Studies of Local Development Projects in Cabramatta Lessons for Renewing and Consolidating West Central Sydney

UNIVERSITY OF NEW SOUTH WALES – FACULTY OF THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT

THESIS PROJECT 2009 (PLAN 4132)

SANG HUNG TAING (GAVEN) Z3160011

23 OCTOBER 2009

Prepared by Sang Hung Taing (Gaven)

Bachelor of Planning degree, Faculty of the Built Environment

University of New South Wales

A SPECIAL NOTE FROM OUR SPONSORS...

This thesis is proudly brought to you by Lipton Tea, makers of the finest quality tea that can keep any student going and going and going and going and going and going…. ABSTRACT

Current circumstances relating to urban renewal and consolidation in the West Central subregion of Sydney and in particular the suburb of Cabramatta can be likened to a stalemate in a game of chess. As the New South Wales Government plans to increase and renew housing in the form of higher density development, the majority of the existing community living within these areas need, amongst other things, better outcomes in terms of development improvements, design quality and more affordable housing options.

From the perspective of developers, there are too many risks for too little returns, starting from project inception to delivery. There is a very real prospect of large scale displacement and greater housing stress, with significant social and political repercussions. Urban renewal in the form of consolidation must be rethought and remodeled through improved policy and specialised development initiatives.

The primary aim of this thesis is to examine and distil broad lessons from local housing projects in Cabramatta to help form best practice property development policy mechanisms. It is hoped that this will help better inform future policy and actions as well as contribute to the existing academic body of work concerning urban consolidation and renewal. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to sincerely thank the local developers who chose to give up their time to participate in this research for which this project would was made possible.

Special thanks to Simon Pinnegar and the team of the City Futures Research Centre for their support and guidance throughout the course of this project. Your knowledge and enthusiasm has been invaluable to my experience as a planner.

And finally, I would like thank my family - Mum, Dad, A Ma and A Gong together with Biggy, Yi Tsair and Re. Thank you for showing the support and love throughout my years of study. I am truly grateful for the patience and special care you have shown me. Table of Contents

1. Introduction ...... 2 1.1 Background ...... 2 1.2 Problem Statement ...... 3 1.2.1 Research Objectives ...... 4 1.2.2 Research Questions ...... 5 1.3 Research Methodology ...... 5 1.4 Structure of Thesis ...... 6

2. Urban Growth Patterns ...... 9 2.1 Overview ...... 9 2.2 Literary Discourse ...... 9 2.3 Urban Renewal ...... 9 2.4 Urban Consolidation ...... 14 2.5 Summary ...... 21

3. Housing Background in Cabramatta ...... 23 3.1 Overview ...... 23 3.2 Renewal and Consolidation Experience ...... 23 3.3 Current Implications for Future Housing ...... 28 3.3 Summary ...... 32

4. Research Approach ...... 35 4.1 Overview ...... 35 4.2 Research Methodology ...... 35 4.2.1 Interviewees ...... 35 4.3 Interview Questions ...... 39 4.4 Research Limitations ...... 40 4.5 Summary ...... 41

5. Research Findings ...... 43 5.1 Overview ...... 43 5.2 Themes ...... 43 5.2.1 Profits and Security ...... 43 5.2.2 Local Ties ...... 44 5.2.3 Financing ...... 45 5.2.4 Development and Approvals Process ...... 48 5.2.5 Market Response ...... 50 5.2.6 Future of Development ...... 52 5.3 Summary ...... 53

6. Research Evaluation ...... 56 6.1 Overview ...... 56 6.2 Evaluation of Findings ...... 56 6.3 Best Practice Recommendations ...... 58 6.4 Summary ...... 63

7. Conclusion ...... 65 7.1 Overview ...... 65 7.2 Research Outcomes ...... 65 7.3 Summary of Recommendations ...... 66 7.4 Suggestions for Future Research ...... 68 7.5 Final Remarks ...... 69

8.0 Bibliography ...... 71

Table of Figures Figure 1 – Research Methodology ...... 6 Figure 2 – Housing in Cabramatta ...... 26 Figure 3 – Housing in Cabramatta ...... 26 Figure 4 – Housing in Cabramatta ...... 27 Figure 5 – Housing in Cabramatta ...... 27 Figure 6 – Cabramatta in 1943 ...... 29 Figure 7 – Cabramatta in 2008 ...... 30

Figure 8 – Comparison of Occupied Private Dwellings ...... 31 Figure 9 – Local Residential Development ...... 32 Figure 10 – Makeup of Housing Component ...... 32 Figure 11 – 77 Hill Street ...... 39

Appendices Appendix A – Approved Local Development Applications Appendix B – Ethics Approval

iii

CHAPTER ONE - INTRODUCTION

1. Introduction

1.1 Background

The Metropolitan Strategy is a broad framework intended to secure Sydney’s place in the global economy by promoting and managing growth (NSW Department of Planning 2005). The strategy is considered as one of the most ambitious plans ever produced to guide Sydney’s growth as it proposes approximately two-thirds of all future housing to be in established areas, effectively signalling the reversal of past strategies where most population growth relied on the new release areas on the outskirts of the region (Meyer, 2005). To help to meet this target, some 95,500 new homes have been designated for the West Central subregion, incorporating the local government areas (LGA) of Parramatta, Bankstown, Fairfield, Auburn and Holroyd (NSW Department of Planning 2005).

A growing body of literature however, suggests that such strategies are deemed to fall short of the mark, brought on by an oversight of the processes needed to implement these strategies and a lack of understanding of the issues affecting these areas. Some of the limits, as identified by Searle, include providing adequate capacities in infrastructure and land, the need to maintain urban vitality, mitigating the potential loss of economic activity and meeting market demand (2003).

Other studies largely produced by Randolph and his colleagues also reveal similar concerns invariably linked to the socio-economic profiles associated with the majority of areas in the West Central. On one side of the equation, urban renewal and consolidation initiatives for the West Central will have a whole raft of social enigmas to contend with whilst on the other, there are difficulties concerning the built form and the quality and capacity of existing housing stocks in these areas – this relates particularly to existing strata and lot arrangements (see Ruming et al., 2007, Randolph, 2006 and Randolph, 2008).

In light of this, the situation appears to present an irreconcilable dilemma for city planners to preserve and promote renewal and consolidate housing (Searle, 2006;

Beer et al., 2007). If current practices in housing continue unchanged there is real concern that it would tend toward even greater exacerbation of the socio-spatial polarisation of high and low income households (Gurran, 2008). Facilitating housing through urban renewal and consolidation initiatives in these areas therefore is likely to face higher risks and take place over a long time span (Randolph, 2006). The do nothing option is not an alternative either. If housing is left the way it is, it would eventually succumb to the problems of urban decay.

The need to develop more innovative and practical solutions of development implementation is thus imperative to ensuring that the bulk of the prescribed housing targets are delivered effectively and sustainably. To avoid further problems for the future, ideal solutions would need to seek for other mechanisms to strike a balance between housing and rental affordability, production of higher quality urban design outcomes and building performance, improvements to tenure choice and improved provision of infrastructure and development funding. For one, various forms of public and private industry arrangements can help achieve this (e.g. Smith, 2006 and Adair, Berry & McGreal, 2003).

So far, policy responses like the Commonwealth Government’s National Rental Affordability Scheme (NRAS), the recent introduction of New South Wales (NSW) Government’s new Affordable Rental Housing - State Environmental Planning Policy (SEPP) together with the roll out of specific housing actions in the Metropolitan Strategy are key steps in the right direction. But more needs to be done.

As a contribution to these efforts, the thesis will reflect on interviews undertaken with various local developers in Cabramatta to help gain a better understanding of the issues they regard as important in shaping future housing in the area and achieving more sustainable outcomes. It is hoped that the findings from this research task will help inform and improve housing renewal and consolidation initiatives for the broader subregional area.

1.2 Problem Statement

The current circumstances relating to urban renewal and consolidation in the West Central subregion and in particular the suburb of Cabramatta can be likened to a

3 stalemate in a game of chess. As the New South Wales Government plans to increase and renew housing in the form of higher density development, the majority of the existing community living within these areas need, amongst other things, betters outcomes in terms of development improvements, design quality and more affordable housing options.

It will be difficult to satisfy these objectives. Current mechanisms and development solutions alone have too large of a gap to fill. From the perspectives of developers, there are too many risks for too little returns, starting from project inception to delivery. For development to work under these models, many undesirable outcomes are likely to happen; there is a real prospect of large scale displacement and greater housing stress with significant social and political repercussions. The move then is with the Government. To break this deadlock, urban renewal in the form of consolidation must be rethought and remodeled through either improved policy and or specialised development initiatives.

The primary objective of this thesis is to examine and distil broad lessons of best practice property development from local housing projects in Cabramatta. It is hoped that this will help better inform future policy and actions as well as contribute to the existing academic body of work concerning urban consolidation and renewal. The role of local developers and the significance of their contributions will serve a primary feature to this. By drawing on their feedback and experiences, the thesis can attempt to highlight possible areas of change and other styles of approach to housing development which may produce better outcomes going forward.

1.2.1 Research Objectives

Investigations into the problem statement will comprise of the following primary and secondary objectives:

 Explore the current body of knowledge relating to urban renewal and consolidation practices;

 Examine the changes in housing and urban form that have occurred in Cabramatta since post Second World War;  Investigate the role developers’ play within Cabramatta and the processes and outcomes of recent residential projects that have occurred in the area;  Present the experiences of local developers and their views as to what they regard as important for future housing to produce sustainable outcomes; and  Identify improvements that can to better support residential development in Cabramatta and in turn for the broader area

1.2.2 Research Questions

To achieve the prescribed objectives, the following sets of research questions will be used.

Primary Questions

 What are the experiences of local developers in the locality?  What features of the development process has benefited them and what has not?  In what ways can these experiences inform best practice solutions for larger scale property development in the future for Cabramatta?

Secondary Questions

 What are the representations of urban renewal and consolidation in the current body of literature?  What is the nature of housing development in Cabramatta?

1.3 Research Methodology

Findings for the research task will be derived by investigating and assembling together various sources of primary and secondary data (see Figure 1). Together, they include a series of one-on-one interviews, a review of the existing body of literature concerning urban renewal and consolidation; and an audit of recent local development applications.

Review of Urban Renewal and Consolidation Literature

One-on-one interviews with Local Development Audit local developers

Data Assembly

Research Findings

Figure 1 – Research Methodology

1.4 Structure of Thesis

The thesis is structured in the following chapters:

Chapter 2 – Presents the existing theoretical framework related to the primary research. This will include a review of the relevant literature which is concerned with urban growth patterns and the concepts of urban renewal and consolidation.

Chapter 3 – Examines the suburb of Cabramatta as a primary case study. This includes an inspection of the history of housing development in the area and an analysis of the areas demographic profile. Major issues concerning housing initiatives specific to this area will also be identified.

Chapter 4 – Describes the research approach and methodology that will be carried out in order to obtain information about local developers in the area and details regarding their respective housing projects.

Chapter 5 – Presents an evaluation findings derived from the primary research task. In this chapter, the key experiences relating to individual development projects, from inception to the areas of finance, construction, design, the approvals process and sales will be put forward.

Chapter 6 – Discusses the findings derived from the primary research task and will present some recommendations on best practice mechanisms which could be adopted.

Chapter 7 – Concludes the thesis by extrapolating together all of the knowledge presented. It will summarise the key recommendations as provided as part of the discussion found within the research evaluation. It will also reflect on how this knowledge can be transferred onto improved housing renewal and consolidation solutions for the broader area.

CHAPTER TWO – URBAN GROWTH PATTERNS

2. Urban Growth Patterns

2.1 Overview

The purpose of this chapter is to examine the current body of knowledge of which the primary research of this paper is contributing to. The tour will begin with a review of the relevant literature concerning urban growth patterns and management practices. The framework will establish the necessary groundwork and understanding which will serve as the prelude to subsequent chapters.

2.2 Literary Discourse

Urban environments need to constantly respond to a whole host of factors, the result of which determines its particular form and function. These factors may include changes in government reforms, shifts in the economy, household characteristics, employment, population growth and migration as well as the demands and constraints from the natural environment to name a few. For many governments, urban renewal and consolidation is seen more and more as the conduit necessary to respond to issues. For example, these may include urban decay, changes to local demographics and dysfunctions in local market economies, space or communities. The following sections in this chapter will identify and discuss the benefits and issues relating to the role of urban renewal and urban consolidation as examined in the current literature.

2.3 Urban Renewal

Renewal is by no means a new concept. It is a process which has been widely used ever since humans first realised that there was a need to replace or alter a particular development or a collection of them. The process comes about through many different reasons, including the advent of new architectural philosophies and with it the introduction of new materials and improvements in craftsmanship. Gradual degradation and catastrophes brought on by natural disasters and even through war can also be some of the precursors to renewal procedures.

The term urban renewal is essentially the same concept. The reference to the term “urban” implies a particular focus on renewal activities taking place in settings of contemporary cities and towns; places which are shaped and supported by complex road networks and other infrastructure utilities, varying distributions of demographic profiles and higher population counts, larger varieties of housing types and living conditions, varying land use clusters and suburbia to name a few. A wide collection of discussions in the urban planning studies literature pay particular attention to this concept. Sometimes referred to as urban revitalisation or regeneration, the following conceptual frameworks offered by some observers encapsulates many of the important dimensions relevant to the practice today.

“Urban revitalisation, the rekindling and revaluing of human activities and interests in cities following the social, cultural and technological changes of the past decades...includes elements of renovation, restoration and redevelopment...” (Taylor & Newtown 1985: 1)

“Problems of economic decline, social and economic change and physical and environmental dereliction may combine in particular localities to create or reinforce poverty, disadvantage and deprivation. Regeneration represents a response to these problems, seeking to promote greater prosperity, wider social inclusion and an enhanced quality of life for local communities. It is a long-term process, linking economic, social and environmental issues and policies” (Smith, 2006)

“Urban renewal is the term given to the combined efforts of public agencies and private individuals to revitalise urban areas by maintaining, rehabilitating or redeveloping properties to make them more suited to future needs. The urban renewal concept is usually applied to situations of environmental decline which offer potential for improvement. In the past this potential has been seen mainly in terms of physical improvement, with an emphasis on redevelopment.” (Department of Environment, Housing and Community Development 1977 pp. vii)

As we see in these frameworks, the notion of physical improvement continues to be the centre piece in urban renewal rationale. Beyond this concept, we see that in the contemporary context, urban renewal is closely associated to influences coming

10 largely in part from political, legal, economic, technical, environmental and sociological aspects. That said, there is an overriding perception that urban renewal projects almost always results in outcomes better than circumstances prior to its undertaking – which begs one to ask, relevant to areas of low-income neighbourhoods, is this necessarily the case? Some case studies detailing urban renewal procedures and outcomes have helped provide some critical insight to better understanding contemporary concerns

In the British context, regeneration initiatives undertaken in Birmingham provide some evidence to the effects of physical and economic restructuring on surrounding residential districts (Cameron and Doling, 1994). Introduced in light of the economic downturn that was occurring around the 1980’s, regeneration strategies were devised to reverse this trend by broadening the city’s economic base of industry to more service-sector oriented (DiGaetano and Klemanski, 1993). To do this, the city council adopted a CBD-focused model of regeneration as its primary vehicle for securing the city's economic future, promoting Birmingham as an international centre for business tourism, leisure and culture, and attracting footloose inward private-sector investment and jobs (Loftman and Nevin, 1992). This was undertaken with pragmatic approach to local development, the result of this has had profound effects on the recovery and growth of the city (Carley 1991).

For social residential land uses, it was found that the outcomes of regeneration initiatives had not resulted in issues of displacement and affordability. Cameron and Doling proposes that the resistance to gentrification from these areas is attributed primarily to the fact that a large proportion of housing is in the ownership of the local authority and where in the instances that transfers take place, it is usually sold to non-profit providers (1994). In effect this has reduced the potential for displacement and maintains the affordability of housing in the area. There have however been some criticisms which have developed as a result of regeneration initiatives in relation to access to economic opportunities available to low-income neighbourhoods. This is highlighted by Barber and Hall as they point out that economic difficulties and wider disadvantage experienced by much of the city’s population and many of its neighbourhoods have continued to endure and even deepened despite the efforts of numerous area-based regeneration programmes

(2008). This is seen as a result largely due to the fact that low income neighbourhoods are excluded and insulated from economic change and regeneration in the city (Cameron and Doling, 1994).

The experience in South Korea also reveals more extreme circumstances. In urban Korea, Ha explains that largely due to the interests of white-collar workers, government interests in macroeconomic concerns and profiteering, housing regeneration projects have systematically reduced the availability of housing in the areas where low-income families are concentrated (2007). Although the focus of such initiatives may have been on improving the physical deterioration of buildings and distressed neighbourhoods spearheaded by joint venture private enterprise, the actual outcomes have provided little consideration for the social and cultural capital of low-income neighbourhoods (Ha, 2007). As such, whilst catering for those more financially capable, Korea’s housing renewal projects have caused other socio- economic problems such as the collapse of low-income communities through eviction and affordability – much to which is instigated by the lack of understanding of what these communities really need (Ha, 2007).

Clearly, there is an interesting contrast existing between the intended outcomes supplied by the urban renewal frameworks and the outcomes described in the renewal case studies presented. Whilst it is acknowledge that although the case studies are not representative of all renewal projects for distressed neighbourhoods, particularly for those that have been successful, it does supply greater perspective on the possible issues and complications arising from these initiatives. By exploring such cases and others alike (see Turok, 1992 and Lawless, 1994), it is realised that the key issues which dominate renewal in such neighbourhoods include the risk of displacement, housing affordability and social equity. It is also important to keep in mind that these issues stem from the point of view in favour of existing communities. In contemplation of Barber and Halls question “whose urban renaissance?” – there is a realisation governing bodies and other stakeholders face unique obstacles as well. For government, this can be because of the need to fulfil political goals whereas in private industry for instance, this would appropriately be the need to make a profit.

In light of all this, what is it about renewal in low income areas that creates the potential for such problems? Of the many possible factors, one key theme is solely attributable to this. This theme is governance – its style of approach, ability to coordinate, and the mechanisms it creates in addressing renewal initiatives in a particular area. Jones and Evans describe this in the sense of the inability of government to act because too much emphasis is placed upon policy tools or due to the difficulties of achieving co-operative action (2006).

As highlighted by Hackworth (2003, see also Cook & Ruming, 2008; Zhu, 1997 and Schall, 2001), policies are invariably linked to different political doctrines of those governments which design and implement them. Because of this, approaches in policies have had significant impacts to the efficiency of achieving outcomes aligning themselves to either socio-democratic or neo-liberal values. Social democratic approaches are considered as policies which embrace a higher degree of government led interventions and promote a centralisation of policies (Baker, 1999), whereas neoliberalism is said to represent those frameworks of political and economic authority that champions market operation and efficiency over a wide range of social relations (Brenner & Theodore, 2002).

In terms of alleviating those impacts which have emerged, it is generally found that low income residential renewal projects involving a high degree of direct government intervention are more capable in dealing with such issues. Such examples may include government-led increases to the supply in social housing stocks and rent control to name a few. Studies undertaken by Milligan, Dielman & Kempen into the impacts of housing policies on low-income households in Australia and the Netherlands illustrate this point (2006).

On this note, it is rather odd that governments in cities across the world are tending to adopt neoliberal approaches to redevelopment policy instead (see Shenjing & Fulong, 2009 and Addie, 2008). Baum explains that this is attributable to growing need push for integration into the global economy, for matters of competitiveness, prosperity and development at the level of the nation state (1997). With reference to the regeneration of low-income neighbourhoods, there seems to be somewhat of a paradox. Brenner and Theodore similarly share this point of view and at the same

13 time shed light to the idea that perhaps more holistic approaches, those that incorporate all areas and groups into the renewal process, would be of a better remedy. They state:

“On one hand, while neoliberalism aspires to create a “utopia” of free markets liberated from all forms of state interference, it has in practice entailed a dramatic intensification of coercive, disciplinary forms of state intervention in order to impose market rule upon all aspects of social life...on the other hand, whereas neoliberal ideology implies that self-regulating markets will generate an optimal allocation of investments and resources, neoliberal political practice has generated pervasive market failures, new forms of social polarization, and a dramatic intensification of uneven development at all spatial scales.” (Brenner and Theodore 2002)

The practice of urban renewal initiatives in distressed neighbourhoods as explored so far involves a complex range of processes affecting many people. Through critical extrapolation of urban renewal frameworks it is clear that the successes and failures are primarily derived from the quality, style and effectiveness of governance. This would usually depend upon co-operation, partnership and the integration of different programmes and policies, adopting a holistic approach at an appropriate geographical scale (Smith, 2006 p 271). Having examined example cases studies and similar to what Zhu states, it is clear that governance which brings about greater capacity for more direct government intervention seems indispensable not only to make market operations efficient, but also to achieve other non-economic goals (1997). This is a vital necessity to the regeneration of neighbourhoods in distress.

2.4 Urban Consolidation

Urban consolidation has been a point of interest and debate amongst scholars, planning practitioners, sociologists, demographers and the like for many decades. As such, there is a vast variety of literature available with the bulk of it examining the concept’s impressions on past and contemporary planning regimes, its perceived and measured benefits as well as drawbacks; and it’s environmental, social and economic impacts. To better understanding of the relationship shared between density and the built form, Scoffham and Vale (2005) challenges us by asking:

“...Does it mean that buildings, and with them the functions of urban life, should be close together; closer together than is now common? Does it mean, inter alia, an increase in density, so that more people and, one might expect, more urban functions are located within a given area?...”

Taking this into consideration and with regard to the general consensus found across the literature, an appropriate definition of the concept could be defined as a means by which more people can be brought into existing residential areas where the necessary infrastructure such as public transport, schools and utilities are already in place (Smith 1997). Having explored the notion of renewal, it can be seen that consolidation is a form of renewal practice. With regard to the planning practice, it is also important to note that it does not refer to one single policy, but rather a number of related land use measures and housing initiatives that can increase residential densities. (NSW Department of Environment and Planning, 1984 p. 1, sourced from Bunker et al 2002) As one may have figured already, some commentators choose to use other terms such as compact city, centralist planning, urban compaction or containment, densification and other more trendy variants like transport oriented design (TOD) and smart growth in their works to describe principally the same method of approach to developing the urban form.

Based on this framework, we continue by exploring the strengths of this concept. Firstly, it requires that urban consolidation concentrates first and foremost on increased residential densities. This suggests that by doing so, the densification of residential land uses underwrites the perceived benefits of living in consolidated areas. This thought is rather logical. For example, we see in Greenberg’s et al work, the provision of infrastructure is described to be more cost effective, as it does not demand for entirely new systems to be installed, by utilising existing capacities by grouping people closer together (2001). Secondly, the need for common visions and comprehensive coordination between policy makers and key stakeholders are also emphasised. This further challenges us to think of consolidated areas, and if one would like the urban fabric as a whole, as perhaps a physical by-product of land management practices and governmental quality.

Throughout the literature, the debate between urban consolidation and urban sprawl is a notable standout, with both doctrines gaining as much support as the other. Breheny describes that the debate between the two concepts has shifted from the traditional grounds based on the quality of urban and rural life and the aesthetics of urbanity to more contemporary concerns of sustainable development (2005). That is not to say that those traditional arguments have disappeared altogether. Nevertheless, as the topical issue of global warming and climate change draws growing interest from governments across the world, the urban consolidation approach has been reviewed as an effective way of enhancing a city’s economy whilst offering increased benefits of mitigating development and population impacts onto the environment.

The potential benefits of urban consolidation as described by the then NSW Department of Environment and Planning, include land savings, more affordable housing, economising on infrastructure, reducing natural resource use in the form of energy and water demand, and widening housing choices (1984; see also Holliday, 2000). A range of papers reflect on these benefits, questioning the integrity of these claims but also providing a critical insight to the whole issue of sustainability. Where studies have been found to focus on a particular variable, many other areas have yet to be investigated. We continue our tour by examining some broad accounts of these discussions.

Contrary to the belief that urban consolidation enables greater housing affordability, some critics in the field have condemned it as being a catalyst to the problem. Proponents generally argue that by imposing urban growth boundaries onto the fringes of the city, the restriction of new supplies of land would place a premium on existing urban areas for either sale or redevelopment prospects. Alan Moran attempts to show that the connection to housing affordability is bizarre; as it is understood in his work, urban consolidation, or as he prefers, “land rationing” would obstruct the natural development of domestic housing market sentiment and reactions (2006). He goes further by asserting that this would systematically undermine the fiscal incentives for local governments to provide for those seeking to enter the home-owning market. His argument does carry some weight, especially

16 when one starts to think about the possible repercussions onto lower income groups in society in terms of housing and rental affordability.

Criticisms aside, having to test and to prove this relationship is not at all an easy task. This is because the empirical case studies examined throughout the literature are often subject to a varying range of political, geographic, cultural, social and economic settings. Where studies have consistently found urban containment policies contributing to housing price inflation in areas where they are imposed, there is general disagreement among scholars over the nature of these effects and the appropriate way to measure them (see Dawkins and Nelson, 2002). As we see, prior to their study of the Melbourne housing market and its relationship to consolidation policies, Hans and O’Connor adopted the view that whilst urban consolidation could be seen as a source of additional supply, it was also a stimulus to demand. (2008). Despite this and having concluded later that the relationship was more or less valid, they did stress that the outcome may only hold true in certain areas and that urban consolidation policies alone are not powerful in explaining the price changes.

In reminding us that urban environments are definitely complex places, Burton’s findings from her examination of urban consolidation in the UK contends that housing is more expensive in a compact city. But like Hans and O’Connor after her, she attributes the trend to other elements. When intervening variables are taken into account, compactness is not the most important determinant of affordability, the proportion of more-affluent residents is far more significant; affordability is probably, therefore, most strongly related to the demand for housing, and the density of housing in a city is simply a reflection of this demand. (Burton, 2000). Therefore, as Smyth elaborates, most households will effectively have to have large incomes in order to be able to afford the house purchases and rents (1999).

Results from these findings are interesting and does provide a unique and rather provocative perspective of the entire situation. Conclusions from the broad range of international cases investigated by Dawkins and Nelson helps bring this into perspective. The effects of urban containment appear to be much more dependent on the style of policy implementation, the structure of local housing markets, the

17 pattern of existing land ownership, and the stringency of other local regulations (2002).

Going hand in hand with the issue of affordability, we now shift our focus a little over to the notion of housing choice and diversity. Advocates of this idea are confronted with strong evidence in the literature, which have been gathered by deconstructing down to important contributing factors which may have been overlooked in the first instance. One example is revealed by Bunker et al. Planning for higher density housing has been undertaken with little explicit recognition of the housing sub- markets, who higher density housing caters for or their specific spatial characteristics within the city (2005). This highlights one important point and that is how urban consolidation policies, although seen as a means of providing additional supply, can be disconnected to the demographic profile; which would affect how it relates to the nature of how people choose. The state of play in the Melbourne and Sydney housing markets as analysed by Yates is a prime example of this. Where urban consolidation has been promoted to as a means of greater diversity and choice, Yates concludes that whilst an increasing number of households have opted for higher density housing options, they have done so only when constrained by income in meeting their location and tenure preferences (2007)

The general impression one is left with from the discussions above is that urban consolidation does seem to instigate affordability problems but at the same time the reason for a greater range of housing stock. This might seem to increase housing choice; but in reality it is only increased as much as one’s income permits. All this appears to result from the potential disregard of urban consolidation in meeting of the needs and preferences of the population.

The connection between urban consolidation and the provision of infrastructure is also another prime area of focus. Throughout various conceptual analyses and empirical studies, the discussions revolve around the issue of whether or not infrastructure provision in contained urban forms would be more economically efficient and thus making it the preferential choice over urban sprawl. As it stands, the current body of work suggests otherwise as we will see.

For pro-consolidators, the benefit of the concept is largely based on a higher rate of infrastructure utilisation. It is argued that, in a compact city, not only are households in closer proximity to facilities but there are also likely to be a greater number of facilities per head of population because minimum densities of population are required for facilities such as retail to be economically viable (see Collie, 1990; Bromley and Thomas, 1993; Fyfe, 1994). This is all good, but as Hopkins et al (economies of scale in wastewater treatment) raises the point, do the cost savings from growth patterns that take advantage of economies of scale in infrastructure, sufficiently justify the costs of plans, incentives, and regulations necessary to achieve such patterns?

Searle and in particular Troy, provide critical insights at this point. As seen in their works, the notion of infrastructure efficiency under urban consolidation seems to be misguided. Firstly, by inspecting Sydney’s existing infrastructure system, Searle draws our attention to the potential limits of infrastructure capacity, incorporating water and drainage, public open space and transport facilities for consolidated areas (2003). The assertions made regarding the key challenges involving the limited ability of existing infrastructure to meet demand and the need to repair and replace obsolete systems suggest that there could be a very significant cost factor involved. Troy’s critical assessment of urban consolidation in the Australian context substantiates these ideas by arguing that facilities are already under-provided in the inner areas and would be even more expensive to provide there than in new outer areas (1996, pp. 58). Most intriguing and perhaps the most damaging of all, he alerts us to the erroneous assumptions of pro consolidators regarding infrastructure rollout.

It is very rare development in urban Australia for lots to be so provided with services or have access to facilities at the outset...Most services and facilities are provided in a lagged response to demand...It is therefore misleading to imply that the full provision of services and facilities occurs as lots are developed (Troy 1996, pp. 59)

The debate over urban consolidation and its environmental merits shares the same controversy. As concerns over energy consumption, resource depletion and environment deprivation continue, this component contributes a lot to the compact city justification. The environmental arguments supporting urban consolidation lay

19 claims that compact cities use less fossil fuels, emit less greenhouse gases, enable more attractive public transport types to be provided, and conserve agricultural and water catchment areas (Smith, 1997). The benefits described are seen to result from a combination of compact city features which include shorter travel distances and greater public transport utilisation. Developments in compact cities are also said to require less energy for heating and air conditioning, decrease the need for watering large lawns, have fewer swimming pools, and offer less of chance of contaminating reservoirs and underground water supplies in the protected open spaces (Greenberg’s et al, 2001).

However, similar to previous sections, we find that the contention is centred on the legitimacy of these environmental savings. Again, it is Troy who comes to the forefront by stating that consolidation initiatives are more likely to result in negative outcomes.

We see that increasing housing density:  actually decreases our capacity to cope with domestic wastes and our opportunities for recycling;  reduces our capacity to harvest or otherwise cope with the rainfall on urban areas and reduce runoff;  makes it harder for urban residents to produce much of their own food;  increases air pollution because it reduces space for growth of trees and shrubs to purify the air and cool the urban area;  reduces chances of growth of wood for fuel and reduces habitats for birds and other native fauna;  increases congestion which increases accidents and energy losses. (1996, pp. 129)

Studies undertaken by Barrett and Breheny are not as critical, but similarly downplay the perceived environmental benefits. They suggest that the trade-offs required to achieve these aims would lead to a worse off position and that any savings made would be minimal (Barrett 1996, Breheny, 1995).

2.5 Summary

This chapter has examined the current body of knowledge relevant to the themes of this thesis. In doing so, it has explored the concepts, ideas, examples and debates relating to the processes of urban renewal and consolidation. Specifically it has highlighted the relationship of government, policy, private industry, the community as well as the environment.

Urban patterns have been a crucial part in the development of issues and opportunities. In the context of Sydney, it is vitally important to gain a better understanding of these processes and how they have shaped current capacities for growth in Cabramatta.

CHAPTER THREE – HOUSING BACKGROUNG IN CABRAMATTA

3. Housing Background in Cabramatta

3.1 Overview

This chapter aims to convey an illustration of the context of housing in Cabramatta. Initially it will provide a brief review of the history of Sydney’s planning policies and subsequent growth patterns which took hold. Specifically, it will present examples of those housing outcomes in Cabramatta which have eventuated as a result of these initiatives. An analysis of current day issues relating to future housing initiatives will also be provided thereafter.

3.2 Renewal and Consolidation Experience

Urban housing strategies have had a profound effect on the nature of growth patterns in Sydney. Like many other observers, tracing the history of its development and the planning documents which set the direction for growth makes it possible to ascertain the planning mentality occurring within New South Wales and moreover offers an insight into the nature of the renewal and consolidation experience concerning residential developments which came to be in Cabramatta.

In a general sense, housing policy interventions in Australia were triggered by severe housing shortages and strong population growth (Milligan, Dieleman and Kempen 2006). In the first half of the twentieth century, Sydney’s urban development changed from the dense built form of the nineteenth century to low density suburban development, aided by increasing ownership of motor cars (Searle, 2007). Initially during the period following the Second World War, Meyer describes that development was shaped by plans within the 1948-1951 County of Cumberland Scheme which proposed a greenbelt to contain urban growth, with any expansion to be in satellite towns (2005).

The blueprint for this plan, however, was to face significant challenges as this period was marked by return of servicemen and a large influx of migrants whom largely sort housing through the access of cheap and plentiful land which resulted in high rates of homeownership and relatively how housing costs (Stretton, 1989).Contributions to

23 housing from both the Commonwealth and state government were also pretty significant during this period, whereby in 1954 government assistance accounted for some 40% of finance for new housing (Dalton, 1999). Additional housing for New South Wales during this period was facilitated by the introduction of the Commonwealth State Housing Agreement (CSHA), a mechanism designed to allow state governments to buy land and build public rental housing using low-cost loans for low-income families (Pugh, 1976). This was later revised to provide mortgage finance for home purchase and sitting tenants were encouraged to buy public housing under favourable rice and lending conditions (Milligan, 2003). The combined effect of these domestic affairs resulted in the subsequent growth beyond the greenbelt, establishing more of a moving boundary to urban expansion which was revised periodically to accommodate growth through rezoning for urban purposes and as a result suburban development at this stage was usually in the form of the separate house on its own block (Beer, 1999 and Bunker 2002).

The development context in this period also propagated through to the logic and vision of the Sydney Region Outline Plan. As Cardew reveals, growth was expected to continue unabated and major societal change was not anticipate by planners; and so the strategy departed from the greenbelt notions of the preceding plan and concentrated to coordinate development and ensure government infrastructure investment met the requirements of growth (1998). In general, the concept was for corridors to be focused on established rail lines radiating from the CBD, in the form of new towns, each with its own town centre and each with its own industrial areas and tertiary education campuses (Meyer 2005). The introduction of strata title legislation supported this as it was designed to help facilitate major expansion of higher density residential development by allowing the ownership of individual apartments (Randolph 2006a). Inevitably though, the vision of the plan was stifled due to the changes in the demography which are traced back to the unexpected falls in the average household size and the gentrification of inner city suburbs (Kendig, 1979). Characterised by much of those separate block developments and now concentrations of higher density developments, the result of the miscalculations had lead to a significant underutilisation of infrastructure that had been put in place (Bunker, Holloway and Randolph, 2005).

Moving forward, planners later found themselves confronted with further challenges. For one, the divergence of capital funding from the Commonwealth had planners meant that planners needed to consider strategies which would primarily reduce expenditure on infrastructure (Searle 2007). Urban consolidation and redevelopment of existing urban areas was to be the answer to containing ongoing sprawl of residential development. Similar to that of Troy, Milligan and others considered more recently that the up-take of neo-liberal policy reforms helped this transition as it enabled market-based housing provision which resulted in the New South Wales Government relying more heavily on private involvement in the planning, financing, and delivery of large-scale residential development projects (1999 and 2006, also see Cook & Ruming 2008). Changes to existing policies which allowed medium density development to take place along with market demand led to the building of dual occupancy developments and large numbers of three-storey walk-up flats either as initial development or as part of a redevelopment process (Bunker, Holloway & Randolph, 2005). This proved to be effective to the cause as subsequent brownfield developments which took place in the 1990s and early 21st century allowed the State Government to wind down outer area land releases as 70% of all dwellings were provided in the established areas but created the impetus for affordability issues (Meyer, 2005). In Fairfield’s local government area, Randolph and Holloway showed that multi-unit dwellings outstripped new houses in absolute terms between 1991 and 2001 (2005). A majority of developments in Cabramatta currently still in use today are an example of those developments (refer to figures 2, 3, 4 and 5). Emphasis to the state of decline to these buildings should also be noted.

Figure 2 – Housing in Cabramatta (Taing 2009)

Figure 3 – Housing in Cabramatta (Taing 2009)

Figure 4 – Housing in Cabramatta (Taing 2009)

Figure 5 – Housing in Cabramatta (Taing 2009)

It is by the same token and together with the more contemporary focus of the New South Wales Government to tackle housing affordability issues and reposition Metropolitan Sydney as a competitive global city which has lead to the adoption of the City of Cities strategic planning document introduced in 2005. Under the strategy, the urban growth pattern is expected to evolve by converging to support the existing decentralised footprint with particular emphasis on the development of multiple sub- centres (NSW Department of Planning, 2005). This approach is considered by Ingram to be the ideal solution in addressing issues of population growth, employment and infrastructure provision to name a few (1998) Moreover within this strategic context, the traditional reliance on new release areas have been largely discounted whereby 60 and 70 per cent of future development have been proposed to occur within existing built-up areas and the residual 30 per cent being catered for in perimeter development zones to the north-west and south-west of the existing urban area (Jensen, 2006). This is anticipated to be in the form of surrounding existing infrastructure facilities – namely rail, with high density residential housing (NSW Department of Planning, 2005).

3.3 Current Implications for Future Housing

The planning and development context explored so far reveals that housing growth patterns have effectively shifted away from its sprawling tendencies to more of the practice of consolidation through regeneration. In recent times, the move is seen to stem from economic growth strategies and the competitive cities rationale. With this change, it is also noticed that the role of government remained consistently minimal throughout the course of development. The range of direct and indirect subsidies developed to support private investment in housing for homeownership has undoubtedly characterised the nature of contemporary residential land uses across Sydney (Beer, Kearins & Pieters, 2007).

Given the housing and development context built up so far, future capacity for renewal and consolidation in Cabramatta, as envisaged by the Metropolitan Strategy would most likely be a challenging task to accomplish. Unlike circumstances of the past, the canvas to which development is proposed to take place presents unique obstacles – the result of many have come about through the accumulative effect of past regimes. The aerial photographs (figures 6 and 7) demonstrate this; whereby in

28 just over 60 years, the nature of housing development and tenure in Cabramatta is found to have significantly changed through phases of redevelopment and consolidation.

Figure 6 – Cabramatta in 1943 (SKM 2007, sourced from the Department of Lands SIX viewer)

Figure 7 – Cabramatta in 2008 (SKM 2008, sourced from the Department of Lands SIX viewer)

In Cabramatta, the long-running contributions of these features have had a profound impact shaping the current urban landscape, community and capacities in housing. Up until this point in time, it is regard that the quality of housing in Cabramatta has become amongst the poorest in Sydney, consisting a mix of poor quality fibro housing and street after street of 3-4 story gun-barrel walk-ups whereby the former exists predominantly in the form of highly fragmented suburban lots and the latter is identified to be entrenched with issues of multiple ownership and strata titling (Randolph, 2008 and Easthope & Randolph, 2009).

A comparison of Australian Bureau of Statistics (ABS) census data collected in 2001 and 2006 has also revealed that the number of those dwellings that are occupied have experienced a downward trend across all categories with the only increase occurring in separate homes (see figure 8). Whilst the timeframe taken for comparison may be limited, this data does indicate that market-based solutions to renewal and consolidation which is unlikely be effective this time round. This comes

30 especially when the majority of local residential developments have been somewhat stagnate in terms of providing a broad range and higher densities. The result of the local development audit has revealed residential development related applications make up for up to 45% of all applications approved the last 9 month period. This component is comprised predominantly of developments for double storey detached dwellings (41%) and alterations and additions to existing dwellings (34%) (see figures 9, 10 and Appendix A).

Together with fact that the area has become home to many of the migrant populations as well as many of the disadvantaged located by way of low income private rental housing tenures, the current situation seemingly demands more innovation in strategy and implementation mechanisms to carry future housing through – which so far none has been devised as yet (Bunker et al 2005a, Sherry, 2006)

Figure 8 – Comparison of Occupied Private Dwellings (source ABS Census Data 2001 and 2006)

Figure 9 – Local Residential Development

Figure 10 – Makeup of Housing Component

3.3 Summary

Since post Second World War, urban policies have unequivocally shaped the development of housing characteristics throughout the city and in particular in those areas around Cabramatta; the result of which has offered valuable insight to the planning mentality of the state towards housing provision. Critical to this, is the understanding the nature of those mechanisms which have been put in place and the outcomes produced as a result. For one, it is clear to see that the minimal role of

32 government in directly supplying housing in New South Wales has played a major part in explaining the constant shortage of household numbers available to meet demand and the creation of various sub-markets. In Cabramatta and areas alike, Bunker, Holloway and Randolph have identified that this has been characterised by financially and socially distressed households (2005a).

In more recent times, it was found that the majority of local residential developments are in the form of low density tenures. This comes with both positive and potentially negative implications affecting the future prospects of housing affordability, potential for displacement and continued physical distress. In light of this, future housing must be re-addressed with alternative policy approaches designed to better respond to existing building and environmental constraints as well as those social changes and issues which have developed as a result of the past.

CHAPTER FOUR – RESEARCH APPROACH

4. Research Approach

4.1 Overview

The purpose of this chapter is to detail the primary research approach and methods that were designed to address the problem statement. As well as providing details of local developers whom were interviewed and explaining the significance of their involvement, this section follows by examining the research topics explored and limitations involved.

4.2 Research Methodology

Qualitative research is concerned with exploring the understandings and meanings that people attribute to their social world (Walter, 2006, pp. 11). Case studies would bring a range of factors into a common analysis, but perhaps more importantly, the depth of understanding they offer is increasingly seen as critical in analysing wider socio-political processes (Yin, 1986 sourced in Jones & Evans, 2006)

As such, a qualitative approach was designed to investigate the problem statement. This involved conducting a series of in-depth face-to-face interviews with local developers to access their perspective and experiences with local development projects. Walter (2006, pp. 205) considers that this approach would be the best means of acquiring quality data. The research approach continues by providing a thematic analysis of the responses gathered.

Local developers were considered preferable candidates for the research task because of their experience and connections to the area. They are the also the group of people most likely to play a major part in renewal and consolidation processes into the future.

4.2.1 Interviewees

The research project was implemented over a 1 month period following an initial selection process for potential candidates. The criteria were based on two conditions. Firstly, they had to have undertaken a housing project within or around the vicinity of

Cabramatta. To ensure that each case was carefully selected as a way of capturing a key quality of interest to the research (Walter, 2006, pp. 283); the second qualification limited the selection process to two per residential development category.

The potential candidates were sourced in a variety of ways. Information from local development applications, real estate agents and sourcing local housing providers had generated a list of 8 potential candidates. Requests for interview sessions were made out via email and subsequently followed up with phone calls. Of the 8 potential candidates, 6 had responded and 2 were omitted from the process because there was no reply. Of those candidates whom had responded, 5 had agreed to an interview whilst the remaining 1 had declined to take part. The following table identifies the profiles of the 5 participating interviewees.

Participant Profile Interview Detail Mrs Tieu Nghi Mrs Maung had been residing in the local 13 Sept 2009 Maung area since first arriving to Australia some 20 years ago. Because of this, she has developed a strong relationship with the area and is familiar with the local community. She is currently employed on a full-time basis in the city and lives with her husband in Burwood. Mr Wilson Chang Mr Chang arrived in Australia some 25 12 Sept 2009 years ago and settled within the local area. He has since changed residences twice within the locality. Mr Chang is married with children and runs a small courier business catering predominantly for deliveries in the western suburbs. Mr Thi Lim Mr Lim and his family arrived and settle in 28 Aug 2009 the local area in 1970. His father had established a successful restaurant

Participant Profile Interview Detail business which is currently in operation today. As such, Mr Lim takes part in overseeing the running of the business now and again. He was once employed as a local real estate agent, but is now involved in the insulation business. Having moved out of the family home in Cecil Hills, Mr Lim currently resides in Cabramatta. Cliff La Mr La was born in Australia, son to migrant 3 Sept 2009 parents. Currently residing just outside Cabramatta in the suburb of Canley Heights, he is employed as a business banker for a major bank. Local Developer X Developer X migrated and settled into the 31 Aug 2009 (Identification local area with his family. Most members of Withheld) the family including Developer X got into various types of businesses ranging from groceries to finance to construction. Since moving out of the original family home, all members of the family have sort newer residencies in and around Cabramatta. Currently, Developer X is semi-retired and is involved in the building industry.

The inclusion of Mrs Maung and Mr Chang were necessary for forming perspectives and opinions from local developers engaged in small scale residential renewal and consolidation projects in the area. In Mrs Maung’s case, she undertook a residential redevelopment project for investment purposes. The project required the demolition of an existing fibro house and the erection of a two storey duplex. Her property is located just outside the northern boundary of Cabramatta in the suburb of Canley Heights. Similarly, Mr Chang has also undertaken a residential redevelopment project

37 incorporating the erection of another duplex development for living and investment purposes.

The choice to select Mr Thi Lim as a participant for the research task was based on the need to represent the opinions of owner occupiers whom engage in projects resulting primarily in renewed residential outcomes only. In Mr. Lim’s case, he had redeveloped his previous single storey brick home to a new double storey dwelling. Cases like Mr Lim’s are prominent in Cabramatta and therefore are of a particular interest to the research task. Mr Lim intends to engage in a potential duplex project within the near future.

Cliff La is also an owner occupier. The residential project undertaken with his brother, involved refurbishment works to his existing double storey brick dwelling, the subdivision of land and the construction of a new double storey dwelling on the resulting new lot. The creation of an easement running away from the street and into the lot provides access to the newly erected dwelling.

On the condition that their identification be withheld, securing the interview with Developer X was also very crucial in providing a representation for local townhouse development in the area. Developer X was involved in a family consortium which spearheaded a residential housing project. Specific project works included the need for site amalgamation and the construction of a new multi-unit townhouse development. The development lies just east of Cabramatta in the suburb of Canley Vale.

The unfortunate decline from the owner of the block of units at 77 Hill Street has meant that the research task has been limited in providing insights for a broader range of residential development categories. Recent redevelopment works undertaken at the block of units incorporated facade upgrades, landscaping, whole of building re-wiring and re-plumbing, and associated security upgrades. If the interview had been accepted, this case would have greatly contributed to the research task as it makes for a good insight into addressing the issues affecting older style unit blocks and townhouse developments in the area. As such, this has created some potential scope for future studies to investigate.

Figure 11 – 77 Hill Street (Taing 2009)

4.3 Interview Questions

The focus of questions designed for the interview process was aimed at drawing out how local developers thought and interpreted what they have done. This would allow them to explain a great deal about how and why they did what they did (Walter, 2006 pp. 35). Following the likes of Brenner et al semi-structured interviews were used to capture formal and informal aspects of the respective projects and to allow flexibility in accordance with the varying time-constraints of different interviewees (1985 cited in Jones and Evans 2005). Approximately 20–30 minutes were used to focus upon standard areas of focus concerning the project, followed by a relatively unstructured discussion of variable length used to explore opinions and less formal aspects of projects and interviewee’s involvement (Jones & Evans, 2005). Probing questions were also used intermittently throughout the interviews to help expand on certain areas of interest.

Generally, the interview questions were guided by covering the following broad topic areas.

 Motivations of the project  Contingencies of the project/risks  Benefits of the project  Project management  Site assembly and strata issues  Feasibility  What would they have done differently?  Perspectives on current development policies

4.4 Research Limitations

The adopted research approach encountered certain limitations and constraints which would have affected the outcomes of the investigation. On the point of scale, the number of interviewees whom were willing to participate in the process limited the scope of perspectives and opinions that could be retrieved. The ability of the research task to investigate the larger housing development located at 77 Hill Street was hindered by the decision of its respective owners not to participate. In effect, these two elements have restricted the capacity of the research task to demonstrate a more comprehensive representation of residential development categories and opinions from local developers in the area.

Whilst in-depth interviews are an ideal way for researching people with busy lifestyles, it also provides an avenue for investigating personal, sensitive and confidential information. As such, it should be made aware that there may be areas of purposeful distortion in the responses obtained.

As the research study could have benefited additionally from a more comprehensive sample size and access to additional facilities of verification and cross-checking, the result of the in-depth interviews did provide the chance to concentrate on the respondents’ individual experiences and understand the lessons they offer. Overall,

40 the research approach was successful in obtaining sufficient and valuable information from local developers.

4.5 Summary

The primary research approach and methods as discussed in the above sections were successful in gathering the necessary information from local developers within and around the Cabramatta area. Despite some initial setbacks and as a result of the interview process, a range of perspectives were obtained for several categories of residential developments. Despite the reluctance from local developers whom had declined to take part, the general response from those who participated was very forthcoming.

CHAPTER FIVE – RESEARCH FINDINGS

5. Research Findings

5.1 Overview

The purpose of this chapter is to document the findings gathered from the interviews. The feedback collected from local developers has been presented under the context of specific themes deemed relevant to the focus of this paper.

5.2 Themes

The findings derived from local developer interviews are presented below. To help with data analysis, information relevant to purpose of this thesis has been structured using a thematic type approach. These themes have been adopted as it provide an ideal means of increasing the understanding of local developer experiences by drawing critical connections to the current issues and highlight possible areas for policy change.

The themes relating to profits and security, local ties, financing, development approvals, market response and future development have been selected as they effectively convey experiences relating to local developer motivations, project risks encountered, development approach, construction and planning issues as well as cost factors involved.

5.2.1 Profits and Security

Not surprisingly, profitability and the sense of enjoying ownership of a stable asset were the major precursors for local developers to have become involved in property development. Generally, they regard it to be a pretty straight forward and relatively safe process which can return a sizable profit. Thi Lim in particular highlights this point of view in stating that “despite some nervous times, building to make money is quite often fun and exciting” (2009). Compared to other investments, of which he has little knowledge of and is uncomfortable with due to the increased volatility, he finds that “on top of increasing capital returns and ability to attract rent”...the tax advantages are also pretty good” for property developers (T Lim 2009, pers. comm.,

28 Aug). “For people in the same situation, this is a great incentive to get developing” (T Lim 2009, pers. comm., 28 Aug).

The sense of security which property development brings to the local developers is also expressed through in their remarks. Cliff La for one makes this perfectly clear by stating that for him “it’s a good way of making money and benefiting from the added security of this type of investment, it’s a good feeling knowing that you are holding onto property” (2009). Wilson Chang also mimics this same belief, stating that his decision to build the duplex allowed him “to obtain a good quality home to live in whilst making money next door” (2009,). He adds, “the arrangement for the building project has been convenient and at the end of the day, I can sleep easier at night knowing that I can be on top of any problems which may occur” (W Chang 2009, pers. comm., 12 Sept). Tieu Maung further reinforces these views by alerting to us that other than the long term capital gains which she considers as the main drawcard, getting into property has “granted the benefits of receiving a passive stream of income in the form of rent” whilst her and her husband are away working (2009). In addition to this, she regards it as a means of “safeguarding the future for the life they want to live” (T N Maung 2009, pers. comm., 13 Sept).

5.2.2 Local Ties

Local developers revealed that their familiarity with the area had more or less shaped their decision to undertake their respective projects in and around Cabramatta. For some, this extended to the familiarity with council processes and connections to local businesses. Consequently, local developers generally pointed out that this has in part influenced their decision to build their projects within the locality as opposed to other places. Tieu Maung’s illustrates this point of view in stating that “having lived in the area for most of my life and... together with investment advice and guidance from her family members”; she considers that it was “only of natural to seek development opportunities within the area” (T N Maung 2009, pers. comm., 13 Sept).

Failing to adequately enter into a housing project in Epping and parts of the Inner West, Cliff La stated that the locational choice for his development eventually turned to “focus on opportunities within the local area” (2009). This was in part due to the fact that he “knew it would be significantly cheaper to enter the market and also

44 because of the growth potential”, adding that “the availability of larger lots in the area had specifically appealed to this decision as well” (C La 2009, pers. comm., 3 Sept).

Thi Lim attributes his past experience as a local real estate agent as one of the key motivators for his decision to locate in Cabramatta (2009). He is quoted in saying “that because of my experience in knowing what to expect from the market place and with various connections to local lawyers, other real estate agents and developers built up over the years, it was a logical choice to have undertaken the project here” (T Lim 2009, pers. comm., 28 Aug). In addition to this, he admits that the development would allow him to “have a quality home that is located close to family, friends and work” (T Lim 2009, pers. comm., 28 Aug).

Like Thi Lim, the case for Wilson Chang and Developer X also relates to their family commitments and connections in the local area. As Wilson Change puts it, “I don’t really have any interest in other places, my job is based here, my children go to school here, and I enjoy the community and the shopping as well” (W Chang 2009, pers. comm., 12 Sept). Developer X mentions that because his family members had also undertaken separate projects in the area “it just seemed like the obvious location to undertake the project” having admitted to “have always thought and aspired to the development prospects for land in this area” (2009). In addition to this, he believes that his "knowledge about the construction industry coupled with his brothers’ and in- laws’ experience and association to local businesses...had benefited the whole project and added that “it would have been a bit more difficult to built the project anywhere else” (Developer X 2009, pers. comm., 31 Aug). It is learnt that Developer X is also well versed in the local council’s processes and has a very familiar understanding of their expectations regarding housing development for the area (2009). This in turn placed him in a predisposed position to conduct his activities within the area.

5.2.3 Financing

Financing was a very important point of discussion amongst the local developers. Most financing was found to be sourced from the banks with the remaining proportion of private funds put together in various ways. The latter is found to reflect the nature in how the development project was carried out. What can be said is that the local

45 developers were found to be in financially sound positions prior to undertaking their projects. We find from the responses that most of the loans were serviced by a secondary source, being either a job, support from another partner or an outside business. Generally, the financial state of the projects encountered little or no complications with all avoiding any potential on defaulting.

Wilson Chang provides an insight into his financial situation to help understand this better; as in his development he “was matched to a mortgage facility designed for the particular situation” whereby the private proportion of credit came in the form of “savings and personal assets” held (2009). He states that this was because he had “been taught to save as much cash as possible before any consideration of an investment can be made” (W Chang 2009, pers. comm., 12 Sept). In his experience, “when you are able to get into that position, more people are willing to deal with you and you can get things done generally more effectively; it can be frustrating and slow but it is worth it; in the end I am able to enjoy reasonable repayments because of this strategy” (W Chang 2009, pers. comm., 12 Sept).

Cliff La’s residential development undertaking was only made possible by forming a partnership with his brother (2009). He mentions that on his own, “it would have been a lot harder to source finance from the banks to help fund the project and also benefited from halving any of the projects risks” (C La 2009, pers. comm., 3 Sept). This also mentions that the “burden of repayments was also softened” (C La 2009, pers. comm., 3 Sept). Currently, he indicates, “the loan is still being paid off with parts of their income and rent received from the new house” (C La 2009, pers. comm., 3 Sept). “Generally because the cost for that particular project was relatively high, there will be a period of consolidation to existing funds before other projects in the pipeline can be commenced” (C La 2009, pers. comm., 3 Sept).

For Thi Lim and his knock-down rebuild project, he states that “having the family business definitely helped create an added advantage to access finance for the project” (2009). He asserts that having “the extra backing of a job and the restaurant has eased the strain on the repayments...providing the extra flexibility of including more features for the house” (T Lim 2009, pers. comm., 28 Aug). He also acknowledges that his position is more privileged than others and admits that “the

46 project would not have likely to have been started if that had not been the case” (T Lim 2009, pers. comm., 28 Aug).

Tieu Maung disclosed that financing for her duplex development came in the form of the “first home owners grant together with combined savings” from both her and her husband (2009). She mentioned that “the bank also took into consideration income levels and was eventually convinced to help finance the project” (T N Maung 2009, pers. comm., 13 Sept). Before the project began, they “stayed in the house for six months to satisfy requirements for the first home owners grant and continued on with the commencement of the project” (T N Maung 2009, pers. comm., 13 Sept). They subsequently managed to sell one side whilst holding on to the other as a rental property (T N Maung 2009, pers. comm., 13 Sept). This strategy has “helped free up much needed capital and eased some of the financial strains” they were experiencing at the time (T N Maung 2009, pers. comm., 13 Sept).

Developer X helps provide some further insight for development financing for higher density projects. He indicates that “prior to the townhouse development he had been buying property independently for some time” and that the townhouse development came about “by getting into a consortium with my brothers” whom also were heavily invested into other property themselves (Developer X 2009, pers. comm., 31 Aug). Developer X sees this as a really crucial factor for the development as it meant that they “could muster a significant sum of cash together and use the combined personal assets as a further guarantee to financiers” (2009). He advises that this provided an effective way to gain leverage and get into property development; “I don’t think the project would have happened without this” (Developer X 2009, pers. comm., 31 Aug). By the same token, he considers it to be “highly risky and dangerous” explaining that he had no protection on his personal assets (Developer X 2009, pers. comm., 31 Aug).

Developer X had indicated that finance was a very delicate stage in “which everyone needed to know what they were going to get out of project” (2009). He admits “it was tricky working alongside family members as many things can go out of hand” (Developer X 2009, pers. comm., 31 Aug). In this particular stage, the process was carried on with extra diligence taking “approximately five months for the financing

47 agreements to be finalised” (Developer X 2009, pers. comm., 31 Aug). “The loan was serviced with personal incomes and investment vehicles from all parties during the entire process...upon the eventual sale of all the units in the townhouse development was paid off in full” (Developer X 2009, pers. comm., 31 Aug).

5.2.4 Development and Approvals Process

There were also various approaches to the development process and approvals application undertaken for each local development project. In part, the differences in these approaches are seemingly reflective of the experience of each local developer. More importantly, it reveals particular practices which may prove crucial to the successful rollout of future housing developments in the area.

For both the duplex developments, Tieu Maung and Wilson Chang indicated that they both purchased different home packages as advertised by some building companies (2009). Having already purchased the land, Tieu Maung describes that they “engaged Masterton homes for their duplex development, to be responsible for all parts of the development and approvals work” (2009). After having picked out their design, fittings and materials, she mentioned that the company proceeded with submitting the relevant subdivision plans, development application lodgement...construction and landscaping of the dwelling (T N Maung 2009, pers. comm., 13 Sept). In hindsight, Tieu Maung believes that “although the company had got the job done and provided assistance throughout most stages of development...the end cost of the whole project worked out to be quite expensive and the quality of the workmanship did not live up to the imagination” (2009). Upon post construction inspections, she had “found many defects and imperfection with materials and detail in the work” (T N Maung 2009, pers. comm., 13 Sept). Tieu Maung stressed that perhaps the most difficult part of the project entailed “seeking agreements with neighbouring properties for the creation of a drainage easement” of which she and her husband pursued themselves; this was in addition to the fact that “the whole project was significantly long...lasting approximately about two years to complete” (2009).

In contrast, Wilson Chang had engaged Lily Homes for his duplex development (2009). Like the case of Tieu Maung, the whole project was predominately delivered

48 by the company. He recounts that it was a ‘smooth and easy process with the company providing guidance through the approvals and building phases” (W Chang 2009, pers. comm., 12 Sept). In terms of pricing, he agreed that he had spent more than he initially wanted to, “having added many extras...partly due to slight delays”, but was satisfied with the product delivered (W Chang 2009, pers. comm., 12 Sept). Unlike Tieu Maung, Wilson noted that the project took approximately sixteen months to complete (W Chang 2009, pers. comm., 12 Sept).

Other owner occupiers had decided to proceed with other approaches. Cliff La had revealed that he was “not in charge of the development and approvals process” (2009). Previous arrangements meant “that the tasks were overseen by a project manager”; commissioned by his brother to assume the majority of responsibilities for the entire project (C La 2009, pers. comm., 3 Sept). Unlike Masterton and Lily Homes, the project manager was “briefed on the design outcomes as well as the budget”. The project manager proceeded to undertake the project by “selecting and contracting the architect, planners and builders suitable for the project” (C La 2009, pers. comm., 3 Sept). Stages vital to the development were noted down as “the subdivision of land, creation of an easement to access new lot located towards the back...and the design and planning approvals for both the existing and new houses” whereby the respective tasks were delegated to the responsible contractors (C La 2009, pers. comm., 3 Sept). With regular briefings for each stage, Cliff and his brother were “kept updated with the progress of the project and any potential setbacks” which may have occurred (C La 2009, pers. comm., 3 Sept). He acknowledges that he was “disappointed in settling with the subdivision pattern”, which was initially “meant to be subdivided into three other separate lots not two”, the final design was reached on the basis of council recommendations (C La 2009, pers. comm., 3 Sept). Despite this, he felt that the whole process was a relative success (C La 2009, pers. comm., 3 Sept).

For Thi Lim and townhouse builder Developer X, the outfit used for their development and approvals process also varied slightly to other local developers. Thi Lim personally drove the project himself primarily “to ensure control of all elements of the redevelopment and save on costs” (T Lim 2009, pers. comm., 28 Aug). The tasks he oversaw included the “costing, design, planning and construction...contracting out

49 tasks to individuals and local companies” (T Lim 2009, pers. comm., 28 Aug). He regards the whole process to be generally successful, attributing it to the “skills and cooperation from each member of the team and because it was relatively small scale by nature” (T Lim 2009, pers. comm., 28 Aug). Outcomes in the design and planning phases were characterised by council’s concerns about the built form of the development and “how it did not relate to the designs of existing dwellings around the land” (T Lim 2009, pers. comm., 28 Aug). Revisions to the design ensured that the development was approved (T Lim 2009, pers. comm., 28 Aug).

For Developer X and his consortium, after having reached initial agreements between parties involved, “the project continued to investigate potential sites capable of supporting a townhouse development” (2009) . Consequently, they were able to piece together “three pieces of land adjoining one another to create a total area of approximately 1800 square metres” (Developer X 2009, pers. comm., 31 Aug). They proceeded on to the design and planning phases whereby initial designs were found to be not entirely satisfactory and were subsequently revised and worked through with council officers (Developer X 2009, pers. comm., 31 Aug). Developer X outlines that “the main issue was related to the prescribed floor space ratios” in which he and his team had proposed a design solution which made way for a slight increase (2009). The problem was eventually settled with changes to the developments layout and design, effectively meeting the council’s floor space requirements (Developer X 2009, pers. comm., 31 Aug). In terms of construction, Developer X notes that they were “able to save a significant amount of money because the project was able to source materials and labour directly through personal work” (2009). In total the project task lasted for just over 20 months to complete from inception right through to delivering the units to the market (Developer X 2009, pers. comm., 31 Aug).

5.2.5 Market Response

Generally, market responses to local developer projects were said to be well received. A general comparison of sales and rental outcomes of each particular project does highlight some areas of contrast and may be useful in providing an indication of the local market trends and capacity.

Cliff La stated that although there was a good level of interest for the new dwelling, many potential buyers were concerned with the fact that it was situated towards to back of the existing dwelling away from the street (2009). As a result of this and the timing of placement onto the market, “there were few serious buyers... the offer prices were below what was expected” and hence below what they were willing to accept (C La 2009, pers. comm., 3 Sept). In turn, they “decided to rent out the property instead... focusing on a sale later down the track (C La 2009, pers. comm., 3 Sept).

Tieu Maung notes that the sale and rental of the duplex development was well received when put to the market, having pointed out that a buyer and a rental tenant was “found within two and a half months from the time of listing” whereby “the sale of one half of the duplex fell just below initial expectations” (2009). She estimates that in hypothetical case of having to sell the other side, she would have achieved a comfortable profit (T N Maung 2009, pers. comm., 13 Sept). For now, her “strategy is to hold onto the remaining property of which is collecting above market rent” (T N Maung 2009, pers. comm., 13 Sept).

Similar to Tieu Maung, Wilson Chang indicates that whilst he has been living on one side of his duplex, he is “renting the other side out at an above market rate” (2009). He justifies this rate by saying that “it is a new development with new facilities and better environment” (W Chang 2009, pers. comm., 12 Sept). He believes that people whom “are looking for a good quality home should be willing to pay a premium”, simplifying later on that “it just makes financial and commercial sense” (W Chang 2009, pers. comm., 12 Sept). He also indicates that the rental listing was well received, “taking approximately a month to place a tenant within the property” ((W Chang 2009, pers. comm., 12 Sept).

Thi Lim points out that if he had the intention of selling his property, he would have opted to “developed either a duplex or triplex development” (2009). He says that “although most would fancy living in his house, it is too expensive for most people in this area to consider purchasing” (T Lim 2009, pers. comm., 28 Aug). He adds that “the redeveloped property would only attract people with large families which make up a small proportion of the local residential market” (T Lim 2009, pers. comm., 28

Aug). From his real estate experience, he considers that “developers should pursue medium density housing...from duplex through to townhouse developments...this would be more appropriate for the local market and be easier to sell” (T Lim 2009, pers. comm., 28 Aug). Developers whom “focus on apartment type living would face high levels of risk and failure to appeal to the market in terms of pricing” (T Lim 2009, pers. comm., 28 Aug). He believes that the ultimate solution for apartments would need to entail “a successful combination of reasonable apartment prices, profits to the developer and excellent building quality” (T Lim 2009, pers. comm., 28 Aug). From his point of view, “this would fill the gap in the market but would very difficult to deliver” (T Lim 2009, pers. comm., 28 Aug).

In Developer X’s circumstances, prior to completion of the project, their marketing campaign involved “selling the properties off the plan to reduce the burden on borrowed costs and risk” (2009). They “managed to sell the majority of the townhouse units and experienced minor delays for the sale of 3 remaining units”. Despite this and “having revised the unit prices... were able to sell the units over an additional two and a half months” (Developer X 2009, pers. comm., 31 Aug). As the project was Developer X’s first major housing development, he “believes the returns made overall were fair...satisfied with the overall outcomes” (Developer X 2009, pers. comm., 31 Aug). From the overall response, he considers that the successes they were able to create from the project came in the form of “delivering the type of housing people want to live in” (Developer X 2009, pers. comm., 31 Aug).

5.2.6 Future of Development

Although unsure about any potential future projects which they may roll out, the local developers were optimistic about the future development for the area. Their perceptions were founded generally on the basis of the changes they believe are taking place in the area, their recent experiences and the redevelopment capabilities of available land stocks.

Both Wilson Chang and Tieu Maung consider that the ambitions of the local people and in particular, young couples wanting to take advantage of government grants, together with the relatively lower price of real estate will produce continued demand for home ownership in this area (2009). “The area provides the ideal conditions for

52 families to realise their dreams of living in a new and spacious home and for others to get into the market” (Maung, 2009). Discounting locational factors such as exclusivity and travel, “other places are just simply too expensive and not worth the money to live in; for the average price of an apartment or terrace close to the city, you can buy a decent sized house with much more space” (Chang, 2009). Wilson Chang adds that this alone will make the place attractive for most people into the future (2009). Cliff La, whom has noticed over the years a gradual increase in newer home developments, believes “that people will eventually realise and take advantage of the fact that the area has great opportunities for growth and improvement” (2009). Whilst the area in general may not be as appealing to live in as opposed to other more favourable parts in Sydney, future developments have much to benefit from the existing rail facilities, commercial districts, open space and other public, private services (C La 2009, pers. comm., 3 Sept). Cliff also believes that “there are great opportunities to capitalise on run down fibro houses and walk up buildings...for walk up buildings in particular, it makes sense to renovate and provide additional levels to these buildings; the catch being to persuade council to change the planning provisions and making sure that it is viable” (La, 2009).

In the views of Thi Lim and Developer X, the current capacity of land is under-utilised and presents many opportunities for redevelopment (2009). Thi Lim speculates that many people like him will continue to invest and build newer houses in the area because it is very straight forward and accessible market (T Lim 2009, pers. comm., 28 Aug). Developer X regards that the prospect of larger scale property projects occurring into the future remains very promising and will be very beneficial for the local area but imagines that the task would be very difficult to undertake (2009). From experience, it is perceived that “the biggest barriers include raising enough funds for the project, getting the cooperation of council to change planning provisions...including increases floor space ratios and zoning” and “finding the ideal location to build” (Developer X, 2009).

5.3 Summary

The results of this chapter have revealed detailed accounts of local developer experiences in Cabramatta. Largely as a result of their circumstances, local developers have been able to find capitalise in local development opportunities, often

53 through an orderly styles of approach. By their accounts, we see certain areas of strengths and weaknesses, information which would greatly assist in determining how policy intervention can better instigate larger scale renewal and consolidation in the area.

The following chapter will provide an in-depth discussion of these findings in relation to current issues as raised in Chapters 2 and 3 as well as providing recommendations regarding future policy interventions.

CHAPTER SIX – RESEARCH EVALUATION

6. Research Evaluation

6.1 Overview

The research evaluation will attempt to interpret these findings in relation to the key issues which have emerged as a result of the literature review and housing background in Cabramatta. It will subsequently provide recommendations for the development of best practice initiatives concerning the future of urban renewal and consolidation in area.

6.2 Evaluation of Findings

Findings from the interviews have provided an in-depth understanding of the intricate details pertaining to key themes emerging from local developer activities in the area. For a start, it can be said that the neoliberal policies to housing has been an effective tool in encouraging local developers to partake in providing new and additional supplies of dwellings to the area – doing justice to those who have advanced the benefits of urban entrepreneurism.

In the first instance, it is clear that current arrangements for local development provide local developers opportunities to gain profit as well as to increase their personal security. Although they were not prepared to reveal figures relating to this, judging from the information provided and based on their future aspirations, it is fair to say that these projects do offer a return great enough to make these project undertakings worth it. In a way, this does dispel some of the allegations that housing renewal and consolidation related projects for the area not feasible. This might however, be the case for professional practices which leads one to think that perhaps incorporating larger developers into the picture for long term renewal and consolidation may not be the ideal solution; given the high margins and fees they impose onto development projects.

In addition to this, it was also found that local developers have sought to a variety of approaches for their projects. In most cases, their experience has shown that many of the approaches were relatively straight forward and was done with relatively little

56 complications. This was further enhanced as it was made aware that all had in some way leveraged the skills and resources of other parties in the local area. This ranged from accessing services of professional builders, local businesses and utilising family ties. It can be said that because of this feature, local development projects are instilled with a high degree of flexibility and options which suit local developer circumstances – an element which corporate bodies don’t have due to those policies and bureaucratic structures that have been put in place effectively slowing them down.

In a more critical sense, such features have been important attribute to the very reason which has enabled low density developments, similar to those belonging to the local developers interviewed, to take place in Cabramatta. Certainly, with the current housing stock and lot configurations and infrastructure capacity this is would be the obvious task to undertake as opposed for large scale higher density projects - which carries a great deal of intricacy in negotiations, deal making and risk .The combined effect of all this is confirmed with the fact that the majority of local residential projects have been in the form of low density developments as was revealed in findings derived from the local development audit included in Chapter 3.

Whilst they do not represent the ideal solution to densification outcomes, new developments have generally contributed positively to the urban landscape and building performance. This has been beneficial in terms of improving the liveability to suit contemporary lifestyles as well as improving quality of the urban environment as a whole. At this stage, housing and rental affordability have not been too much of an issue as local developer experiences indicated that they are meeting current market capacity.

Circumstantially though, in view of growing concerns relating to affordability, growth and the deteriorating state of housing, current local developments may be a of additional impetus for future development issues. Where there are already limited capacities for high density developments to take place, by development pace and land opportunities, it seems that the long term consequences of these low density projects may further impact larger scale renewal and consolidation prospects by way of complicating the processes of site assembly, escalate the price of land and hence

57 affect any profitability of housing projects, increase resource consumption by way of destroying good quality developments and most importantly render high density developments incompatible with those land uses.

Consequently, it is by the absence of detailed policy, effective governance structures and public funding then that Ruming and others consider to current ad hoc style of development will not effectively satisfy the broader social, economic and environmental concerns (2007). In light of this, it is logical then to introduce direct forms of government intervention to address the renewal and consolidation problems in Cabramatta. For local developers this would produce more positive outcomes in terms of realising greater development outcomes and profits. Whilst it would be a source of increased competition, it would provide greater incentives for them to continue developing within the area.

6.3 Best Practice Recommendations

The findings obtained from local developers have provided some ideas in forming best practice solutions which can better address urban renewal and consolidation issues in Cabramatta. Because the state and the local governments would most likely be responsible for initiating such an approach, these ideas pay particular focus to their roles as well as their interactions with other private entities.

The first of these ideas looks to the prospect of incorporating public-private partnerships as an alternative solution to current development practices. This is a crucial concept for housing development in Cabramatta as experiences in the US have found, such partnerships have lead to improved coordination of resources as well as policy outcomes (Nye & Glickman 2000, p 194-197). Establishing public- private partnerships for future building developments would offer greater opportunities for housing renewal and development to overcome existing impediments and concerns as examined throughout the literature. As Bratt has identified, such partnerships may be modelled of combinations incorporating the participation of the public sector through local housing authorities, the private for- profit sector, and non-profit organisations (2008). In the context of Cabramatta, this would likely require the participation from bodies such as the Department of Housing, Department of Planning, Fairfield City Council, various building groups and local

58 community co-operatives to name a few. The challenge this however, is to be as clear as possible about how each type of developer can best play a role that would lead to fruitful and mutually beneficial collaborations or partnerships (Bratt 2008).

As it stands, current arrangements are primarily one dimensional, mainly carried out by many small scale developers for purposes of profit and security and are not conducive in meeting effective long term housing needs and objectives for the area. Partnership arrangements would ultimately create a better set up for parties to negotiate, benefit from increased capabilities to draw from each other’s strengths and at the same time counter their own weaknesses. As found in local developer responses, the features which serve to justify and benefit local projects include having connections to established business and building networks as well as an understanding of community viewpoints. Arranging public-private partnerships would allow the state and local government to gain access and benefit from these key strengths, not to mention other experiences and skill sets in particular areas of the development phase. In Developer X’s case for example, this might result in gaining better knowledge of site assembly for the benefit of new larger scale projects. Other potential scenarios for collaboration may also look to combine the existing design and construction synergies of home builders such as Masterton and Lily Homes, as commissioned by Tieu Maung and Wilson Chang. These bodies can offer efficient access to a network of builders, materials sourcing, and expertise in design, engineering and construction

In turn, what this means for interested development bodies, either professional or local, is that they would gain vital support in areas which they may not be as efficient. This may include improved guidance and efficient engagement to the planning system and related processes. Risks to developers may also be reduced. In terms of property acquisition and initial cash outlay, there is capacity for the state and local government to supply, in exchange for low income housing, local land stocks which may be available in their holdings or perhaps through compulsory acquisition powers. As opposed to individual developers whom may undertake large scale projects on alternative land located away from commercial zones, major road, rail and other infrastructure facilities, such avenues of approach would provide better convenience to the community and present more sustainable development through redeveloping

59 existing housing stocks and in particular of those notorious 3-4 storey walk up flat buildings that are characteristic of the area. Together, these arrangements may also result in significant cost savings incurred throughout the course of a project.

The notion of embracing public-private partnerships leads us to the second idea for improving renewal and consolidation prospects for the local area– that is to create greater funding options available to development entities. As we have learned from local developer responses, financing for their respective projects was largely obtained by leveraging off personal assets and income streams. This confirms the broader trend that private-sector funding has been a dominant source of urban regeneration finance with equity, provided by the developer, and debt being the principal methods (Adair et al, 2003). Such financial arrangements have so far been adequate in producing developments generally no greater than medium density type housing and would prove very challenging and risky for developers wanting to undertake anything greater. Even for Thi Lim and Developer X, who have relatively strong financial capacities and are well equipped in undertaking medium sized projects themselves, would experience difficulties in raising the required finance for larger scale projects if they had intended to.

The solution is to improve what Begg terms as the “investability” of cities (2002), or taken in this case to be Cabramatta. The state and local government should create, in addition to available benefits, greater options for funding to generate bigger incentives for developers to undertake such projects. As experiences in the UK have shown, such mechanisms have been a primary instigator of regeneration programmes, providing effective solutions in for renewal in particularly complex areas (Tyler, 2001). These include providing various grant based mechanisms, gap funding (Tyler, 2001) and arranging medium and long term capital (Urban Task Force, 1999) for developers. Methods of incorporating programmes which allocate future increases in property taxes from a designated area to pay for improvements within that specific area, better known as tax incremental financing or TIFs have also been the option of many municipalities in the US to facilitate the infrastructure improvements which accompanying renewal and consolidation efforts (Dye & Merriman, 1999, Ratcliffe et al., 1999 sourced in Adair et al 2003)

Depending on the nature of how the state, local council and development entities are engaged, funding options for renewal and consolidation in Cabramatta may include, but not limited to establishing redevelopment trusts, low interest loan packages, staged cash injections, remodelling developer contribution payments and or special tax treatments to encourage developers to undertake land regeneration for low income housing. For larger institutional developers, this would mean greater capacities for them to alleviate some of the perceived risks which are currently keeping them away from any involvement in regeneration and consolidation projects in the area.

Emerging from the research, the third proposal to improve renewal and consolidation in Cabramatta is the need to update current planning provisions to better support new higher density outcomes. As well as better aligning state directions as prescribed in the Metropolitan and West Central subregional strategies, changes to planning controls would ultimately prepare the right foundation and capacity for renewal and higher density housing. This would in turn create more certainty to development entities and to the market. From local developer experiences, example issues which proved to be troublesome to their development aspirations were found to be in the areas relating to floor space ratios, building design and subdivision patterns. Although we may not know the complete justifications of council decisions regarding these points of conflicts at the time of local developer projects, it does highlight that current controls, weather appropriate or not, may in fact be deterring the prospects of renewed or higher density developments from taking place. In review of the provisions in Fairfield City Council’s Local Environmental Plan (LEP) 1994, few elements were found to adequately provide opportunities for the delivery of higher density housing within Cabramatta. This is particularly so for land situated close to the commercial centre and railway station. Some elements were found to support opportunities for ample redevelopment and renovation projects, but not on any major scale. The major point of the whole problem is that developers are left directionless. Without this direction, it has left a greater tendency for building development to occur in an uncoordinated fashion that does not properly relate to existing facilities.

Some initial revisions to existing planning provisions may look to incorporate changes to floor space ratios, increasing limits to built form and re-examining current zoning allowances. Implementing such changes would ensure that future housing developments have the flexibility to supply an increased number of dwellings per development, take up less land and instigate increased housing diversity available to the community. Further updates to design provisions would additionally ensure that development would be carried out in manner that is reasonable and responds appropriately to the desired future character of the local area. Of course, this would be prepared in tandem with input from the community. In addition to these changes, council may also consider developing specific guidance material for existing flat buildings and townhouses as to generate greater capacity for renovation projects. The most important of all changes would need to be the adoption of quadruple bottom line requirements to ensure that future developments are financially and economically viable, meet social goals and amongst other things, have concern for the social and economic needs of the residents living in the housing (Bratt 2008).

Moreover, additional benefits may come in the form of creating specialised regeneration zones or site specific master plans to house the changes existing provisions. According to Bell, the method focuses on devising a document, or series of documents, explaining the development proposals for an area by including a strategy for the area, designs and implementation details (2005, p 85). Through this place-based approach, the local council or housing authority may specify the desired changes which can apply to relatively wide areas or perhaps, subject to detailed land audits and investigations, to a series of key individual sites (Bell 2005, p 85). This method of approach would ultimately place greater control with public authorities, installing into development initiatives a high degree of co-ordination and sophistication which might otherwise be lacking and thus mitigating the prospects of rampant building development from taking place.

The ideas conveyed above will be crucial in forming best practice solutions to help produce better outcomes for housing renewal and consolidation. As initiators of future housing, the state and the local council must, before anything else re-evaluate their current positions to housing development in the area and revise engagement patterns to market participants. To proceed down the line with the same ad hoc

62 planning mentality and by continuing to promote greater stocks in private housing developments as witnessed in previous sections, the future of housing in Cabramatta is destined for failure. Although the recommendations may have been presented separately, it is hoped that the state and council would look to combine them, together with other outside measures, to produce a comprehensive approach for the future of housing in Cabramatta.

6.4 Summary

We have observed that current local development practices have contributed to renewal and consolidation outcomes in Cabramatta. Such forms of development however, are unlikely to address the growing concerns of growth, urban decay and housing affordability. If anything, they are perhaps more an obstacle to renewal and consolidation prospects in the area.

Given the current housing development processes in Cabramatta, not to mention the legal controls that govern them, developers are unlikely to fully bring about large scale urban regeneration, which the area is in so much need of, together with consolidation outcomes as proposed by the New South Wales Government. Those mechanisms of best practice for future renewal and consolidation initiatives which have been suggested offer an ideal solution to achieve this.

CHAPTER SEVEN – RESEARCH FINDINGS

7. Conclusion

7.1 Overview

The purpose of this chapter is to conclude the thesis by consolidating the information and findings presented in the previous chapters. It will begin with a summation of the research outcomes as well as the key recommendations concerning the future development of urban renewal and consolidation policies in Cabramatta. Based on these findings, a reflection on planning implications for the subregion as well as suggestions for future research is included.

7.2 Research Outcomes

The research objective of this thesis has been to understand how best to renew and consolidate the suburb of Cabramatta without adversely affecting current living conditions and the general community. Given the location and existing context of the area, investigations into local development projects have provided an ideal case study to distil broad lessons of approach to better inform future renewal and consolidation initiatives for not just Cabramatta but also for the broader area of the West Central subregion.

The literature review concerning the key themes of urban renewal and urban consolidation has also enabled greater perspectives on matters relating to sustainability of development, governance and their impacts on the form and function of low income communities and neighbourhoods. This has been specifically explored through domestic and international experiences as outlined in Chapter 2.

In addition to this, by identifying the policies which has governed housing development in Cabramatta, we have also been able to understand more thoroughly the role of the state and local government in connection to the supply of housing in low income areas as well as their relationship to housing providers and the community at large. Transitions in housing policy in the past have illustrated a general retraction of government based projects for the provision of low income housing. Instead, its responsibilities have effectively become placed in the hands of

65 private developers and left to decisions of market. Where this approach may have relieved housing problems in the past, it is no longer relevant to the context of today and as such must be redesigned to better deal with current dilemmas relating to physical deterioration, supply, affordability, the potential for displacement, funding and other difficulties in the development process. Given the paradoxical nature of current arrangements, government decisions in relation to housing in Cabramatta is now more crucial than ever before. This was all highlighted throughout Chapter 3.

The design of the investigations into local developer experiences has provided crucial insight in understanding the current strengths and limitations of property-led local development practices taking place in a low income neighbourhood. Details regarding the research together with an illustration of local developer profiles and descriptions of their development projects have all been provided within Chapter 4. Subsequent findings which focus on local developer decisions, choices in development vehicles, funding arrangements and project outcomes have generated a vital point of discussion in relation to forming best practice solutions for future urban renewal and consolidation initiatives for Cabramatta. This is presented in Chapter 5 alongside the recommended changes needed in current initiatives.

Overall, the outcomes arising from the thesis has addressed those objectives and questions which were set out prior to the commencement of the research. In doing so, it has highlighted some of the mechanisms which would benefit efforts to renewal and consolidate the suburb of Cabramatta.

7.3 Summary of Recommendations

The recommendations provided as part of the discussion of findings derived from this research study focus primarily on the role of state and local government and their relationship to development bodies and the community.

 Public-private partnerships

The state and or local government should exploit the opportunities to work with housing providers and local community operatives to instigate renewal and

66 consolidation projects within area. Current circumstances cannot attract the attention of professional developers and so the majority of housing projects are mainly carried out by many small scale developers for purposes of personal profit and security. Unless partnership schemes are not implemented, development in the area is likely to remain inefficient in meeting effective long term housing needs and objectives for the area

 Government-based funding

More government based funding mechanisms should also be put in place in addition to current options. As private funds make up a large proportion of property development funding, developers are stand to gain substantially lower profits for the risks associated. As such development opportunities will likely continue to suffer from the paralysis of financial burdens associated with property development. On conditions that development projects will result in affordable and innovative housing solutions, a range of funding mechanisms exists to help alleviate this. They include establishing redevelopment trusts, designing low interest loan packages, offer staged cash injections, creation of tax incentives and revising developer contribution plans.

 Update existing policy provisions

Future housing renewal and consolidation projects are subject to the limitations of current planning provisions. Current provisions have effectively capped the potential for developments which may offer ideal housing solutions to the area in terms of design and capacity. Existing provisions need to be reviewed and updated accordingly to allow and encourage appropriate housing developments to take place. Initial revisions to existing planning provisions may look to incorporate revisions to floor space ratios, increasing limits to built form and re-examining current zoning allowances. Updates to design provisions would additionally ensure that development would be carried out in manner that is reasonable and responds appropriately to the desired future character of the local area. The state and council should also look to implement bottom line requirements to force development outcomes to be more financially and economically viable, have regard to community aspirations and attend to current social concerns.

 Develop place-based policies

To specifically exploit development opportunities in strategic areas and to extreme pockets of decline, the state and local government should look to create specialised regeneration zones or site specific master plans to house the changes existing provisions. As well as providing guidance to the future of development, this line of approach would place greater control for public authorities to tailor development outcomes more appropriately to relate to current issues for the community and future growth of the area. It is also acts as an ideal way to muster in and house those other mechanisms which have been already suggested, effectively improving the quality of co-ordination and sophistication involved in the development process and thus mitigating the prospects of rampant building development from taking place.

7.4 Suggestions for Future Research

The large scope of issues which urban renewal and consolidation prospects face in area stresses a need for greater studies to be undertaken. This thesis has provided some of the mechanisms which are designed to mitigate certain areas of concern only by primarily examining local developer contributions. As those mechanisms themselves exist in many different variations and can be combined in innovative ways, future research can look to provide thorough modeling of their individual impacts.

As discussed before, the primary research was not without limitations. The research could have covered a larger pool and a more extensive range of local residential development projects. The refusal of the owner at 77 Hill Street makes a great example to this. Even though the project was essentially more relevant to renewal than to consolidation, it would have provided important insight into better ways of reinvigorating and managing outdated walkup buildings. Further research into these particular experiences also exists for future capacities.

In the specific context for improving renewal and consolidation for the wider areas of the subregion, examinations into local developer experiences in other localities

68 modelled similar to the primary research of this thesis provides further opportunities of investigations. The development context of other areas may prove to be substantially different to that of Cabramatta and would information collected would add to a comprehensive body of knowledge to inform broad policy implications

7.5 Final Remarks

From a strategic point of view, the West Central subregion remains as one of the most crucial areas in Metropolitan Sydney which offer great opportunities to support additional dwellings and to meet housing demands for future. There are now even more incentives to do this as much of the housing in the area are nearing the end of their physical and economic lifecycles.

As revealed in this thesis, increasing the scale of both the state and local governments involvement in housing collaborations will be a crucial in achieving this as well as delivering more sustainable outcomes for the community. Government intervention through the form of development partnerships, financial leveraging and policy and plan changes will been an effective means of ensuring that housing stays affordable, development projects remain viable and housing quality is improved.

Though these mechanisms will benefit renewal and consolidation prospects, it should be pointed out that many other options are also available for adoption. The key to this task however is in the ability of the state and local government to incorporate such mechanisms into a comprehensive strategy, one which pulls together the resources and knowledge from various sources to better co-ordinate future development and serve the interests of the community. This will undoubtedly impact on how development takes place as well as providing a clear vision going forward.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

8.0 Bibliography

Adair, A., Berry, J. & McGreal. S (2003) “Financing Property's Contribution to Regeneration”. Urban Studies, 40(5-6), pp.1065-1080.

Addie, J.-P.D. (2008) “The rhetoric and reality of urban policy in the neoliberal city: implications for social struggle in Over-the-Rhine, Cincinnati”, Environment & Planning A, 40(11) pp. 2674-2692.

Australian Bureau of Statistics 2001, ‘Cabramatta (C) (Statistical Local Area), Basic Community Profile’, viewed 15 Aug 2009, < http://www.censusdata.abs.gov.au/ABSNavigation/prenav/ViewData?&action=404&d ocumentproductno=SSC11371&documenttype=Details&tabname=Details&areacode =SSC11371&issue=2001&producttype=Community%20Profiles&&producttype=Com munity%20Profiles&javascript=true&textversion=false&navmapdisplayed=true&bread crumb=LPD&#Basic%20Community%20Profile >

Australian Bureau of Statistics 2006, ‘Cabramatta (C) (Statistical Local Area), Basic Community Profile’, viewed 15 Aug 2009, < http://www.censusdata.abs.gov.au/ABSNavigation/prenav/ViewData?&action=404&d ocumentproductno=SSC11157&documenttype=Details&tabname=Details&areacode =SSC11157&issue=2006&producttype=Community%20Profiles&&producttype=Com munity%20Profiles&javascript=true&textversion=false&navmapdisplayed=true&bread crumb=LPD&&collection=Census&period=2006&producttype=Community%20Profile s&#Basic%20Community%20Profile >

Baker, M. (1999) “Intervention or interference? Central government involvement in the plan-making process in six English regions”, Town Planning Review, 70(1).

Barber, A. and Hall, S. (2008) “Birmingham: whose urban renaissance? Regeneration as a response to economic restructuring”, Policy Studies 29(3), 281- 92.

Barrett, G.1996, The Transport Dimension in M. Jenks, E. Burton & K. Williams (eds), The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form?, E & F N Spon, UK, pp. 148-156.

Baum, S. (1997) “Sydney, Australia: A global city? Testing the social polarisation thesis”, Urban Studies, 34(11) pp. 1881-1903.

Beer, A. (1999) “Housing investment and the private rental sector in Australia”, Urban Studies, 36(2), pp. 255–269.

Beer, A., Kearins, B. & Pieters, H. (2007) “Housing affordability and planning in Australia”, Housing Studies, 22(1), pp. 11–24.

Begg, I. (2002) “‘Investability’: the key to competitive regions and cities, policy review section”, Journal of Regional Studies, 36(2) pp. 187–200.

Bell, D. (2005) “The Emergence of Contemporary Masterplans: Property Markets and the Value of Urban Design”, Journal of Urban Design 10(1), pp. 81-110.

Bratt, R.G. (2008) “Nonprofit and For-Profit Developers of Subsidized Rental Housing: Comparative Attributes and Collaborative Opportunities”. Housing Policy Debate, 19(2) pp. 323-65.

Breheny, M. (1995) “Compact cities and transport energy consumption”, Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers NS, 20 (1), pp. 81–101.

Breheny, M.1996, Centrists, Decentrists and Compromisers: Views on the Future of Urban Form in M. Jenks, E. Burton & K. Williams (eds), The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form?, E & F N Spon, UK, pp. 10-29.

Brenner, M., Brown, J. & Canter, D. (1985) The Research Interview: Uses and Approaches, Academic Press, London.

Brenner, N. and Theodore, N (2002) “Cities and the Geographies of "Actually Existing Neoliberalism"”. Antipode 34(3), 349-79.

Bromley, R. D. F. and Thomas, C. J. (1993) “The retail revolution, the carless shopper and disadvantage”,Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers N. S., 18, pp. 222–236.

Bunker, R. (2002) “In the shadow of the city: the fringe around the Australian metropolis in the 1950s”. Planning Perspectives, 17(1) pp. 61-82.

Bunker, R., Gleeson, B. Holloway, D. and Randolph, B. (2002) “The Local Impacts of Urban Consolidation in Sydney”, Urban Policy and Research, 20 (2), 143-167.

Bunker, R., Holloway, D. and Randolph, B (2005) “Building the Connection Between Housing Needs and Metropolitan Planning in Sydney, Australia”, Housing Studies, 20(5) pp. 771-94.

Bunker, R., Holloway D. & Randolph, B. (2005a) “The expansion of urban consolidation in Sydney: social impacts and implications”, Australian Planner, 42 (3), pp. 16-25.

Burton, E. (2000) The Compact City: Just or Just Compact? A Preliminary Analysis. Urban Studies, 1969-2006.

Cameron, S. and Doling. J (1994) “Housing neighbourhoods and urban regeneration. Urban Studies”, 31(7), pp. 1211-1223.

Cardew, R. (1998) Corridors of Planning: Recollections of the Sydney Region Outline Plan Preparation. Proceedings from IPHS 20th Century Planning Experience Conference, UNSW, Sydney, New South Wales 15-18 July, 89-94

Carley, M. (1991) “Business in urban regeneration partnerships: a case study of Birmingham, Local Economy”, 6, pp. 100-115.

Collie, M. (1990) “The case for urban consolidation”, Australian Planner, 28, pp. 26– 33.

Cook, N. and Ruming, K. (2008) “On the Fringe of Neoliberalism: residential development in outer suburban Sydney”, Australian Geographer 39(2) pp. 211 - 228.

Dalton, T. (1999). Making housing policy in Australia: Home ownership and the disengagement of the state. PhD thesis. Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology (RMIT) University, Melbourne.

Dawkins, C.J.and Nelson, A.C., (2002) “Urban containment policies and housing prices: an international comparison with implications for future research”, Land Use Policy 19(1) pp. 1-12.

Digaetano, A. and Klemanski, J. S. (1993) “Urban regime capacity: a comparison of Birmingham, England, and Detroit, Michigan”, Journal of Urban Affairs, 15(4), pp. 367-384.

Department of Environment, Housing and Community Development 1978, A report on the consultations of the urban renewal task force of the department of environment, housing and community development, AGPS, Canberra

Dye, R. F. and Merriman, D. F. (1999) “Popular financing tool hurts”, Engineering News Record, 243(4), p. 123.

Easthope, H. and Randolph, B. (2009) “Governing the Compact City: The Challenges of Apartment Living in Sydney, Australia”. Housing Studies 24(2), pp. 243-59.

Fairfield City Council (1994) Local Environmental Plan 1994, Fairfield City Council, Sydney.

Greenberg, M., Lowrie, K., Mayer, H., Miller, K. T. Solitare, L., (2001) “Brownfield redevelopment as a smart growth option in the United States”, The Environmentalist, 21(2), pp. 129-143.

Gurran, N (2008) “Affordable Housing: A Dilemma for Metropolitan Planning?”, Urban Policy and Research, 26(1), pp.101 -110

Ha, S. K. (2007) “Housing regeneration and building sustainable low-income communities in Korea”, Habitat International 31(1), 116-29.

Hackworth, J. (2003) “Public housing and the rescaling of regulation in the USA”, Environment & Planning A, 35(3) pp. 531.

Han, S. and O’Connor, K. (2008) “Urban consolidation and house prices: a case study of Melbourne 1990-2004”, GeoJournal, 73(4) 285-295.

Hopkins, L.D., Xu, X. & Knaap G.J. (2004) “Economies of scale in wastewater treatment and planning for urban growth”, Environment & Planning B: Planning & Design, 31(6) pp. 879-93.

Holliday, S. (2000) “The higher density debate”, New Planner, 42, pp. 6–15.

Ingram, G.K. (1998) “Patterns of Metropolitan Development: What Have We Learned?”, Urban Studies, 35(7) pp. 1019-1035.

Kendig H (1979) New Life for Old Suburbs. George Allen & Unwin, Sydney.

Jensen P. R. (2006) Housing Strategies for Sydney: Basic Considerations, Seminar for the Australian Institute of Urban Studies

Jones, P. and Evans, J (2006) “Urban regeneration, governance and the state: Exploring notions of distance and proximity”, Urban Studies, 43(9) pp. 1491-1509.

Lawless, P. (1994) “Partnership in urban regeneration in the UK: The Sheffield Central Area Study”, Urban Studies, 31(8) pp. 1303.

Loftman, P. and Nevin, B. (1992) Urban regeneration and social equity: a case study of Birmingham 1986-1992. Faculty of the Built Environment Research Paper No. 8. University of Central England in Birmingham.

Meyer B (2005) Future Sydney – A City of Cities. E-Proceedings of ‘Post-Suburban Sydney: The City in Transformation’ Conference, Parramatta, Sydney, New South Wales 22-23 November, 1-17

Milligan, V. R. and Dieleman, F. M. & Kempen, R. van (2006) “Impacts of contrasting housing policies on low-income households in Australian and the Netherlands” Journal of Housing and the Built Environment, 21(3) pp. 237-255.

Milligan, V. R. (2003). How different? Comparing housing policies and housing affordability consequences for low-income households in Australia and the Netherlands. Nederlandse Geografische Studies 318. Utrecht University.

Moran, A., 2006, The tragedy of planning: losing the great Australian dream, Pinnacle Print Group, Thornbury.

New South Wales Department of Planning (2005) City of Cities: a Plan for Sydney’s Future, Department of Planning, Sydney.

NSW Department of Environment and Planning (1984) Planning Issues in the Sydney Region: Urban Consolidation, Department of Environment and Planning, Sydney.

Nye, N. and Glickman N. J. (2000). "Working Together: Building Capacity for Community Development." Housing Policy Debate 11(1): pp. 163-98.

Pugh, C. (1976). Intergovernmental relations and the development of Australian housing policies. Research Monograph no. 15. Centre for Research on Federal Financial Relations. Canberra: Australian National University.

Randolph, B. & Holloway, D. (2005) “A Social Profile of Households in High Density Housing in Fairfield”, City Futures Research Centre, University of New South Wales, Sydney.

Randolph, B. (2006) Urban Renewal: a new role for new housing providers in creating sustainable communities?, City Futures Research Centre Issues Paper, University of New South Wales, Sydney.

Randolph, B. (2006a) “Delivering the compact city in Australia: current trends and future implications”, Urban Policy and Research, 24(4), pp. 473–490.

Randolph, B. (2008) Socially Inclusive Urban Renewal in Low Value Suburbs: A Synopsis of Issues and an Agenda for Action?, City Futures Research Centre Issues Paper No. 6, University of New South Wales, Sydney.

Ratcliffe, J., Williams, B. & Branagh, S. (1999) Managing and Financing Urban Regeneration. Dublin Institute of Technology, Dublin

Ruming, K., Randolph, B., Pinnegar, S. & Judd, B. (2007) ‘Delivering Sustainable Renewal in Australia’s Middle and Outer Suburbs: Council Reflections’. Proceedings of the 3rd State of Australian Cities Conference, University of South Australia Adelaide, November, 2007.

Schall, L.D. (1976) “Urban Renewal Policy and Economic Efficiency”, American Economic Review, 66(4) pp. 612-629.

Scoffham, E and Vale, B..1996, How Compact is Sustainable—How Sustainable is Compact? in M. Jenks, E. Burton & K. Williams (eds), The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form?, E & F N Spon, UK, pp. 56-62.

Searle, G. (2003) The Limits to Urban Consolidation. Urban Frontiers Program Issues Paper No. 14, University of Western Sydney, Sydney.

Searle, G. (2006) “Is the city of cities metropolitan strategy the answer for Sydney?, Urban Policy and Research”, 24(4), pp. 553–566.

Searle, G. (2007) Sydney's urban consolidation experience: Power, politics and community. Urban Research Program Research Paper 12, Griffith University, Queensland.

Shenjing, H. and W. Fulong (2009) “China's Emerging Neoliberal Urbanism: Perspectives from Urban Redevelopment”, Antipode, 41(2) pp. 282-304.

Sherry, C. (2006) “Termination of strata schemes in New South Wales—proposals for reform”, Australian Property Law Journal, 13(3), pp. 227–239.

Smith, R. (2006) Housing Stock Transfer: Investing in Renewal as a Tool for Sustainable Regeneration. Housing Studies, 21(2), pp. 269-82.

Smith, S (1997) Urban Consolidation: Current Developments, New South Wales Parliamentary Library Service, Sydney. Smyth, H.1996, Running the Gauntlet: A Compact City within a Doughnut of Decay in M. Jenks, E. Burton & K. Williams (eds), The Compact City: A Sustainable Urban Form?, E & F N Spon, UK, pp. 87-97.

Stretton, H. (1989) Ideas for Australian Cities (Sydney: Transit Australia).

Taylor, M. A. P. and Newton, P. W. (1985) “Urban design and revitalization -- An Australian perspective”, Urban Ecology 9, pp. 1-23.

Troy, P. 1996 The perils of urban consolidation Federation Press, Leichhardt, NSW.

Troy, P. 1999 ‘Urban institutions’, in Troy, P. (ed.) Serving the city, Pluto Press, Sydney, pp. 1-12.

Turok, I. (1992) “Property-led urban regeneration: panacea or placebo?”, Environment & Planning A, 24(3) pp. 361.

Tyler, P. (2001) Turning our urban areas around: do area based initiatives work? A review of evidence base and lessons for future policy. Paper delivered at Belfast City Council seminar, Belfast.

Urban Task Force (1999) Towards an Urban Renaissance. The Report of the Urban Task Force, Routledge, London

Walter, M. 2006, Social Research Methods, South Melbourne, Oxford University Press, South Melbourne

Yates, J.(2001) “The rhetoric and reality of housing choice: The role of urban consolidation”,Urban Policy and Research,19(4) pp. 491 – 527

YIN, R. (1989) Case Study Research: Design and Methods, Sage, London

Zhu, J. (1997) “The Effectiveness of Public Intervention in the Property Market”, Urban Studies, 34(4) pp. 627-646.

APPENDIX A

APPROVED LOCAL DEVLEOPMENT APPLICATIONS

Printed: 11/03/2009 2:23:11PM Fairfield Live Database

Officer: All Records Fairfield City Council Development Type: Development Application Approval Type: All Records Application Register - Determined Proposal Type: All Records Development Applications Est. Cost from: 0 To: 999,999,999.00 1/01/2009 to 31/01/2009

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 680.1/2006 0680/2006DA Westminster Homes Pty Ltd 12-14 Calmsley PL HORSLEY PARK 23/01/2009 DA Determination - Surrendered Two Storey Dwelling 340,000 722.1/2007 0722/2007DA Mrs M Anekthanasub 9 Senior ST CANLEY VALE 05/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Triplex 600,000 964.1/2007 0964/2007DA Mr P Gibson 52-68 Gloucester ST BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 27/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Carpark 200,000 164.1/2008 0164/2008DA Mr R Molluso 175 The Boulevarde FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 22/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dual Occupancy-Detached 365,000 264.1/2008 0264/2008DA G Truong 41 Kiora ST CANLEY HEIGHTS 09/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 218,000 1297.1/2008 Resitech 110-112 Harris ST FAIRFIELD 13/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Aged Persons Housing 423,000 1301.1/2008 Mr M Gauci 15-21 Brolen WAY CECIL PARK 08/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Agriculture 28,000 1348.1/2008 Ms THT Tran 29 Cutler RD LANSVALE 14/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Home Business-Beauty Salon 5,000 1397.1/2008 Mr TL Huynh 6 Mittiamo ST CANLEY HEIGHTS 28/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Home Business-Clothing 2,000 1398.1/2008 Pharmacell Australia Pty Ltd 169-173 Hume HWY CABRAMATTA 13/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 3,000 1420.1/2008 NSW Department of Education & Training13 Harrington ST CABRAMATTA WEST 14/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Education Establishment 2,100,000 1430.1/2008 Mr L Wong 231 Canley Vale RD CANLEY HEIGHTS 29/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Refreshment Room 150,000 1431.1/2008 Mrs KLT Pham 151 Canley Vale RD CANLEY HEIGHTS 23/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Home Business-Office 6,000 1507.1/2008 Mr SH Tain 6 Boyd ST CABRAMATTA WEST 19/01/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Air Conditioning Unit 10,000 1509.1/2008 Mr RCH Lee 101 High ST CABRAMATTA WEST 29/01/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Air Conditioning Unit 5,400 1567.1/2008 Mr DH Do 72 Dawson ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 23/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 275,600 1576.1/2008 Mr J Bayeh 239 Canley Vale RD CANLEY HEIGHTS 12/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 170,000 1587.1/2008 Mr RO Lindsay 29-35 Duff RD CECIL PARK 05/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 265,875 1615.1/2008 SLM Carport 27 Coventry RD CABRAMATTA 27/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 9,800 1624.1/2008 Mrs R Santa Barbara 13-21 Rossetti ST WETHERILL PARK 23/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 60,000 1628.1/2008 Mr P Damjanovic 16 Ferry RD LANSVALE 08/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 30,000 1642.1/2008 Kelly Services Australia 8/55 Newton RD WETHERILL PARK 02/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 0 1657.1/2008 Mr M Coletta 23 Barton ST SMITHFIELD 27/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Air Conditioning Unit 2,000 1659.1/2008 Mr B Polic 18 Van Dieman CRES FAIRFIELD WEST 09/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 55,000 1662.1/2008 Mr S Wu 6 Macquarie ST FAIRFIELD 08/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Air Conditioning Unit 10,000 1685.1/2008 Mr B Adada 26 James ST FAIRFIELD EAST 20/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 50,000 1690.1/2008 Mr JY Wu 195 Gladstone ST CABRAMATTA 13/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Home Bus-Acupuncture/Massage/Chiro 1,000 1707.1/2008 Mr TS Nguyen 11 Willowbank CRES CANLEY VALE 09/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 217,095 1708.1/2008 Eden Brae Homes 6A Charles ST SMITHFIELD 22/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 292,089 1723.1/2008 Mr AJ Griffiths 21 Alamein RD BOSSLEY PARK 28/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Inground Pool 8,000 1727.1/2008 Mr J Haskal 673-683 Smithfield RD EDENSOR PARK 09/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Community Facility 250,000 1729.1/2008 Mr A J Gallagher 244 Edensor RD EDENSOR PARK 16/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 7,000

Page 1 of 4 Printed: 11/03/2009 2:23:55PM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 1748.1/2008 Mr B Kumar 55 Willowbank CRES CANLEY VALE 19/01/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Single Storey Dwelling 171,697 1753.1/2008 Mr G Alagha 29 Cheyenne RD GREENFIELD PARK 08/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 33,000 1759.1/2008 Mrs Z Prlic 15 Stivala PL BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 02/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 200,000 1760.1/2008 Polpan Pty Ltd & Jugail NO 8 P/T 2/13 William ST FAIRFIELD 23/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Health Consulting Room/s 35,000 1761.1/2008 S Ayyoub Architects & Engineers 301 Brenan ST SMITHFIELD 13/01/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 30,000 1764.1/2008 Bac Design Pty Ltd 1054 Canley Vale RD WETHERILL PARK 08/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Warehouse 10,000 1765.1/2008 Sydney Tools Pty Ltd 2A Robert ST SMITHFIELD 12/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 0 1787.1/2008 Excelfit 34 Vidal ST WETHERILL PARK 30/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 10,000 1793.1/2008 Award Chemicals Pty Ltd 3/33 Victoria ST SMITHFIELD 05/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 0 1807.1/2008 United Design & Constructions Pty Ltd268 Edensor RD EDENSOR PARK 08/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 260,000 1825.1/2008 Global Projects NSW Pty Ltd 14 Anzac AVE FAIRFIELD 20/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Club 200,000 1827.1/2008 Mr K W Wu 5/47 Park RD CABRAMATTA 12/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Refreshment Room 50,000 1830.1/2008 Wizard Home Improvements 5 Tobruk PL BOSSLEY PARK 29/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 14,000 1833.1/2008 Link Studio Pty Ltd 102 John ST CABRAMATTA 08/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 20,000 1834.1/2008 Link Studio Pty Ltd 102 John ST CABRAMATTA 09/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 20,000 1835.1/2008 Mr T Hong 7/47 Park RD CABRAMATTA 28/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 20,000 1837.1/2008 Mr N V Nguyen 4/6 Villawood PL VILLAWOOD 23/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 4,000 1839.1/2008 Mr DM Calabro 59 Townview RD MT PRITCHARD 08/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 35,000 1865.1/2008 S Ayyoub Architects & Engineers 75 Oliphant ST MT PRITCHARD 20/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 100,000 1867.1/2008 Mr M Tomac 99 Nelson ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 27/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 220,000 1873.1/2008 L & T Filters Productions 6/11 Potter CL WETHERILL PARK 05/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 10,000 1874.1/2008 Miss T L Dinh 29 John ST CABRAMATTA 13/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 1,000 1878.1/2008 Mr M Yau 9 Hercules ST FAIRFIELD EAST 21/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 40,000 1879.1/2008 Mrs S Le 159 Sweethaven RD BOSSLEY PARK 19/01/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Outbuilding 8,000 1880.1/2008 Merkorious Construction Pty Limited283 North Liverpool RD BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 29/01/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 50,000 1883.1/2008 Mr M Banic 121 Thorney RD FAIRFIELD WEST 23/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 22,000 1884.1/2008 Mrs K Davies 18 Rennie ST WETHERILL PARK 02/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 0 1890.1/2008 Mr B Al Reziq 128 Orchardleigh ST OLD GUILDFORD 27/01/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 50,000 1891.1/2008 Mrs TVH Vu 112 Sweethaven RD GREENFIELD PARK 28/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Land Fill 7,000 1892.1/2008 Mr A Youhanna 1/30 Nelson ST FAIRFIELD 27/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Medical Centre 42,750 1895.1/2008 Mr N Markovic 7/4 Station ST FAIRFIELD 12/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 0 1899.1/2008 Mr M Zammit 1788 The Horsley DR HORSLEY PARK 23/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Sign/s 2,000

Page 2 of 4 Printed: 11/03/2009 2:23:55PM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 1908.1/2008 Mr T T Zgiar 71 Lily ST WETHERILL PARK 02/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 10,800 1911.1/2008 Mrs N Tendera 19 Jasnar ST GREENFIELD PARK 12/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Home Business-Hairdressing 0 1918.1/2008 TVL Domestic Architecture Designers70 John ST CABRAMATTA 19/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Office Fitout 4,000 1925.1/2008 Mr QB Ho 19 Adelong CL WAKELEY 15/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 60,000 1929.1/2008 Ms T D Tran 38 Willowbank CRES CANLEY VALE 23/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 256,231 1945.1/2008 Mr V H Chau 23 Beckenham ST CANLEY VALE 20/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 200,000 1950.1/2008 Department of Ageing,Disability & Home49-61 Care Spencer ST FAIRFIELD 06/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Office Fitout 215,000 1954.1/2008 Mr Q T Ha 2 Hughes ST CABRAMATTA 27/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Medical Centre 15,000 1955.1/2008 Mr H Le 2 Cartela CRES SMITHFIELD 20/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 3,500 1960.1/2008 A & W Wholesalers Pty Ltd 105-113 Cowpasture RD WETHERILL PARK 30/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 0 1965.1/2008 Mrs V Jozic 5 Cowper PL WETHERILL PARK 13/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Air Conditioning Unit 1,000 1972.1/2008 Mr AF Creagh 6 Citrine CL BOSSLEY PARK 08/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 8,000 1983.1/2008 Wizard Home Improvements 20 Kingfisher AVE BOSSLEY PARK 30/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 6,900 1986.1/2008 Craig's Mga Steel Buildings 6 Bardia PL BOSSLEY PARK 30/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 11,000 1987.1/2008 Mr Z Wehbeh 75 Belmore ST FAIRFIELD EAST 28/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 25,000 1988.1/2008 Mr HM Tran 52 Madeline ST FAIRFIELD WEST 05/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 7,000 4.1/2009 Mr TC Lam 36 Bligh ST VILLAWOOD 28/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 18,000 9.1/2009 S Ayyoub Architects & Engineers 53 Lawrence ST FAIRFIELD 23/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 80,000 13.1/2009 Mr D Mitrovic 5 Marlborough ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 13/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 5,000 15.1/2009 Mr A Lu 228 Ware ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 12/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 8,000 20.1/2009 Mr Z Hassan 228 Polding ST SMITHFIELD 13/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 6,000 22.1/2009 Mr V D Huynh 9/20-22 Hughes ST CABRAMATTA 15/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 11,600 25.1/2009 Mr G Haddad 2 Throsby ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 14/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 0 30.1/2009 Mr RCH Lee 101 High ST CABRAMATTA WEST 20/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Air Conditioning Unit 6,300 31.1/2009 D - Vine Sweets Pty Limited 561-583 Polding ST PRAIRIEWOOD 21/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 22,000 32.1/2009 Mr C Lim 6 Boyd ST CABRAMATTA WEST 28/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Fence 9,000 33.1/2009 Mr U Morvillo 2 Rossiter ST SMITHFIELD 27/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 10,000 35.1/2009 Richmond & Ross Pty Ltd 30 Smithfield RD SMITHFIELD 20/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Refreshment Room 10,000 37.1/2009 Mrs A Casaol 98 Denison ST CARRAMAR 20/01/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 3,950 49.1/2009 Fairfield City Council 64A Bareena ST CABRAMATTA 23/01/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Community Facility 0 63.1/2009 Mrs H C Ma 3 Howatt ST VILLAWOOD 30/01/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Shop 5,000 Total Development Applications Applications: 95 Est. Cost: 8,842,587

Page 3 of 4 Printed: 11/03/2009 2:23:55PM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost GRAND TOTAL Applications: 95 Est. Cost: 8,842,587

Page 4 of 4 Printed: 11/03/2009 11:05:40AM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 792.1/2006 0792/2006DA MY Huong Trinh 46 Alick ST CABRAMATTA 12/02/2009 DA Determination - Surrendered Dwelling Addition/Alteration 55,000 800.2/2006 Mrs F Siracusa 10 Alvisio CL EDENSOR PARK 17/02/2009 MA Determination - Withdrawn Two Storey Dwelling 268,000 968.1/2007 0968/2007DA T Hong 9 Darra PL ST JOHNS PARK 05/02/2009 DA Determination - Surrendered Dwelling Addition/Alteration 8,500 979.1/2007 0979/2007DA Aus-Firstworld Pty Ltd 269 Canley Vale RD CANLEY HEIGHTS 17/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Multi-Unit Housing Development 2,200,000 32.1/2008 0032/2008DA Cavasinni Constructions Pty Ltd 18 Cavasinni PL WETHERILL PARK 03/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Warehouse 1,500,000 113.1/2008 0113/2008DA Mrs L Rinaldo 14-28 Cobham ST HORSLEY PARK 06/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 520,000 195.1/2008 0195/2008DA Mr L Pham 32 Reserve ST SMITHFIELD 09/02/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 190,000 231.1/2008 0231/2008DA Bridal Factory Australia Pty Ltd 16 Toohey RD WETHERILL PARK 11/02/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Industry 10,000 1074.1/2008 VT Architects Pty Ltd 56 Canley Vale RD CANLEY VALE 17/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Commercial Building 280,000 1322.1/2008 Mr A Arce 4 Saltbush PL BOSSLEY PARK 10/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 250,000 1352.1/2008 Mr Wood 12/1345 The Horsley DR WETHERILL PARK 27/02/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Industry 0 1357.1/2008 Mr R Di Filippo 12 Nello PL WETHERILL PARK 03/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Warehouse 198,000 1426.1/2008 Mr A Daher 17 Atherton ST FAIRFIELD WEST 10/02/2009 DA Determination - Surrendered Outbuilding 22,000 1478.1/2008 Mr A Severino 63-65 Warana RD CECIL PARK 03/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 450,000 1526.1/2008 Petra Development Australia Pty Ltd191-203 Garfield RD HORSLEY PARK 11/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 271,000 1536.1/2008 Mr DS Tran 49 Kauri ST CABRAMATTA 11/02/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Air Conditioning Unit 0 1625.1/2008 Mr J Romeo 2 O'Shea CL EDENSOR PARK 12/02/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 45,000 1633.1/2008 DSB Design & Construction Pty Ltd 135 Hamilton RD FAIRFIELD 17/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 450,000 1646.1/2008 Mr G Kvackovski 9 Townview RD MT PRITCHARD 25/02/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Single Storey Dwelling 150,000 1691.1/2008 Mr NC Ly 65 Church ST CABRAMATTA 12/02/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 35,000 1736.1/2008 Mr M Nicola 1A Burley RD HORSLEY PARK 04/02/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Single Storey Dwelling 235,000 1743.1/2008 Algorry Zappia & Associated Pty Ltd1111 The Horsley DR WETHERILL PARK 11/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Commercial Building 94,000 1767.1/2008 Mr D Mediati 7 Pendlebury PL ABBOTSBURY 05/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Aboveground Pool 5,000 1777.1/2008 Chesworth's Home Improvements Pty28 Ltd Crosby CRES FAIRFIELD 09/02/2009 DA Determination - Surrendered Granny Flat 47,000 1799.1/2008 Total Scrap Metals Recycling Pty Ltd19 Junction ST OLD GUILDFORD 17/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 0 1811.1/2008 Mr HM Tran 52 Madeline ST FAIRFIELD WEST 11/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 219,815 1814.1/2008 C Lim 17 Coventry RD CABRAMATTA 03/02/2009 Section 82A Determination - ApprovalTwo Storey Dwelling 335,000 1821.1/2008 Mr JT Vocisano 83 Chifley ST SMITHFIELD 12/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 4,000 1823.1/2008 Mr G Iemma 10 Perry ST BOSSLEY PARK 27/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 4,000 1841.1/2008 Chris Weston & Associates 5 Centre PL WETHERILL PARK 10/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Vehicle Repair Workshop/Station 0 1845.1/2008 Mr N Raad 165 Maud ST FAIRFIELD WEST 06/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 12,000 1847.1/2008 Mr J L Conroy 79 Henry ST OLD GUILDFORD 12/02/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 12,000

Page 1 of 4 Printed: 11/03/2009 11:06:37AM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 1851.1/2008 Mr MH Luu 156 Neville ST SMITHFIELD 10/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 8,000 1854.1/2008 Mr R Mitrevski 1 Shaw PL FAIRFIELD WEST 18/02/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Dwelling Addition/Alteration 45,000 1857.1/2008 Mr B Barkho 11 Quinn PL PRAIRIEWOOD 11/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 20,000 1861.1/2008 Mr A P Homaidan 6/51 John ST CABRAMATTA 09/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Business Premises 0 1868.1/2008 Samson & Delilah 882 The Horsley DR SMITHFIELD 12/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 90,000 1881.1/2008 Firstyle Homes Pty Ltd 9 Beckenham ST CANLEY VALE 11/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 196,018 1882.1/2008 Mr I Klanac 8 Norfolk AVE FAIRFIELD WEST 13/02/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 25,000 1885.1/2008 Mr DEV Jackson 8 Wyatt CL WETHERILL PARK 06/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Fence 8,000 1894.1/2008 Wires 17 Aladore AVE CABRAMATTA 26/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Education Establishment 3,000 1904.1/2008 AVM Construction Pty Ltd 272-274 Horsley RD HORSLEY PARK 10/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 38,000 1905.1/2008 Heritage Carports & Awnings 27 Dukic ST BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 26/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 16,000 1917.1/2008 Mrs D Cassarino 252-260 Cecil RD CECIL PARK 20/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Home Business-Beauty Salon 0 1923.1/2008 CPT Corp Pty Ltd 1/34 Chancery ST CANLEY VALE 12/02/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Outbuilding 7,000 1924.1/2008 Mrs MA Fisher 4 Kempsey PL BOSSLEY PARK 09/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 8,000 1926.1/2008 Pham & Le's Pty Ltd 203 Canley Vale RD CANLEY HEIGHTS 26/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Health Consulting Room/s 0 1930.1/2008 Eco Solutions 4/442-446 Victoria ST WETHERILL PARK 09/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 18,000 1931.1/2008 Mr HI Pauls 44 Polding ST FAIRFIELD 03/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 0 1933.1/2008 Condor Designs Pty Ltd 9 Booth CL FAIRFIELD WEST 17/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 50,000 1935.1/2008 Mr H Khlide 179-185 The Boulevarde FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 13/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 11,000 1938.1/2008 Mr FM Ojeda 198 Neville ST SMITHFIELD 25/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 248,335 1947.1/2008 2 Design Team 20 Wewak PL BOSSLEY PARK 27/02/2009 DA Determination - Surrendered Fence 9,000 1958.1/2008 Plastform Pty Ltd 20-24 Newton RD WETHERILL PARK 06/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 0 1962.1/2008 New Era Design 109 Prairie Vale RD BOSSLEY PARK 20/02/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Club 60,000 1963.1/2008 Elegant Beauty Nail & Hair College 10/9-11 Hughes ST CABRAMATTA 27/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 15,000 1964.1/2008 Mr TD Vo 54 Sussex ST CABRAMATTA 24/02/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 50,000 1969.1/2008 Mr D Buhagiar 15 Ashur CRES GREENFIELD PARK 23/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 30,000 1974.1/2008 V V Enterprises Pty Ltd 33/1-3 Knight ST LANSVALE 11/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Bulky Goods/Showroom 0 1975.1/2008 Mr L Contigiani 32A Tangerine ST VILLAWOOD 12/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 130,000 1978.1/2008 Wizard Home Improvements 259 Edensor RD EDENSOR PARK 06/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 9,000 1980.1/2008 Mr W Mouhajer 183-185 Hume HWY CABRAMATTA 02/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Office Fitout 0 1982.1/2008 Mr CX Huynh 25 Tangerine ST VILLAWOOD 09/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Home Business-Vehicle Repairs 0 5.1/2009 Mr M Ho 35 Francis ST FAIRFIELD 10/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 18,000

Page 2 of 4 Printed: 11/03/2009 11:06:37AM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 10.1/2009 Mr M Sediqi 13 Cockburn CRES FAIRFIELD EAST 24/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 38,000 21.1/2009 Suters Architects 496 Smithfield RD PRAIRIEWOOD 25/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Place Of Worship 90,000 28.1/2009 Britten & Assoc Pty Ltd 70 John ST CABRAMATTA 04/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Strata 0 38.1/2009 Firstyle Homes Pty Ltd 55 Willowbank CRES CANLEY VALE 03/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 202,772 43.1/2009 Mr WL Bei 223 River AVE CARRAMAR 20/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Home Business-Clothing 0 45.1/2009 Ms TLT Nguyen 17 Willowbank CRES CANLEY VALE 02/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Fence 5,200 46.1/2009 Heritage Carports & Awnings 9 Katrina CRES CABRAMATTA WEST 09/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 12,000 47.1/2009 Hpt Architects 18/31 Hughes ST CABRAMATTA 17/02/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 4,000 54.1/2009 Mr S Patangay 16A Beckenham ST CANLEY VALE 10/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 190,000 57.1/2009 M Coletta 23 Barton ST SMITHFIELD 11/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 0 61.1/2009 Mrs C Allen 21 Charlotte CRES CANLEY VALE 10/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 3,500 62.1/2009 Wizard Home Improvements 12 Joyce ST FAIRFIELD 17/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 15,000 64.1/2009 Mr SD Aziz 1 Gambier ST BOSSLEY PARK 26/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 50,000 66.1/2009 Association Of The SS Crocifisso 630 Cabramatta RDW BONNYRIGG 20/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Festival 0 69.1/2009 Richmond & Ross Pty Ltd 749 Smithfield RD EDENSOR PARK 17/02/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Refreshment Room 30,000 73.1/2009 Mr V M Nguyen 98 The Boulevarde FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 06/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 8,000 74.1/2009 Mr VK Do 34 Derby ST CANLEY HEIGHTS 24/02/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 10,000 76.1/2009 SLM Carport 5 Allambie RD EDENSOR PARK 09/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 0 77.1/2009 Feature Home Improvments 53 Innisfail RD WAKELEY 09/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 5,000 78.1/2009 Mr M Tariveran 2 Saltbush PL BOSSLEY PARK 10/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 0 79.1/2009 Ms T Nguyen 8 Boyd ST CABRAMATTA WEST 06/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 8,000 80.1/2009 Buildsmart Home Improvements 18 Hackett RD ABBOTSBURY 26/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 9,000 85.1/2009 Mr S Samia 45 Dublin ST SMITHFIELD 24/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 30,000 89.1/2009 JNL Home Improvements Pty Ltd 92 Bulls RD WAKELEY 09/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 3,000 96.1/2009 Mr D Anicic 36 Cartwright ST BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 09/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 4,900 103.1/2009 Have A Seat Pty Ltd 4/1 Cowpasture PL WETHERILL PARK 27/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 10,000 108.1/2009 Bright Home Improvement Pty Ltd 2A Ellis PDE YENNORA 27/02/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Outbuilding 9,500 118.1/2009 Ms NA Campbell 9 Mildara PL EDENSOR PARK 19/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 11,600 124.1/2009 Mrs RJ Oakley 34 Canterbury RD ST JOHNS PARK 19/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 8,000 125.1/2009 JNL Home Improvement Pty Ltd 10 Ashur CRES GREENFIELD PARK 19/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 3,000 158.1/2009 M Scopelliti 17 Yalumba PL EDENSOR PARK 26/02/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 4,000 Total Development Applications Applications: 95 Est. Cost: 9,747,140

Page 3 of 4 Printed: 11/03/2009 11:06:37AM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost GRAND TOTAL Applications: 95 Est. Cost: 9,747,140

Page 4 of 4 Printed: 3/04/2009 3:53:45PM Fairfield Live Database

Officer: All Records Fairfield City Council Development Type: Development Application Approval Type: All Records Application Register - Determined Development Applications Est. Cost from: 0 To: 999,999,999.00 1/03/2009 to 31/03/2009

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 1055.1/2006 1055/2006DA Mr P Stefanovic 37 Rosedale ST CANLEY HEIGHTS 25/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Duplex 250,000 805.1/2007 0805/2007DA PGH Environmental Planning 215-223 Redmayne RD HORSLEY PARK 26/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Place Of Worship 45,000 1121.1/2007 1121/2007DA Mr D Lu 263 Cabramatta RDW CABRAMATTA 26/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Commercial/Residential Development 1,000,000 217.1/2008 0217/2008DA R Carwash 154-158 The Boulevarde FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 19/03/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Car Wash 280,000 330.1/2008 0330/2008DA Bongiorno Hawkins & Assoc Pty Ltd661-671 Smithfield RD EDENSOR PARK 27/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Commercial/Residential Development 1,000,000 331.1/2008 0331/2008DA Quick Skips Australia Pty Ltd 8 Muir PL WETHERILL PARK 06/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 0 1142.1/2008 Britten & Assoc Pty Ltd 88 John ST CABRAMATTA 05/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Strata 0 1143.1/2008 Britten & Assoc Pty Ltd 86 John ST CABRAMATTA 05/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Strata 0 1144.1/2008 Britten & Assoc Pty Ltd 82-84 John ST CABRAMATTA 05/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Strata 0 1222.1/2008 Pelorus Property Group 824 Woodville RD VILLAWOOD 06/03/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Business Premises 422,000 1240.1/2008 Paynter Dixon Constructions Pty Ltd88-102 Smithfield RD SMITHFIELD 10/03/2009 Approved - Council Club 0 1332.1/2008 Fairfield City Council 15 Nelson ST FAIRFIELD 02/03/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Carpark 263,000 1383.1/2008 Gadsden Signs 2 Cowpasture PL WETHERILL PARK 10/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Sign/s 0 1422.1/2008 General Furniture Pty Ltd 7/1-3 Knight ST LANSVALE 23/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 3,000 1463.1/2008 S S Seawin Design & Construction Pty11 LambertLtd PL MT PRITCHARD 17/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 220,000 1515.1/2008 Recyling Holdings Pty Ltd 87-89 Lisbon ST FAIRFIELD EAST 30/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 0 1517.1/2008 Greenfield DA Services 1840 The Horsley DR HORSLEY PARK 06/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Commercial Building 20,000 1559.1/2008 Mr S Alabbasi 31 Francis ST FAIRFIELD 12/03/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Duplex 520,000 1563.1/2008 Totu Pty Ltd 36 Stanbrook ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 26/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Multi-Unit Housing Development 950,000 1566.1/2008 Mr L Nguyen 108 McBurney RD CABRAMATTA 16/03/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 258,000 1590.1/2008 Mr L T Ton 7 Hubert ST FAIRFIELD 16/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 533,500 1597.1/2008 Mr HT Le 111B High ST CABRAMATTA WEST 02/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 0 1598.1/2008 Anthony Oliver Architects 39-41 Frank ST WETHERILL PARK 06/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Warehouse 3,000,608 1614.1/2008 Mrs Q Li 20 Cunninghame ST FAIRFIELD 02/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Home Bus-Acupuncture/Massage/Chiro 0 1616.1/2008 C C Weston & Assoc 116 The Avenue CANLEY VALE 05/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Child Care Centre and Residence 200,000 1640.1/2008 Mr V Huynh 19 Willowbank CRES CANLEY VALE 04/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 187,940 1650.1/2008 Mr S Rustom 39 Russell ST MT PRITCHARD 09/03/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Air Conditioning Unit 5,000 1679.1/2008 Mr I Solomon 669 The Horsley DR SMITHFIELD 10/03/2009 Approved - Council Sign/s 12,000 1682.1/2008 Caljaryn Developments Pty Limited 52 Hemphill AVE MT PRITCHARD 25/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 329,750 1695.1/2008 Cabramatta Ink Pty Limited 31 Arthur ST CABRAMATTA 10/03/2009 Approved - Council Shop 10,000 1700.1/2008 Mr A Chau 70 Margaret ST FAIRFIELD WEST 16/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 253,000 1739.1/2008 Sotto Projects 15 Elizabeth ST WETHERILL PARK 10/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Business Premises 536,000

Page 1 of 5 Printed: 3/04/2009 3:54:26PM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 1744.1/2008 Ms N Younan 31A Warragamba CRES BOSSLEY PARK 03/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Home Business-Beauty Salon 0 1755.1/2008 Vietnamese Comm In Australia NSW4/50 Chapter Park RDInc CABRAMATTA 09/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Sign/s 5,000 1769.1/2008 Hong Phat International Foods Pty Ltd264 Canley Vale RD CANLEY HEIGHTS 25/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 100,000 1775.1/2008 Wincrest Homes 146 Burley RD HORSLEY PARK 20/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 295,000 1806.1/2008 Bellmarch Developments Pty Ltd 24 Willowbank CRES CANLEY VALE 10/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 215,000 1812.1/2008 Mr JP Sharma 45 Wattle AVE VILLAWOOD 09/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 120,000 1815.1/2008 Mr M Zora 44 Court RD FAIRFIELD 18/03/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Shop 0 1826.1/2008 Ms TCHT Mai 37 Victory ST FAIRFIELD EAST 16/03/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 58,000 1846.1/2008 M Husar 1 Morna ST GREENFIELD PARK 11/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 65,000 1862.1/2008 Cabramatta Golf Club Limited 440 Cabramatta RDW CABRAMATTA 25/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Recreation Facility 97,000 1871.1/2008 Mrs V Kiattichaidamrong 95 Torrens ST CANLEY HEIGHTS 06/03/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Home Business-Hairdressing 4,000 1887.1/2008 Vietnamese Cultural Schools Assoc 5Inc Lupin AVE FAIRFIELD EAST 10/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 169,000 1888.1/2008 Mrs CM Darke 9 Bimbi PL BONNYRIGG 04/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Earthworks 250 1901.1/2008 Wincrest Homes Pty Ltd 70 Sussex ST CABRAMATTA 23/03/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Two Storey Dwelling 280,000 1906.1/2008 Paul Rolfe Consulting Pty Ltd 25 Fairfield ST FAIRFIELD EAST 12/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Warehouse 19,000 1907.1/2008 Primo Products Pty Limited 441-443 Victoria ST WETHERILL PARK 12/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 50,000 1909.1/2008 Mr MR Khan 10 Richmond CL ST JOHNS PARK 27/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 48,000 1910.1/2008 Mrs R Sadiq 5 Richmond CL ST JOHNS PARK 27/03/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 102,000 1915.1/2008 Ms J Dinh 328 Canley Vale RD CANLEY HEIGHTS 16/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Home Business-Clothing 0 1916.1/2008 Ms TLC Do 3 Maugham CRES WETHERILL PARK 26/03/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 45,000 1919.1/2008 Mr AW Balamoan 6/162 Chifley ST WETHERILL PARK 18/03/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Shade shelter 4,000 1921.1/2008 Dvyne Design & Construction Pty Ltd36 Ace AVE FAIRFIELD 02/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 15,000 1928.1/2008 B A C Design Pty Ltd 49 Greenfield RD GREENFIELD PARK 16/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 270,000 1932.1/2008 Mr KR Bird 31 Neerini AVE SMITHFIELD 06/03/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Home Business-Beauty Salon 15,000 1943.1/2008 Mr L Leung 10/85 John ST CABRAMATTA 18/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Footpath Trading 1,000 1946.1/2008 Hospeco Pty Ltd 19 Daniel ST WETHERILL PARK 16/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 0 1948.1/2008 Mr T Nguyen 238 Cabramatta RDW CABRAMATTA 06/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Sign/s 2,900 1959.1/2008 Mr PE Marsh 90 McBurney RD CABRAMATTA 19/03/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Outbuilding 12,000 1961.1/2008 Mr G Gattellari 59 Gwandalan RD EDENSOR PARK 16/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 47,500 1966.1/2008 Eastline Developments Pty Ltd 10 Province ST ABBOTSBURY 27/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 200,000 1967.1/2008 Eastline Developments Pty Ltd 10 Province ST ABBOTSBURY 27/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 200,000 1968.1/2008 Mr C Taccone 148-158 Abbotsbury DR HORSLEY PARK 25/03/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 21,000

Page 2 of 5 Printed: 3/04/2009 3:54:26PM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 1981.1/2008 Miss N Khamo 141 Mimosa RD BOSSLEY PARK 16/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Home Bus-Health Consult (medical+dental) 0 1984.1/2008 Mr S Jebrail 76 Coonawarra ST EDENSOR PARK 17/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 200,000 1989.1/2008 7-Eleven Stores Pty Ltd 234 Hamilton RD FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 23/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Sign/s 40,000 3.1/2009 Wizard Home Improvements 8 Berrigan PL BOSSLEY PARK 25/03/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 11,995 8.1/2009 Magic Charcoal Chickens 208 Canley Vale RD CANLEY HEIGHTS 12/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 0 11.1/2009 Centrum Archittects Pty Ltd 1179 The Horsley DR WETHERILL PARK 25/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Refreshment Room 700,000 21.1/2009 Suters Architects 496 Smithfield RD PRAIRIEWOOD 18/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Place Of Worship 90,000 23.1/2009 Mr E Samuel 44 Salter RD BOSSLEY PARK 11/03/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 250,000 24.1/2009 Mr S Alabbasi 3/53 Smart ST FAIRFIELD 09/03/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Shop 0 26.1/2009 Wizard Home Improvements 25 Power ST PRAIRIEWOOD 11/03/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 39,000 27.1/2009 Mr A Khodr 113 Wilson RD BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 10/03/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 700,000 39.1/2009 Mrs S Younan 33-34 Alaine PL CECIL PARK 09/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 4,500 40.1/2009 Mr J Mellino 231 Canley Vale RD CANLEY HEIGHTS 10/03/2009 Approved - Council Refreshment Room 20,000 44.1/2009 Mr A Asnciar 153-189 Wallgrove RD CECIL PARK 03/03/2009 Application Withdrawn Subdivision Torrens 0 51.1/2009 Mr T T Zgiar 71 Lily ST WETHERILL PARK 16/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Inground Pool 13,950 52.1/2009 Champion Homes 419-425 Elizabeth DR BONNYRIGG 03/03/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Single Storey Dwelling 160,000 55.1/2009 Mr Z Sekulic 31 Wolseley ST FAIRFIELD 02/03/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 3,300 56.1/2009 Mr V M Nguyen 98 The Boulevarde FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 31/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 267,916 59.1/2009 Mr K Yousif 5 Thomas ST FAIRFIELD 11/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 222,000 60.1/2009 Ms TP Tran 8 Beckenham ST CANLEY VALE 31/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 233,000 65.1/2009 Sunford Pty Limited 11 Grainger AVE MT PRITCHARD 18/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 7,000 71.1/2009 Condor Designs Pty Ltd 3/118 Ware ST FAIRFIELD 16/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Medical Centre 60,000 75.1/2009 Mr J Zhang 4/119A John ST CABRAMATTA 02/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Health Consulting Room/s 0 82.1/2009 Britten & Assoc Pty Ltd 228 Polding ST SMITHFIELD 27/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 0 84.1/2009 Professional Print Mgnt Pty Ltd 4 Dixon ST ABBOTSBURY 18/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Home Business-Office 0 88.1/2009 Mr G Ljubojevic 18 Chisholm ST SMITHFIELD 04/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 16,000 90.1/2009 JNL Home Improvements Pty Ltd 14 Canva ST CANLEY VALE 02/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 7,000 93.1/2009 Delta Kitchens Australia Pty Ltd 10/12-18 Fairfield ST FAIRFIELD EAST 16/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 0 94.1/2009 Mrs JA Keighley 709 Cabramatta RDW BONNYRIGG 13/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 5,000 99.1/2009 Patioland Parramatta Pty Ltd 15 Donahue CL PRAIRIEWOOD 26/03/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 24,000 100.1/2009 Our Lady of Victories Catholic Parish1788 The Horsley DR HORSLEY PARK 17/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Community Event 0 101.1/2009 Mr D S Flora 55 Greenfield RD GREENFIELD PARK 27/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 280,000

Page 3 of 5 Printed: 3/04/2009 3:54:26PM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 102.1/2009 JNL Home Improvement Pty Ltd 26 Sulman RD CABRAMATTA WEST 04/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 9,000 104.1/2009 Project Surveyors 1111 The Horsley DR WETHERILL PARK 12/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Strata 0 107.1/2009 Mr HP Le 46 Alick ST CABRAMATTA 18/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 35,000 111.1/2009 S Kokten 2 Wheller ST BOSSLEY PARK 19/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Home Business-Hairdressing 0 113.1/2009 Mr TDD Bui 4 Oak PL MT PRITCHARD 10/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 21,000 114.1/2009 JNL Home Improvement Pty Ltd 42 Willowbank CRES CANLEY VALE 04/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 6,000 119.1/2009 Mr MA Toro 31 Victory ST FAIRFIELD 02/03/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 39,000 120.1/2009 Mr B Khoury 15 Gurley PL BONNYRIGG 18/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Home Business-Hairdressing 16,000 128.1/2009 7-Eleven Stores Pty Ltd 167 Meadows RD MT PRITCHARD 24/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Sign/s 40,000 129.1/2009 Sunscreen Patios & Pergolas 6 Thorpe PL ABBOTSBURY 27/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 27,000 130.1/2009 State Wide Industrial Pty Ltd 447 Victoria ST WETHERILL PARK 16/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 200 134.1/2009 Dr KT Dinh 27/48-50 Hill ST CABRAMATTA 23/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Medical Centre 5,000 136.1/2009 A Jawabreh 13 Chisholm ST SMITHFIELD 10/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 250,000 139.1/2009 Mr SL Messner 12 Haylen PL EDENSOR PARK 04/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 6,000 142.1/2009 Mrs S Phanthavong 21 Katinka ST BONNYRIGG 18/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 10,000 143.1/2009 Heritage Carports & Awnings 5 Sparta PL BOSSLEY PARK 25/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 4,000 145.1/2009 Firstyle Homes Pty Ltd 16 Willowbank CRES CANLEY VALE 18/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 191,000 147.1/2009 Pacific Bodyworks Pty Ltd 2 Ormsby PL WETHERILL PARK 26/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 0 148.1/2009 JNL Home Improvement Pty Ltd 14 Cunninghame ST FAIRFIELD 30/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 6,000 149.1/2009 Mr M Daniel 18 Bramley ST FAIRFIELD WEST 10/03/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Home Business-Beauty Salon 0 150.1/2009 Mr SN Quan 49 Lovoni ST CABRAMATTA 02/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 5,000 152.1/2009 Mr B Bell 43A Stimson ST SMITHFIELD 30/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 9,000 153.1/2009 Mr W KABBOUT 1/5 Rigg PL BONNYRIGG 18/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 5,000 154.1/2009 Hong Enterprise P/L 1/81 John ST CABRAMATTA 05/03/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Shop 5,000 155.1/2009 Mr W KWOK 200 The Boulevarde FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 04/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Business Premises 10,000 157.1/2009 Mr M Tomac 99 Nelson ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 30/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Inground Pool 29,000 160.1/2009 Mr V C Nguyen 28 Torrens ST CANLEY HEIGHTS 24/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 3,600 163.1/2009 Mr VC Nguyen 30 Melbourne RD ST JOHNS PARK 13/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 40,000 164.1/2009 Mrs MML Le 13/48-50 Hill ST CABRAMATTA 23/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Medical Centre 10,000 169.1/2009 Mr R Lee 99 Shakespeare ST WETHERILL PARK 17/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 5,000 170.1/2009 Mr G Sacca 31 Malcolm AVE MT PRITCHARD 18/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 20,000 171.1/2009 V Vu 55 Boyd ST CABRAMATTA WEST 30/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 35,000

Page 4 of 5 Printed: 3/04/2009 3:54:26PM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 174.1/2009 Designcorp Australia Pty Ltd 9 Partridge AVE YENNORA 30/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 90,000 178.1/2009 JFT Constructions Pty Limited 24 Gilbert ST CABRAMATTA 10/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Air Conditioning Unit 14,000 180.1/2009 Ms L Truong 163 Gladstone ST CABRAMATTA 31/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 230,000 181.1/2009 Mr PC Loadman 53 Apache RD BOSSLEY PARK 19/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 9,547 185.1/2009 Mr PA Som 49 Satara AVE CABRAMATTA WEST 09/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 8,000 189.1/2009 Mr D Mitrovic 5 Marlborough ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 17/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 0 190.1/2009 Austral Building Corporation Pty Ltd195 Ware ST FAIRFIELD 26/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Strata 0 196.1/2009 Mr M Karlo 40 Galton ST WETHERILL PARK 30/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 240,000 203.1/2009 NTL Building Contractor 42 Galton ST WETHERILL PARK 19/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Fence 11,000 206.1/2009 JNL Home Improvement Pty Ltd 8 Caulfield CRES ST JOHNS PARK 31/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 3,000 210.1/2009 Mrs L Qassis 4 Durack CL EDENSOR PARK 27/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 7,000 211.1/2009 M Gulic 259 St Johns RD ST JOHNS PARK 31/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 4,000 216.1/2009 Mr J Marando 26 Percy ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 24/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 5,000 220.1/2009 Mr SF Stivala 605 Cabramatta RDW CABRAMATTA WEST 24/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 9,000 221.1/2009 Mr I Ciric 24 Lang ST SMITHFIELD 20/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 8,000 234.1/2009 Mr L Brajkovic 15 Albany CL WAKELEY 30/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 6,000 245.1/2009 Mrs RT Birett 31 Fifth AVE CANLEY VALE 30/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 11,000 246.1/2009 Mr L Estipho 17 Stimson ST SMITHFIELD 30/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 5,000 257.1/2009 Mr I Ivanovski 83 Nelson ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 31/03/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 7,500 Total Development Applications Applications: 147 Est. Cost: 17,623,956 GRAND TOTAL Applications: 147 Est. Cost: 17,623,956

Page 5 of 5 Printed: 11/05/2009 2:42:15PM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 1361.1/2003 1361/2003DA Mr F Raso 55 Ryder RD GREENFIELD PARK 23/04/2009 DA Determination - Surrendered Dwelling Addition/Alteration 7,000 1558.1/2006 1558/2006DA Mrs S Spasojevic 12 Ferngrove RD CANLEY HEIGHTS 23/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dual Occupancy-Attached 280,000 885.1/2007 0885/2007DA Paynter Dixon Constructions Pty Ltd53 Cabramatta RDE CABRAMATTA 07/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Club 0 994.1/2007 0994/2007DA Mr APTT Nguyen 169-173 Hume HWY CABRAMATTA 08/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Warehouse 5,000 55.1/2008 0055/2008DA Mr CL Demasi 186-188 Cecil RD CECIL PARK 08/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 304,700 1207.1/2008 Miss J Chau 41 Madeline ST FAIRFIELD WEST 17/04/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Outbuilding 10,500 1250.1/2008 Sedrala Pty Ltd 148 Hume HWY LANSVALE 21/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 600,000 1280.1/2008 Mr G Kouris 48 Russell ST MT PRITCHARD 16/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 400,000 1335.1/2008 Britten & Accociates Pty Ltd 2245-2253 Elizabeth DR CECIL PARK 27/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 0 1337.1/2008 Mrs S Lim 147-161 Garfield RD HORSLEY PARK 07/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 0 1368.1/2008 Mr A Taleb 112 High ST CABRAMATTA WEST 06/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Triplex 400,000 1389.1/2008 Miss K Hua 35 Moonshine AVE CABRAMATTA WEST 01/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 456,000 1452.1/2008 G C Building Designer Pty Limited 12 Allowrie RD VILLAWOOD 01/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 50,000 1506.1/2008 Mr GH Turner 24 Shackel AVE OLD GUILDFORD 08/04/2009 Section 82A Determination - Refusal Dwelling Addition/Alteration 90,000 1672.1/2008 Fairfield City Council 35 Florence ST MT PRITCHARD 06/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Flood Lighting 28,000 1688.1/2008 Mr H L Ly 136 Broomfield ST CABRAMATTA 01/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 263,000 1749.1/2008 Mr T H Nguyen 13 Clare ST CABRAMATTA WEST 08/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 15,000 1792.1/2008 Ms JG Williams 36 Taralga ST OLD GUILDFORD 08/04/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Single Storey Dwelling 209,342 1842.1/2008 Mr J Gioffre 382 Elizabeth DR MT PRITCHARD 01/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 174,040 1877.1/2008 Mr RN Moopnar 387A Elizabeth DR MT PRITCHARD 30/04/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 273,000 1890.1/2008 Mr B Al Reziq 128 Orchardleigh ST OLD GUILDFORD 14/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 50,000 1973.1/2008 Mr M Demetlika 86 Hollywood DR LANSVALE 08/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 180,000 1976.1/2008 Mr A Lu 228 Ware ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 22/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 349,050 12.1/2009 Mrs RZ Hanna 28 Raphael ST GREENFIELD PARK 06/04/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 80,000 34.1/2009 Britten & Assoc Pty Ltd 22 Levuka ST CABRAMATTA 06/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 708,000 50.1/2009 Wizard Home Improvements 1/14 Coolibar ST CANLEY HEIGHTS 01/04/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 9,700 53.1/2009 Champion Homes 419-425 Elizabeth DR BONNYRIGG 09/04/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Two Storey Dwelling 212,000 83.1/2009 Mr R Lam 1 Bindaree ST LANSVALE 01/04/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 669,000 95.1/2009 Eden Brae Homes 6 Beckenham ST CANLEY VALE 28/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 213,543 98.1/2009 Mr S Pandaram 13 Willowbank CRES CANLEY VALE 22/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 212,000 106.1/2009 Kallah Pty Ltd 152 Quarry RD BOSSLEY PARK 03/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Inground Pool 23,500 110.1/2009 Eden Brae Homes 222 Victoria ST WETHERILL PARK 23/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 199,164

Page 1 of 4 Printed: 11/05/2009 2:42:59PM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 115.1/2009 Mr SN Quan 49 Lovoni ST CABRAMATTA 28/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 234,320 116.1/2009 Mr P Vandy 120 Nelson ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 21/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 350,000 119.1/2009 Mr MA Toro 31 Victory ST FAIRFIELD 29/04/2009 Section 82A Determination - Refusal Granny Flat 39,000 126.1/2009 Mr V Nguyen 5 Andrea CL BONNYRIGG 30/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 38,000 133.1/2009 Richmond & Ross Pty Ltd 749 Smithfield RD EDENSOR PARK 21/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Commercial Building 15,000 140.1/2009 Mr D Kvackovski 9 Townview RD MT PRITCHARD 02/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 188,870 141.1/2009 Transpacific Group Pty Ltd 233 Canley Vale RD CANLEY HEIGHTS 06/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Commercial Building 95,000 151.1/2009 Mr S Ayyoub 12 Benelong AVE SMITHFIELD 01/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 35,000 156.1/2009 Mr C Huynh 3 Lovoni ST CABRAMATTA 15/04/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 135,000 159.1/2009 Mr P Kakovski 28 Garrison RD BOSSLEY PARK 03/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Inground Pool 35,000 162.1/2009 Mr J Kuoch 76 Broomfield ST CABRAMATTA 08/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Office Fitout 2,000 167.1/2009 Mr K Jardak 20 Ryder RD GREENFIELD PARK 07/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 40,000 173.1/2009 Jardak Developments 2 Hoyle PL GREENFIELD PARK 07/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 40,000 177.1/2009 Mr K Nguyen 74 Thorney RD FAIRFIELD WEST 01/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Commercial Building 220 186.1/2009 Mr L Al-Sheikh 56 Meadows RD MT PRITCHARD 16/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Business Premises 50,000 194.1/2009 Mr TN Cao 373 North Liverpool RD BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 24/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Retaining Wall 6,000 197.1/2009 Mr V Petrovsky 4 Katinka ST BONNYRIGG 03/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 7,000 198.1/2009 Mr J Gittany 16 Wewak PL BOSSLEY PARK 08/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 210,000 199.1/2009 Lily Homes 4 McIlvenie ST CANLEY HEIGHTS 08/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 298,000 200.1/2009 Lao Buddhist Society Of NSW Inc 697A Smithfield RD EDENSOR PARK 08/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Festival 12,000 202.1/2009 All West Diesel 104-108 Fairfield ST FAIRFIELD EAST 20/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 0 204.1/2009 Mr T Thai 70-72 John ST CABRAMATTA 02/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 2,000 209.1/2009 Mr H A Salama 35 Cutler RD LANSVALE 01/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Air Conditioning Unit 2,000 212.1/2009 Baini Design 5 Kay ST OLD GUILDFORD 21/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 80,000 215.1/2009 Mr VD Pham 67 Fairview RD CABRAMATTA 21/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 37,000 219.1/2009 Mrs T A Truong 101-103 John ST CABRAMATTA 06/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 15,000 226.1/2009 Mr A Mansour 6 O'Meally ST PRAIRIEWOOD 01/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 10,000 227.1/2009 Ms K T P Hua 14 Sydney Luker AVE CABRAMATTA WEST 21/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Fence 6,000 228.1/2009 Mr R Capaldi 4 Cusak CL EDENSOR PARK 24/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 3,000 229.1/2009 Mr E Horish 10 Smithfield RD SMITHFIELD 07/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Tow Truck Depot 0 238.1/2009 Ausland Constructions Pty Ltd 2 Third AVE CANLEY VALE 16/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Fence 15,000 241.1/2009 Lean Lackenby & Hayward 114 Camden ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 27/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Strata 0

Page 2 of 4 Printed: 11/05/2009 2:42:59PM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 243.1/2009 RS Canceri Pty Ltd 1/50A Park RD CABRAMATTA 01/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Strata 0 244.1/2009 Ms G Menna 169 Mimosa RD BOSSLEY PARK 30/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 35,000 248.1/2009 Antwork Design 33 Reservoir RD MT PRITCHARD 01/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 33,500 249.1/2009 Greenfield DA Services 34 John ST CABRAMATTA 06/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Business Premises 665,000 255.1/2009 Mr AO Toma 49 Dransfield RD EDENSOR PARK 21/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 25,000 260.1/2009 Perfection Building Services 5 Denbern ST BOSSLEY PARK 30/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 60,000 261.1/2009 Mr K Mitchell 149 Townview RD MT PRITCHARD 24/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 19,400 266.1/2009 Mr Z Kalapac 21 Bowden ST CABRAMATTA 22/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 35,000 267.1/2009 Mr A AL-Dakak 141 Bossley RD BOSSLEY PARK 03/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 27,000 272.1/2009 A & K Engineering Group Pty Ltd 59 Hassall ST SMITHFIELD 30/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 150,000 278.1/2009 SLM Carports 9 Narellan CRES BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 17/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 6,000 279.1/2009 Ausland Constructions Pty Ltd 4 Third AVE CANLEY VALE 16/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Fence 7,500 281.1/2009 Amazing Home Improvements 13 Hope CRES BOSSLEY PARK 17/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 4,100 282.1/2009 Mr S Ferguson 27-29 Coreen AVE CECIL PARK 30/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Inground Pool 34,800 283.1/2009 Mr P Melodia 34 Begovich CRES ABBOTSBURY 24/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Fence 2,048 286.1/2009 Miss JUP Ha 38 Madeline ST FAIRFIELD WEST 28/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Fence 7,700 290.1/2009 JNL Home Improvement Pty Ltd 34 Province ST ABBOTSBURY 14/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 5,000 292.1/2009 Condor Designs Architects 22 Freeman AVE CANLEY VALE 24/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 10,000 294.1/2009 Ms TP To 57 Lime ST CABRAMATTA WEST 16/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 20,000 299.1/2009 Mr C Kilicoglu 1A Stevenson ST WETHERILL PARK 14/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 48,000 310.1/2009 Mr VK Ouy 14 Hackett RD ABBOTSBURY 17/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Fence 4,500 315.1/2009 Pajic Building Co Pty Ltd 16 Delamere ST CANLEY VALE 15/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 4,900 316.1/2009 Mr ST Ho 88 Mandarin ST VILLAWOOD 21/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Fence 6,470 318.1/2009 Mr D Naidu 29 Alt ST SMITHFIELD 28/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 35,000 323.1/2009 Mr SM Hussaini 59 Province ST ABBOTSBURY 28/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 5,000 325.1/2009 Mr VQ Le 2 Batman PL ST JOHNS PARK 28/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 5,500 328.1/2009 T N Constructions Pty Ltd 53 Lansdowne RD CANLEY VALE 29/04/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 62,300 338.1/2009 Ms LU Wang 2 Caranya PL CABRAMATTA WEST 28/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 8,000 344.1/2009 Ms DH Ly 42 Delgarno RD BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 23/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 4,000 345.1/2009 Miss THT Vu 3 Boyd ST CABRAMATTA WEST 28/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 10,000 346.1/2009 Mr A Helmy 41 Marley CRES BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 28/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 5,000 363.1/2009 Wizard Home Improvements 64 Chifley ST SMITHFIELD 30/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 6,000

Page 3 of 4 Printed: 11/05/2009 2:42:59PM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 376.1/2009 Mr K Heckenburg 5 Rosemont AVE SMITHFIELD 29/04/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 5,000 Total Development Applications Applications: 97 Est. Cost: 9,828,667 GRAND TOTAL Applications: 97 Est. Cost: 9,828,667

Page 4 of 4 Printed: 2/06/2009 4:09:51PM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 303.1/2007 0303/2007DA Advanced Garages 88 Eton ST SMITHFIELD 18/05/2009 Section 82A Determination - Refusal Outbuilding 11,000 1185.1/2008 Assyrian School Ltd 217-233 Horsley RD HORSLEY PARK 12/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Education Establishment 12,000,000 1221.1/2008 Sambuild Pty Ltd 6 Cook AVE CANLEY VALE 04/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 12,000 1311.1/2008 C C Western & Assoc 55-63 Market ST SMITHFIELD 08/05/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Industry 0 1369.1/2008 Sun Engineering 8 Blaxland ST YENNORA 14/05/2009 DA Determination - Surrendered Dwelling Addition/Alteration 44,000 1489.1/2008 Mr R Sekulic 14 Boyd ST CABRAMATTA WEST 05/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Duplex 300,000 1620.1/2008 Mr VK Quy 250 Hume HWY LANSVALE 11/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 19,000 1643.1/2008 Resitech Dept Of Housing 25 Koonoona AVE VILLAWOOD 19/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Aged Persons Housing 1,055,000 1684.1/2008 Mr P Kyriakos 125 Delamere ST CANLEY VALE 29/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Duplex 248,000 1702.1/2008 Fowler Homes 124 The Horsley DR CARRAMAR 06/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Community Facility 355,510 1718.1/2008 CPT Corp Pty Ltd 100 John ST CABRAMATTA 12/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 6,000 1738.1/2008 Mr M Kassem 71 Railway ST YENNORA 08/05/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Junk Yard 0 1802.1/2008 TT Red Rooster Bonnyrigg Pty Ltd 751 Smithfield RD EDENSOR PARK 18/05/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Refreshment Room 95,000 1831.1/2008 T & D Trading Co Pty Ltd 35/1-3 Knight ST LANSVALE 29/05/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Warehouse 5,000 1832.1/2008 T & D Trading Co Pty Ltd 14/1-3 Knight ST LANSVALE 29/05/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Warehouse 5,000 1840.1/2008 Mr V Bongiorno 54 Walworth RD HORSLEY PARK 29/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 260,000 1864.1/2008 Mr S Ayouby 12 Tangerine ST VILLAWOOD 29/05/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Tow Truck Depot 0 1952.1/2008 Paynter Dixon Constructions Pty Ltd101 Meadows RD MT PRITCHARD 11/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Club 170,000 1970.1/2008 Matthew Quomi Pty Ltd 24 Bodalla ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 04/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Triplex 390,000 6.1/2009 Mr D Konjevic 13 Telford PL PRAIRIEWOOD 11/05/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 170,000 42.1/2009 Mrs A Castaneda 45 Polding ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 26/05/2009 Approved - Council Group Home 0 45.1/2009 Ms TLT Nguyen 17 Willowbank CRES CANLEY VALE 14/05/2009 DA Determination - Surrendered Fence 5,200 72.1/2009 Mr XY Cai 39/1-3 Knight ST LANSVALE 21/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 24,500 74.1/2009 Mr VK Do 34 Derby ST CANLEY HEIGHTS 01/05/2009 Section 82A Determination - Refusal Outbuilding 10,000 99.1/2009 Patioland Parramatta Pty Ltd 15 Donahue CL PRAIRIEWOOD 21/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 24,000 109.1/2009 Gaintak Investment Pty Ltd 15 Elizabeth ST WETHERILL PARK 25/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Bulky Goods/Showroom 200,000 123.1/2009 Mr K Ly 70-72 John ST CABRAMATTA 18/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 10,000 132.1/2009 Mr M Brikha 23 Ligar ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 21/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Triplex 450,000 137.1/2009 Mr K H Chea 43 Avenel ST CANLEY VALE 05/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 65,000 144.1/2009 Miss GP Tran 98 Derria ST CANLEY HEIGHTS 12/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 331,000 184.1/2009 Miss GV Huynh 52 Campbell ST FAIRFIELD EAST 04/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 38,000 187.1/2009 Mr J Ayoubi 146 Hume HWY LANSVALE 11/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Vehicle Repair Workshop/Station 20,000

Page 1 of 4 Printed: 2/06/2009 4:10:41PM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 191.1/2009 Mr DD Le 13 Mumford RD CABRAMATTA WEST 06/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 50,000 195.1/2009 Virtual Y Designs 12 Wattle AVE VILLAWOOD 22/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 270,000 207.1/2009 Green Valley Enterprises Pty Ltd 8-36 Station ST FAIRFIELD 11/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 13,000 208.1/2009 Nadia's Performance Studio 11/367-369 Victoria ST WETHERILL PARK 05/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 0 214.1/2009 M L Noble Properties Pty Ltd 19 Nelson ST FAIRFIELD 12/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Strata 0 217.1/2009 Tonip Pty Ltd Design Group 43 Smart ST FAIRFIELD 11/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Commercial Building 35,000 218.1/2009 Mrs DH Bengamin 72 Kingfisher AVE BOSSLEY PARK 11/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Home Bus-Health Consult (medical+dental) 0 222.1/2009 OK Supermarket 5-9 Freedom PLZ CABRAMATTA 05/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 0 225.1/2009 Eagle Homes 71 Dawson ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 20/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 273,261 230.1/2009 Mr A Hermez 17 Stivala PL BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 11/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 250,000 233.1/2009 Crown Castle Australia Pty Ltd Border RD HORSLEY PARK 01/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 0 242.1/2009 Mr A Scampino 204 The Boulevarde FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 11/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 2,000 247.1/2009 Mr M Cengiz 16/272 Victoria ST WETHERILL PARK 11/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 1,000 252.1/2009 Select Distribution Pty Ltd 1/27A Davis RD WETHERILL PARK 11/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 3,000 256.1/2009 Mr S Alyas 5 Zuni CL BOSSLEY PARK 07/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 391,600 258.1/2009 Mr W A Shah 19 Stivala PL BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 08/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 300,000 263.1/2009 C Lim 8 Boyd ST CABRAMATTA WEST 04/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 300,000 268.1/2009 Mr J C Luzardo 7/48-66 The Horsley DR CARRAMAR 12/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 0 270.1/2009 Mr S Zaami 14 Mataro CL EDENSOR PARK 12/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 280,000 273.1/2009 Boris Grgurevic & Assoc Pty Ltd 83 Torrens ST CANLEY HEIGHTS 11/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 238,000 275.1/2009 Mr A Krishna 250 Fairfield ST FAIRFIELD EAST 11/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 10,000 276.1/2009 Ms T X T Nguyen 15 Sandringham ST ST JOHNS PARK 22/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 334,785 284.1/2009 Mr NO Ta 70-72 John ST CABRAMATTA 11/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 15,000 285.1/2009 Mr CB Pham 6 Witt CL EDENSOR PARK 12/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 150,000 287.1/2009 Kampuchea Krom Culture Centre of 114NSW Broomfield Inc ST CABRAMATTA 25/05/2009 Complete Place Of Worship 3,000 291.1/2009 Mr F Trstenjak 44 Northumberland ST BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 06/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Fence 5,000 293.1/2009 Mr M Daniel 1 Corona RD FAIRFIELD WEST 28/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 45,000 298.1/2009 Ms LU Wang 2 Caranya PL CABRAMATTA WEST 22/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 278,442 300.1/2009 Mr S Ayyoub 13 Granville ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 04/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 40,000 301.1/2009 Mr M Nguyen 34 Water ST CABRAMATTA WEST 06/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 235,000 302.1/2009 Hughes Trueman Pty Ltd 8 East PDE FAIRFIELD 22/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Civil Works 0 306.1/2009 Gaintak Investment Pty Ltd 15 Elizabeth ST WETHERILL PARK 25/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Bulky Goods/Showroom 60,000

Page 2 of 4 Printed: 2/06/2009 4:10:41PM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 307.1/2009 Mr J Urdanegui 3 Lang ST SMITHFIELD 12/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 207,867 309.1/2009 Barbara Tarnawski Architects 44 Charles ST SMITHFIELD 28/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 180,000 320.1/2009 Mr B Harrison 34 Quiros AVE FAIRFIELD WEST 12/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 9,000 321.1/2009 Mrs DM Nicoletti 176-186 Duff RD CECIL PARK 01/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 0 326.1/2009 Mr MS Khuong 24 Bauer RD CABRAMATTA WEST 18/05/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Dwelling Addition/Alteration 16,000 330.1/2009 Eden Brae Homes 22 Willowbank CRES CANLEY VALE 20/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 189,621 333.1/2009 Ms AAH Nguyen 83 Railway PDE CANLEY VALE 01/05/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Two Storey Dwelling 140,000 337.1/2009 Clarendon Homes 4 Whyalla CL WAKELEY 20/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 228,000 348.1/2009 Mr M T Quach 28 Lisa CRES BONNYRIGG 19/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 284,000 351.1/2009 Ms X C Tang 35 Huon ST CABRAMATTA 27/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 226,275 353.1/2009 Mr VV Tran 51 Boyd ST CABRAMATTA WEST 28/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 380,000 355.1/2009 Focus Homes 10 Brown ST SMITHFIELD 27/05/2009 Complete Two Storey Dwelling 516,000 362.1/2009 Mr A El Sayed 25 The Promenade YENNORA 21/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 0 364.1/2009 Mr AP Nguyen 1 Hemphill AVE MT PRITCHARD 12/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 8,500 368.1/2009 Mr J Rabadi 27 Shackel AVE OLD GUILDFORD 28/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 23,000 375.1/2009 Mr V H Chau 23 Beckenham ST CANLEY VALE 12/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Air Conditioning Unit 5,000 381.1/2009 TH Lu 88 John ST CABRAMATTA 06/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 10,000 382.1/2009 Cape Cod Australia Pty Ltd 11 Stanbrook ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 21/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 132,534 384.1/2009 Mr L Chau 89 Market ST SMITHFIELD 19/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 0 386.1/2009 Mrs QC Bui 5 Abercrombie ST CABRAMATTA WEST 11/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 8,000 387.1/2009 Alby Design & Construction Pty Ltd 16 Glenroy CRES ST JOHNS PARK 20/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 70,000 388.1/2009 JNL Home Improvement Pty Ltd 43 Salisbury ST CANLEY HEIGHTS 28/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 6,000 393.1/2009 JNL Home Improvement Pty Ltd 4 Santangelo CL EDENSOR PARK 12/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 4,000 397.1/2009 Mr KQ Lam 63 Buranda CRES ST JOHNS PARK 21/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 9,500 400.1/2009 Hunter & Northern Logistics Pty Ltd 10 Allen PL WETHERILL PARK 19/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Warehouse 0 404.1/2009 Project Surveyors 302 Canley Vale RD CANLEY HEIGHTS 11/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 0 408.1/2009 Ms T N H Nguyen 257 Mimosa RD GREENFIELD PARK 28/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 50,000 414.1/2009 Ms C Huynh 16 Brahma CL BOSSLEY PARK 18/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 7,500 415.1/2009 Mr D Boyd 46 Warrumbungle ST FAIRFIELD WEST 18/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 2,860 428.1/2009 Mr N Cuk 25 Aplin RD BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 19/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 11,000 430.1/2009 S.P.S. Home Improvements 93 Roland ST BOSSLEY PARK 20/05/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Dwelling Addition/Alteration 11,900 445.1/2009 Mr R Sullo 17 Hiland CRES SMITHFIELD 28/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 2,000

Page 3 of 4 Printed: 2/06/2009 4:10:41PM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 446.1/2009 Aca Design Consultants 84-88 Restwell RD BOSSLEY PARK 20/05/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Community Facility 65,000 Total Development Applications Applications: 97 Est. Cost: 22,709,855 GRAND TOTAL Applications: 97 Est. Cost: 22,709,855

Page 4 of 4 Printed: 7/07/2009 1:43:25PM Fairfield Live Database

Officer: All Records Fairfield City Council Development Type: All Records Approval Type: All Records Application Register - Determined Development Applications Est. Cost from: 0 To: 999,999,999.00 1/06/2009 to 30/06/2009

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 234.2/2000 Mr M Petrusevic 1 Parker ST FAIRFIELD 18/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 240,000 289.3/2006 Valore Holdings Pty Ltd 239 Canley Vale RD CANLEY HEIGHTS 25/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Business Premises 0 502.1/2006 0502/2006DA Mr S Kivarkis 140 Mimosa RD BOSSLEY PARK 23/06/2009 DA Determination - Surrendered Granny Flat 70,000 1127.2/2006 N Askarya 107 Shakespeare ST WETHERILL PARK 09/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 285,000 10215.1/2006 0215/2006CC Mr S Kivarkis 140 Mimosa RD BOSSLEY PARK 23/06/2009 CC Determination - Withdrawn Granny Flat 70,000 1036.2/2007 Mr Z Gaspi 1 Willmot ST BOSSLEY PARK 01/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 80,000 1198.1/2007 1198/2007DA Ryleton Pty Ltd 1 Villawood PL VILLAWOOD 04/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Commercial/Residential Development 18,000,000 10251.1/2007 0251/2007CC Mr U Morvillo 2 Rossiter ST SMITHFIELD 16/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Duplex 360,000 49.3/2008 Ramakers Architects Pty Ltd 8 Alan ST FAIRFIELD 19/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Refreshment Room 210,000 245.2/2008 Mrs S Daniel 1 Ainsworth CRES WETHERILL PARK 02/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 25,000 1005.2/2008 Mr B Elmoury 102 High ST CABRAMATTA WEST 19/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 350,000 1109.2/2008 FDC Construction & Fitout Pty Ltd 49-53 Newton RD WETHERILL PARK 11/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 0 1109.3/2008 FDC Construction & Fitout Pty Ltd 49-53 Newton RD WETHERILL PARK 22/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 0 1284.1/2008 Mrs ZH Manche 1 Stanley ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 01/06/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Two Storey Dwelling 397,000 1300.1/2008 Mr HV Canh 10 Longfield ST CABRAMATTA 16/06/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Warehouse 43,000 1429.2/2008 Ms NA Ngo 121 Arbutus ST CANLEY HEIGHTS 22/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 441,375 1688.2/2008 Mrs HL Ly 136 Broomfield ST CABRAMATTA 01/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 263,000 1696.1/2008 Mr K David 1 Alan ST FAIRFIELD 16/06/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Commercial Building 222,700 1872.1/2008 Mrs P Vella 65-69 Jamieson CL HORSLEY PARK 15/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 277,000 1885.2/2008 Mr DEV Jackson 8 Wyatt CL WETHERILL PARK 02/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Fence 8,000 1906.2/2008 Paul Rolfe Consulting Pty Ltd 25 Fairfield ST FAIRFIELD EAST 12/06/2009 MA Determination - Withdrawn Warehouse 0 1913.1/2008 Mrs T V Lam 43 Willowbank CRES CANLEY VALE 12/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 230,000 1929.1/2008 Ms T D Tran 38 Willowbank CRES CANLEY VALE 10/06/2009 DA Determination - Surrendered Two Storey Dwelling 256,231 1957.1/2008 Classic Frosted Glass Pty Ltd 121-123 Cowpasture RD WETHERILL PARK 23/06/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Commercial Building 650,000 1979.1/2008 Westminster Homes Pty Ltd 39 Willowbank CRES CANLEY VALE 22/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 197,000 6.1/2009 Mr D Konjevic 13 Telford PL PRAIRIEWOOD 24/06/2009 Section 82A Determination - Refusal Single Storey Dwelling 170,000 67.1/2009 Mr TP Nguyen 80 Lansdowne RD CANLEY VALE 02/06/2009 Section 82A Determination - Refusal Single Storey Dwelling 185,000 68.1/2009 Mr N Isaac 14 Currey PL FAIRFIELD WEST 09/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 183,000 92.1/2009 Tran & Truong Residential Property 110Pty LtdMcBurney RD CABRAMATTA 25/06/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 15,000 117.1/2009 Ms S Marm 49 Satara AVE CABRAMATTA WEST 09/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 265,000 138.1/2009 Mrs H C Ma 1 Villawood PL VILLAWOOD 16/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 7,000 156.1/2009 Mr C Huynh 3 Lovoni ST CABRAMATTA 02/06/2009 Section 82A Determination - Refusal Single Storey Dwelling 135,000

Page 1 of 5 Printed: 7/07/2009 1:44:12PM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 183.1/2009 Firststyle Homes Pty Limited 3 Ryan AVE CABRAMATTA 12/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 205,000 232.1/2009 John B Stephen & Assoc 38 Vine ST FAIRFIELD 19/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Strata 0 240.1/2009 Mr BM Chang 65 Madeline ST FAIRFIELD WEST 22/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 298,183 251.1/2009 Becton Property Group 28 Bonnyrigg AVE BONNYRIGG 01/06/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Sign/s 168,364 262.1/2009 Patioland Parramatta Pty Ltd 30 Crayford CRES MT PRITCHARD 01/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 11,805 271.1/2009 Urban Style Design Pty Ltd 154-158 The Boulevarde FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 09/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Commercial Building 734,678 274.1/2009 Mrs K Bonello 3-4 Rigney CL CECIL PARK 05/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 430,500 289.1/2009 Mr VH Nguyen 106 Knight ST LANSVALE 10/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 2,000 296.1/2009 State Property Authority 431 Elizabeth DR BONNYRIGG 02/06/2009 DA Determination - Surrendered Subdivision Strata 0 311.1/2009 Ms T Quach 14 Willowbank CRES CANLEY VALE 09/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 188,000 312.1/2009 Mr K Nguyen 74 Thorney RD FAIRFIELD WEST 25/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 3,000 318.2/2009 Mr D Naidu 29 Alt ST SMITHFIELD 02/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 35,000 329.1/2009 Mr J Gioffre 382A Elizabeth DR MT PRITCHARD 15/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 185,570 331.1/2009 Mr HT Vo 5 Abercrombie ST CABRAMATTA WEST 09/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 271,742 332.1/2009 Cancer Council 104 Smithfield RD SMITHFIELD 17/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Ceremony 0 340.1/2009 Tsang & Lee Architects Pty Lyd 111-115 Arundel RD HORSLEY PARK 25/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 12,000 342.1/2009 Eagles Homes 22A Premier ST CANLEY VALE 10/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 210,611 343.1/2009 Albert Spiess Pty Ltd 400 Victoria ST WETHERILL PARK 09/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 545,000 347.1/2009 Mr F Sergi 26 Benghazi ST BOSSLEY PARK 09/06/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 9,000 349.1/2009 Mr M Brikha 101 Station ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 24/06/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 50,000 350.1/2009 Ms DP Fenech 714 The Horsley DR SMITHFIELD 01/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 0 352.1/2009 Mr AJ Munari 19 Gwandalan RD EDENSOR PARK 02/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 90,000 358.1/2009 Mr M Grasso 580 Smithfield RD PRAIRIEWOOD 25/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Home Business-Beauty Salon 25,000 366.1/2009 Ms TP La 20 Loloma ST CABRAMATTA 15/06/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 17,000 369.1/2009 Mr M Jajou 25/1 Cowpasture PL WETHERILL PARK 05/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 150,000 370.1/2009 Mr KT Lam 3 Woodlands AVE BOSSLEY PARK 04/06/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 11,500 372.1/2009 Timberline Homes 7A Liverpool ST CABRAMATTA 12/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 139,000 378.1/2009 Mrs LHT Ngo 5 Dalmatia ST CARRAMAR 16/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 270,000 389.1/2009 Mr VO Nguyen 25 Roebuck ST CABRAMATTA 02/06/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 420,000 390.1/2009 Development Approval Managers Pty211-217 Ltd North Liverpool RD BONNYRIGG 05/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 0 396.1/2009 Mr D Hong 21 Karoon AVE CANLEY HEIGHTS 02/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 72,000 398.1/2009 Mr KT Tek 1/44 Park RD CABRAMATTA 03/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Refreshment Room 25,000

Page 2 of 5 Printed: 7/07/2009 1:44:12PM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 399.1/2009 Mr M Karlo 40 Galton ST WETHERILL PARK 16/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Air Conditioning Unit 12,000 401.1/2009 Top Harvest Pty Ltd 102 John ST CABRAMATTA 26/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 2,500 403.1/2009 Top Harvest Pty Ltd 102 John ST CABRAMATTA 26/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Business Premises 2,500 406.1/2009 Alma Engineers Pty Ltd 34 Joyce ST FAIRFIELD 30/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 0 407.1/2009 Mrs CT Henson 7 Driscoll ST ABBOTSBURY 09/06/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Outbuilding 10,000 410.1/2009 Mrs L Piper 2 Hillend PL WAKELEY 10/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 3,000 413.1/2009 Mr AB Shamoon 152 Quarry RD BOSSLEY PARK 24/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 16,235 416.1/2009 Mr B Al Reziq 8 Blaxland ST YENNORA 02/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 85,000 417.1/2009 Mr S Yazbeck 5 Withers PL ABBOTSBURY 04/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 550,000 419.1/2009 Merkorious Construction Pty Limited4 Macarthur ST FAIRFIELD EAST 10/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 310,000 420.1/2009 Mrs L Schultz 47 Brown ST SMITHFIELD 16/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 10,100 421.1/2009 Mr K W Foulstone 646-656 Woodville RD OLD GUILDFORD 04/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Community Event 0 423.1/2009 Mr JB Dela-Cruz 4 Whyalla CL WAKELEY 01/06/2009 DA Determination - Surrendered Demolition 11,000 424.1/2009 The Regd Prop Of Strata Plan 1209938 Hardy ST FAIRFIELD 12/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 11,000 425.1/2009 Designcorp Australia Pty Ltd 561-583 Polding ST PRAIRIEWOOD 11/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 75,000 431.1/2009 Britten & Assoc Pty Ltd 7 Enterprise PL WETHERILL PARK 11/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Strata 0 434.1/2009 Tri Distributors Aust Pty Ltd 8 Cavasinni PL WETHERILL PARK 01/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 7,000 436.1/2009 Mr D Dimic 44 Alick ST CABRAMATTA 25/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 50,000 438.1/2009 Mrs R Oraham 91A Kalang RD EDENSOR PARK 09/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 220,000 442.1/2009 Merkorious Construction Pty Limited13 Orchardleigh ST YENNORA 17/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 70,000 443.1/2009 Mr N Naamo 85-101 Horsley RD HORSLEY PARK 26/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 700,000 444.1/2009 Mr J Manning 28 Crosby CRES FAIRFIELD 10/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 45,000 449.1/2009 CSB NSW Pty Ltd 6 Lisa CRES BONNYRIGG 05/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 195,000 450.1/2009 Dr Sadek Pty Limited 1/118 Ware ST FAIRFIELD 17/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Medical Centre 40,000 453.1/2009 Mr LB Wu 79 Torrens ST CANLEY HEIGHTS 10/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Fence 9,800 454.1/2009 Trevelle Homes 39 Middlehope ST BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 10/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 223,000 455.1/2009 Dvyne Design & Construction Pty Ltd692 The Horsley DR SMITHFIELD 30/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 2,500 456.1/2009 Dynamite Beauty Salon 200-202 The Boulevarde FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 24/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 20,000 458.1/2009 Bluescope Water Pty Ltd 75 Edensor RD ST JOHNS PARK 24/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Water Tank 45,000 463.1/2009 Pro Corp Designs 290 Lincoln RD HORSLEY PARK 29/06/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Two Storey Dwelling 470,000 468.1/2009 Mrs R B Sadiq 5 Richmond CL ST JOHNS PARK 16/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 109,000 472.1/2009 Mrs RH Abikhalil 34 Moir ST SMITHFIELD 09/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 50,000

Page 3 of 5 Printed: 7/07/2009 1:44:12PM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 473.1/2009 Mr M Novkovic 13 Swanley ST MT PRITCHARD 04/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 11,000 476.1/2009 State Property Authority 431 Elizabeth DR BONNYRIGG 10/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 0 478.1/2009 P & J Plumbing 295-309 Chandos RD HORSLEY PARK 11/06/2009 Complete Aerated Septic Tank 0 479.1/2009 Ms V Pereira 2/23 Cartwright ST BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 02/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 4,500 480.1/2009 Glen Cameron Nominees Pty Ltd 50 Redfern ST WETHERILL PARK 11/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Warehouse 0 481.1/2009 Fowler Homes Pty Ltd 124 The Horsley DR CARRAMAR 17/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 7,700 484.1/2009 Mr A Mirabilio 30 Begovich CRES ABBOTSBURY 12/06/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Dwelling Addition/Alteration 48,000 492.1/2009 Advan Developments Pty Ltd 32 Church ST CABRAMATTA 11/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Strata 680,000 493.1/2009 Mr G Morabito 25 Power ST PRAIRIEWOOD 11/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 45,000 499.1/2009 Mr J Urdanegui 3 Lang ST SMITHFIELD 10/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 9,000 510.1/2009 J K & L Construction Pty Ltd 4/85 John ST CABRAMATTA 24/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 50,000 513.1/2009 Mr R Prtenjak 4 Echuca CL BONNYRIGG 25/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 7,500 515.1/2009 Customline Carports 2 Lidell PL BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 11/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 4,900 516.1/2009 Mrs F Siracusa 10 Alvisio CL EDENSOR PARK 10/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 5,000 517.1/2009 Mr AR Miranda 2 Gazi CL BOSSLEY PARK 16/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 4,000 520.1/2009 Sunscreen Patios & Pergolas 7 Mimosa RD BOSSLEY PARK 29/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 16,000 523.1/2009 Austek Home Improvements 2 Patricia AVE MT PRITCHARD 12/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 6,000 527.1/2009 Mrs P Badoyan 23 Gardiner CRES FAIRFIELD WEST 12/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 5,000 528.1/2009 Mrs C Occhiuto 8 Pope PL FAIRFIELD WEST 24/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 7,000 529.1/2009 Mr BJ Maher 24 Tuncurry ST BOSSLEY PARK 11/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 9,000 535.1/2009 Mr J C Green 251 Canley Vale RD CANLEY HEIGHTS 24/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 7,500 536.1/2009 Mr KA Kathmi 108-108A Harris ST FAIRFIELD 25/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 0 537.1/2009 Mrs HHT Tran 42 Tangerine ST FAIRFIELD EAST 12/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 38,000 538.1/2009 Ms ML Bui 7 Oliphant ST MT PRITCHARD 25/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 3,500 542.1/2009 Wizard Home Improvements 11 Keesing ST EDENSOR PARK 25/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 7,000 544.1/2009 Wizard Home Improvements 11 Frome ST FAIRFIELD WEST 17/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 35,000 545.1/2009 JNL Home Improvement Pty Ltd 8 Wyalong CL WAKELEY 24/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 5,000 548.1/2009 Mr JB Dela-Cruz 4 Whyalla CL WAKELEY 25/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Air Conditioning Unit 9,000 553.1/2009 Ms C S Jorquera 22A Premier ST CANLEY VALE 25/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 7,000 556.1/2009 Focus Homes 10 Brown ST SMITHFIELD 16/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 0 559.1/2009 Mr HD Nguyen 16 Richmond CL ST JOHNS PARK 25/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 3,000 564.1/2009 Mr Z Brasnovic 64 Vidal ST WETHERILL PARK 29/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 25,000

Page 4 of 5 Printed: 7/07/2009 1:44:12PM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 574.1/2009 Woodville Community Services 16 Kamira AVE VILLAWOOD 24/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Festival 0 580.1/2009 Mr P Huynh 98 Cumberland ST CABRAMATTA 25/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Fence 6,000 581.1/2009 King Tomislav Croation Club Ltd 223-227 Edensor RD EDENSOR PARK 25/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Festival 0 606.1/2009 Mr S Petrovsky 24 Kindee AVE BONNYRIGG 29/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 50,000 607.1/2009 Mr VK Tran 45 Garland CRES BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 30/06/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 8,000 Total Development Applications Applications: 133 Est. Cost: 32,693,494 GRAND TOTAL Applications: 133 Est. Cost: 32,693,494

Page 5 of 5 Printed: 10/08/2009 4:10:57PM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 19.1/2005 0019/2005DA Mr B Tankhounthavong 37 Marley CRES BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 10/07/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Dwelling Addition/Alteration 18,000 1238.1/2007 1238/2007DA Mr Nguyen 102 Sweethaven RD GREENFIELD PARK 28/07/2009 DA Determination - Surrendered Single Storey Dwelling 201,316 1027.1/2008 Shopping Centre Management Pty Ltd100 Bonnyrigg AVE BONNYRIGG 08/07/2009 Approved - Council Shopping Centre 56,616,887 1665.1/2008 Hamptons Planning 100 Bonnyrigg AVE BONNYRIGG 20/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shopping Centre 50,000 1671.1/2008 Global Reliance Pty Ltd 248 Hume HWY LANSVALE 07/07/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Car Yard 12,000 1942.1/2008 Transpacific Group Pty Ltd 46 Hill ST CABRAMATTA 09/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Commercial Building 986,000 97.1/2009 Sinclair Knight Merz 678 The Horsley DR SMITHFIELD 27/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Service Station 703,000 131.1/2009 Tiger One Investment Pty Ltd 239 Canley Vale RD CANLEY HEIGHTS 14/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Commercial Building 250,000 146.1/2009 VTC Holdings Pty Ltd 15 Cunninghame ST FAIRFIELD 09/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Residential Flat Building 2,200,000 165.1/2009 Miss T Khamo 44 Treloar PL EDENSOR PARK 24/07/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Home Business-Clothing 20,000 213.1/2009 Miss C L Quan 101 Harris ST FAIRFIELD 06/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 37,000 231.1/2009 Ms KN Tran 5 Lansdowne RD CANLEY VALE 02/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 15,000 250.1/2009 Mr W Hermiz 44 Court RD FAIRFIELD 24/07/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Shop 0 269.1/2009 Signmanager 223-227 Edensor RD EDENSOR PARK 03/07/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Sign/s 3,000 288.1/2009 Australasian Conference Assoc Ltd 22-30 Mansfield ST WETHERILL PARK 02/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Carpark 50,000 324.1/2009 Antworks Design 69 Madeline ST FAIRFIELD WEST 06/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 188,000 328.1/2009 T N Constructions Pty Ltd 53 Lansdowne RD CANLEY VALE 07/07/2009 Section 82A Determination - Refusal Granny Flat 62,300 334.1/2009 Condor Design Pty Ltd 23 Wilga ST FAIRFIELD 01/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 35,000 347.1/2009 Mr F Sergi 26 Benghazi ST BOSSLEY PARK 15/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 9,000 357.1/2009 C C Weston & Assoc 12 Lagana PL WETHERILL PARK 27/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Bulky Goods/Showroom 20,000 359.1/2009 Mr V Nudler 2-4 Villawood RD VILLAWOOD 20/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Carpark 15,000 367.1/2009 Yum! Restaurants Aust Pty Ltd 561-583 Polding ST PRAIRIEWOOD 02/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Sign/s 25,000 377.1/2009 Lu Projects Pty Ltd 24-32 Hughes ST CABRAMATTA 02/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 38,000 391.1/2009 Mrs T Kargar 13 Chavin PL GREENFIELD PARK 24/07/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Home Business-Food 3,000 394.1/2009 Miss T T B Nguyen 28 Beckenham ST CANLEY VALE 08/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 202,146 395.1/2009 Mr D Cammareri 2 Stuart ST CANLEY VALE 22/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 48,000 409.1/2009 D Dimaria 59 Marlborough ST SMITHFIELD 15/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 312,000 412.1/2009 Mr J T Nguyen 239 Canley Vale RD CANLEY HEIGHTS 06/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 4,000 418.1/2009 Focus Homes 194 Brenan ST SMITHFIELD 07/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 306,500 422.1/2009 Mrs PF Lim 16 Holdin ST BONNYRIGG 02/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Home Business-Hairdressing 0 429.1/2009 Retail Food Group 100 Bonnyrigg AVE BONNYRIGG 09/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 100,000 432.1/2009 Five Star Quality Products Pty Ltd 130 Newton RD WETHERILL PARK 02/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Warehouse 0

Page 1 of 4 Printed: 10/08/2009 4:11:45PM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 433.1/2009 Eagle Homes 32 Bligh ST VILLAWOOD 14/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 40,950 437.1/2009 Auto Ice Parts Pty Ltd 72 Railway ST YENNORA 06/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Auto Dismantler 0 462.1/2009 Mr D Backo 19 McCarthy ST FAIRFIELD WEST 15/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 48,000 464.1/2009 Ms TM Nguyen 19 Lord ST CABRAMATTA WEST 13/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 437,000 465.1/2009 Mr F Rizzuti 130-136 Lincoln RD HORSLEY PARK 13/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 3,000 467.1/2009 Mr D Cece 123-143 Horsley RD HORSLEY PARK 02/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Home Business-Office 3,000 470.1/2009 Nguyen & Luu Pty Ltd 1/81 John ST CABRAMATTA 01/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 20,000 477.1/2009 Vinh Nguyen Bros & Assoc 103 Lord ST CABRAMATTA WEST 01/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Fence 16,000 485.1/2009 De'Bonnaire Designz 88 Henry ST OLD GUILDFORD 13/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 86,000 486.1/2009 Mr JW Webster 36 Silverwater CRES LANSVALE 14/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 7,000 487.1/2009 Essential Planning 3-7 Woodstock ST ST JOHNS PARK 08/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 357,000 488.1/2009 Mr N Li 2/50 Park RD CABRAMATTA 14/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 5,000 496.1/2009 Mr V Pham 239 Canley Vale RD CANLEY HEIGHTS 06/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Office Fitout 10,900 498.1/2009 Mr R Skhale 8 Morven ST OLD GUILDFORD 08/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 200,000 503.1/2009 Mr MA EL-Kheir 42 Malta ST FAIRFIELD EAST 16/07/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Dwelling Addition/Alteration 45,000 507.1/2009 Supplements 101 134 Edensor RD BONNYRIGG 10/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 12,000 508.1/2009 Evalesco Construtction Pty Ltd 1 Marlborough ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 01/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 55,000 509.1/2009 Mr N B Jenkins 17 Rhondda ST SMITHFIELD 14/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 7,000 511.1/2009 Mr S V Chour 33 Hamel RD MT PRITCHARD 07/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 1,000 514.1/2009 Mr A Luu 5 Lord ST CABRAMATTA WEST 06/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 333,700 518.1/2009 Casaview Constructions 23 Gardiner CRES FAIRFIELD WEST 27/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 224,250 521.1/2009 Mr M Romic 2 Beckenham ST CANLEY VALE 29/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 232,000 524.1/2009 Fairfield City Council 55 Boyd ST CABRAMATTA WEST 01/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 0 525.1/2009 Mr TS Ngo 40 Andrew AVE CANLEY HEIGHTS 06/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 105,000 526.1/2009 Mr J Huynh 43 Derby ST CANLEY HEIGHTS 13/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 80,000 533.1/2009 Mr TT Mai 12 Veron ST FAIRFIELD 13/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 300,000 541.1/2009 Mr I Vittozzi 27 Phyllis ST MT PRITCHARD 28/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 45,000 543.1/2009 Mr M M Antic 22A Stimson ST SMITHFIELD 22/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 205,000 551.1/2009 Mr BL Nguyen 4 Somers ST BONNYRIGG 24/07/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Home Business-Clothing 3,000 555.1/2009 Mr R Sullo 17 Hiland CRES SMITHFIELD 14/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 270,000 560.1/2009 Mr T Nassrat 36A Avonlea ST CANLEY HEIGHTS 27/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 20,000 562.1/2009 Ms T R Stevens 7/41-47 Spencer ST FAIRFIELD 28/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Business Premises 0

Page 2 of 4 Printed: 10/08/2009 4:11:45PM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 565.1/2009 Mr O Taleb 81 Broughton ST OLD GUILDFORD 16/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 5,000 568.1/2009 Miss THT Vu 3 Boyd ST CABRAMATTA WEST 13/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 354,043 570.1/2009 Clarendon Homes 52 Smiths AVE CABRAMATTA 27/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 259,615 577.1/2009 Mr D Tran 7 Katrina CRES CABRAMATTA WEST 27/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 6,000 582.1/2009 Mr VK Do 34 Derby ST CANLEY HEIGHTS 15/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 12,000 583.1/2009 Nextspace Pty Ltd 1-29 Court RD FAIRFIELD 16/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 75,000 585.1/2009 Mr C Tang 104 Lansdowne RD CANLEY VALE 29/07/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 35,000 586.1/2009 Mr I Kukic 86 Hemphill AVE MT PRITCHARD 14/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 243,000 587.1/2009 Ms C Huynh 16 Brahma CL BOSSLEY PARK 15/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Air Conditioning Unit 11,300 588.1/2009 Mr D Gajic 13 Bainton RD MT PRITCHARD 13/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Fence 11,000 590.1/2009 Mr DC Petalas 22 Neville ST SMITHFIELD 06/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Public Recreation Facility 0 591.1/2009 Alma Engineers Pty Ltd 25 Alt ST SMITHFIELD 10/07/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Fence 9,000 592.1/2009 Alma Engineers Pty Ltd 13 Chisholm ST SMITHFIELD 01/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Fence 9,000 593.1/2009 Mrs L M Vo 2/49 Smart ST FAIRFIELD 16/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 30,000 594.1/2009 Lingling Manchester 37 John ST CABRAMATTA 15/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 1,000 595.1/2009 Ms S K Wu 166 Canley Vale RD CANLEY HEIGHTS 01/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 7,000 598.1/2009 Mr D Miladinovic 24 Corry ST BONNYRIGG 23/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 65,000 599.1/2009 Mr G Haddad 2 Throsby ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 22/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 229,000 601.1/2009 Mr Z Wehbeh 75 Belmore ST FAIRFIELD EAST 07/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 8,000 602.1/2009 Mr B Kanj 83 Whitaker ST OLD GUILDFORD 21/07/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Granny Flat 25,000 605.1/2009 Project Surveyors 10-12 Oxford ST SMITHFIELD 20/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Strata 0 613.1/2009 Mr C To 144 Fairfield ST FAIRFIELD 28/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 80,000 614.1/2009 Mr AA Khilla 11 Esmond PL WAKELEY 01/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 6,000 615.1/2009 Mrs MS Sivieng 15 Senior ST CANLEY VALE 06/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 8,000 616.1/2009 Mr BH Truong 51 Arbutus ST CANLEY HEIGHTS 06/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 7,000 617.1/2009 Mr M Faraj 30 Willowbank CRES CANLEY VALE 29/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 230,000 618.1/2009 Mr A Helmy 41 Marley CRES BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 14/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 250,000 619.1/2009 Mr V M Phan 11 Laycock PL BONNYRIGG 16/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 19,000 628.1/2009 Mr J G Tolomeo 54 Galton ST WETHERILL PARK 27/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 125,000 633.1/2009 Mrs LHT Ngo 5 Dalmatia ST CARRAMAR 13/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 8,000 635.1/2009 Mr AN Karroum 8 Glenton ST ABBOTSBURY 14/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 2,500 643.1/2009 Fairfield City Council 16 Fisher ST CABRAMATTA 13/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 26,000

Page 3 of 4 Printed: 10/08/2009 4:11:45PM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 644.1/2009 Mr J Jabbour 43 Orchardleigh ST YENNORA 21/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 1,000 646.1/2009 Vinh Nguyen Bros & Assoc 16 Canterbury RD ST JOHNS PARK 21/07/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Granny Flat 33,500 648.1/2009 Mr CC Ho 12 The Grove FAIRFIELD 13/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 8,000 649.1/2009 Arconn P/L (Trading as Perfect Practice)53 Mimosa RD BOSSLEY PARK 20/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Medical Centre 50,000 654.1/2009 Mr G Georges 12 Dublin ST SMITHFIELD 27/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 200,000 656.1/2009 Mr AR West 7-9 Longfellow ST WETHERILL PARK 08/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 8,500 657.1/2009 Mr SH Tain 6 Boyd ST CABRAMATTA WEST 14/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 1,000 660.1/2009 Merkorious Construction Pty Limited13 Orchardleigh ST YENNORA 27/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Air Conditioning Unit 6,000 664.1/2009 Mr VS Le 5 Como PL ST JOHNS PARK 28/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 6,000 666.1/2009 Ms T K Pham 17 Broad ST CABRAMATTA 14/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 60,000 667.1/2009 Vinh Nguyen Bros & Assoc 39 Baragoola ST FAIRFIELD WEST 30/07/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 28,000 669.1/2009 Karisma Building Services Pty Ltd 12 Ashgrove ST ST JOHNS PARK 21/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 81,000 670.1/2009 Mr Z Q Liang 13/64 Ware ST FAIRFIELD 21/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 15,000 676.1/2009 Sea Breeze Pools 33 Rafter CRES ABBOTSBURY 20/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Inground Pool 19,000 681.1/2009 Mrs D Foti 579 Smithfield RD GREENFIELD PARK 23/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 150,000 682.1/2009 Mr P Gibbs 2D Knight ST LANSVALE 15/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 10,000 690.1/2009 Vinh Nguyen Bros & Assoc 14 Chelsea DR CANLEY HEIGHTS 29/07/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 28,000 709.1/2009 Mr A Emami 4 Percy ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 29/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 7,000 711.1/2009 Western Sydney Parklands Trust 144-154 Cowpasture RD WETHERILL PARK 29/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 4,598 712.1/2009 Local Pools Spas 6 Maxwell PL ABBOTSBURY 29/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Inground Pool 30,000 713.1/2009 Ranbuild Sydney 5 Horn CL ABBOTSBURY 29/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 21,750 714.1/2009 Mr A N Luu 5 Lord ST CABRAMATTA WEST 29/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 8,000 722.1/2009 Mr LJ Varcoe 21 Bauer RD CABRAMATTA WEST 29/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 9,000 728.1/2009 Ecodemo & Construction Pty Ltd 121 Campbell ST FAIRFIELD EAST 29/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 8,500 734.1/2009 Mr D Luu 16 Yalumba PL EDENSOR PARK 30/07/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 3,500 Total Development Applications Applications: 121 Est. Cost: 68,655,755 GRAND TOTAL Applications: 121 Est. Cost: 68,655,755

Page 4 of 4 Printed: 7/09/2009 11:58:27AM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 957.1/2007 0957/2007DA Wal Robbins Additions Pty Ltd 21 Tallowood CRES BOSSLEY PARK 14/08/2009 DA Determination - Surrendered Dwelling Addition/Alteration 100,000 1286.1/2008 Mr B Lopreiato 472 Cabramatta RDW MT PRITCHARD 11/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Service Station 48,000 1953.1/2008 Petra Development Australia Pty Ltd305 Polding ST FAIRFIELD WEST 04/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Triplex 398,000 87.1/2009 Ms HA Page 3 Mackenzie ST CANLEY VALE 07/08/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 180,000 122.1/2009 Britten & Assoc Pty Ltd 7-11 Calmsley PL HORSLEY PARK 04/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 0 175.1/2009 Mr R Borg 1824-1830 The Horsley DR HORSLEY PARK 17/08/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Refreshment Room 0 192.1/2009 Mr C J Wood 1/1345 The Horsley DR WETHERILL PARK 06/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 0 201.1/2009 Starr Constructions Pty Limited 344-346 Horsley RD HORSLEY PARK 18/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 585,240 254.1/2009 Mr T Thai 30 Broomfield ST CABRAMATTA 14/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 30,000 259.1/2009 Mr EZ Filipic 9A Urunga PL BOSSLEY PARK 06/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 225,000 264.1/2009 Ecocycle Materials Pty Ltd 155 Newton RD WETHERILL PARK 20/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 10,000 265.1/2009 Australian Postal Corp 379 Victoria ST WETHERILL PARK 31/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Warehouse 4,751,610 308.1/2009 Mr P Chau 105 Cumberland ST CABRAMATTA 05/08/2009 Section 82A Determination - Refusal Granny Flat 40,000 314.1/2009 Presidential Land & Maritime Management130 Restwell Pty Ltd RD BOSSLEY PARK 10/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Health Consulting Room/s and Residence 4,000 322.1/2009 Eagle Homes 326A Elizabeth DR MT PRITCHARD 17/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 180,615 327.1/2009 Mr GW Crouch 22 Riverside RD LANSVALE 19/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 11,000 341.1/2009 Ms MA Radice 13 Hampton ST FAIRFIELD 03/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 50,000 349.1/2009 Mr M Brikha 101 Station ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 12/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 100,000 355.1/2009 Focus Homes 10 Brown ST SMITHFIELD 25/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 516,000 371.1/2009 Mrs N Spasojevic 239 Canley Vale RD CANLEY HEIGHTS 04/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Commercial Building 60,000 373.1/2009 Mister 350Z Smash Repairs 48 Whitaker ST YENNORA 11/08/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Vehicle Repair Workshop/Station 5,000 435.1/2009 Mr VN Tran 21 Young ST MT PRITCHARD 26/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Home Business-Hairdressing 5,000 439.1/2009 New Era Design 121 Prairie Vale RD BOSSLEY PARK 17/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Club 29,000 451.1/2009 Fairfield Consulting Services 45-53 Selkirk AVE CECIL PARK 03/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 0 452.1/2009 Cabramatta Bowling & Recreation Club82 Longfield Ltd ST CABRAMATTA 11/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Sign/s 35,000 457.1/2009 Habitation Design & Interiors 281-287 Delaware RD HORSLEY PARK 18/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 35,000 471.1/2009 JNL Home Improvement Pty Ltd 204 Neville ST SMITHFIELD 28/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 6,000 475.1/2009 On Time Freight Management Pty Ltd21/19-26 Durian PL WETHERILL PARK 10/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Warehouse 0 482.1/2009 Mrs L Mrouki 46 Hamilton RD FAIRFIELD 13/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 15,000 497.1/2009 Mr Y Adams 5 Washington WAY CECIL PARK 05/08/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Land Fill 0 500.1/2009 Mrs T B V Nguyen 239 Canley Vale RD CANLEY HEIGHTS 18/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Refreshment Room 50,000 501.1/2009 Eden Brae Homes 454 The Horsley DR FAIRFIELD 07/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 179,000

Page 1 of 4 Printed: 7/09/2009 11:59:12AM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 504.1/2009 Mr JC Vacopoulos 753 The Horsley DR SMITHFIELD 03/08/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Fence 10,000 512.1/2009 Auto Ingress Pty Ltd 6/19-26 Durian PL WETHERILL PARK 10/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Warehouse 0 534.1/2009 Franklins Pty Ltd 561-583 Polding ST PRAIRIEWOOD 11/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 850,000 547.1/2009 Mr TN Vuong 21 Morna ST GREENFIELD PARK 06/08/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 33,000 552.1/2009 Ms C Q Ho 12 The Grove FAIRFIELD 11/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 257,987 554.1/2009 Bonnyrigg Sports Club 610 Elizabeth DR BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 10/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Festival 0 571.1/2009 T Too Pty Ltd 17/19-26 Durian PL WETHERILL PARK 10/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Warehouse 35,000 584.1/2009 Ms Y C Zhao 195 Cabramatta RDW CABRAMATTA 03/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Health Consulting Room/s 0 589.1/2009 Mr Q L So 8/105 John ST CABRAMATTA 12/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 20,000 597.1/2009 Mrs L Schultz 65 Whitaker ST OLD GUILDFORD 07/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 8,000 600.1/2009 Tina Vo Pty Ltd 50 Chadderton ST CABRAMATTA 28/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 0 604.1/2009 Mr VC Nguyen 239 The Boulevarde FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 03/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Medical Centre 15,000 610.1/2009 OK Supermarket (Cabramatta) Pty Ltd5-9 Freedom PLZ CABRAMATTA 03/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Footpath Trading 1,000 620.1/2009 Mrs M Husar 2/245 Railway PDE CABRAMATTA 17/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Vehicle Repair Workshop/Station 5,000 629.1/2009 Mr N Abbu 1/27 Davis RD WETHERILL PARK 04/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 70,000 630.1/2009 D & R Architects 673 The Horsley DR SMITHFIELD 10/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Medical Centre 200,000 631.1/2009 Mr C F Phan 151 Cabramatta RDE CABRAMATTA 07/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 25,000 641.1/2009 Mr TH Lu 236 Canley Vale RD CANLEY HEIGHTS 03/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Office Fitout 30,000 652.1/2009 Mr J Falzon 6 Maxwell PL ABBOTSBURY 17/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 220,000 653.1/2009 Posh Homes Pty Ltd 7 William ST FAIRFIELD 04/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Commercial Building 100,000 661.1/2009 Mrs N Tang 31 Rickard RD BOSSLEY PARK 04/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 90,000 663.1/2009 Firstyle Homes Pty Ltd 7 Murrumbidgee ST BOSSLEY PARK 04/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 218,000 665.1/2009 Mr SD Aziz 1 Gambier ST BOSSLEY PARK 18/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Inground Pool 26,250 672.1/2009 Mr HD Tran 5 Wilcock ST CARRAMAR 19/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 42,000 686.1/2009 Mr S Alyas 5 Zuni CL BOSSLEY PARK 07/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Inground Pool 20,000 689.1/2009 Mr F Sgro 13 Rachel CRES MT PRITCHARD 05/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 30,000 693.1/2009 Mr PC Stabile 3 Bernard PL EDENSOR PARK 04/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 247,095 694.1/2009 Mr M Hajobeid 242 Hume HWY LANSVALE 17/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 0 700.1/2009 Mr M Nguyen 3 Stuart ST CANLEY VALE 24/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 297,249 703.1/2009 Hi-Tech Metrology Pty Ltd 25/19-26 Durian PL WETHERILL PARK 03/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Warehouse 0 706.1/2009 Independent Home Improvements 25 Brentwood ST FAIRFIELD WEST 24/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 20,000 707.1/2009 Mr G Dirou 2 Colville PL BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 12/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 15,000

Page 2 of 4 Printed: 7/09/2009 11:59:12AM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 716.1/2009 Perfection Building Services 355 Polding ST FAIRFIELD WEST 11/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 280,000 724.1/2009 Active Uniforms 7/19-26 Durian PL WETHERILL PARK 07/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Warehouse 0 725.1/2009 Delicia Empanadas & Deli 204 The Boulevarde FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 06/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 1,500 727.1/2009 Mrs TP Nguyen 47A Chancery ST CANLEY VALE 17/08/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 35,000 729.1/2009 Mr A Giorgi 37 John ST CABRAMATTA 05/08/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Refreshment Room 52,000 732.1/2009 Mrs TT Tran 23 Chelsea DR CANLEY HEIGHTS 19/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 50,000 735.1/2009 Wal Robbins Additions Pty Ltd 18 Hampshire PL WAKELEY 14/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 94,000 738.1/2009 Mrs D Filipello 18/47 Mallacoota ST WAKELEY 18/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 3,000 739.1/2009 Mr V B Thiem 33A Lime ST CABRAMATTA WEST 19/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 4,500 741.1/2009 Mr V S Chiu 36 Booyong ST CABRAMATTA 03/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 10,000 743.1/2009 Mr M Medic 4/8 Thesiger RD BONNYRIGG 08/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 4,200 744.1/2009 ARK Health Care Enterprises Pty Ltd8 Albert ST CABRAMATTA 03/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 9,000 749.1/2009 Mr AT Griffiths 2 Brahma CL BOSSLEY PARK 26/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 8,000 750.1/2009 Ms C N Tong 3 Stuart ST CANLEY VALE 07/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 8,000 752.1/2009 Wizard Home Improvements 4 Barker ST BOSSLEY PARK 26/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 20,800 753.1/2009 Ms T Do 31 Garland CRES BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 27/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 340,000 756.1/2009 Twinlite Awnings Australia Pty Ltd 135 Selkirk AVE CECIL PARK 12/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 9,000 758.1/2009 Ms T L A Do 3 Maugham CRES WETHERILL PARK 18/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 8,000 761.1/2009 Mr T Solofoni 8 Rosford ST SMITHFIELD 18/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 15,000 762.1/2009 Mr M Tagliavento 2 Rawson RD FAIRFIELD WEST 03/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 4,800 764.1/2009 Mr PJ Fagan 26 Bougainville AVE BOSSLEY PARK 12/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 30,000 765.1/2009 Ms P Lopategui 21 Stivala PL BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 18/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 150,000 770.1/2009 LTD Thai 40 Wyong ST CANLEY HEIGHTS 07/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Fence 5,000 778.1/2009 Mr S Ignazzi 46 Anthony ST FAIRFIELD 11/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 12,000 779.1/2009 Wizard Home Improvements 14B Gilbert ST CABRAMATTA 24/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 19,000 780.1/2009 Mr E Jacob 16 Ryder RD GREENFIELD PARK 26/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 30,000 783.1/2009 Mr J Vongsuthi 23 Ivanhoe ST ST JOHNS PARK 20/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Fence 10,000 792.1/2009 Atrak Pty Ltd 14 Rothbury ST EDENSOR PARK 18/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 10,000 795.1/2009 Mr H D Tran 3A Frederick ST FAIRFIELD 12/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 10,000 802.1/2009 Adriatic Pools Pty Ltd 10 Lisa CRES BONNYRIGG 21/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Inground Pool 25,000 804.1/2009 Patioland Parramatta Pty Ltd 17 The Avenue CANLEY VALE 17/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 15,000 822.1/2009 Ms SA Toma 9A Stanbrook ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 18/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 2,000

Page 3 of 4 Printed: 7/09/2009 11:59:12AM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 823.1/2009 Mr M Toma 9 Stanbrook ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 19/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 2,000 835.1/2009 Mr GA Pavone 8 Weeroona RD EDENSOR PARK 26/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 30,000 836.1/2009 Miss T Giang 59 Curtin ST CABRAMATTA 26/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 9,500 837.1/2009 Mr PV Rodic 15 Noffs PL BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 19/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 5,000 843.1/2009 Petra Developments Australia Pty Ltd20 Bach PL BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 26/08/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 150,000 Total Development Applications Applications: 101 Est. Cost: 12,005,346 GRAND TOTAL Applications: 101 Est. Cost: 12,005,346

Page 4 of 4 Printed: 2/10/2009 11:12:45AM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 409.1/2006 0409/2006DA Mr M Bello 37 Castlereagh ST BOSSLEY PARK 28/09/2009 DA Determination - Surrendered Dwelling Addition/Alteration 25,000 516.1/2007 0516/2007DA Ms S Nguyen 522 Cabramatta RDW MT PRITCHARD 24/09/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 10,000 226.1/2008 0226/2008DA Hodges Shorten Architects Pty Ltd 176-180 Hume HWY LANSVALE 17/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Office Fitout 380,000 268.1/2008 0268/2008DA Bongiorno Hawkins Frassetto & Assoc92 PtyJohn Limited ST CABRAMATTA 14/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Commercial/Residential Development 250,000 1161.1/2008 Mr A Molluso 17 Salisbury ST CANLEY HEIGHTS 16/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Duplex 250,000 1242.1/2008 ES Engineering & Drafting 109 Smart ST FAIRFIELD 29/09/2009 DA Determination - Surrendered Dwelling Addition/Alteration 91,270 1424.1/2008 Cylinder Head Rebuilders Pty Ltd 71 Victoria ST SMITHFIELD 25/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 0 1850.1/2008 Mr A Bagala 273 Lincoln RD HORSLEY PARK 14/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Agriculture 231,000 1885.1/2008 Mr DEV Jackson 8 Wyatt CL WETHERILL PARK 15/09/2009 DA Determination - Surrendered Fence 8,000 1944.1/2008 Mr S Vongxayasy 13/1-3 Knight ST LANSVALE 07/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 630 105.1/2009 Mr A Mamou 42 St Johns RD CABRAMATTA 22/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Place Of Worship 20,000 127.1/2009 Ozsend 2 NSW Pty Ltd 376 The Horsley DR FAIRFIELD 11/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Commercial Building 27,673,800 176.1/2009 Mr A Mamou 12A Polding ST FAIRFIELD 03/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 95,000 287.1/2009 Kampuchea Krom Culture Centre of 114NSW Broomfield Inc ST CABRAMATTA 22/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Place Of Worship 3,000 317.1/2009 T & H Group Pty Ltd 8/1-3 Knight ST LANSVALE 09/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Warehouse 0 380.1/2009 Alkosh Pty Ltd 197 Edensor RD EDENSOR PARK 14/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Child Care Centre 20,000 385.1/2009 Gaintak Investment Pty Ltd 15 Elizabeth ST WETHERILL PARK 17/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Office Fitout 950,000 474.1/2009 Mr N Bisso 615 The Horsley DR SMITHFIELD 17/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dual Occupancy-Detached 270,000 506.1/2009 Wisdom Homes 240 Hamilton RD FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 16/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 285,000 519.1/2009 Dem Holdings NSW Pty Ltd 8 Bentley ST WETHERILL PARK 01/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 330,000 561.1/2009 Mr A Khodr 26 Gardiner CRES FAIRFIELD WEST 03/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Home Business-Hairdressing 5,000 566.1/2009 Laxales Beauty & Hair Supplies 90 Victoria ST SMITHFIELD 09/09/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Warehouse 6,000 575.1/2009 Mr I Toprak 28 Bathurst ST WAKELEY 08/09/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 40,000 578.1/2009 Eden Brae Homes 1638 The Horsley DR HORSLEY PARK 09/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 303,700 583.1/2009 Nextspace Pty Ltd 1-29 Court RD FAIRFIELD 28/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 75,000 609.1/2009 Heat & Control Pty Ltd 23/19-26 Durian PL WETHERILL PARK 02/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Warehouse 0 612.1/2009 Lisa Nguyen Nail Beauty & Tatoo Pty88 Ltd John ST CABRAMATTA 07/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 0 622.1/2009 Advance Building Solutions Pty Ltd 48 Katinka ST BONNYRIGG 11/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 120,000 623.1/2009 Mr B W Bailey 1822 The Horsley DR HORSLEY PARK 08/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 0 627.1/2009 Mr F Betti 164 The Boulevarde FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 09/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Refreshment Room 10,000 636.1/2009 Ms Z Barbour 7 Presland CL LANSVALE 15/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 250,000 642.1/2009 Scope Building Design Pty Ltd 66-68 Arundel RD HORSLEY PARK 29/09/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 300,000

Page 1 of 4 Printed: 2/10/2009 11:13:34AM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 645.1/2009 Mr H R Francis 2 Hackett RD ABBOTSBURY 23/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 379,500 651.1/2009 Vinh Nguyen Bros & Assoc 73 Hercules ST FAIRFIELD EAST 02/09/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 28,000 658.1/2009 Vinh Nguyen Bros & Assoc 22 Hillcrest AVE VILLAWOOD 02/09/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 28,000 674.1/2009 Ms TMT Nguyen 11 St Johns RD CANLEY HEIGHTS 28/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 34,000 691.1/2009 Mrs D Lebbos 29 Villawood PL VILLAWOOD 08/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 22,500 692.1/2009 Leffler Simes Pty Ltd 561-583 Polding ST PRAIRIEWOOD 04/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shopping Centre 100,000 695.1/2009 Mr T Sylaprany 62 Bold ST CABRAMATTA WEST 08/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 295,000 697.1/2009 Rob Thomas Developments 222-226 Cecil RD CECIL PARK 14/09/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 45,000 698.1/2009 Mr K Kanjou 57 Larra ST YENNORA 21/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Vehicle Repair Workshop/Station 0 699.1/2009 Firstyle Homes Pty Ltd 29 Timothy PL EDENSOR PARK 04/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 206,000 702.1/2009 Madeena's Charcoal Chicken 680 The Horsley DR SMITHFIELD 22/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 50,000 705.1/2009 Hyperlube Automotive Services 50 Chadderton ST CABRAMATTA 08/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Vehicle Repair Workshop/Station 0 708.1/2009 Motor Exchange 9/252-256 Hume HWY LANSVALE 08/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Car Yard 0 710.1/2009 Miss D Novacevska 34 Maxwell PL ABBOTSBURY 04/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 320,000 719.1/2009 Champion Home Sales 4 Angelina CRES CABRAMATTA 08/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 185,200 720.1/2009 Condor Design Pty Ltd 3/118 Ware ST FAIRFIELD 03/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Sign/s 0 726.1/2009 Champion Homes NSW Pty Ltd 69A Beckenham ST CANLEY VALE 21/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 180,000 736.1/2009 Ms JG Williams 36 Taralga ST OLD GUILDFORD 14/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 282,000 745.1/2009 Mr G E Abou-Haidar 1 Beckenham ST CANLEY VALE 14/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Air Conditioning Unit 10,000 747.1/2009 Ms J Nguyen 101-103 John ST CABRAMATTA 03/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 150,000 748.1/2009 Mr L K Lim 46 Chadderton ST CABRAMATTA 17/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Warehouse 5,000 763.1/2009 Mrs TKP Nguyen 50 Smiths AVE CABRAMATTA 11/09/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 35,000 766.1/2009 Mr QM Pham 59 Whitaker ST YENNORA 08/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 34,000 767.1/2009 Mrs ML Umali 28 Dalbertis ST ABBOTSBURY 29/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Home Business-Food 0 768.1/2009 Mr N Matti 428 Hamilton RD FAIRFIELD WEST 23/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Home Business-Food 2,000 774.1/2009 Westminster Homes Pty Ltd 39 Willowbank CRES CANLEY VALE 16/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Air Conditioning Unit 12,000 775.1/2009 Mr MG Vu 31 Solo CRES FAIRFIELD 14/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Air Conditioning Unit 10,000 777.1/2009 Sundance Racking Pty Ltd 9/19-26 Durian PL WETHERILL PARK 03/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Industry 0 782.1/2009 Mr J Rabadi 27 Shackel AVE OLD GUILDFORD 08/09/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 10,420 784.1/2009 Mr D Horvat 87 Kalang RD EDENSOR PARK 10/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 320,000 785.1/2009 RS Canceri Pty Ltd 27 Kalang RD EDENSOR PARK 25/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 0 788.1/2009 Dr KC Ma 46 Arthur ST CABRAMATTA 07/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Health Consulting Room/s and Residence 3,500

Page 2 of 4 Printed: 2/10/2009 11:13:34AM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 789.1/2009 Mr QH Le 217 John ST CABRAMATTA WEST 08/09/2009 Refused - Delegated Authority Granny Flat 35,000 791.1/2009 Mr M Del Principe 196 Neville ST SMITHFIELD 03/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 8,000 793.1/2009 Mr T Q La 1 The Crescent FAIRFIELD 24/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 5,000 797.1/2009 Mr M Gutovic 49 Macquarie ST FAIRFIELD 23/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 300,000 798.1/2009 Mr M Yousif 5 Murrumbidgee ST BOSSLEY PARK 15/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 291,382 799.1/2009 Merkarious Construction 10 Matthes ST YENNORA 08/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 300,000 805.1/2009 Champion Homes 6 Angelina CRES CABRAMATTA 14/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 272,000 810.1/2009 Mr E Dastan 37 Landon ST FAIRFIELD EAST 14/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 240,000 812.1/2009 Bonnyrigg Management Company 130 Edensor RD BONNYRIGG 21/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Community Event 0 819.1/2009 BP Australia Pty Ltd 138 Hamilton RD FAIRFIELD 07/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Sign/s 24,000 828.1/2009 St Johns Park Pharmacy 56-70 Canberra ST ST JOHNS PARK 01/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Medical Centre 220,000 830.1/2009 Mr BH Pham 28 Dalton PL FAIRFIELD WEST 08/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 253,000 832.1/2009 Clarendon Homes 202A John ST CABRAMATTA 09/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 252,665 833.1/2009 Mr J Lim 25 Homestead RD BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 23/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 383,687 838.1/2009 Mr T Kemal 1183-1187 The Horsley DR WETHERILL PARK 24/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 5,000 839.1/2009 Mr S Isho 73-79 The Crescent FAIRFIELD 14/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Shop 0 841.1/2009 Mr J Blaskovic 34 Hawthorn ST ST JOHNS PARK 04/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 11,500 846.1/2009 Ms L F Tjong 44 Tangerine ST FAIRFIELD EAST 21/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 209,783 848.1/2009 Catholiccare 91 Ware ST FAIRFIELD 09/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Sign/s 1,000 850.1/2009 Mr Y Abdul Kader 10 Edmondson CRES CARRAMAR 08/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 3,000 857.1/2009 Project Surveyors Pty Ltd 25 Oxford ST SMITHFIELD 16/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Strata 0 858.1/2009 Champion Homes NSW Pty Ltd 12 Lisa CRES BONNYRIGG 14/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 209,000 864.1/2009 Mr S Yako 489A Smithfield RD PRAIRIEWOOD 18/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 42,000 865.1/2009 Mrs TL Banh 64 Ferngrove RD CANLEY HEIGHTS 08/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Fence 9,000 866.1/2009 Mr S Samia 121 Neville ST SMITHFIELD 08/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 7,700 867.1/2009 Mr S Samia 45 Dublin ST SMITHFIELD 08/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 2,200 871.1/2009 Mr M Amir 30 Lisa CRES BONNYRIGG 14/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 140,000 873.1/2009 Mr C Kev 2 Kembla ST WAKELEY 16/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Two Storey Dwelling 230,000 875.1/2009 Mr A T Chau 70 Margaret ST FAIRFIELD WEST 16/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 23,000 878.1/2009 Britten & Assoc Pty Ltd 19A Hampton ST FAIRFIELD 16/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Strata 0 881.1/2009 Mr V Lamattina 632 Polding ST BOSSLEY PARK 03/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 3,000 882.1/2009 Wizard Home Improvements 12 Richards RD WAKELEY 10/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 15,000

Page 3 of 4 Printed: 2/10/2009 11:13:34AM Fairfield Live Database

Document External Ref. Applicant. Property Address. Determined Status Development Type(1st) Est. Cost 884.1/2009 Mr BH Tran 16 Coolibar ST CANLEY HEIGHTS 14/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 7,700 885.1/2009 Allworth Constructions Pty Ltd 42 Lisa CRES BONNYRIGG 14/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 169,480 886.1/2009 Mr R Banbekian 31 Falmer ST ABBOTSBURY 02/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Air Conditioning Unit 0 890.1/2009 Mr Z Abedine 4 Mena AVE LANSVALE 23/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority House Raising 80,000 891.1/2009 Frankham Engineering Surveys 36A Broad ST CABRAMATTA 17/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 0 892.1/2009 Mr E Triantafillou 29 Falmer ST ABBOTSBURY 02/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Air Conditioning Unit 0 893.1/2009 Mr JW Cruwys 21 Maugham CRES WETHERILL PARK 28/09/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Outbuilding 7,000 901.1/2009 Mr F Abdo 93 Camden ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 15/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Strata 0 903.1/2009 Mr J Cao 38 Katinka ST BONNYRIGG 14/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Single Storey Dwelling 176,055 905.1/2009 Lean Lackenby & Hayward 114 Camden ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 17/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Strata 0 911.1/2009 Britten & Assoc Pty Ltd 108-108A Harris ST FAIRFIELD 21/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 0 924.1/2009 Ms E Oraham 71 Evans ST FAIRFIELD HEIGHTS 21/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 8,000 927.1/2009 Mr A Alameri 55 Wolseley ST FAIRFIELD 21/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 5,000 932.1/2009 Mr F Priyana 3 Avonlea ST CANLEY HEIGHTS 21/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 40,000 933.1/2009 Ms M T Tran 12 Judith AVE CABRAMATTA 23/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Drainage 3,000 936.1/2009 Mr M F White 6 Alexander ST SMITHFIELD 21/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 7,000 938.1/2009 Khmer Community Of NSW Inc 26 Bonnyrigg AVE BONNYRIGG 16/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Ceremony 0 943.1/2009 Mr JE Zarb 8 Andrew AVE CANLEY HEIGHTS 22/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Subdivision Torrens 0 944.1/2009 Customline Carports 33 Lovoni ST CABRAMATTA 21/09/2009 DA Determination - Withdrawn Outbuilding 11,900 946.1/2009 Mr S Lasek 53 Charles ST SMITHFIELD 29/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Fence 12,069 951.1/2009 Mr GC O'Connor 31 Winburndale RD WAKELEY 23/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Aboveground Pool 3,000 956.1/2009 Mr R Nguyen 75 The Avenue CANLEY VALE 21/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Demolition 10,000 975.1/2009 CPT Corp Pty Ltd 63 Northumberland ST BONNYRIGG HEIGHTS 28/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Outbuilding 8,000 987.1/2009 Ms A M Haramina 12 Winstanley PL MT PRITCHARD 28/09/2009 Approved - Delegated Authority Dwelling Addition/Alteration 15,000 Total Development Applications Applications: 120 Est. Cost: 38,808,641 GRAND TOTAL Applications: 120 Est. Cost: 38,808,641

Page 4 of 4

Appendix B

Ethics Approval

FACULTY OF THE BUILT ENVIRONMENT

HUMAN RESEARCH ETHICS ADVISORY PANEL

17 Aug 2009

Application No: 95055 Project Title: Urban Renewal in Cabramatta

Attention: Sang Taing

Dear Sang,

Thank you for your application requesting approval to conduct research involving humans. The Panel has evaluated your application and upon their recommendation, has attached the decision below.

Please be aware that approval is for a period of twelve months from the date of this letter, unless otherwise stated below.

All further information/documentation (if any) is to be submitted to FBE HREAP via Student Centre. Please submit originals plus four copies. Email submission will not be recognised.

Decision

Approved with Your application is approved; however, there are certain things conditions you must do, before you may conduct your research. Please see below for details, and your responses will assist us in completing your file.

Advisory comments: Item

Research 1 Your application indicates that you may need to obtain one or more Letters of Support before you conduct your research. Letters of Support are required whenever you involve any organisation (other than UNSW) or any individual (other than an employee of UNSW) in your research, whereby: (a) you intend to interview, survey or include employees in a focus group; or (b) your research is wholly or partly funded by any organisation (other than UNSW) or individual (other than an employee of UNSW). Please contact your Supervisor for further direction (if applicable). A Letter of Support must conform to one of the formats indicated in Form 6. Please forward all Letters of Support to HREAP to complete your file.

Research 2 Approval is granted to the applicant for a twelve month period from the date of this letter. Any approval to conduct research given to the applicant is done so on the condition that the applicant is at the date of approval: (a) a Student undertaking an approved course of study in the FBE; or (b) a member of Academic Staff in the FBE. If, at any time subsequent to the date of approval and prior to completion of the research project the applicant ceases to be either of (a) and (b) above, then any prior approval given to the applicant to conduct will be deemed to be revoked forthwith. The applicant must inform the FBE HREA Panel immediately upon any change, or possible change, to the applicant’s status that may affect any prior approval given by the Panel to the applicant to conduct research.

Research 3 You need to include the Revocation Statement at the end of the Project Information Statement.

Evaluation Authority: Approving Authority:

Jim Plume

Michael Brand (Convener) Head of School FBE HREA Panel Faculty of the Built Environment

SYDNEY 2052 AUSTRALIA 2 Email: [email protected]