, aircraft noise, road noise, and acid sulfate soils in the event permission is granted.

Development Proposal

The proposed development is a two-storey childcare centre that is intended to accommodate up to 100 children. The proposed facility will consist of a basement, which will have a capacity of 20 cars, with 9 designated for staff and 11 for visitors and 1 for the disabled. The one-way vehicular access is provided from Wonga Road with exit onto Hill Road with pedestrian access being via a lift and staircase from the basement.

The ground floor of the center would contain the administrative offices, staff rooms, reception area, kitchen, laundry, play areas for children, bathrooms, and playgrounds. The first floor would provide for more offices, storerooms, indoor play areas and another balcony for play in the outdoors. The proposed hours of operation are from 7:Working hours are from 8:00am to 4:00pm from Monday to Friday and the center is closed on Saturdays, Sundays and public holidays.

Development Restrictions and Concerns

In the course of the application process, several important concerns were raised. The documentation was incomplete and contained numerous discrepancies. The car parking spaces ranged from one document to another, and crucial diagrams like the swept path analysis were not included. Recommendations for acoustics and contamination assessment were also deemed insufficient.

The proposal was also considered to be in conflict with a number of key planning instruments and guidelines including the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan (LLEP) 2008, State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021, State Environmental Planning Policy (Transport and Infrastructure) 2021, Education and Care Services National Regulations 2011, and the Child Care Planning Guideline 2021.

Community and Stakeholder Concerns

The community concerns were taken into consideration during the assessment. People expressed worry on issues to do with traffic congestion, invasion of privacy due to the presence of the balcony and on how this was to affect the overall character of the neighborhood. However, the applicant has failed to provide sufficient information even after being asked several times and left many key issues unanswered.

3. Issues and Controversies

The assessment of the development application DA-1127/2022 for the construction of a two-storey childcare centre at the subject site located at 115 Wonga Road and 83 Hill Road, Lurnea has been surrounded by controversies and problems.

Environmental Concerns:

The first concern that was identified during the assessment was environmental factors. Some issues were raised on the sufficiency of the environmental assessments particularly on the acoustic effects and contamination risks. There were no comprehensive reports on these issues in the proposal; hence, one cannot be certain of the effect that the development will have on the environment.

Planning Policy Compliance:

The proposal was considered to be in conflict with several planning instruments and policies; the Liverpool Local Environmental Plan (LLEP) 2008, State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021, State Environmental Planning Policy (Transport and Infrastructure) 2021, Education and Care Services National Regulations 2011 and Child Care Planning Guideline 2021. These discrepancies questioned the harmonization of the development with the overall planning framework and its potential to meet legal standards.

Community Opposition:

Many people in the locale and the community also expressed their concerns regarding the construction of the childcare center. Some of the issues raised during the meeting include traffic jam, noise pollution, and effects of the development on the areas character. Some of the residents also raised concerns with the first floor balcony stating that it would intrude on the privacy of the neighbouring houses. The degree of community opposition in this case emphasized the importance of proper community involvement and feedback during the application process for development.

Incomplete Information:

In the course of this assessment, the applicant has been unresponsive to councils requests for information and the information provided was incomplete and inconsistent. The lack of information, for instance, the number of car parking spaces and the swept path analysis, raised concern on the viability and safety of the proposed development. Furthermore, the lack of a comprehensive approach to environmental issues and planning policy requirements made the assessment process even more challenging and cast doubt on whether the project met the requirements of the law.

Recommendation for Refusal:

Given the various concerns and controversies associated with the proposed development, the Liverpool City Council advised against the approval of DA-1127/2022. The concerns of the stakeholders are evident, and the applicant has not adequately responded to the key issues that are of concern; hence, the proposed childcare centre was deemed not to be in the public interest and did not meet the planning criteria. This recommendation highlighted the need for adequate documentation, adherence to the legal frameworks and sound management of the stakeholder consultation during the development application process.

4. Stakeholders

The development application DA-1127/2022 for the construction of a two-storey childcare center at 115 Wonga Road and 83 Hill Road, Lurnea, had numerous stakeholders with different responsibilities and concerns relating to the project.

Ultra Design and Engineering Pty Ltd as the applicant for the development was mainly involved in the preparation and submission of the development application to the Liverpool City Council. The companys main concern is to get permission for the childcare centre project to go ahead with the construction works. Their motivation could be financial, that is, the successful completion of the development will fetch them some amount of money and it will also add to the list of projects they have initiated or are working on.

Liverpool City Council:

The Liverpool City Council was the approving authority that was entitled to review and decide on the development application of the project. In its capacity as the decision-maker in this process, the councils primary concern was to ensure that the proposed childcare centre complied with planning and environmental laws as well as community standards. The council also had to assess the effect the development could have on the area and its residents.

Local people and inhabitants of the community in the vicinity of the proposed development site were important stakeholders in the process. Their concern was to safeguard the image and the reputation of their community, mitigate the possible nuisance posed by the proposed childcare center, and assert that their voices be considered during the assessment stage. These stakeholders expressed their concerns and opposition to the council and the community consultations through submissions.

Lurnea Public School:

As for the childcare centre that is proposed to be built near the school, Lurnea Public School had a keen interest in the development applications result. The schools concern may have been the effect of traffic congestion, noise pollution, and safety of the students and teachers. There could have been feedback or concerns that the school raised to the council on how the proposed development would affect its operations and the general community.

Environmental and Planning Consultants:

Environmental assessment and planning consultants, as well as architectural design consultants, may have been involved in the preparation of the application materials. These consultants were particularly useful for undertaking the environmental impact assessment, considering planning policies and advising on how to meet the legal framework for the proposal. Their concern was to ensure that the council and other stakeholders did not raise any concerns that would hinder the approval of the development.

Thus, their participation can be viewed as an example of the various voices and positions that are involved in the development application process, which underlines the necessity of proper communication and cooperation between all parties to ensure the consideration of the concerns and the attainment of the common goals.

5. Events Timeline

6. Analysis of Stakeholder Opinions

Understanding the views of the stakeholders involved in the development application DA-1127/2022 for the childcare facility at 115 Wonga Road and 83 Hill Road, Lurnea shows that they have different opinions, fears, and goals.

The proponent, Ultra Design and Engineering Pty Ltd, was keen on the development proposal mainly to secure approval for constructing the childcare centre. Their concerns were to ensure that the project was successful since it would yield financial returns and the chance to add to the list of structures they have built. However, their lack of response to some important issues that were brought up during the assessment process points to some level of dissatisfaction or carelessness in meeting the necessary legal framework and peoples concerns.

Liverpool City Council:

Liverpool City Council was specifically focused on the issue of enforcing the planning and development control, environmental and social considerations to the proposed development. Their analysis of the development application was based on evaluating the implications of the childcare centre on the area and the community. Although their recommendation to refuse indicates the councils willingness to adhere to planning guidelines and consider the communitys concerns, it also reveals the difficulties involved in assessing large-scale developments with substantial environmental and policy consequences.

The following concerns and objections from the local residents and community members were raised concerning the proposed childcare centre. These concerns were mainly directed at maintaining the integrity of the neighborhood and improving the quality of life in the area, reducing the impact of traffic and noise, and avoiding encroachment on other properties. Their opposition to the development underlined the lessons that can be drawn from the case about the role of public involvement in the planning process, and the difficulties that the developers face when they neglect the interests of the local community.

Lurnea Public School:

Lurnea Public School, which is located close to the proposed childcare centre, raised concerns on traffic flow, noise pollution, and the safety of the children and teachers in the school. They engaged in the development application as they wanted to protect the interest of the school community and the environment surrounding the school. It is probable that their input shaped the councils approach to the proposal, especially in relation to traffic control and the safety of the pedestrians.

Environmental and Planning Consultants:

The consultants hired for the purpose of the development application provided valuable services in the area of environmental impact, planning policy, and advice. Their interests were also in line with ensuring that the development was approved to enhance the provision of the required services by meeting the standard set by the council and other stakeholders. However, the absence of a holistic and clear explanation of their approach may have posed some problems in the assessment process.

Overall Analysis:

Stakeholder perspectives and perceptions are multifaceted and influenced by their interest and concern in the development application process. Whereas the applicant wanted the council to allow them to open the childcare centre for business reasons, the council and other members of the community focused on things such as law enforcement, environmental conservation, and the wellbeing of the community. Although, the stakeholders have different points of view, it is crucial to share information, consult and cooperate in order to solve the problems, solve conflicts and achieve the goals of the development application process.

7. On the Process Undertaken

The process that the Council employed was quite rigorous with the Council asking for supplementary information and the applicant being afforded a chance to respond. However, due to the fact that the applicant provided incomplete information, the application process was long and was not successful in the end. Some recommendations for increasing efficiency include better defining the list of documents to be provided and checking that the applicants provide all the necessary information before moving on to the next stage.

8. Comment on the Outcome

The final decision was made and this was to recommend refusal and the Council deciding that the proposed development was not in the public interest. Possible options for the site could have included a less extensive development that would not have been as threatening to the local design code and public perception.

9. Discuss the Views on the Process by Different Parties

Developer's Approach

The Councils concerns were not fully met by the developer which led to submission of incomplete documents and lateness in most cases. If the application had been supported by a more proactive and holistic response approach, it would have had better chances of being approved.

Council's Approach

The Council followed a clear and unambiguous approach and it followed the rules and guidelines to the letter and provided the applicant with all the necessary avenues to address his concerns. This approach made sure that all possible implications were taken into account before coming up with a recommendation.

Community's Approach

The community managed to express their concerns and make formal objections, which outlined the potential problems with the proposed development. Better communication between the developer and the community could have been useful in preventing some of these issues.

10. Conclusion

The case of Development Application DA-1127/2022 depicts the numerous issues and difficulties associated with the development approval process. Some of the major observations include the significance of documenting the processes, involving the stakeholders, and following the laid down planning procedures. Such findings will be useful for future applications in order to avoid pitfalls and successfully pass through the approval process.

11. References

• Liverpool City Council Development Control Plan 2008

• Liverpool Local Environmental Plan 2008

• State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021

• State Environmental Planning Policy (Transport and Infrastructure) 2021

• Education and Care Services National Regulations 2011

• Child Care Planning Guideline 2021

12. Appendix

• Date: 10 May 2023

• Activity: Site visit and photographs

• Location: 115 Wonga Road and 83 Hill Road, Lurnea

• Date: 12 May 2023

• Activity: Meeting with Council Planning Officer

• Location: Liverpool City Council

• Date: 14 May 2023

• Activity: Review of council business papers and planning reports

• Location: Council Library

• Date: 16 May 2023

• Activity: Interviews with local residents and representatives of community groups

• Location: Lurnea

Are you struggling to keep up with the demands of your academic journey? Don't worry, we've got your back!
Exam Question Bank is your trusted partner in achieving academic excellence for all kind of technical and non-technical subjects. Our comprehensive range of academic services is designed to cater to students at every level. Whether you're a high school student, a college undergraduate, or pursuing advanced studies, we have the expertise and resources to support you.

To connect with expert and ask your query click here Exam Question Bank