ordinary meeting of council to be held on tuesday, 26 april 2005 at ...

Ordinary Meeting <strong>of</strong> Council - 26 April 2005 9 / 3
Item 9
DA1081/04
24 March 2005
Meri<strong>to</strong>n has approached each <strong>of</strong> affected owners requesting their consent <strong>to</strong> extinguish the
s<strong>to</strong>rmwater easements on their title and replaced with a new easement permitting the discharge <strong>of</strong>
s<strong>to</strong>rmwater from lands in the public roadway as well as Meri<strong>to</strong>n.
Council has requested creation <strong>of</strong> the new easement under Section 88B <strong>of</strong> the Conveyancing Act
1919.
Of the five properties, Meri<strong>to</strong>n has obtained a <strong>to</strong>tal <strong>of</strong> four written consents by:
• A letter from 5, 7 and 9 Rhonda Close, and
• A Deed <strong>of</strong> Agreement from 17 Gilda Avenue.
The remaining fifth consent from 19 Gilda Avenue was initially sought by commencing
proceedings in the Supreme Court pursuant <strong>to</strong> Section 88K <strong>of</strong> the Conveyancing Act 1919, however
the owner has given written consent prior <strong>to</strong> the hearing.
Meri<strong>to</strong>n has prepared the necessary documents for execution by the owners who have consented,
and submitted these <strong>to</strong> Council for comment. The extinguishment <strong>of</strong> the existing easement was
sought using Section 88B <strong>of</strong> the Conveyencing Act 1919, and is considered satisfac<strong>to</strong>ry. However,
as the creation (for a Transfer granting easement) was sought using the Real Property Act 1900,
Meri<strong>to</strong>n were requested <strong>to</strong> liaise with Fox & Staniland acting on Council’s <strong>be</strong>half. Fox & Staniland
have amended the proposed wording by Meri<strong>to</strong>n who have agreed, such that it remains a Council
easement.
Assessment <strong>of</strong> property s<strong>to</strong>rmwater discharge in<strong>to</strong> Council pipelines
An assessment was made <strong>of</strong> the s<strong>to</strong>rmwater report and plans prepared by Brown Consulting (NSW)
Pty Ltd and are considered satisfac<strong>to</strong>ry. Design <strong>of</strong> the s<strong>to</strong>rmwater requirements was undertaken in
accordance with the Council’s Water Management Development Control Plan No 47. A reduced
plan <strong>of</strong> the s<strong>to</strong>rmwater management measures and layout is shown on Attachment 2.
Key devices <strong>of</strong> the internal s<strong>to</strong>rmwater management system comprise;
• A series <strong>of</strong> rainwater tanks <strong>to</strong>talling 185m 3 (supplying water for internal use) and
s<strong>to</strong>rmwater tanks <strong>to</strong>talling 286 m 3 (supplying water for irrigation);
• Detention basins for on-site s<strong>to</strong>rage <strong>to</strong>talling 613 m 3 ; and
• Two bioretention basins <strong>to</strong> reduce water borne pollutants. One is placed <strong>be</strong>fore each <strong>of</strong> the
two discharge points in<strong>to</strong> the Council s<strong>to</strong>rmwater pipeline.
The net result <strong>of</strong> these devices for s<strong>to</strong>rmwater does not adversely impact on downstream properties
or the pipe system. Specifically, these achieve:
• Reduced peak flow <strong>of</strong> 0.32m 3 /s leaving the site compared <strong>to</strong> 0.9m 3 /s for existing conditions
from a 100 year ARI design s<strong>to</strong>rm event.
• At Gilda Avenue, a reduced <strong>to</strong>tal flow from 5.7 <strong>to</strong> 5.0m 3 /s, and reduced peak surface flow
from 4.9m 3 /s <strong>to</strong> 4.1m 3 /s.
N:\050426-OMC-SR-03089-1580 TO 1596 PACIFIC HIGH.doc/tattam /3