BUSINESS PAPER

 

gENERAL Meeting

 

Wednesday,  16 May, 2012

at 6:30 pm

 

 

 

 

 

 


Hornsby Shire Council                                                                                         Table of Contents

Page 1

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

AGENDA AND SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

Notices of Motion

Item 1     NOM3/12 Schofields Parade, Pennant Hills - Old Pony Club Site

Rescission Motions  

MATTERS OF URGENCY

ITEMS PASSED BY EXCEPTION / CALL FOR SPEAKERS ON AGENDA ITEMS

GENERAL BUSINESS

General Manager's Division

Item 2     GM10/12 Event Calendar - 2012/13

Corporate and Community Division

Item 3     CC19/12 Investments and Borrowings for 2011/12 - Status For Period Ending 31 March 2012

Item 4     CC20/12 Pecuniary Interest and Other Matters Returns - Disclosures by Councillors and Designated Persons

Item 5     CC21/12 Delivery Program 2011-2015 including Operational Plan (Budget) 2011/12 - March 2012 Quarterly Budget Review

Environment Division

Item 6     EN21/12 Rural Sports Facility, Galston - Possible Expansion of Use

Item 7     EN24/12 Hornsby Mountain Bike Trail - Results of Review of Environmental Factors

Planning Division

Item 8     PLN21/12 Development Application - Section 96(2) - Erection of a 10 storey development - 14 Pound Road and  15 - 17 Wanderers Way, Hornsby

Item 9     PLN25/12 Development Application - Proposed two storey mixed-use development comprising six commercial and retail units,  twelve residential units and basement car parking
25 - 29 Turner Road, Berowra Heights

Item 10   PLN30/12 Development Application - Demolition of a tennis court and subdivision of one allotment into two lots 17 Cannan Close Cherrybrook

Item 11   PLN32/12 Reporting Variations to Development Standards

Item 12   PLN33/12 Changes to the State Government's Local Environmental Plan Making Process

Item 13   PLN34/12 Exhibition of Draft Hornsby Development Control Plan

Works Division

Item 14   WK18/12 Expression of Interest No EOI 1/2012 - Design and Construction of Additions and Improvements to the Roselea Community Centre

Item 15   WK20/12 Pacific Highway - change of name to Peats Ferry Road

CONFIDENTIAL ITEMS

SUPPLEMENTARY AGENDA

PUBLIC FORUM – NON AGENDA ITEMS

Mayoral Minutes

Mayor's Notes

Item 16   MN5/12 Mayor's Notes from 1 to 30 April 2012  

Questions of Which Notice Has Been Given     

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

 


Hornsby Shire Council                                                  Agenda and Summary of Recommendations

Page 1

 

AGENDA AND SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

 

PRESENT

NATIONAL ANTHEM

OPENING PRAYER/S

Reverand John Reid from Thornleigh Community Baptist Church, will open the meeting in prayer

 

Acknowledgement of RELIGIOUS DIVERSITY

Statement by the Chairperson:

 

"We recognise our Shire's rich cultural and religious diversity and we acknowledge and pay respect to the beliefs of all members of our community, regardless of creed or faith."

 

ABORIGINAL RECOGNITION

Statement by the Chairperson: 

 

"We acknowledge we are on the traditional lands of the Darug and Guringai Peoples.  We pay our respects to elders past and present."

 

AUDIO RECORDING OF COUNCIL MEETING

Statement by the Chairperson:

 

"I advise all present that tonight's meeting is being audio recorded for the purposes of providing a record of public comment at the meeting, supporting the democratic process, broadening knowledge and participation in community affairs, and demonstrating Council’s commitment to openness and accountability.  The recordings will be made available on Council’s website once the Minutes have been finalised. All speakers are requested to ensure their comments are relevant to the issue at hand and to refrain from making personal comments or criticisms."

 

 

APOLOGIES / LEAVE OF ABSENCE

POLITICAL DONATIONS DISCLOSURE  

Statement by the Chairperson:

 

“In accordance with Section 147 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, any person or organisation who has made a relevant planning application or a submission in respect of a relevant planning application which is on tonight’s agenda, and who has made a reportable political donation or gift to a Councillor or employee of the Council, must make a Political Donations Disclosure Statement.

 

If a Councillor or employee has received a reportable political donation or gift from a person or organisation who has made a relevant planning application or a submission in respect of a relevant planning application which is on tonight’s agenda, they must declare a non-pecuniary conflict of interests to the meeting, disclose the nature of the interest and manage the conflict of interests in accordance with Council’s Code of Conduct.”

presentations

declarations of interest

Clause 52 of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice (Section 451 of the Local Government Act, 1993) requires that a councillor or a member of a Council committee who has a pecuniary interest in a matter which is before the Council or committee and who is present at a meeting of the Council or committee at which the matter is being considered must disclose the nature of the interest to the meeting as soon as practicable.  The disclosure is also to be submitted in writing (on the form titled “Declaration of Interest”).

 

The Councillor or member of a Council committee must not be present at, or in sight of, the meeting of the Council or committee:

 

(a)      at any time during which the matter is being considered or discussed by the Council or committee.

 

(b)      at any time during which the Council or committee  is voting on any question in relation to the matter.

 

Clause 51A of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice provides that a Councillor, Council officer, or a member of a Council committee who has a non pecuniary interest in any matter with which the Council is concerned and who is present at a meeting of the Council or committee at which the matter is being considered must disclose the nature of the interest to the meeting as soon as practicable.  The disclosure is also to be submitted in writing (on the form titled “Declaration of Interest”).

 

If the non-pecuniary interest is significant, the Councillor must:

 

a)     remove the source of conflict, by relinquishing or divesting the interest that creates the conflict, or reallocating the conflicting duties to another Council official.

 

OR

 

b)     have no involvement in the matter by absenting themself from and not taking part in any debate or voting on the issue as if the provisions of Section 451(2) of the Act apply.

 

If the non-pecuniary interest is less than significant, the Councillor must provide an explanation of why they consider that the interest does not require further action in the circumstances.

confirmation of minutes

THAT the Minutes of the General Council Meeting held on 18 April, 2012 be confirmed; a copy having been distributed to all Councillors.

Petitions

Rescission Motions  

ITEMS PASSED BY EXCEPTION / CALL FOR SPEAKERS ON AGENDA ITEMS

Note:    

Persons wishing to address Council on matters which are on the Agenda are permitted to speak, prior to the item being discussed, and their names will be recorded in the Minutes in respect of that particular item.

 

Persons wishing to address Council on non agenda matters, are permitted to speak after all items on the agenda in respect of which there is a speaker from the public have been finalised by Council.  Their names will be recorded in the Minutes under the heading "Public Forum for Non Agenda Items".

 

GENERAL BUSINESS

 

·               Items for which there is a Public Forum Speaker

·               Public Forum for non agenda items

·               Balance of General Business items

 

General Manager's Division

Page Number

Item 2        GM10/12 Event Calendar - 2012/13

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT Council endorse the proposed calendar of events for 2012/13, including the expansion of the community partnership model for delivering some events.

 

Corporate and Community Division

Page Number

Item 3        CC19/12 Investments and Borrowings for 2011/12 - Status For Period Ending 31 March 2012

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT the contents of Executive Manager’s Report No. CC19/12 be received and noted.

 

Page Number

Item 4        CC20/12 Pecuniary Interest and Other Matters Returns - Disclosures by Councillors and Designated Persons

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT Council note the Disclosure of Pecuniary Interests and Other Matters Returns recently lodged with the General Manager have been tabled as required by the Local Government Act.

 

Page Number

Item 5        CC21/12 Delivery Program 2011-2015 including Operational Plan (Budget) 2011/12 - March 2012 Quarterly Budget Review

 

THAT the March 2012 Quarterly Review of the Operational Plan (Budget) 2011/12 be received and noted.

 

Environment Division

Page Number

Item 6        EN21/12 Rural Sports Facility, Galston - Possible Expansion of Use

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT Council:

 

1.         Thank all who submitted an Expression of Interest for use of the Rural Sports Facility.

 

2.         Invite Arcadia Public School and Northholm Grammar School to enter into a licence for the use of the Rural Sports Facility on weekdays.

 

3.         Invite Riders Galston Inc. to enter into a licence for the use of the Rural Sports Facility on Saturdays.

 

4.         Encourage use of the Rural Sports Facility by Riding for the Disabled Association NSW.

 

Page Number

Item 7        EN24/12 Hornsby Mountain Bike Trail - Results of Review of Environmental Factors

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT Council:

 

1.      Approve the Review of Environmental Factors subject to the conditions of approval detailed in Attachment 13 to Executive Manager’s Report No. EN24/12.

 

2.      Authorise construction of the Hornsby Mountain Bike Trail generally in accordance with the layout shown in Attachment 12 to Executive Manager’s Report No. EN24/12.

 

Planning Division

Page Number

Item 8        PLN21/12 Development Application - Section 96(2) - Erection of a 10 storey development - 14 Pound Road and  15 - 17 Wanderers Way, Hornsby

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT Development Application No. 737/2005/C for construction of a multi-unit housing development comprising 55 units with basement car parking and deletion of conditions of consent relating to Stratum subdivision and the landscape pedestrian plaza at Lot 2 DP 544977 and Lot 10 DP 599285, No. 14 Pound Road and Nos. 15 - 17 Wanderers Way, Hornsby be amended as detailed in Schedule 1 of Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN21/12.

 

Page Number

Item 9        PLN25/12 Development Application - Proposed two storey mixed-use development comprising six commercial and retail units,  twelve residential units and basement car parking
25 - 29 Turner Road, Berowra Heights

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT Development Application No. 1384/2011 for a proposed two storey mixed-use development comprising six commercial and retail units,  twelve residential units and basement car parking at Lot 100 DP 1043150, Nos. 25 – 29 Turner Road, Berowra Heights be approved subject to the conditions of consent detailed in Schedule 1 of Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN25/12.

 

Page Number

Item 10      PLN30/12 Development Application - Demolition of a tennis court and subdivision of one allotment into two lots 17 Cannan Close Cherrybrook

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT Development Application No. DA/186/2012 for demolition of a tennis court and subdivision of one allotment into two lots at Lot 1035 DP 812942, 17 Cannan Close, Cherrybrook be approved subject to the conditions of consent detailed in Schedule 1 of Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN30/12.

 

Page Number

Item 11      PLN32/12 Reporting Variations to Development Standards

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT the contents of Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN32/12 be received and noted.

 

Page Number

Item 12      PLN33/12 Changes to the State Government's Local Environmental Plan Making Process

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT a submission be forwarded to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure noting that the proposal for making changes to the plan making process maybe premature given the status of the independent review of the of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act and identifying the implications for Hornsby Shire identified in Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN33/12.

 

Page Number

Item 13      PLN34/12 Exhibition of Draft Hornsby  Development Control Plan

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT:

 

1.         Council endorse the draft Hornsby Development Control Plan 2012 for public exhibition.

 

2.         The draft Hornsby Development Control Plan 2012 be exhibited for a minimum of sixty days concurrently with the draft Hornsby Local Environmental Plan in accordance with the consultation strategy attached to Executive Managers Report No. PLN34/12.

 

3.         The General Manager be delegated authority to endorse exhibition material, including the preparation of an Information Brochure for distribution to the community.

 

4.         The General Manager be authorised to make changes to the draft Hornsby Development Control Plan 2012 prior to exhibition to correct minor errors, omissions or formatting. 

 

5.         Following exhibition of the draft Hornsby Development Control Plan 2012, a report on submissions received in response to the public exhibition be presented to Council for its consideration.

 

Works Division

Page Number

Item 14      WK18/12 Expression of Interest No EOI 1/2012 - Design and Construction of Additions and Improvements to the Roselea Community Centre

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT:

 

1.     Council invite A J Bristow & Sons P/L, Builtform Constructions P/L, Projectcorp Australia P/L, Rapid Constructions P/L and Zadro Constructions P/L to submit tenders for the Refurbishment of the Roselea Community Centre, Beecroft.

 

2.      The results of the tender be reported back to Council.

 

Page Number

Item 15      WK20/12 Pacific Highway - change of name to  Peats Ferry Road

 

THAT:  

 

1.      Council adopt the proposal to rename Pacific Highway as Peats Ferry Road between George Street and Bridge Road, Hornsby as per previous resolution and extend the roadway to be renamed to include the section of the former highway between Bridge Road and Galston Road (MR161) and between Galston Road and Jersey Street North, Asquith (SR2103).

 

2.      Council advise RMS that the proposal to rename Pacific Highway as Peats Ferry Road includes a section of state highway (MR161) between Bridge Road and Galston Road.

 

3.      Council invite written submissions from the public about the proposed renaming of Pacific Highway between George Street and Bridge Road, Hornsby as Peats Ferry Road.

 

CONFIDENTIAL ITEMS

PUBLIC FORUM – NON AGENDA ITEMS

Questions of Which Notice Has Been Given

Mayor's Notes

Page Number

Item 16      MN7/12 Mayor's Notes from 1 to 30 April 2012

Mayoral Minutes

NOTICES OF MOTION

Page Number

Item 1        NOM3/12 Schofields Parade, Pennant Hills - Old Pony Club Site

 

THAT Council write to the State Members for Hornsby and Epping, to advise them of the status and background of the old pony club site on Schofields Parade, Pennant Hills.

 

Supplementary AGENDA

MATTERS OF URGENCY

QUESTIONS WITHOUT MOTICE


 


 

Notice of Motion No. NOM3/12

Date of Meeting: 16/05/2012

 

1        SCHOFIELDS PARADE, PENNANT HILLS - OLD PONY CLUB SITE   

 

 

 

COUNCILLOR McMurdo To Move

 

THAT Council write again to the State Members for Hornsby and Epping, and the State Minister for the Environment, advising them that whilst Council recognises a shortage of playing fields in the Pennant Hills/Cherrybrook area, Council does not support the creation of a sports ground at the former pony club site at Stringybark Ridge, or anywhere else in the Berowra Valley Regional Park, due to the impacts on surrounding high quality bushland. Instead, Council supports the creation of sports grounds in less environmentally and ecologically sensitive areas of the Shire – preferably only on degraded lands.

________________________________

 

Note from Councillor McMurdo

 

At the Planning Meeting of 7 March 2012 Councillors voted on a Mayoral Minute (MM2/12) that simply said…..

 

THAT Council write to the State Members for Hornsby and Epping, to advise them of the status and background of the old pony club site on Schofields Parade, Pennant Hills.”

 

As the motion stood, and the brief outline implied, it did not implicitly support the creation of a sports ground at Stringybark Ridge yet the letter that went to the Members for Hornsby and Epping specifically stated “Stringybark Ridge contains a cleared, level area that could accommodate a large sportsground, amenities and spectator movement, and would be an ideal addition to local sportsground facilities.” It went on to state that HSC would be prepared to work with the NSW Government on the creation of a sports ground at that site, offering a meeting with staff “to discuss the matter further”, and asked that they raise the matter of the need to amend the Plan of Management for BVRP to permit the use with the relevant Minister.

 

There was no discussion of the environmental constraints to such a proposal, nor was there any reference to the recent Review of Environmental Factors undertaken of the site and its surrounds by the NP&W Service which found, amongst other things, that:

 

1.         The Berowra Valley Regional Park has exceptionally high habitat values, mainly due to the fact that it is a natural corridor that extends north to the Hawkesbury River. This corridor extends the number of species able to use this area and permits flow of individuals throughout the area. The area is prime habitat for large owls, smaller owls, parrots and possums, plus offers habitat for feathertail gliders and microbat species. The many small seepages offer excellent habitat for frog species, especially the red-crowned toadlet, which is common.

 

2.         Stringybark Ridge currently has records of two threatened plant species found during the course of the December 2011 survey. These are Tetratheca glandulosa and Melaleuca deanei.   The Stringybark Ridge has other threatened plant species in the area including Darwinia biflora, Persoonia nutans, Persoonia hirsuta, Syzygium paniculatum and Galium australe that could potentially be adversely affected.

 

 

3.         Several threatened fauna species have been recorded in this site. They include the Powerful Owl, the Grey-headed Flying Fox, the Glossy Black Cockatoo, the Gang Gang Cockatoo and Red-crowned Toadlet. In addition, there are several threatened fauna species that have been recorded within a few kilometres of the site and which in fact may also occur on site. These include the Masked Owl, the Grey Falcon, the Superb Fruit Dove, the Regent Honeyeater and the Varied Sitella.

 

4.         The area is currently rich with returning fauna. The survey records that the total of fauna detected along the Stringybark Ridge was 46 bird species, 13 mammal species and 15 reptile and amphibian species.

 

 

5.         The area has existing Aboriginal Heritage sites and new sites were discovered during the December 2011 survey.

 

Also not included in the information provided to the State Members was information that the area has particularly poor road access from the High School onwards, and parking is very difficult or non-existent close to the Park entrance. To provide an appropriate access road and parking at the site would involve the removal of a significant amount of recently regenerated and high-quality bushland. This is apart from the disturbance to the flora and fauna of surrounding areas that accompanies sports grounds and their facilities. Facilities such as toilets, showers, and lighting do not exist and would be expensive to erect and maintain. Further, the impact of lighting is likely to have a detrimental impact on native fauna in the locality.

 

Another omission from the letter was information that in April 2006, Council adopted A Sports Facility Strategy - Recommended Strategies and Action Plan which had reviewed potential development sites for sports grounds and which had discounted the site at Stringybark Ridge citing strong community opposition and a Ministerial decision to adopt a Plan of Management which identified future usage to be only of a passive nature. The Plan of Management is still in place for Berowra Valley Regional Park.

 

Council support for the creation of a sports ground in an environmentally sensitive area such as the Berowra Valley Regional Park would be an action in breach of Council’s own Biodiversity Conservation Strategy and so should not be condoned.

 

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 

File Reference:           F2008/00693

Document Number:   D01917358

  


 

General Manager's Report No. GM10/12

General Manager Division

Date of Meeting: 16/05/2012

 

2        EVENT CALENDAR - 2012/13   

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

Hornsby Shire Council currently provides a number of free events for the community. These events maximise Council’s exposure across the community, acknowledge diversity, build community harmony and nurture community pride.

 

This report seeks Council endorsement of improvements to Council’s event calendar, including expanding the provision of events via the community partnership model piloted in 2011/12. 

 

The value to Council of this model is increased recognition and exposure across a broader events program throughout Hornsby Shire without impacting on existing resources.

 

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE

 

This report outlines Council’s planned events to be delivered in 2012/13 by the Strategy and Communications Branch. It is written as a continuation of the events delivered in 2011/12 within the confines of known budget and resource constraints.

 

DISCUSSION

 

The primary objective of Council events is to contribute to the positive image of Council and provide residents with a free experience locally. As the popularity of council-run events increases there is a consequential impact on the time and resources required to host a successful events calendar.

 

In order to continue to delivery a worthy calendar of events Council needs to move towards a more sustainable delivery model for some events, and therefore the 2011/12 program included a trial of a community partnership model at two major events and one minor event. 

 

Major events in 2011/12

Month

Event

Event detail

September 2011

The Bushland Shire Festival

Signature event held at Fagan Park, Galston.

Over 8,000 attendees.

This event included stalls, a main stage program, a community stage program, entertainment, sideshows and numerous free activities. Some community groups assisted with the organisation of this event.

 

December  2011

Christmas Spectacular

A Christmas celebration including carols,  attended by 6,000 people. This event was organised in partnership with local church groups.

 

January 2012

Australia Day

A large citizenship ceremony held at Hornsby RSL Club plus free ticket giveaway to Koala Park Sanctuary at Pennant Hills and free flag giveaways, live music and a sausage sizzle in Hornsby Mall

 

March 2012

OneWorld Multicultural Festival

A carnival atmosphere event which included an eight-hour stage program. There was a range of international food offerings, stalls and activities or children and a spectacular fireworks display at 8pm. The number of Festival attendees decreased from 5pm onwards until the firework display.

 

 

Minor events in 2011/12

·    August 2011 Local Government Week promotion

·    August 2011 Knit In

·    February 2011 Outdoor Movies x 4 –  2 screenings achieved, 2 cancelled due to inclement weather

·    March 2011 Outdoor Movies at Cherrybrook  - Community partnership with a local school and scout group

·    May 2011 - Digital Online Photographic Competition – in progress for May

 

Ongoing events in 2011/12

·    Citizenship ceremonies from January to November with approximately 70 candidates per month

·    Civic events such as park openings

·    Roving entertainment and events in Hornsby Mall

 

The outcomes from the three community partnership trials demonstrated that, with stringent guidelines and an enthusiastic community, a partnership can deliver a successful event in a financially efficient manner.  This report recommends expanding the community partnership model in 2012/13.

 

Events proposed for 2012/13

The proposal for Council’s Event Calendar 2012/13 is contained in the table below.

  

Month

Event

Event detail

August 2012

Knit In

At Hornsby Central Library as per previous years

September 2012

Bushland Shire Festival

Similar size to previous year but with a greater emphasis on local produce and sustainable produce. Local community groups will be encouraged to participate in the planning for this large event.

 

December 2012

Christmas Spectacular

Similar format to previous year but with an expansion of the community partners to include additional churches.

 

January 2013

Australia Day

 A large Civic Citizenship ceremony to be held at Hornsby RSL club. The changes to this event include:

·    Cancellation of Koala Park Free ticketing

·    Expressions of interest for additional community barbecues in each ward

·    Additional local events will be encouraged and supported

 

Late 2012 or February 2013

Movies under the stars

3 movies events, one per ward, produced by community groups. Groups will be supported as per the pilot project undertaken in Cherrybrook in March 2012. An expression of interest process will be undertaken to ensure all groups have equal opportunity to apply.

 

March 2013

OneWorld

A smaller event with similar elements.  This event would be held in Hornsby Mall from 10am to 4pm only.

 

May 2012

Photo competition

The intention for the 2013 competition is to use Council’s website to facilitate the competition and use a professional photographer to judge the competition.

 

 

Moving to a community partnership model for events will require Council’s event coordinator to develop community event guidelines covering event logistics and the council services and support offered.

 

There are numerous community events that could benefit from the increased profile offered via a community partnership.  Council’s 2012/13 program partners will initially be required to document their expression of interest and then agree to the conditions of a memorandum of understanding before being granted access to any partnership materials. 

 

The following list of potential community partnership events demonstrates the diversity of events that may wish to take advantage of the partner model.

 

·    Berowra Woodchop

·    Lantern Festival

·    Greek Festival 

·    Civic Events

·    Hornsby War Memorial Hall rededication

·    Opera by the Lake at Fagan Park

·    Epping Street Fair

·    Teddy Bears Picnic at Lisgar Gardens

·    Beecroft in Bloom

·    Brooklyn Spring Fair and Market

·    Arcadia Markets

 

As well as delivering the major events listed in the table above, the 2012/13 event program will encompass ongoing events including citizenship ceremonies and other civic events, and events in Hornsby Mall.

 

BUDGET

 

As this report recommends variations to existing events provided by Council within existing resources, there is nil budgetary impact.

 

POLICY

 

This report has nil policy implications.

 

CONSULTATION

 

Council officers are consulted in the planning of an event and encouraged to participate in the event by showcasing their team’s/division’s services available to the community.

 

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER

 

The officer responsible for this report is the Manager Strategy and Communication - Julie Williams - who can be contacted on 9847 6790.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT Council endorse the proposed calendar of events for 2012/13, including the expansion of the community partnership model for delivering some events.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Scott Phillips

General Manager

General Manager Division

 

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 

File Reference:           F2004/08423-02

Document Number:   D01904883

  


 

Executive Manager's Report No. CC19/12

Corporate and Community Division

Date of Meeting: 16/05/2012

 

3        INVESTMENTS AND BORROWINGS FOR 2011/12 - STATUS FOR PERIOD ENDING 31 MARCH 2012   

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

Council is provided with a monthly report summarising current general economic conditions which may have an impact on investment returns.  The report includes schedules detailing Council's investments and borrowings and highlights the monthly and year to date performance of the investments. In this regard, investments are generally held for the medium to long term.

 

This Report indicates that the total year to date investment income for the period ending 31 March 2012 was $1,494,000 compared to the budgeted income for the same period of $1,169,000.  Of the investment income earned, 29% of the total relates to externally restricted funds and is required to be allocated to those funds.

 

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE

 

The purpose of this Report is to advise Council of funds invested in accordance with Section 625 of the Local Government Act; and details as required by Clause 212(1) of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and Council's Investment of Surplus Funds Policy (which was last reviewed by Council at its 20 April 2011 Ordinary Meeting).

 

DISCUSSION

 

Council's Investment Performance – Period Ending 30 March 2012

 

·    The At-Call and Term Deposits achieved an annualised return of 5.70% for the period ending 31 March 2012 compared to the benchmark of 4.25%.

 

·    NSW T-Corp Long Term Growth Facility achieved a marked to market annualised return of 34.44% for the period ending 31 March 2012 compared to the benchmark of 21.94%.  This fund has a 70% allocation to growth assets. Short term performance is expected to be volatile and the investment should be viewed over the longer term.

 

·    The Capital Guaranteed Notes achieved annualised returns of 0% for the period ending 31 March 2012 compared to the benchmark of 4.70%. No interest will be accrued for the remaining life of the securities.

 

For total investments, the annualised return for the period ending 31 March 2012 was 5.80% compared to the benchmark of 4.70%.

 

Statement by Glenn Stevens, Governor, Reserve Bank Board:  Monetary Policy Decision – Media Release 3 April 2012

At its meeting today, the Board decided to leave the cash rate unchanged at 4.25 per cent.

Recent information is consistent with the expectation that the world economy will grow at a below-trend pace this year, but does not suggest that a deep downturn is occurring.  Several countries in Europe will record very weak outcomes, but the US economy is continuing a moderate expansion.  Growth in China has moderated, as was intended, and is likely to remain at a more measured and sustainable pace in the future.  Conditions around other parts of Asia softened in 2011, partly due to natural disasters, but are not showing signs of further deterioration.  Some moderation in inflation has allowed policymakers in the region to ease monetary policies somewhat.  Commodity prices declined for a few months last year and are noticeably off their peaks, but have been relatively stable for a while now, at quite high levels.  Australia’s terms of trade have peaked, though they remain high. 

Financial market sentiment has generally continued to improve in recent weeks and capital markets are supplying funding to corporations and well-rated banks.  At the margin, wholesale funding costs are tending to decline, though they remain higher, relative to benchmark rates, than in mid 2011.  But the task of putting European banks and sovereigns onto a sound footing for the longer term remains large and Europe will remain a potential source of adverse shocks for some time yet.

In Australia, growth in domestic demand ran at its fastest for four years in 2011, driven by private spending.  Nonetheless the balance of recent information suggests that output growth was somewhat below trend over the year.  There are differences in performance between sectors, and considerable structural change is occurring.  Labour market conditions softened during 2011, though the rate of unemployment has been little changed for some time.

Interest rates for borrowers remain close to their medium-term average.  Credit growth remains modest.  Housing prices have shown some signs of stabilising recently, after having declined for most of 2011, but generally the housing market remains soft.  The exchange rate has remained high over recent months, even though the terms of trade have declined somewhat.

In underlying terms, inflation was around 2½ per cent in 2011.  CPI inflation was higher than that but will fall over the next quarter or two.  It is currently expected that inflation will be in the 2–3 per cent range over the coming one to two years.  This forecast abstracts from the effects of the carbon price and also embodies an assumption that productivity growth in the economy increases somewhat as a result of the structural change now occurring.  At its next meeting, the Board will have the opportunity to reassess the outlook for inflation, taking into account not only data on demand and output but also forthcoming information on prices.

The Board eased monetary policy late in 2011.  Since then, its judgement has been that, with growth expected to be close to trend, inflation close to target and lending rates close to average, the setting of monetary policy was appropriate.  The Board's view was also that, were demand conditions to weaken materially, the inflation outlook would provide scope for easier monetary policy.  At today's meeting, the Board judged the pace of output growth to be somewhat lower than earlier estimated, but also thought it prudent to see forthcoming key data on prices to reassess its outlook for inflation, before considering a further step to ease monetary policy.

Borrowings

 

In respect of borrowings, the weighted average interest rate payable on loans taken out from June 2002 to June 2011, based on the principal balances outstanding, is 6.89%. The Borrowings Schedule as at 31 March 2012 is attached for Council’s information.

 

BUDGET

 

Total year to date investment income for the period ending 31 March 2012 was $1,494,000.  The budgeted income for the period was $1,169,000.  Approximately 29% of the total income relates to externally restricted funds and is required to be allocated to those funds.

 

POLICY

 

All investments have been made in accordance with the Local Government Act, the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and Council's Investment of Surplus Funds Policy.

 

CONSULTATION

 

Initial investments and reallocation of funds are made, where appropriate, after consultation with Council's financial investment adviser and fund managers.

 

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER

 

The officer responsible for the preparation of this Report is the Chief Financial Officer - Glen Magus - who can be contacted on 9847 6635.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT the contents of Executive Manager’s Report No. CC19/12 be received and noted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Glen Magus

Chief Financial Officer - Financial Services

Corporate and Community Division

 

 

 

 

Gary Bensley

Executive Manager

Corporate and Community Division

 

 

Attachments:

1.View

HSC Investment Portfolio as at 31 March 2012

 

 

2.View

HSC Borrowing Schedule as at 31 March 2012

 

 

 

 

File Reference:           F2004/06987

Document Number:   D01901364

 


 

Executive Manager's Report No. CC20/12

Corporate and Community Division

Date of Meeting: 16/05/2012

 

4        PECUNIARY INTEREST AND OTHER MATTERS RETURNS - DISCLOSURES BY COUNCILLORS AND DESIGNATED PERSONS   

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

Section 449 of the Local Government Act (the Act) details the statutory requirements in respect of the lodgement of Disclosure of Pecuniary Interests and Other Matters Return/s by Councillors and Designated Persons. Section 450A(2) of the Act details the reporting requirements associated with the lodgement of such Returns.

 

In accordance with those Sections of the Act, this Report provides information regarding the Return/s recently lodged with the General Manager.  It is recommended that Council note that the Disclosure of Pecuniary Interests and Other Matters Return/s lodged with the General Manager have been tabled in accordance with the requirements of the Act.

 

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE

 

The purpose of this Report is to table the Disclosure of Pecuniary Interests and Other Matters Returns lodged by Councillors/Designated Persons who have left, commenced with, or internally transferred to a relevant position within Council.

 

DISCUSSION

 

Section 449(1) of the Act requires a Councillor or Designated Person to complete and lodge with the General Manager a Disclosure of Pecuniary Interests and Other Matters Return within three months after becoming a Councillor or a Designated Person.  Section 449(3) requires a Councillor or Designated Person holding that position at 30 June in any year to complete and lodge with the General Manager a Return within three months after that date.  Section 449(5) states that nothing prevents a Councillor or Designated Person from lodging more than one Return in any year.

 

Section 450A(2) of the Act requires that Returns lodged under Section 449 are to be tabled at a meeting of Council.  Returns lodged under Sections 449(1) and 449(3) are to be tabled at the first meeting held after the last day for lodgement under those Sections; and Returns lodged for any other reason are to be tabled at the first meeting after their lodgement.

 

Council's procedures in respect of the disclosing of interests have been developed to cater for the election/appointment/employment/retirement/resignation/etc of Councillors or Designated Persons.  These procedures:

 

•     require all Councillors and Designated Persons who hold that position at 30 June in any year to submit Returns to the General Manager by 30 September in that year (i.e. they are lodged under S449(3)).  These Returns are tabled at the October General Meeting of Council in that year;

 

•     require newly elected Councillors or newly appointed Designated Persons to lodge Returns to the General Manager within three months of their election/appointment (i.e. they are lodged under S449(1).  These Returns are tabled at the next available General Meeting of Council; and

 

•     require those Councillors or Designated Persons who are leaving Council (because of retirement, resignation, etc) to lodge Returns to the General Manager by their last day with Council.  These Returns are tabled at the next available General Meeting of Council.

 

Returns lodged in accordance with Section 449(1) and/or 449(5) of the Local Government Act and Council's Procedures

 

Council last considered the tabling of Disclosure of Pecuniary Interests and Other Matters Returns under these Sections of the Act at the General Meeting held on 18 April 2012 (see Report No. CC18/12).  Since that time, one additional Return has been lodged with the General Manager and is now tabled as required by the Local Government Act. 

 

Date Lodged

Councillor/Designated Person (Position)

Reason for Lodgement

11/04/2012

Administration and Waiting List Officer, Child Care Team, Community Services Branch (Temporary)

New appointment

 

BUDGET

 

There are no budgetary implications associated with this Report.

 

POLICY

 

There are no policy implications associated with this Report.

 

CONSULTATION

 

Consultation has occurred with those required to complete a Disclosure of Pecuniary Interests and Other Matters Return.

 

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER

 

The officer responsible for the preparation of this Report is the Manager, Governance and Customer Service – Ms Robyn Abicair - who can be contacted on 9847 6608.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT Council note the Disclosure of Pecuniary Interests and Other Matters Returns recently lodged with the General Manager have been tabled as required by the Local Government Act.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Robyn Abicair

Manager - Governance & Customer Service

Corporate and Community Division

 

 

 

 

Gary Bensley

Executive Manager

Corporate and Community Division

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 

File Reference:           F2011/00977

Document Number:   D01903441

 


 

Executive Manager's Report No. CC21/12

Corporate and Community Division

Date of Meeting: 16/05/2012

 

5        DELIVERY PROGRAM 2011-2015 INCLUDING OPERATIONAL PLAN (BUDGET) 2011/12 - MARCH 2012 QUARTERLY BUDGET REVIEW   

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

Accountable organisations like Council review their budget and operational performance each quarter. In this regard, the March 2012 Quarterly Review of the Delivery Program 2011–2015, including the Operational Plan (Budget) for 2011/12 is attached.

 

The 2011/12 Original Budget forecast a surplus at 30 June 2012 of $6K. The September and December 2011 Quarterly Reviews resulted in no net changes to the Original Budget. As the March 2012 Quarterly Review also recommends no net budget changes, the forecast Budget position at 30 June 2012 remains at $6K.

 

A review of all expenditure and income as at 31 March 2012 by the ExCo Budget Group has identified savings in the 2011/12 Budget to the value of $1 million. The Budget Group has recommended that the savings be applied to eliminating the need to borrow externally this year.

 

This liquidity result is satisfactory in maintaining Council’s current working funds position and the operational performance of the organisation has been in line with the service delivery standards adopted by Council.

 

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE

 

The purpose of this Report is to present for Council’s consideration the March 2012 Quarterly Review of the Delivery Program 2011–2015, including the Operational Plan (Budget) for 2011/12.

 

DISCUSSION

 

Operational comment

 

On 23 March 2011 Council adopted its 2011–2015 Delivery Program which included the 2011/12 Operational Plan and Fees and Charges. The Delivery Program sets out the manner in which Council intends to align its business goals with its intent of "creating a living environment" and is divided into the following five elements:

 

·    Governance

·    Ecology

·    Economy

·    Society and culture

·    Human Habitat

 

The attached graphs demonstrate satisfactory operational performance during the nine months to March 2012.

 

 

Budget comment

 

This Review includes the third quarter results for 2011/12, comparing actual expenditure and income for the third quarter against the budget for the third quarter. The Net Operating and Capital result after internal funding movements showed a positive variance of $5.85 million as compared to the March 2012 Quarter Budget. This variance has largely been the result of the timing differences of project related works and the initial phasing of the 2011/12 Budget.

 

The 2011/12 Original Budget forecast a surplus at 30 June 2012 of $6K and no net budget changes were made at the September and December 2011 Quarterly Reviews. As the March 2012 Quarter Review also recommends no net budget changes, the forecast Budget position at 30 June 2012 remains at $6K.

 

While the 2011/12 March Budget Review recommends no net budget changes, there are a number of material budget changes and offsets that are listed below:

 

·    ($430,000) - higher investment income

·    ($563,076) - reduced labour expenses

·    $1,000,000 - reduced external loan borrowing funding

·    ($6,924) - other net budget changes

·    $2,515,000 - repayment of old Commonwealth Bank (CBA) building purchase internal loan

·    ($2,515,000) - release of restricted asset funds to extinguish CBA building purchase internal loan

 

A review of all expenditure and income as at 31 March 2012 by the Budget Group has identified savings to the value of $1 million. The savings identified are from higher than anticipated investment income and a rigorous review of labour budgets. The savings resulting from labour savings is largely attributed to the non-replacement of staff in the lead up to the review of Council’s external services.

 

The Budget Group has taken a financially prudent approach to apply these savings to eliminate the need to borrow externally this year. As a consequence, next financial year’s budget will save $144K in debt servicing costs and further improve Council’s debt service ratio. This will increase Council’s budgeted surplus to $405K for the 2012/13 financial year, noting that a proportion of this surplus will need to be applied to increased costs associated with the imposition of the carbon tax.

 

Quarterly Budget Review Statements

 

In December 2010, the Division of Local Government produced a set of minimum financial reporting requirements that councils are required to report against from 1 July 2011. Collectively, these reporting requirements are known as the Quarterly Budget Review Statement (QBRS) and will be reported to Council at the end of each quarter.

 

The QBRS is composed of, but not limited to, the following budget review components:

 

·    Statement by the responsible accounting officer on Council’s financial position at the end of the year based on the information in the QBRS;

·    Budget Review Income and Expenses Statement;

·    Budget Review Capital Budget;

·    Budget Review Cash and Investments position;

·    Budget Review Key Performance Indicators; and,

·    Budget Review Contracts and Other Expenses

 

Attachment 2 of this Report provides the information in respect to the above requirements.

 

BUDGET

 

This Report provides the March 2012 Quarterly Review of the 2011/12 Operational Plan (Budget).

 

POLICY

 

There are no specific policy implications associated with this Report.

 

CONSULTATION

 

All Divisions and appropriate staff have had input into the March 2012 Quarterly Review process.

 

TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE SUMMARY

 

Triple Bottom Line is a framework for improving Council's decisions by ensuring accountability and transparency on social, environmental and economic factors.  It does this by reporting upon Council's strategic themes.

 

As this report does not propose any actions which require a sustainability assessment, no Triple Bottom Line considerations apply.

 

RESPONSIBLE OFFICERS

 

The officers responsible for preparation of this Report are Julie Williams - Manager, Strategy and Communications and Glen Magus – Chief Financial Officer. They can be contacted on 9847-6790 and 9847-6635 respectively.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT the March 2012 Quarterly Review of the Operational Plan (Budget) 2011/12 be received and noted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gary Bensley

Executive Manager

Corporate and Community Division

 

 

 

 

Scott Phillips

General Manager

General Manager Division

 

 

Attachments:

1.View

3rd Quarter Review - January to March 2012

 

 

2.View

Quarterly Budget Review Statement - March 2012

 

 

 

 

File Reference:           F2010/00575

Document Number:   D01904290

  


 

Executive Manager's Report No. EN21/12

Environment Division

Date of Meeting: 16/05/2012

 

6        RURAL SPORTS FACILITY, GALSTON - POSSIBLE EXPANSION OF USE   

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

In October 2011, Council resolved to call for expressions of interest into expanding the use of the Rural Sports Facility (RSF) located at Galston.  In response, advertisements were placed in the local media and letters were written to equestrian clubs and coaches inviting expressions of interest (EoIs) for use of the facility. 

 

A total of four submissions were received - two from schools seeking to use the RSF for school sport on weekdays or Saturdays; one from a new equestrian club (Riders Galston Incorporated) that is interested in using the RSF on Sunday afternoons; and one from an equestrian club (Galston Equestrian Club) that is an existing user of the RSF.

 

Through the EoI process Council has also become aware of Riding for the Disabled NSW (RDA), a charitable organisation where voluntary coaches assist disabled people with horse-based therapy.  Council has subsequently written to RDA inviting it to express an interest in operating at the RSF.

 

As the RSF is currently utilised by existing users of the facility for organised events on most Sundays throughout the year, there is limited opportunity for additional use to occur on a Sunday. 

 

This report recommends that Council invite the schools and Riders Galston Incorporated to use the RSF on weekdays or Saturdays, and to encourage use of the facility by Riding for the Disabled NSW.

 

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE

 

The purpose of this report is to inform Council of submissions received as a result of a call for expressions of interest into additional uses at the RSF.

 

BACKGROUND

 

The RSF is a four hectare parcel of community land located at 18-20 Bayfield Road, Galston.  The site was acquired by Council in 2005 for the purposes of providing a recreational facility primarily for equestrian and canine related activities.  The RSF was opened in 2008 and is currently licensed to the Arcadia Pony Club (APC) and Galston Equestrian Club (GEC) who together take up most Sundays throughout the year for organised events.

 

On Saturdays and weekdays the RSF is used for unstructured horse riding but at much lower levels of attendance than for the club events.

 

 

 

 

 

 

DISCUSSION

 

In October 2011, Council considered Executive Manager’s Report No. EN45/11 into the possible expansion of uses at the RSF, and resolved THAT:

 

“1.    Expressions of interest be publicly invited for additional uses of the Rural Sports Facility, including but not limited to, other recreational activities.

 

2.       Once the expressions of interest process has been completed, the matter be discussed with Councillors at an informal briefing session prior to a report being prepared for Council’s consideration.”

 

EoIs were invited from November 2011 to the end of February 2012.  During this period advertisements were placed in the local media, on Council’s website, and individual letters advising of the EoI process were sent to the equestrian clubs and 21 equestrian coaches.

 

To make it clear that Council would consider a variety of uses at the RSF, the following information was presented in Council’s invitation:

 

“Additional uses are not necessarily confined to recreation.  Council is particularly interested in further Saturday and midweek use, but expressions may also deal with Sunday use.

 

The ground may be suited to a variety of uses that are permissible in open space zones in the Hornsby Shire Local Environment Plan such as (but not restricted to) additional equestrian activities (including coaching), canine activities and shows, outdoor markets, exhibitions, performances and other sports which may be compatible at a ground used for horse riding”

 

As part of any submission, respondents were asked to address the following points:

 

·    A full description of the proposal

·    Proposed visitor numbers

·    Demographic profile of proposed participants

·    Environmental and other impacts

·    Any proposed alteration to the existing facilities

·    Social benefit and cost

·    Whether or not for private profit

·    Sponsorship

·    Experience

·    Insurance

 

Submissions Received

 

Four submissions were received in response to the invitation for EoIs as follows:

 

1.   Arcadia Public School*

·      Use for school equestrian sport

·      20 participants of primary school age

·      Weekdays 2pm - 3pm

·      Formal coaching and training

 

2.   Northholm Grammar School*

·      Coaching and training for school equestrian team

·      15 riders, 8 - 18 years of age

·      4pm - 6pm weekdays, or Saturdays

·      Although outside school hours, could be considered as school sport

 

*Note:    Council does not charge schools for hire of Council grounds for weekly sport

 

3.   Galston Equestrian Club (GEC)

·    Existing foundation user of RSF

·    Opposed to additional use that conflicts with GEC use (which is: alternate Sundays**, some Saturdays)

·    Warns of additional maintenance and capital costs Council may incur

·    Suggests RSF as a venue for inter-school events, Riding for the Disabled, equine therapy

 

**Note:   Arcadia Pony Club are currently licensed to use the remaining Sundays at the facility.

 

4.   Riders Galston Inc (RGI)

·    Club in foundation stage looking for a venue

·    Wants to use Sunday afternoons, already allocated to GEC and APC

·    Has not taken up previous offer of Saturday allocations

·    Offering equestrian activities similar to existing clubs

·    Estimated numbers 50, expects to grow if venue provided

 

In response to the submission from GEC, Council has written to Riding for the Disabled Association NSW (RDA) inviting it to express interest in operating at the RSF.  RDA is a charitable organisation where voluntary coaches assist disabled people with horse-based therapy.  It is understood that if RDA were to use the RSF, a local volunteer group would need to be formed that could occupy the RSF under licence.

 

Council staff have held preliminary discussions with RDA’s development officer, and RDA has written to Council outlining the process for setting up a local RDA group to operate at the RSF.  Such operation could, at its full extent, run Monday-Saturday and would not impinge greatly on existing club use of the RSF.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The RSF is currently occupied by existing users of the facility for organised events on most Sundays throughout the year and there is limited opportunity for additional use to occur on a Sunday.

 

The EoI process has highlighted the potential for some additional use of the facility by school groups, RGI and RDA on weekdays and Saturdays, although it should be noted that RGI have not taken up previous offers of Saturday afternoon allocations.

 

This report recommends that Council offer weekday use of the facility to the school groups; Saturday use to Riders Galston Inc, and continue to encourage use of the facility by Riding for the Disabled NSW.

 

 

BUDGET

 

This report is considered to be budget neutral as any additional revenue that may be received from new fee-paying hirers, would likely to be offset by increased maintenance costs.

 

POLICY

 

There are no policy implications from this report.

 

CONSULTATION

 

In the preparation of this Report Council placed advertisements in the local press, on Council’s website and sent individual letters to equestrian clubs and coaches calling for expressions of interest into additional use of the Rural Sports Facility, Galston.

 

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER

 

The officer responsible for the preparation of this Report is the Manager, Parks and Landscape Team - Peter Kemp who can be contacted on 9847 6792.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT Council:

 

1.         Thank all who submitted an Expression of Interest for use of the Rural Sports Facility.

 

2.         Invite Arcadia Public School and Northholm Grammar School to enter into a licence for the use of the Rural Sports Facility on weekdays.

 

3.         Invite Riders Galston Inc. to enter into a licence for the use of the Rural Sports Facility on Saturdays.

 

4.         Encourage use of the Rural Sports Facility by Riding for the Disabled Association NSW.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Stephen Fedorow

Acting Executive Manager - Environment

Environment Division

 

 

 

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

 

File Reference:           F2004/06971

Document Number:   D01888603

 


 

Executive Manager's Report No. EN24/12

Environment Division

Date of Meeting: 16/05/2012

 

7        HORNSBY MOUNTAIN BIKE TRAIL - RESULTS OF REVIEW OF ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS   

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

Commencing in December 2008, Council has undertaken a thorough scoping, assessment, design and consultation process for the proposed Hornsby Mountain Bike Trail (‘the trail’).  The single track, cross country mountain bike trail proposed for Hornsby Park and Old Mans Valley has had a Review of Environmental Factors (‘the REF’) prepared by an independent environmental consultant who found that the proposed trail will include mitigation measures and will not have a significant impact on the environment.  The REF therefore recommended that it is acceptable for Council to proceed with the trail.

 

A number of additional environmental, heritage and acoustic studies have also been undertaken, generally concluding that the potential impacts of the proposed trail are likely to be minimal and able to be adequately mitigated.

 

The REF was publicly exhibited for a 30 day period during September 2011 and 307 submissions were received as a result.  266 submissions supported the proposed trail and 41 objected to the proposed trail or elements of the proposed trail.

 

In response to issues raised in public submissions, some amendments have been made to the proposed trail layout that, amongst other issues seeks to address concerns about the proximity of the Southside Loop of the proposed trail to residences in Dural Street and associated concerns of privacy, noise and security.

 

This report considers that the issues raised are able to be adequately addressed and recommends that Council approve the REF and authorise construction of the Hornsby Mountain Bike Trail.

 

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE

 

The purpose of this report is to inform Council of the Review of Environmental Factors, including public submissions, for the Hornsby Mountain Bike Trail and seek Council’s endorsement to proceed with the Trail.

 

BACKGROUND

 

In December 2008, following a period of public consultation, Council adopted an Unstructured Recreation Strategy resolving in part:

 

“THAT Council authorise further investigation into the development of mountain bike trails within the Hornsby Local Government Area.”

 

In December 2009, Council considered Executive Managers Report No. EN58/09 that responded to Council’s resolution and identified a number of potential locations within Hornsby Shire for mountain bike trails to be constructed.  Of these, the Old Mans Valley area was identified as the most suitable Council owned land for mountain bike trails.

 

In September 2010, Council considered a further report (Executive Managers Report No. EN37/10) that recommended the Hornsby Park and Old Mans Valley Area as providing the best opportunity for a mountain bike trail in Hornsby Shire. 

 

A concept map was included as part of the report that showed an indicative trail layout within Hornsby Park and Old Mans Valley.  Upon consideration Council resolved as follows:

 

“THAT Counci:l

 

1.          Note progress of the endorsed recommendations from Executive Manager’s Report No. EN58/09.

 

2.          Provide in-principle support for the establishment of a mountain bike facility within the Hornsby Park/Old Mans Valley area subject to funding.

 

3.          Not proceed with the proposal by World Trail for a Hornsby to Westleigh Mountain Bike Track due to environmental sensitivities.”

 

In July 2011, Council considered Executive Managers Report No. EN28/11 that provided further details regarding development of the trails within Hornsby Park/Old Mans Valley and resolved in part:

 

“THAT

 

1.         Council endorse the Hornsby Mountain Bike Trail Plan identified in Attachment 1.

 

2.          Council endorse commencement of the Hornsby Park loop (labelled as Stage 1 in Attachment 1) in 2011/12 and the Old Mans Valley Loop (labelled as Stage 2 on Attachment 1) pending the adoption of Old Mans Valley Plan of Management.”

 

DISCUSSION

 

The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (‘the Act’) requires that an environmental assessment is carried out prior to the commencement of any development, work or activity.  This is typically carried out through the development application process; however where the proposed work or activity does not require development consent under Part 4 of the Act, an REF under Part 5 of the Act is to be conducted.

 

An REF identifies and evaluates the impacts of an activity to decide if the impacts are likely to significantly affect the environment, and is designed to provide enough information to make an informed decision as to the likely significance of the impact of the activity on the environment (including critical habitat or threatened species, populations or ecological communities, or their habitats).

 

The proposed mountain bike trails are classified as Minor Council Works under the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 (Clause 6(3)) and do not require a development application and assessment under Part 4 of the Act.

 

The State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 also permits Council to construct cycleways on a public reserve under the control of or vested in Council without development consent under Part 4 of the Act.

An REF (Attachment 1) for the proposed mountain bike trails was prepared on behalf of Council by an independent environmental consultant that concluded:

 

·      The proposal will not have a significant impact on the environment and an environmental impact statement is not required

·      The proposal is unlikely to have significant impact upon species, populations or ecological communities listed under the NSW Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 and a Species Impact Statement is not required

·      The proposal will not affect any matters of National Environmental Significance listed under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999

·      The proposal will include mitigation measures and methods, will not have a significant impact on the environment and is recommended that it is acceptable to proceed

 

Public Submissions

 

The REF was publicly exhibited for a period of 30 days during September 2011 and during this period advertisements were placed in the local media notifying of the exhibition periods and inviting submissions on the REF. 

 

A copy of the REF was placed on Council’s website and hardcopies were made available at Hornsby Central Library and at Council’s Administration Centre.  140 properties in close proximity to the proposed trails were notified of the exhibition by letter that included a brochure and map displaying the proposed trail layout.

 

A total of 307 submissions were received as a result of the public exhibition, with 266 supporting the proposed trails and 41 objecting to the proposal.

 

Submissions made during and post the formal period of public exhibition can be generally categorised as follows:

 

·      Submissions generally in support of the mountain bike trails

·      Concerns regarding Stage 1 ‘Southside Loop’ (including proximity to residents, loss of privacy and increased noise)

·      Impact on flora and fauna

·      Safety concerns

·      Statutory obligations

·      Ongoing management

·      Trail design

·      Consultation process

·      General comments

 

Attachment 2 to this report includes an appraisal of the issues raised in submissions and a summary response to these.

 

Public Agencies

 

Comment regarding the proposed trail was also sought from the NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS), NSW Department of Primary Industries (DPI) – Catchments and Lands, NSW Office of Environment and Heritage - National Parks and Wildlife Service (OEH) and the Hawkesbury Nepean Catchment Management Trust (HNCMT). 

 

The NSW RFS generally had no issue with the proposed trail and sought that Council develop plans and procedures to warn the public about fires, and the potential for emergency vehicles to use the fire trail.  Conditions of approval have been proposed to incorporate the RFS requirements.

 

OEH had no objection to the proposed trail, and HNCMT did not provide a response.

 

DPI made a submission with the substantive issue being potential impacts on vegetation, in particular Blue Gum Diatreme Forest and Blackbutt Gully Forest.

 

In response to the issues raised by DPI, Council commissioned an independent study by ecological consultants Dr Peter and Dr Judy Smith to further investigate the impacts of the proposed trail upon vegetation communities.  The Smiths made a number of additional recommendations beyond those included in the REF that would further reduce the impact of the proposed trail.  The findings of the Smith’s study and recommendations are discussed in further detail later in this report.

 

Issues raised in the DPI submission have also been included in the overall issues and response register.

 

Additional Studies

 

A number of additional studies have been conducted both prior to and post the REF to provide greater detail regarding the likely impact of the proposed trail on the environment, heritage and noise; and proposed mitigation measures.  These studies are discussed in further detail below.

 

Targeted Survey for Varied Sittella and Supplementary Section 5A Assessments

 

Supplementary Section 5A Assessments for the Powerful Owl, Masked Owl and Varied Sittella were conducted by Aquila Ecological Surveys in August 2011 (Attachment 3).  Aquila found that in each case it is unlikely that the proposed trail would have a significant effect on the birds or their habitat.

 

Aquila recommended that the monitoring of bird populations be undertaken at least annually (during spring) to determine whether there are any changes on populations of those species reliant on structurally complex bushland (such as the Varied Sittella).

 

Aquila was retained to conduct targeted surveys for the Varied Sittella, and in monitoring conducted in October 2011, November 2011 and February 2012 did not sight any Varied Sittellas in the area affected by the proposed trail (Attachment 4).

 

Aboriginal Heritage Impact Assessment

 

In December 2011 an Aboriginal Heritage Impact Assessment (Attachment 5) of the proposed trail was conducted by the Guringai Tribal Link Aboriginal Corporation (GTLAC).  The assessment did not identify any Aboriginal artefacts or objects of significance, however could not discount the potential of in-situ artefact materials in the lesser disturbed areas of the proposed trail.  GTLAC recommended that monitoring be conducted at the areas of earth removal to ensure any Aboriginal cultural materials are salvaged and recorded for the AHIMS database.

European Heritage Impact Statement

 

A European Heritage Impact Statement (Attachment 6) prepared by Long Blackledge Architects in December 2011, found that the proposed trail would have little adverse impact on the heritage significance of the place or effect on adjacent places and items of heritage significance.  Further, where there is potential for adverse impacts these impacts have or can be satisfactorily mitigated by an adjustment to the proposed trail’s route.

 

Historical Archaeological Advice

 

In February 2012, Futurepast Heritage Consulting provided an opinion of potential historical archaeological issues that may arise as a result of the proposed trail (Attachment 7). 

Futurepast found that the historical archaeological resources of the former Higgins estate are largely contained to the area of the original homestead and cemetery, which are not affected by the proposed trail and that other areas of the site are highly disturbed and have minimal archaeological significance.  Accordingly, the potential impacts of the proposed trail on historical archaeological remains are considered to be minimal.

 

Geotechnical Advice

 

In June 2011, engineering consultants Pells Sullivan Meynik (PSM) provided geotechnical advice regarding the construction of the proposed trail in areas of Old Mans Valley (Attachment 8).  PSM consider the probability to be low that the cuts proposed to form the trail may result in more extensive instability of the ground surface upslope of the trail.

 

PSM also advise that localised support (such as a copper log wall, vegetation or other similar retaining or stabilisation works) depending on soil and/or seepage characteristics of the location can be addressed either at the time of construction or by regular inspection and maintenance.

 

Bush Regeneration Offset Works

 

51,700 square metres of bush regeneration works are proposed to be undertaken by Hornsby Shire Council to offset the impact of the proposed trail.  A map outlining the areas of bush regeneration offset works is included as Attachment 9.

 

Blue Gum Diatreme Forest and Vegetation Impacts

 

In April 2012, ecological consultants Dr Peter Smith and Dr Judy Smith provided supplementary advice on the impacts of the proposed track location on native vegetation, in particular Blue Gum Diatreme Forest and the Blackbutt Gully Forest on the Southside (Attachment 10). 

 

The Smiths found that there whilst there is Blue Gum Diatreme Forest within Hornsby Park and Old Mans Valley, for the most part the proposed trail does not enter the stands. 

 

The Smiths have recommended that the proposed trail be rerouted so that it is located a minimum of 20m away from the Blue Gum Diatreme Forest.  Other recommendations include hand construction in areas where the proposed trail is adjacent to Blue Gum Diatreme Forest, and the installation of a bike tyre scrubber at the point of entry of bikes to the trail network.

 

The report also found that the mitigation measures proposed to reduce the impact of the Southside Loop of proposed trail in Blackbutt Gully Forest, appeared to be adequate and appropriate.

 

The Smith’s recommendations would be incorporated into the final trail design and their recommendations have been included as conditions of approval for the proposed trail.

 

Acoustic Assessment

 

An independent acoustic study (Attachment 11) has been prepared to assess the likely noise impacts of non-motorised mountain bike pass-by noise to neighbouring residents.  Using conservative source noise levels, this study concluded that:

 

·    The daytime, evening and night time LAeq noise criteria are expected to be met at nearby residences on Dural Street.

·    If riders congregate on the track adjacent to 28 Dural Street that the intrusiveness noise criteria may be exceeded.

·    Riders shouting or talking loudly on the ascending track may be audible and also exceed the sleep disturbance criterion during the night time period and that riders should be discouraged from congregating until they are on the descending track.

 

Since the completion of the acoustic study, amendments have been made to the proposed trail layout so that the Southside Loop would now be introduced to the west of 28 Dural Street and where possible moved further away from properties in Dural Street (Attachment 12).

 

Whilst the acoustic study assessed noise compliance against the daytime, evening and night time criteria, it should be noted the proposed trail would only be open for use during daylight hours.  This will be controlled by the provision of appropriate signage supported by monitoring by Council Rangers.

 

Further, the proposed trail has been designed not to provide any natural congregation or staging points; and talking or shouting from riders is expected to be limited in the more strenuous ascending section that is closest to Dural Street residences.  Trail signage would also reflect the need to for riders to limit noise in this section.

 

Amendments to the Proposed Trail as a result of Submissions or Recommendations from Additional Studies.

 

Following assessment of the issues raised through public submissions, and recommendations coming from the additional studies, a number of amendments have been made to the project as follows:

 

Southside Loop Section

 

A number of concerns were raised by Dural Street residents regarding the proximity of the trail to their residences and associated issues of privacy, safety, security and noise. 

 

In response, the proposed trail layout has been amended so that the easternmost section would travel along Quarry Road for approximately 60 metres, before entering the bushland.  Where possible, the remainder of the proposed trail has been moved further away from property boundaries. 

 

Under the new alignment the proposed trail would be located within 17 metres of the rear boundary of 36 Dural Street, extending to 20 metres at the beginning of the crown road reserve at 38 Dural Street, and increasing in distance as the proposed trail progresses further west.

 

In addition to the realignment of the proposed trail, screening planting would occur near the proposed trail to increase the privacy of Dural Street residences.  As part of this program, the dense weed thickets that currently provide visual screening would be retained until such time as the new planting associated with the proposed trail provides an effective screen.

 

With reference to the concerns about safety and security it should be noted that the user demographic of the proposed trail is not linked to antisocial behaviour with the vast majority of expected users greater than 26 years of age.  An increase in use of the park by families and recreational bike riders will also improve passive monitoring of the area, therefore it is not considered likely that there will be an increase in theft, trespass or vandalism.

 

The majority of resident concerns relating to noise have been considered within the proceeding acoustic assessment section of this report.

 

Whilst concerns have also been raised about noise associated with trail bikes and motorised mountain bikes using the proposed trail, the proposed trail has been specifically designed as a single track, cross country trail that is not suited to trail bikes or motorised mountain bikes.   In addition, trail signage would be installed that prohibits the use of either trail bikes or motorised mountain bikes.

 

Rubbish

 

A policy of ‘take your rubbish with you’ will be further developed through trail signage.  Volunteer working bees in the past have focussed on rubbish removal and will continue to do so in the future.

 

Bathtub Section

 

The proposed trail has been realigned so that there is now only one turnback within the southern, good quality bushland which requires construction to be undertaken by hand. 

 

In the northern part of the Bathtub section of the proposed trail, the originally planned tight series of turns would be deleted due to removal of this section of the trail in favour of a proposal to run trail across a section of TAFE land.  This would result in only one turn remaining in this section of proposed trail.

 

Night Riding

 

Whilst the original proposal did not specifically provide for night time riding, it suggested that the trails could be used at night.  Due to the risk to riders, the potential impacts on nocturnal fauna, and the undesirability and absence of lighting, the proposed trail would only be open during daylight hours.

 

 

 

 

 

Crusher Section

 

The original proposal required a section of sandstone to be cut in order to provide a suitable gradient for the proposed trail.  The proposed trail has been moved to a higher level to avoid the rock and is now located closer to the road and within a weed plume.

 

Bush Rock Removal

 

Due to the presence of good quality Blackbutt Gully Forest, adjacent areas of Blue Gum Diatreme Forest and diverse flora and fauna species, it is considered best practice that Council avoid using bush rock for track construction in the bushland areas unless it forms part of the track tread where it is to be reused within the footprint of the trail. 

 

Rock associated with former quarry activity located in the more heavily degraded areas would be re-used on-site for trail construction. Any small amounts of rock required in the areas of good quality bushland would be generally of sandstone origin.

 

Bush Regeneration Offset Works

 

51,700 square metres of bush regeneration works are proposed to be undertaken by Hornsby Shire Council to offset the impact of the proposed trail

 

TAFE Land

 

Discussions have been held with TAFE who are generally in support of including sections of the proposed trail on their land.  This section would be located on the lowest western-most bushland section of the TAFE property.

 

An assessment found that including a section of the proposed trail on TAFE land would reduce the environmental impact of the proposed trail by enabling a steep section of the originally proposed trail to be deleted.

 

TAFE is actively considering the proposal.

 

Blue Gum Diatreme Forest

 

The proposed trail has been rerouted so that does not enter any Blue Gum Diatreme Forest, and maintains a minimum buffer area of 20m.  In addition, any construction of the proposed trial to occur in close proximity to Blue Gum Diatreme Forest would be carried out by hand.

 

Conditions of Approval

 

Conditions of approval have been prepared for the REF that relate generally to Blue Gum Diatreme Forest and other mitigation measures for the construction, maintenance and operation of the trail derived from the REF and supporting studies.  These conditions are included as Attachment 13 to this report.

 

CONCLUSION

 

An independent REF into the proposed mountain bike trail found that the proposal would include mitigation measures and methods, and would not have a significant impact upon the environment.  The REF found that it would be acceptable for Council to proceed with the proposed trail. 

 

The REF was placed on public exhibition for a period of 30 days during September 2011 and received a total of 307 submissions.  266 submissions supported the proposed trail and 41 objected to the proposed trail or elements of the proposed trail.

 

Following consideration of the submissions, a number of additional studies were conducted; some amendments were made to the proposed trail in order to address concerns that were raised or recommendations arising from the additional studies.

 

Having regard to the amendments that have been made to the proposed trail, and conditions of approval incorporating suggested mitigation measures, it is considered reasonable for Council to proceed with the proposed trail.

 

BUDGET

 

This report recommends that Council proceed with the approval and construction of the proposed Hornsby Mountain Bike Trail.  The Hornsby Mountain Bike Trail project has been identified in the 10 year Special Rate Variation capital works program and sufficient funds have been allocated to allow the proposed trails to be constructed. 

 

Council has also received a $50,000 grant from the NSW Department of Sport and Recreation for the project.

 

POLICY

 

There are no policy implications associated with this Report.

 

CONSULTATION

 

Council publicly exhibited a Review of Environmental Factors for the proposed Hornsby Mountain Bike Trail for a period of 30 days during September 2011.

 

Submissions received during the consultation are considered in the Discussion section of this report.

 

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER

 

The officer responsible for the preparation of this Report is the Manager, Bushland and Biodiversity - Diane Campbell, who can be contacted on telephone 9847 6903.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT Council:

 

1.      Approve the Review of Environmental Factors subject to the conditions of approval detailed in Attachment 13 to Executive Manager’s Report No. EN24/12.

 

2.      Authorise construction of the Hornsby Mountain Bike Trail generally in accordance with the layout shown in Attachment 12 to Executive Manager’s Report No. EN24/12.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Stephen Fedorow

Acting Executive Manager - Environment

Environment Division

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.View

Review of Environmental Factors - Hornsby Mountain Bike Trail

 

 

2.View

Appraisal of Submissions - Issues and Responses - Hornsby Mountain Bike Trail

 

 

3.View

Targeted Survey for Varied Sittella and Supplementary Section 5A Assessments

 

 

4.View

Varied Sittella Survey Interim Report

 

 

5.View

Aboriginal Heritage Impact Assessment

 

 

6.View

European Heritage Impact Statement

 

 

7.View

Historical Archaeological Advice

 

 

8.View

Geotechnical Advice

 

 

9.View

Bush Regeneration Offset Works

 

 

10.View

Vegetation Assessment - Blue Gum Diatreme Forest and Blackbutt Gully Forest

 

 

11.View

Acoustic Assessment

 

 

12.View

Hornsby Mountain Bike Trail Map

Included under separate cover

 

13.View

Conditions of Approval - Hornsby Mountain Bike Trail

 

 

 

 

File Reference:           F2011/01149-02

Document Number:   D01899532

  


 

Planning Report No. PLN21/12

Date of Meeting: 16/05/2012

 

8        DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - SECTION 96(2) - ERECTION OF A 10 STOREY DEVELOPMENT - 14 POUND ROAD AND  15 - 17 WANDERERS WAY, HORNSBY    

 

 

Development Application No:

DA/737/2005/C

Description of Proposal:

Section 96(2) modification of an approved multi-unit housing development to increase the number of units from 55 to 80 residential units and deletion of conditions of consent relating to Stratum subdivision and the landscape pedestrian plaza

Property Description:

Lot 2 DP 544977 and Lot 10 DP 599285, No. 14 Pound Road and Nos. 15 - 17 Wanderers Way, Hornsby

Applicant:

Gelder

Owners:

Mr S Merhi and Mrs B Merhi

Statutory Provisions:

Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994

Residential D (High Density) Zone

Estimated Value:

$12,000,000

Ward:

B

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT Development Application No. 737/2005/C for construction of a multi-unit housing development comprising 55 units with basement car parking and deletion of conditions of consent relating to Stratum subdivision and the landscape pedestrian plaza at Lot 2 DP 544977 and Lot 10 DP 599285, No. 14 Pound Road and Nos. 15 - 17 Wanderers Way, Hornsby be amended as detailed in Schedule 1 of Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN21/12.

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

1.         The amended proposal involves modification to the approved development to increase the number of units from 55 to 80 units. The Section 96(2) application also seeks to delete conditions of consent relating to Stratum subdivision and the landscape pedestrian plaza.

 

2.         On 21 December 2005, Council approved Development Application No. 737/2005 for demolition of the existing development and erection of a nine storey multi-unit housing development comprising 55 units with basement level car parking.

 

3.         The proposal complies with the requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65, the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 and High Density Multi-Unit Housing Development Control Plan.

 

4.         Two submissions have been received in respect of the application.

 

5.         It is recommended that the application be approved.

 

HISTORY OF THE APPLICATION   

 

On 21 December 2005, Council approved Development Application No. 737/2005 for the demolition of existing structures, erection of a nine storey development comprising 55 residential units and two levels of basement parking subject to a deferred commencement consent. The deferred commencement conditions related to the registration of the subdivision which would allow for a land swap, demolition of the existing development on the site, and the provision of a new landscape plan.

 

On 6 October 2006, Council approved a Section 96(1A) application for modification of DA/ 737/2005 to remove the deferred commencement requirement that the above works be resolved within 12 months of granting the consent.

 

On 8 November 2006, Council considered Executive Manager’s Report No. WK 59/06 in relation to the sale of Council’s property at 12 Pound Road, Hornsby to the adjoining owners of 14 Pound Road, and the acquisition of Stratum land from 14 Pound Road for open space purposes (known as the “land swap”). Council resolved to agree to the exchange of land.

 

The site upon which the development would take place comprised two allotments, one of which was in the ownership of Council and the other in the ownership of the applicant. A commercial agreement had been reached between Council and the applicant to undertake a land swap such that the proposed development would achieve vehicular access from Wanderers Way and thus allow for the closure of Pound Road in accordance with the Pound Road Masterplan. Part of the approved basement level car parking would be contained beneath the area of land which would have reverted to the ownership of Council following the land swap. As such, a Stratum subdivision would have been required, subject of the land swap, prior to any development occurring in relation to the multi-unit housing development.

 

On 3 May 2010, Council approved a Section 96(1A) application to modify Development Application No. 737/2005 to stage the works to facilitate the Stratum subdivision as part of stage 1 works, to delay the demolition of the existing buildings and the payment of the required Section 94 Contribution.

 

On 30 June 2010, Council considered Confidential Executive Manager’s Report No. WK46/10 in relation to the proposed sale and acquisition of Council property at 12 Pound Road and resolved to proceed with negotiations. The negotiations resulted in a commercial agreement being reached between Council and the applicant. Council’s land at 12 Pound Road has been purchased by the owner of 14 Pound Road. The proposed development would achieve vehicular access from Wanderers Way. The landscape plaza is no longer required by Council, therefore a Stratum subdivision for the basement level car parking would not be required to be undertaken. The Pound Road Precinct Masterplan in the High Density Multi-Unit Housing Development Control Plan does not require the provision of a landscaped pedestrian plaza on the site.

 

 

 

THE SITE

 

The site is described as Lot 2 DP 544977 and Lot 10 DP 599285, 14 Pound Road and 15-17 Wanderers Way, Hornsby. The site is irregular in shape and has an area of 2307m2.

 

The site contains existing industrial style buildings and an open car parking area. Existing access to the site is gained via Wanderers Way.

 

Development surrounding the site includes existing high rise multi-unit housing developments. To the west, the site adjoins the Northern Rail line.

 

THE PROPOSAL

 

The Section 96 application seeks to modify the approved development to increase the number of units from 55 to 80 units. The additional yield would be achieved by deleting the pitched roof design and replacing it with an additional level of units with a flat roof design. All the floor levels of the building have been revised to provide additional units.

 

The approved development provided the following mix of units:

 

·       54 x 2 bedroom units

 

·       1 x 3 bedroom unit

 

The proposed development provides the following mix of units:

 

·       21 x 1 bedroom units

 

·       49 x 2 bedroom units

 

·       10 x 3 bedroom units      

 

The approved development contained two levels of basement parking and nine levels of units above. The upper level basement consisted of car parking, two residential units and a meeting room. The lower basement area contained car parking and a swimming pool. The modified proposal involves deletion of the two residential units, meeting room and swimming pool in the basement levels. The basement levels would be revised to accommodate additional car parking spaces.

 

In addition, the following modifications are proposed:

 

·       Reconfiguration of apartment layouts on each floor.

 

·       Alteration of the external façade to suit the new apartment layout.

 

·       The original approved development had a floor space ratio of 3.665:1 based on a land size of 1671.1m2 which did not include Council’s land of 635.9m2. The amended proposal has a floor space ratio of 3.39:1 based on a site area of 2307m2.

 

·       A slight reduction of the overall height of the development from approved RL 214.650m to RL 214.150m.

 

·       Slight increase in floor to ceiling height from 2.450 metres to 2.5 metres.

 

·       Increase in the width of the balconies from 2 metres to a minimum width of 2.5 metres.

 

 A detailed summary of the proposed changes on each level is outlined below.

 

Lower basement level

 

·       Deletion of the swimming pool and associated toilets and facilities.

·       Provision of 56 car parking spaces.

·       Relocation of the compactor and garbage storage area to the upper basement level.

·       Relocation of the lifts and circulation ramps.

·       Deletion of the egress stair from the upper level.

 

Upper basement level

 

·       Deletion of two residential units and the meeting room.

·       Provision of 51 car parking spaces.

·       Provision of compactor and garbage storage area.

·       Lifts and circulation ramps relocated within this basement level.

·       Fire egress compliant with BCA requirements.

·       Deletion of egress stair from the upper levels.

 

Ground level

 

·       The approved development provided six units on this level. The proposed development would provide eight units on this level.

 

·       The approved gross floor area on this level was 609.95m2. The proposed gross floor area on this level would be 745.78m2.

 

·       The approved development contained 5 x 2 bedroom units with some studies on this level. The proposed development provides 3 x 1 bedroom units, 4 x 2 bedroom units and 1 x 3 bedroom unit.

 

·       Landscaping is proposed to remain as per the approved landscape plan.

 

·       A fire passage from the stairs to outside has been provided.

 

Levels 1-9 

 

·       The approved development provided six units on each level. The proposed development would provide eight units on each level.

 

·       The approved gross floor area on each level was 609.95m2. The proposed gross floor area on each level would be 786.58m2.

 

·       The approved development contained 6 x 2 bedroom units on each level. The proposed development provides 2 x 1 bedroom units, 5 x 2 bedroom units and 1 x 3 bedroom unit.

 

The approved development provides a conventional pitched roof. The proposed development would provide a flat roof design.

 

The Section 96(2) application also seeks to delete the conditions of consent relating to Stratum subdivision and the landscape pedestrian plaza which are no longer relevant to the proposal. The Pound Road Precinct Masterplan in the High Density Multi-Unit Housing Development Control Plan does not require the provision of a pedestrian plaza on the site.

 

ASSESSMENT

 

The development application has been assessed having regard to the ‘Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036’, the ‘North Subregion (Draft) Subregional Strategy’ and the matters for consideration prescribed under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the Act).  Subsequently, the following issues have been identified for further consideration.

1.   STRATEGIC CONTEXT

 

1.1       Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036 and (Draft) North Subregional Strategy

 

The Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036 is a broad framework to secure Sydney’s place in the global economy by promoting and managing growth.  It outlines a vision for Sydney to 2036; the challenges faced, and the directions to follow to address these challenges and achieve the vision.  The Draft North Subregional Strategy acts as a framework for Council in its preparation of the Comprehensive LEP by the end of 2012.

 

The Draft North Subregional Strategy sets the following targets for the Hornsby LGA by 2031:

·       Employment capacity to increase by 9,000 jobs; and

 

·       Housing stock to increase by 11,000 dwellings.

 

The proposed development would be consistent with the draft Strategy by providing additional dwellings and would contribute towards housing choice in the locality.

 

2.   STATUTORY CONTROLS

 

Section 79C(1)(a) requires Council to consider “any relevant environmental planning instruments, draft environmental planning instruments, development control plans, planning agreements and regulations”.

 

2.1       Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 - Section 96(2)

 

The proposal constitutes an amendment under Section 96(2). Council pursuant to Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act, 1979, may consider an application to amend development consent provided that, inter alia:

 

(a)     it is satisfied that the development to which the consent as modified relates is substantially the same development as the development for which consent was originally granted and before that consent as originally granted was modified (if at all), and

 

(b)     it has consulted with the relevant Minister, public authority or approval body (within the meaning of Division 5) in respect of a condition imposed as a requirement of a concurrence to the consent or in accordance with the general terms of an approval proposed to be granted by the approval body and that Minister, authority or body has not, within 21 days after being consulted, objected to the modification of that consent, and

 

(c)     it has notified the application in accordance with (i)  the regulations, if the regulations so require, or (ii)  a development control plan, if the consent authority is a council that has made a development control plan that requires the notification or advertising of applications for modification of a development consent, and

 

(d)     it has considered any submissions made concerning the proposed modification within the period prescribed by the regulations or provided by the development control plan, as the case may be.

 

(e)     In determining an application for modification of a consent under this section, the consent authority must take into consideration such of the matters referred to in section 79C (1) as are of relevance to the development the subject of the application.

 

The original approval is for a nine storey residential development comprising 55 residential units and two levels of basement car parking. The proposed modification increases the approved number of residential units to 80. The additional unit yield has been achieved by deleting the pitch roof and replacing it with an additional level of units with a flat roof design. All the floors have been revised to provide additional units. The application also includes basement car parking in two levels.

 

The height of the building would remain the same. The building would also retain a similar footprint. The external modifications would only be cosmetic to reflect the internal changes and provide a simplified, yet contemporary, façade design to comply with the development controls within the Hornsby Town Centre Development Control Plan and State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65. With regard to Section 96(2)(a), it is considered that the proposal as amended is substantially the same as the development originally approved.

 

With regard to Section 96(2)(b), the original proposal was referred to RailCorp. The modified proposal was also referred to RailCorp. This matter is discussed in detail in Section 2.4 of this report.

 

With respect to Section 96(c) and (d), the application was renotified to neighbouring properties in accordance with Council’s Notification and Exhibition Development Control Plan and two submissions were received. For further discussion on this matter, refer to Section 5 of this report.

 

With respect to Section 96(3), an assessment against the relevant provisions of Section 79C(1) are provided within this report.


 

2.2       Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994

 

The subject land is zoned Residential D (High Density) under Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 (HSLEP 1994).  The objectives of the Residential D (High Density) zone are:

 

(a)     to provide for the housing needs of the population of the Hornsby area.

 

(b)     to promote a variety of housing types and other land uses compatible with a high density residential environment.

 

(c)     to provide for development that is within the environmental capacity of a high density residential environment.

 

The proposed development is defined as ‘multi-unit housing’ under the HSLEP 1994 and is permissible in the zone with Council’s consent. The proposed amendments would provide additional housing for the population of the Hornsby area. The proposed amendments would also increase the mix of apartments to include 3 bedroom units promoting a greater variety of housing choice.  Therefore, the proposed amendments comply with the objectives of the zone.

 

Sub-clause 15(1) of the HSLEP 1994 states that a floorspace ratio of 1.6:1 applies to the Residential D (High Density) zone. Sub-clause 15(2) states that:

 

“Regardless of subclause (1), the Council may consent to development which results in a floorspace ratio greater than that indicated in the table if the proposed floorspace ratio satisfies the provisions of Schedule B.”

 

The site is located within the area of land shown in Diagram 11 of Schedule B of the HSLEP 1994. Schedule B states that:

 

1.      The floorspace ratio in respect of the land shown edged heavy black on Diagram 11 may exceed 2:1 where the gross floor area that results in a floorspace ratio of 2:1 is used or proposed to be used exclusively for the purpose of multi-unit housing.

 

Therefore, based on the above clause, the floorspace ratio relating multi-unit housing contained in the HSLEP 1994 does not apply where the floorspace ratio in excess of 2:1 is used, or proposed to be used, exclusively for multi-unit housing.

 

The approved development has a floorspace ratio of 3.665:1. The approved floorspace ratio was calculated over a site area of 1671m2 which did not include Council’s land of 635.9m2. At the time of the original approval of the development, the land swap agreement had not been registered.

 

The amended development has a floorspace ratio of 3.39:1, with the area in excess of 2:1 to be exclusively used for multi-unit housing and as such, the proposal complies with sub-clause 15(2) of the HSLEP 1994. The site area for the amended development is 2306.2m2 as Council’s land has been purchased by the owner of 14 Pound Road. Therefore, the proposed floorspace ratio has been calculated on the abovementioned site. 


 

2.3       State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 requires that Council must not consent to the carrying out of any development on land unless it has considered whether the land is contaminated or requires remediation for the proposed use. 

 

The matter was assessed in detail under DA/737/2005. The proposed modifications would not alter the compliance of the development with SEPP 55.

 

2.4       State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

 

The modified application has been assessed against the requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007. This policy contains State-wide planning controls for developments adjoining rail-corridors and busy roads.  The application of the SEPP to the proposed amendments is discussed below.

 

2.4.1    Development in Rail Corridors

 

The development is located immediately adjoining the Northern Rail Corridor and would require excavation within 25 metres (measured horizontally) of the corridor. Therefore, the original development required (and obtained) concurrence of RailCorp under Clause 85 and 86 of SEPP (Infrastructure). The modified proposal was also referred to RailCorp for comment. RailCorp has raised no objection to the development subject to implementation of conditions of consent.

 

2.4.1.1 Clause 87 – Impact of rail noise or vibration on non-rail development

 

Clause 87 of SEPP (Infrastructure) applies to the development as it would be impacted upon by the noise and vibration from the rail corridor. In accordance with the requirements of the SEPP(Infrastructure), the modified application has been assessed against the noise related controls contained within the Department of Planning and Infrastructure’s publication “Development near Rail Corridors and Busy Roads – Interim Guidelines”.

 

The applicant has submitted a Noise Assessment Report which details the construction techniques to attenuate rail noise and vibration. Council’s assessment of the proposal considers that the development is satisfactory subject to the implementation of recommended conditions.

 

2.5       State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality of Residential Flat Development

 

The modified application has been assessed against the requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 (SEPP 65). This Policy provides State-wide planning controls for establishing design criteria for the assessment of residential flat developments and for residential components of mixed use developments. The primary aim of SEPP 65 is to “improve the design quality of residential flat development in New South Wales”. 

 

The following section of this report includes an assessment of the residential component of the proposed development against the ten principles provided in Part 2 of SEPP 65:


 

2.5.1    Principle 1: Context

 

This matter was assessed in detail under DA/737/2005.

 

The modified development maintains residential floor space within a contemporary building form in a high density precinct in close proximity to the ‘Town Centre’ and is considered to respond suitably to the ‘context’ principle of SEPP 65.

 

2.5.2    Principle 2: Scale

 

The modified proposal would involve a ten storey building. The proposed modification would not alter the compliance of the development with the “scale” component of SEPP 65 as opposed to the original development as the building envelope and height of the building would remain largely the same.  Therefore, no further assessment in this regard is necessary.

 

2.5.3    Principle 3: Built Form

 

The proposed development, as modified, provides a contemporary façade design which is compatible with the surrounding developments within the Pound Road precinct.  The details of the elements of the built form have been assessed against the development controls with the High Density Multi-Unit Housing Development Control Plan in Section 2.8 of this report.

 

2.5.4    Principle 4: Density

 

The modified development complies with the floorspace ratio requirement contained within the HSLEP and complies with the density principle of SEPP 65.

 

2.5.5    Principle 5: Resource, energy and water efficiency

 

The modified development includes a BASIX certificate and complies with the requirements with regard to water, thermal comfort and energy. The proposed modifications also comply with the natural ventilation and solar access requirements within the Residential Flat Design Code (RFDC). The details of the above matters have been discussed in Sections 2.5.11 and 2.6 of this report. 

 

2.5.6    Principle 6: Landscape

 

Whilst the proposal no longer incorporates a pedestrian landscape plaza, the amended proposal retains the landscape area as originally approved. The courtyards of the ground level residential units would also incorporate sufficient landscaping to soften the built form.

 

Given the above, the application satisfies the intent of the ‘Landscaping’ principle of SEPP 65.

 

2.5.7    Principle 7: Amenity

                                     

The modified application has been assessed against the ‘Building Amenity’ criteria within the RFDC and is discussed in detail in Section 2.5.11 of this report.  The application is assessed as satisfactory against the ‘Amenity’ principle of SEPP 65.

 


2.5.8    Principle 8: Safety and security

 

The majority of the balconies and living areas in the modified proposal address Wanderers Way and the landscape area. The design has regard to the ‘Crime Prevention through Environmental Design’ principles and does not include any obvious unobserved areas.

 

This matter has been discussed in detail in Section 5.2 of this report.

 

2.5.9    Principle 9: Social dimensions

 

The modified proposal would not alter the compliance of the original proposal with regard to “Social Dimensions”.

 

2.5.10 Principle 10: Aesthetics

 

The modified proposal is generally consistent with the design principles contained within the RFDC. It is considered that the aesthetic quality of the building contributes to the desired future character of the high density precinct.

 

The details of the assessment of the built form and the aesthetics of the development against the High Density Multi-Unit Housing Development Control Plan controls are contained in Section 2.8 of this report.

 

2.5.11 The Residential Flat Design Code

 

Clause 30(2) of SEPP 65 requires consent authorities to consider the design quality of the residential flat development when evaluated in accordance with the design quality principles, and the RFDC.  The following is an assessment of the proposal against the requirements of the RFDC:

 

Residential Flat Design Code

Site Design

Issue

Rule of Thumb

Provided

Compliance & Comments

Building Depth

10-18 metres

 

26 metres maximum

No – The original approval had a depth of 21.5metres

Building Separation

12m  increased to 18m from fifth level

25m from ninth level

Zero building separation is acceptable in appropriate contexts,

such as in urban areas between street wall building types (party walls)

Nil setback from northern boundary

4m setback from southern boundary 

No - Building separation at northern and southern sides remain as approved

 

Deep Soil Zone

Min 25%

Not provided

No – The original proposal did not provide a minimum 25% deep soil zone

Communal open space

25-30%

28.8%

Yes

Private Open Space (POS) for Ground floor units

Min 25m2 POS for each unit with a minimum preferred dimension in one direction of 4 metres.

POS for ground floor units do not comply with the minimum 25m2 requirement

No – The original proposal provided minimum 25m2 POS for the ground floor courtyards. However, a communal open space area was not provided.

Pedestrian Access

20% of the dwellings  should have barrier free access

Continuous path of travel via lifts provided to all units

Yes

Unit Depths

Issue

Rule of Thumb

Provided

Compliance

Single Aspect Apartment Depth

 

 8m maximum depth

 6.08m to 8.64m (62.5% compliance)

No – Original approval had units with 9m depths

 

Back of Kitchen

8m from a window

6.92m to 9.19 (67% compliance)

No – Original approval had internal kitchens with little or no access to a window

 

 

Building Configuration

Issue

Rule of Thumb

Provided

Compliance

Balconies

One primary balcony/courtyard and secondary balconies to bedrooms

 

 

 

One primary balcony/courtyard provided to living areas

 

 

 

 

No - The bedrooms are not provided with secondary balconies. The bedrooms are well ventilated; therefore further balconies are not essential for these units

Depth of balconies

Minimum depth 2m for primary balconies

> 2m for primary balconies/courtyards

Yes

Ceiling heights -

2.7m min height

2.5m

No - The proposal provides 50mm higher ceiling heights than originally approved.

No. of units accessed from double corridors

Maximum  8

8

Yes

Corridors

Short and clear sights

 

Avoid tight corners

Corridors lengths are optimised with sufficient foyer spaces

No corners provided

Yes

 

Yes

Total Storage area

6m3 (1 Bed)

8m3(2 Bed)

10m3(3 Bed)

Storage areas to be provided to the rear of parking spaces and 50% in the units

Yes

Building Amenity

Issue

Rule of Thumb

Provided

Compliance

Solar access

70% receive 2 hrs direct sunlight

100% of units receive 2hrs of sunlight in living rooms and private open spaces

Yes

No of single aspect units  with SW-SE aspect

10% maximum

There are no single aspect units that are located to the south, SW or SE.

Yes

Cross ventilated units

60%

62.5%

Yes

Kitchen with access to natural ventilation

25%

67%

Yes

 

As detailed in the above table, the proposed development does not comply with some ‘rules of thumb’ within the RFDC.  The matters of non-compliance have been discussed in the above table and/or below as well as a brief discussion on compliance with relevant performance standards.

 

 

 

2.5.11.1 Building Depth

 

The RFDC prescribes that the control over the building depth is important as non-compliance could result in overshadowing and lack of cross-ventilation to the residential units.

 

The approved development included a building depth of 21.5 metres. As indicated in the table above, the applicant has demonstrated the units would be cross-ventilated and would receive sufficient direct solar access. Further, the submitted shadow diagrams indicate that the building would not overshadow the private open space areas and the living areas of the adjoining development to the south. Accordingly, it is considered that the proposed development achieves the objective of the ‘Building Depth’ control within the RFDC and is acceptable in its current form.

 

2.5.11.2 Building Separation

 

The RFDC requires that the building separation between two adjoining developments to be 12m, then increased to 18m from the fifth level and 25m from the ninth level and above to provide sufficient solar access and cross ventilation to the upper level units.

 

The modified proposal would retain the setbacks from the northern and southern boundaries, as originally approved under DA/737/2005. Therefore, no further assessment in this regard is necessary.

 

2.5.11.3 Deep Soil Zone

 

The approved proposal does not provide for any deep soil landscaping area within the site.  The modified proposal does not alter this development outcome. Therefore, no further assessment in this regard is necessary.

 

2.5.11.4  Acoustic Privacy

 

The internal layouts of the residential units in the modified proposal are designed such that noise generating areas of a number of units would adjoin each other. Storage or circulation zones would act as a buffer between units. Bedrooms and service areas such as kitchens, bathrooms and laundries are also proposed to be grouped together wherever possible. Continuous walls are proposed to ground level courtyards. Measures to reduce noise transmission from common corridors have been provided within the unit layouts.

 

The modified proposal complies with the ‘Acoustic Privacy’ requirements within the RFDC and is assessed as satisfactory.

 

2.5.11.5 Private Open Space

 

The private ground floor courtyards of the original approval complied with the rule of thumb. As indicated in the above table, the ground floor courtyards of the amended proposal do not comply with the rule of thumb within the RFDC. However, the proposal provides an extensive communal open space area. The original approval did not include the provision of the communal open space. Therefore, the size of the proposed courtyards for these units is considered acceptable.

 

 

2.6          State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index – BASIX) - 2004

 

The application has been assessed against the requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy (BASIX) 2004 which seeks to encourage sustainable residential development.

 

The modified proposal includes a BASIX certificate in accordance with the requirements of the SEPP including the list of commitments to be complied with at the construction stage and during the use of the premises. The BASIX certificate achieves the minimum scores for thermal comfort, water and energy.

 

2.7          Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20: Hawkesbury Nepean River

 

The original application was assessed against the requirements of Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 (SREP 20).  The modified proposal would not alter the compliance of the original proposal with the provisions of SREP 20. Therefore, no further assessment is necessary.

 

2.8       High Density Multi Unit Housing Development Control Plan

 

The proposed development has been assessed having regard to the relevant performance and prescriptive requirements of Council’s High Density Multi Unit Housing Development Control Plan (High Density Housing DCP). The following table sets out the proposal’s compliance with the relevant prescriptive requirements of the Plan:

 

High Density Multi Unit Housing Development Control Plan

Control

Proposal

Requirement

Compliance

Site Coverage

38.5%

35%

No

Height

10 storeys

9 storeys

No

Outdoor Areas:

 

1 bedroom units

2 bedroom units

3 Bedroom

 

Width

 

 

8.75m2

8.7m2

12m2

 

2.5m

 

 

6m2

8m2

10m2

 

2.0m

 

 

Yes

Yes

Yes

 

Yes

Car Parking

 

Residential

 

Residential visitor

 

 

107 spaces

 

16 spaces

 

 

101 spaces

 

16 spaces

 

 

Yes

 

Yes

 

As detailed in the above table, the modified development does not comply with a number of prescriptive requirements of the High Density Multi-Unit Housing Development Control Plan (High Density Housing DCP).  The matters of non-compliance are detailed below, as well as a brief discussion on compliance with relevant performance requirements.

 

2.8.1    Site Coverage

 

The original development exceeded the site coverage requirement by providing a site coverage of 37.1%.  It is considered that the variation to this control is warranted as the development meets the floorspace ratio control which applies to the site. Council has indicated in previous applications in the Pound Road precinct, that to strictly apply the 35% site coverage control would derogate from the intentions of the High Density Housing DCP which seeks to maximise the density of housing in the area.

 

2.8.2    Setback

 

The setbacks of the proposed building from the adjoining property boundaries are similar to the approved setbacks. The Masterplan for the Pound Road precinct does not provide any setback standards for the subject site. However, the proposed location and layout of the built form on the site would not impact on the amenity of the adjoining developments.

 

2.8.3 Height

 

The Masterplan for the Pound Road precinct requires a maximum building height of nine storeys on the site. The approved development contained two levels of basement parking and nine levels of residential units above. The upper basement level consisted of car parking, two residential units and a meeting room. Essentially, the approved development contained ten storeys of residential units.

 

The proposed modification seeks to delete the pitched roof and replace it with an additional level of units within a flat roof design. The Ridge RL (at its highest point) of the proposed building is 214.150m. The approved Ridge RL of the building is 214.650m. The proposed overall height of the proposed building is less than the approved development by 500mm. Therefore, there is no increase in the overall height of the building. The submitted shadow diagrams indicate that the proposed additional storey would not result in the unreasonable loss of solar access to the adjoining developments.

 

2.8.4    Privacy

 

The High Density Housing DCP states that windows of habitable areas should not face directly onto the windows, balconies of adjoining dwellings.

 

The design of the proposed development adequate building incorporates separation to maintain privacy of the proposed units and adjoining developments. The living areas of the units are not orientated to front each other.  The ground level courtyards include continuous walls and landscaping.

 

The balconies of the proposed units have been designed such that overlooking between the units and adjacent units is minimised. The balconies attached to the living rooms of the units on the upper floors have been provided with privacy screens which would minimise any impacts on privacy.  

 

It is considered that reasonable privacy to both the internal and external areas of the site is maintained.

 

 

 

 

 

2.8.5    Landscaping

 

The High Density Housing DCP requires 50% of the site to be landscaped. The approved development provided 39% landscape area. The modified proposal does not reduce the approved landscape area and is considered acceptable.

 

2.8.6    Drainage Control

 

Council’s engineer assessment of the proposed amendments raised no objection.

 

2.9       Car Parking Development Control Plan

 

The proposed amendments have been assessed having regard to the relevant performance and prescriptive design requirements of Council’s Car Parking Development Control Plan (Car Parking DCP).  Car parking is proposed to be provided in accordance with the requirements of the DCP to address the needs of future residents.

 

2.10     Access and Mobility Development Control Plan

 

The proposed amendments have been assessed having regard to the relevant performance and prescriptive requirements of Council’s Access and Mobility Development Control Plan (the Mobility DCP).  The Mobility DCP requires the provision of two adaptable units. The amended proposal provides two adaptable units (Nos. 1 and 8) and appropriate car parking spaces for persons with a disability, in accordance with the requirements of the Mobility DCP.

 

2.11     Waste Management and Minimisation Development Control Plan

 

The increase in dwellings from 55 to 80 requires additional bins to be provided. The proposed garbage room is of sufficient area to house the required number of bins. The recycling bins are located in the compactor/carousel room, with full bins being placed in the garbage room by the site caretaker/manager for collection. The compactor/carousel is in a caged area so that the residents do not have access for safety reasons.

 

A garbage truck parking area has been provided next to the garbage room to allow a truck to stand and not block Wanderers Way. Vehicle turning paths have been provided demonstrating that waste collection vehicles would be able to reverse into this parking area.

 

It is considered that the proposal complies with the requirements of Council’s Waste Management and Minimisation DCP.

 

2.12   Sustainable Water Development Control Plan

 

Subject to sediment and erosion control measures being implemented on site during construction, the proposal would comply with the requirements contained within the Sustainable Water DCP.

 

2.13     Section 94 Contributions Plan

 

Council’s Section 94 Plan applies to the proposed amendment as it would result in the generation of additional residential floor space.  Therefore, the Section 94 contribution condition is proposed to be modified for the increase in number of units from 55 to 80.

 

 

3.   ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

 

Section 79C(1)(b) of the Act requires Council to consider “the likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impacts in the locality”.

 

3.1       Natural Environment

 

The modified proposal does not change the impact of the development on the natural environment and no further assessment in this regard is necessary.

 

3.2       Built Environment

 

3.2.1    Built Form

 

The modified development would retain the height and bulk of the approved development and therefore, would not alter the impact on the locality with regard to built form.  The matters in relation to built form of the modified proposal and the impact on the streetscape are discussed in detail in Sections 2.5 and 2.8 of this report.

 

3.2.2    Traffic

 

The development as modified would involve access from Wanderers Way via a driveway for ingress and egress.  The applicant has submitted a Traffic Assessment Report which has calculated the trip generation for the amended development in accordance with the Roads and Maritime Services guidelines and concluded that the development would result in a net increase of 8 trips per hour during the PM peak period, which is considered negligible.  Council’s traffic assessment of the amendments concludes that the additional traffic generation could be accommodated within the surrounding road system.

 

3.3       Social Impacts

 

The matter has been assessed in detail within the original assessment of DA/737/2005.  No further assessment is necessary.

 

3.4       Economic Impacts

 

The matter has been assessed in detail within the original assessment of DA/737/2005.  No further assessment is necessary.

 

4.   SITE SUITABILITY

 

Section 79C(1)(c) of the Act requires Council to consider “the suitability of the site for the development”.

 

The matter has been assessed in detail within the assessment of DA/737/2005.  No further assessment is necessary.

 

5.   PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

 

Section 79C(1)(d) of the Act requires Council to consider “any submissions made in accordance with this Act”.

 

5.1       Community Consultation

 

The proposed development was placed on public exhibition and was notified to adjoining and nearby landowners between 4 January 2012 and 26 January 2012 in accordance with Council’s Notification and Exhibition Development Control Plan.  During this period, Council received two submissions, one objected to the development and the other submission requested conditions be imposed.  The map below illustrates the location of those nearby landowners who made a submission to the proposal.

 

 

NOTIFICATION PLAN

 

 

 

•      PROPERTIES NOTIFIED

 

 

 

 

X     SUBMISSIONS

         RECEIVED

 

 


          PROPERTY SUBJECT OF DEVELOPMENT

 

 

One submission objected the building being constructed in front of Nos. 4-10 Pound Road. The merits of this issue have been addressed in the body of the report.

 

One submission from was neutral to the development and requested that Council impose conditions of consent requiring construction vehicles and machinery to be contained on site; minimisation of noise, dust and vibration and submission of a dilapidation report. The conditions of consent have been included in the original approval with respect to these matters. No additional conditions are required to be imposed.

 

5.2       Public Agencies

 

The development application was referred to RailCorp for consideration.  RailCorp raised no objections to the amended proposal subject to the imposition of recommended conditions.

 

6.   THE PUBLIC INTEREST

 

Section 79C(1)(e) of the Act requires Council to consider “the public interest”.

 

The public interest is an overarching requirement, which includes the consideration of the matters discussed in this report.  Implicit to the public interest is the achievement of future built outcomes adequately responding to and respecting the future desired outcomes expressed in environmental planning instruments and development control plans.

 

The proposed amendments are considered to have satisfactorily addressed Council’s and relevant agencies’ criteria and would provide a development outcome that, on balance, would result in a positive impact for the community.  Accordingly, it is considered that the approval of the modified development would be in the public interest.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The proposal involves a Section 96(2) modification to an approved multi-unit housing development to increase the number of units from 55 to 80 units. The Section 96(2) application seeks variation to the conditions of consent relating to Stratum subdivision and the landscape pedestrian plaza.

 

The development complies with Section 79C of the Act, the design principles within SEPP 65, the standards within SEPP (Infrastructure) 2007, the HSLEP 1994 and the development controls within High Density Multi-Unit Housing DCP.

 

Approval of the proposed modifications to the development is recommended.

 

Note:   At the time of the completion of this planning report, no persons have made a Political Donations Disclosure Statement pursuant to Section 147 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in respect of the subject planning application.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rod Pickles

Manager - Assessment Team 2

Planning Division

 

 

 

 

James Farrington

Acting Executive Manager - Planning

Planning Division

 

 

Attachments:

1.View

Locality Plan

 

 

2.View

Site Plan

 

 

3.View

Floor Plans

 

 

4.View

Landscape Plan

 

 

5.View

Elevations and Section

 

 

6.View

Shadow Diagram

 

 

 

 

File Reference:           DA/737/2005/C

Document Number:   D01871605

 


 

SCHEDULE 1

 

 

Date of 1st modification:

 

4 October 2006

 

Details of 1st modification:

Removal of reference to deferred commencement consent, deletion of condition 7, modification of conditions 19 and 80.

 

 

 

 

Date of 2nd  modification:

 

3 May 2010

 

Details of 2nd  modification:

Modification of the description of the development to provide for subdivision of two allotments into two, demolition of existing structures, the erection of a 9 storey multi-unit housing development comprising 55 residential units and basement car parking and Stratum subdivision.

 

Renumbering of conditions, removal of redundant conditions and staging of works to facilitate Stratum subdivision as part of stage 1 works.

 

 

Date of this modification:

 

16 May 2012

 

Details of this  modification:

Modification of the description of the development to provide for the demolition of existing structures, the erection of a 10 storey multi-unit housing development comprising 80 residential units and basement car parking.

 

Deletion of conditions relating to the Stratum subdivision and the landscape pedestrian plaza.

 

Conditions Added:

15A, 15B, 15C, 21A, 27A, 35A, 42A, 42B, 42C, 42D, 46A, 46B, 46C, 47-51

 

Conditions Deleted:

2-6, 14, 28(b), 35, 36, 44

 

Advisory Notes - “Subdivision Certificate Requirements” and “Subdivision Lodgement of Plan” 

 

Conditions Modified:

1, 12, 15, 31(b), 41, 46

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS

 

The conditions of consent within this notice of determination have been applied to ensure that the use of the land and/or building is carried out in such a manner that is consistent with the aims and objectives of the relevant legislation, planning instruments and Council policies affecting the land and does not disrupt the amenity of the neighbourhood or impact upon the environment.

 

Note:  For the purpose of this consent, the term ‘applicant’ means any person who has the authority to act on or the benefit of the development consent.

 

Note:  For the purpose of this consent, any reference to an Act, Regulation, Australian Standard or publication by a public authority shall be taken to mean the gazetted Act or Regulation, or adopted Australian Standard or publication as in force on the date that the application for a construction certificate is made.

1.      Approved Plans and Supporting Documentation

The development must be carried out in accordance with the plans and documentation listed below and endorsed with Council’s stamp, except where amended by Council and/or other conditions of this consent:

 

Architectural Plans prepared by Gelder

 

Plan No.

Issue

Title

Dated

SK01

E

Basement carpark plans

06.03.2012

SK02

B

Ground Floor and Typical Plans

16.12.2011

SK03

B

Roof – Site Analysis Plan

16.12.2011

SK04

B

Elevations and Sections

06.03.2012

L01

B

Landscape Plan

06.03.2012

 

            Supporting Documents and Plans

 

Document Title

Prepared by

Dated

Detail and Contour Survey (Plan No. 1701/1 (5C)

Warren Eldridge

03.07.2003

Shadow Diagrams (Plan No. SK05, Issue B)

Gelder

19.12.2011

Statement of Environmental Effects

Wayne Siwak Urban Planning Consultant

December 2011

Acoustical Assessment (Reference No. 41.3860.R8:ZSC)

The Acoustic Group

20 December 2011

Assessment of Traffic and Parking Implications (Reference No. 08151)

Transport and Traffic Planning Associates

December 2011

BASIX Certificate No. 409888M

Building Sustainability Assessments

16 December 2011

ABSA Certificate No.63489170

Building Sustainability Assessments

December 2011

Schedule of Finishes (Reference No. 2-1920-E08-01)

Gelder

-

SEPP 65 Compliance (Reference No. 2/1290/C03/05)

Gelder

March 2012

Design Verification (Reference No. 2/1290/C03-04SG)

Gelder

1.03.2012

 

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF STRATUM SUBDIVISION CERTIFICATE TO CREATE LOT 501

2.   Deleted

3.   Deleted

4.   Deleted

5.   Deleted

6.   Deleted

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

7.   Building Code of Australia

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

8.   Contract of Insurance (Residential Building Work)

In the case of residential building work for which the Home Building Act, 1989 requires there to be a contract of insurance in force in accordance with Part 6 of that Act, that such a contract of insurance is in force before any building work authorised to be carried out by the consent commences.

 

Note:   This condition does not apply to the extent to which an exemption is in force under Clause 187 or 188 of the Act, subject to the terms of any condition or requirement referred to in Clause 187(6) or 188(4) of the Act, or to the erection of a temporary building.

9.   Notification of Home Building Act, 1989 Requirements

Residential building work within the meaning of the Home Building Act, 1989 must not be carried out unless the principal certifying authority for the development to which the work relates (not being Council) has given Council written notice of the following information:

 

a.         In the case of work for which a principal contractor is required to be appointed:

 

i.        The name and licence number of the principal contractor.

ii.       The name of the insurer by which the work is insured under Part 6 of that Act.

 

b.         In the case of work to be done by an owner-builder:

 

i.        The name of the owner-builder.

ii.       If the owner-builder is required to hold an owner-builder’s permit under that Act, the number of the owner-builder’s permit.

 

Note:   If arrangements for doing the residential building work are changed while the work is in progress so that the information notified becomes out of date, further work must not be carried out unless the principal certifying authority for the development to which the work relates (not being Council) has given Council written notification of the updated information.

10. Water/Electricity Utility Services

The applicant must submit written evidence of the following service provider requirements:

 

a.         Energy Australia – a letter of consent demonstrating that satisfactory arrangements have been made to service the proposed development.

 

b.         Sydney Water – the submission of a ‘Notice of Requirements’ under s73 of the Sydney Water Act 1994.

 

Note:   Sydney Water requires that s73 applications are to be made through an authorised Sydney Water Servicing Coordinator.  Refer to www.sydneywater.com.au or telephone 13 20 92 for assistance.

11. Dilapidation Report

A ‘Dilapidation Report’ is to be prepared by a ‘chartered structural engineer’ detailing the structural condition of all adjoining properties.

12. Noise – Rail Corridor

The development must be carried out in accordance with the recommendations contained within the acoustic report submitted with the development application, titled, prepared by The Acoustic Group and dated 20 December 2011 and the requirements of the Department of Planning’s Development Near Rail Corridors and Busy Roads – Interim Guideline and Ralcorp’s Interim Guidelines for Applicants.

 

Note:   The Department of Planning’s document is available at www.planning.nsw.gov.au (development assessments).  The RailCorp document is available at www.railcorp.nsw.gov.au/publications.

13.      Electrolysis Risk

RailCorp requires that the Applicant to procure a report on the Electrolysis Risk to the development from stray currents, and the measures that will be taken to control that risk.

Note:   The Applicant is recommended to consult a RailCorp Electrolysis expert. The measures recommended in the Electrolysis report must be incorporated into the design.

14.      Deleted

15.      Waste Management

            The garbage room is to be constructed in accordance with Hornsby Shire Council's Waste Minimisation and Management Development Control Plan with regards to water/hose for cleansing, graded floors with drainage to sewer, robust door(s), sealed/impervious surfaces, adequate lighting and ventilation.

 

15A.   Garbage Storage Room

 

         There shall be no steps along the bin carting route from the compactor room to the garbage room and the garbage truck parking position. Only ramps between different levels are acceptable.

 

15B.   Recycling Room

 

            To enable access to the recycling room in the lower basement area by those who are disabled, the stairs leading to the recycling room are to be fitted with a stair climber or similar device, details of which are to be provided with the Construction Certificate.

 

15C.   Car Parking

 

All car parking must be constructed in accordance with Australian Standard AS 2890.1 – 2004 – Off Street Car Parking and Australian Standard 2890.2 - 2002 – Off Street Commercial and the following requirement:

 

a.         All parking areas and driveways are to be sealed to an all weather standard, line marked and signposted.

 

b.         All parking spaces for people with disabilities must be constructed in accordance with Australian Standard AS/NZS 2890.6:2009 – Off-street parking for people with disabilities.

 

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

16. Erection of Construction Sign

A sign must be erected in a prominent position on any site on which building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out:

 

a.         Showing the name, address and telephone number of the principal certifying authority for the work,

 

b.         Showing the name of the principal contractor (if any) for any demolition or building work and a telephone number on which that person may be contacted outside working hours, and

 

c.         Stating that unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited.

 

Note:   Any such sign is to be maintained while the building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out, but must be removed when the work has been completed.

17. Protection of Adjoining Areas

A temporary hoarding, fence or awning must be erected between the work site and adjoining lands before the works begin and must be kept in place until after the completion of the works if the works:

 

a.         Could cause a danger, obstruction or inconvenience to pedestrian or vehicular traffic.

 

b.         Could cause damage to adjoining lands by falling objects.

 

c.         Involve the enclosure of a public place or part of a public place.

 

Note:   Notwithstanding the above, Council’s separate written approval is required prior to the erection of any structure or other obstruction on public land.

18. Toilet Facilities

Toilet facilities must be available or provided at the works site before works begin and must be maintained until the works are completed at a ratio of one toilet for every 20 persons employed at the site.  Each toilet must:

 

a.         be a standard flushing toilet connected to a public sewer; or

 

b.         be a temporary chemical closet approved under the Local Government Act, 1993; or

 

c.         have an on-site effluent disposal system approved under the Local Government Act, 1993

19. Erosion and Sediment Control

Erosion and sediment control measures must be provided and maintained throughout the construction period in accordance with the manual ‘Soils and Construction 2004 (Bluebook)’, the approved plans, Council specifications and to the satisfaction of the principal certifying authority.  The erosion and sediment control devices must remain in place until the site has been stabilised and revegetated.

 

Note:   On the spot penalties up to $1,500 may be issued for any non-compliance with this requirement without any further notification or warning.

 

 

REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION

20. Construction Work Hours

All work on site (including demolition and earth works) must only occur between 7am and 5pm Monday to Saturday.

 

No work is to be undertaken on Sundays or public holidays.

21. Demolition

All demolition work must be carried out in accordance with Australian Standard 2601-2001 – The Demolition of Structures and the following requirements:

 

a.         Demolition material is to be disposed of to an authorised recycling and/or waste disposal site and/or in accordance with an approved waste management plan.

 

b.         Demolition works, where asbestos material is being removed, must be undertaken by a contractor that holds an appropriate licence issued by WorkCover NSW in accordance with Chapter 10 of the Occupational Health and Safety Regulation 2001 and Clause 29 of the Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 1996.

 

c.         On construction sites where buildings contain asbestos material, a standard commercially manufactured sign containing the words ‘DANGER ASBESTOS REMOVAL IN PROGRESS’ measuring not less than 400mm x 300mm must be erected in a prominent position visible from the street.

 

21A.   Removal of Waste

 

Written records of the following items must be maintained during the removal of any waste from the site and such information submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority within fourteen days of the date of completion of the works:

 

i.          The identity of the person removing the waste;

 

ii.          The waste carrier vehicle registration;

 

iii.         Date and time of waste collection;

 

iv.         A description of the waste (type of waste and estimated quantity);

 

iv.         The site to which the waste is to be taken;

 

v.         The corresponding tip docket/receipt from the site to which the waste was transferred (noting date and time of delivery, description (type and quantity) of waste);

 

vii.        Whether the waste is expected to be reused, recycled or go to landfill.

 

Note: In accordance with the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, the definition of waste includes any unwanted substance, regardless of whether it is reused, recycled or disposed to landfill.

22. Environmental Management

The site must be managed in accordance with the publication ‘Managing Urban Stormwater – Landcom (March 2004) and the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 by way of implementing appropriate measures to prevent sediment run-off, excessive dust, noise or odour emanating from the site during the construction of the development.

23. Sediment Basin

            The basin shall be included and designed to contain 25mm runoff from the 75th percentile, 5-day rainfall event with an additional 20% capacity provided for storage of sediment. The outlet discharge shall be a slow control discharge (i.e. riser or a sheet flow spillway) designed to discharge at peak flow of a 20 year frequency storm. Trash collection screening filter should be install at the inlet of the basin. The following additional information is to be included in the SWMP: -

 

a.         details of catchment area of basin;

 

b.         design capacity dimensions of basin and overflow mechanism;

 

c.         estimate of the average volumes of water to be disposed from the basin;

 

d.         details of treatment methods to be employed to water prior to disposal from basin (flocculation);

 

e.         estimate of the water quality after treatment prior to disposal from basin (suspended solids);

 

f.          method of disposal of water from basin;

 

g.         location of discharge points and / or disposal areas of water from basin, and

 

h.         inspection and maintenance program for basin.

 

All design criteria and calculations used to size sediment and erosion control measures should be shown, and construction standard drawings are to be provided on each type of sediment and erosion control measure proposed.

24. Street Sweeping

Street sweeping must be undertaken following sediment tracking from the site along Wanderers Way during works and until the site is established.

25. Council Property

During construction works, no building materials, waste, machinery or related matter is to be stored on the road or footpath.  The public reserve is to be kept in a clean, tidy and safe condition at all times.

26. Excavated Material

All excavated material removed from the site must be classified in accordance with the NSW Environment Protection Authority’s Environmental Guidelines – Assessment, Classification and Management of Liquid and Non-Liquid Wastes prior to disposal to an approved waste management facility and reported to the principal certifying authority.

27. Survey Report – Finished Floor Level

A report(s) must be prepared by a registered surveyor and submitted to the principal certifying authority prior to the pouring of concrete at each level of the building certifying that:

 

a.         The building, retaining walls and the like have been correctly positioned on the site.

 

b.         The finished floor level(s) are in accordance with the approved plans.

 

27A.   Landfill

 

Landfill must be constructed in accordance with Council’s ‘Construction Specification, 2005’ and the following requirements:

 

a.         All fill material imported to the site is to wholly consist of Virgin Excavated Natural Material (VENM) as defined in Schedule 1 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 or a material approved under the Department of Environment and Climate Change’s general resource recovery exemption.

 

b.         A compaction certificate is to be obtained from a geotechnical engineer verifying that the specified compaction requirements have been met.

 

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

 

Note:  For the purpose of this consent, any reference to ‘occupation certificate’ shall also be taken to mean ‘interim occupation certificate’ unless otherwise stated.

28. Stormwater Drainage

The stormwater drainage system for the development must be designed and constructed in accordance with Council’s Civil Works – Design and Construction Specification 2005 and the following requirements:

 

a.         Connected directly to Council’s street drainage system in Wanderers Way.

 

b.         Deleted

29. Stormwater Treatment Control

            The proponent is required to provide a permanent stormwater treatment device that will screen and capture gross stormwater pollutants generated during the post development phase. Accordingly, engineering cross-sectional plans and maintenance/management details to be provided with the stormwater engineering plans.

 

The design criteria shall include the following:

 

a.         Performance capture criteria in excess of 90% of gross stormwater pollutants (e.g. litter, floatable, organic debris, coarse/fine sediments, suspended solids, oils and road grit) during a 1- year ARI storm event.

 

b.         Stormwater pollutants captured shall not be resuspended.

 

c.         The device shall be non-blocking and not cause impact on drainage infrastructure.

 

d.         The device shall have access for inspection and maintenance and adequately accessible by a vehicle for cleaning, dewatering and removal of captured pollutants.

 

e.         The device shall be non accessible to the general public and aesthetically non intrusive.

30. On Site Stormwater Detention

An on-site stormwater detention system must be designed by a chartered civil engineer and constructed in accordance with the following requirements:

 

a.          Have a capacity of not less than 16.5 cubic metres, and a maximum discharge (when full) of 66.9 litres per second.

 

b.          Have a surcharge/inspection grate located directly above the outlet.

 

c.          Discharge from the detention system to be controlled via 1 metre length of pipe, not less than 50 millimetres diameter or via a stainless plate with sharply drilled orifice bolted over the face of the outlet discharging into a larger diameter pipe capable of carrying the design flow to an approved Council system.

 

d.          Not be constructed in a location that would impact upon the visual or recreational amenity of residents.

31. Internal Driveway/Vehicular Areas

The driveway and parking areas on site must be designed in accordance with Australian Standards 2890.1, 2890.2, 3727 and the following requirements:

 

a.          The visitor car parking spaces are to be clearly marked on site in accordance with AS 2890.1

 

b.          Two disabled car parking spaces are to be provided in the basement car parking area. One car space is to be allocated to Unit 1 and the other space to Unit 8 (the adaptable units). The disabled car spaces are to be positioned as close as possible to the lift servicing the basement car parking area.

 

c.          The minimum height between the floor and an overhead obstruction in the disabled car parking space is to be 2.5 meters

32. Traffic Control Plan

A Traffic Control Plan (TCP) must be prepared by a qualified traffic controller in accordance with the Roads & Traffic Authority’s Traffic Control at Worksites Manual 1998 and Australian Standard 1742.3 for all work on a public road and/or Wanderers Way and be submitted to Council.  The TCP must detail the following:

 

a.         Arrangements for public notification of the works.

 

b.         Temporary construction signage.

 

c.         Permanent post-construction signage.

 

d.         Vehicle movement plans.

 

e.         Traffic management plans.

 

f.          Pedestrian and cyclist access/safety.

33. Damage to Council Assets

Any damage caused to Council’s assets as a result of the construction of the development must be rectified in accordance with Council’s written requirements and at the sole cost of the applicant.

34. Creation of Easements

The following matter(s) must be nominated on the plan of subdivision under s88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919

 

a.        The creation of an appropriate "Positive Covenant" and "Restriction as to User" over the constructed on-site detention/retention systems and outlet works, within the lots in favour of Council in accordance with Council’s prescribed wording.  The position of the on-site detention system is to be clearly indicated on the title.

 

b.        To register the OSD easement, the restriction on the use of land “works-as-executed” details of the on-site-detention system must be submitted verifying that the required storage and discharge rates have been constructed in accordance with the design requirements.  The details must show the invert levels of the on site system together with pipe sizes and grades.  Any variations to the approved plans must be shown in red on the “works-as-executed” plan and supported by calculations.

 

Note:   Council must be nominated as the authority to release, vary or modify any easement, restriction or covenant.

35.      Deleted

35A.  Trees to on-slab landscape

To ensure trees of a height appropriate to the scale of development are planted the seven (7) Magnolia ‘little gem’ trees specified for the on-slab landscape area are to be replaced with seven (7) Fraxinus oxycarpa ‘Raywoodii’ (Claret Ash). Trees shall be installed at a minimum 100 litre pot size.

36.      Deleted

37. Completion of Landscaping

A certificate must be provided by a practicing landscape architect, horticulturalist or person with similar qualifications and experience certifying that all required landscaping works have been satisfactorily completed in accordance with the approved landscape plans.

 

Note:   Advice on suitable species for landscaping can be obtained from Council’s planting guide ‘Indigenous Plants for the Bushland Shire’, available at www.hornsby.nsw.gov.au.

38. Garbage Collection Easement

For the purpose of waste collection, an easement entitling Council, its servants and agents and persons authorised by it to enter upon the subject land and to operate thereon, vehicles and other equipment for the purposes of garbage collection must be granted to Council by the owner of the land.  

 

Note:  The easement must be in a form prescribed by Council and must include covenants to the effect that parties will not be liable for any damage caused to the subject land or any part thereof or to any property located therein or thereon by reason of the operation thereon of any vehicle or other equipment used in connection with the collection of garbage and to the effect that the owner for the time being of the subject land shall indemnify the Council, its servants, agents and persons authorised by it to collect garbage against liability in respect of any such claims made by any person whomsoever.

39. Cooling Towers

All cooling towers must be designed and installed in accordance with the Public Health Act 1991, the Public Health (Microbial Control) Regulation 2000 and Australian/New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 3666 – Air-Handling and Water Systems of Buildings.  Certification of compliance with the Standard must be obtained from a suitably qualified person.

 

Note:  Under clause 15 of the Public Health (Microbial Control) Regulation 2000 the occupier of the part of premises where a regulated system is installed must notify the Council of the following particulars:

 

a.         Type of system.

 

b.         The address of the premises on which the system is installed.

 

c.         The name, and the residential and business addresses, of the owner of the premises.

 

d.         If the operation area on the premises is occupied otherwise than by the owner, those particulars in relation to the occupier the telephone numbers at which, during business hours and after business hours, the person or persons referred to in the above point may be contacted.

40. Works as Executed Plan

A works-as-executed plan(s) must be prepared by a registered surveyor and submitted to Council for completed road pavement, kerb & gutter, public drainage systems, driveways and on-site detention system.  The plan(s) must be accompanied by a certificate from a registered surveyor certifying that all pipelines and associated structures lie wholly within any relevant easements.

41. s94 Infrastructure Contributions

The payment to Council of a contribution of $931,891.55* for eighty dwellings towards the cost of infrastructure identified in Council’s Development Contributions Plan 2007-2011.

 

Note: *    The value of contribution is current as at 24 April 2012.  The contribution will be adjusted from this date in accordance with the underlying consumer price index for subsequent financial quarters.  It is recommended that you contact Council to ascertain the indexed value of the contribution prior to payment.

42.     Planter Boxes/On slab planting

On slab planter boxes must include automatic irrigation, subsoil drainage (proprietary drainage cell, 50mm sand and filter fabric) waterproofing, minimum 500mm planting soil for shrubs and minimum 1000mm planting soil for trees and palms and 75mm mulch to ensure sustainable landscape is achieved.

 

42A.   Garbage Compactor

 

            The garbage compactor and those who operate it and those who benefit from it must comply with the manufacturer's instructions and procedures, and all Standards, Codes of Practice, Acts and Regulations relevant to the garbage compactor.

 

42B.   Fulfilment of BASIX Commitments

 

The applicant must demonstrate the fulfilment of BASIX commitments pertaining to the development.

 

42C.   Security Intercom

 

A security intercom must be provided on the driveway entry to the car park so that visitors are able to contact the person in the unit they are visiting to release the car park roller shutter giving the visitor access to the car park. 

 

 

 

42D.   Consolidation of Allotments

 

All allotments the subject of this consent must be consolidated into one allotment.

 

Note:   The applicant is recommended to submit the plan of subdivision to consolidate allotments to the NSW Department of Lands at least 4-6 weeks prior to seeking an occupation certificate.

 

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

43.    Noise – Plant and Machinery

The level of total continuous noise emanating from operation of all the plant, including air conditioning units and processes in all buildings (LA10) (measured for at least 15 minutes) in or on the above premises, must not exceed the background level by more than 5dB(A) when measured at all property boundaries.

44.     Deleted

45.     Fire Safety Statement - Annual

On at least one occasion in every 12 month period following the date of the first ‘Fire Safety Certificate’ issued for the property, the owner must provide Council with an annual ‘Fire Safety Certificate’ to each essential service installed in the building.

46.     Landscape establishment

The landscape works must be maintained into the future to ensure the establishment and successful growth of plant material to meet the intent of the landscape design. This must include but not be limited to watering, weeding, replacement of failed plant material and promoting the growth of plants through standard industry practices.

 

46A.   Car Parking

 

All car parking must be operated in accordance with Australian Standard AS 2890.1 – 2004 – Off Street Car Parking and Australian Standard 2890.2 - 2002 – Off Street Commercial and the following requirement:

 

a.      Car parking, loading and manoeuvring areas to be used solely for nominated purposes.

 

b.      Vehicles awaiting loading, unloading or servicing shall be parked on site and not on adjacent or nearby public roads;

 

c.      All vehicular entry on to the site and egress from the site shall be made in a forward direction.

 

46B.   Car Parking

 

All parking spaces for people with disabilities must operated in accordance with Australian Standard AS/NZS 2890.6:2009 – Off-street parking for people with disabilities.

 

46C.   Site Caretaker

 

A site caretaker must be employed and be responsible for moving bins to and from the bin storage area(s) and the waste collection point, washing bins and maintaining storage areas, managing the communal composting area, arranging the prompt removal of dumped rubbish, and ensuring all residents are informed of the waste management system.

 

 

CONDITIONS OF CONCURRENCE – RailCorp

 

The following conditions of consent are from the nominated State Agency pursuant to Section 79B of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and must be complied with to the satisfaction of that Agency.

47.     Survey

The applicant must provide an accurate survey locating the development with respect to the rail boundary and rail infrastructure. This work is to be undertaken by a registered surveyor, to the satisfaction of RailCorp’s representative.

48.     Geotechnical, Structural Stability and Integrity

The applicant must provide a geotechnical engineering report to RailCorp for review by RailCorp’s Geotechnical section prior to the commencement of works. The report must demonstrate that the development has no negative impact on the rail corridor or the integrity of the infrastructure through its loading and ground deformation and must contain structural design details/analysis for review by RailCorp. The report must include the potential impact of demolition and excavation induced vibration in rail facilities and loadings imposed on RailCorp facilities by the development.

49.     Aerial Operations

Prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate, the applicant must submit to RailCorp a plan showing all craneage and other aerial operations for the development and must comply with all RailCorp requirements. The Principal Certifying Authority must not issue the Construction Certificate until written confirmation has been received from RailCorp confirming that this condition has been satisfied.

50.     Fencing

Prior to the commencement of works appropriate fencing must be installed along the rail corridor to prevent unauthorised access to the rail corridor. Details of the type of fencing and the method of erection area to be to RailCorp’s satisfaction prior to the fencing work being undertaken. RailCorp may provide supervision, at the developer’s cost, for the erection of the new fencing.

51.     Scaffolding

No scaffolding is to be used within 6 horizontal metres of the rail corridor unless prior written approval has been obtained from RailCorp. To obtain approval, the applicant will be required to submit details of the scaffolding, the means of erecting and securing this scaffolding, the material to be used, and the type of screening to be installed to prevent falling onto the rail corridor.

- END OF CONDITIONS -

 

 

ADVISORY NOTES

 

The following information is provided for your assistance to ensure compliance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, other relevant legislation and Council’s policies and specifications.  This information does not form part of the conditions of development consent pursuant to Section 80A of the Act.

 

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 requirements

 

The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 requires:

 

·          The issue of a construction certificate prior to the commencement of any works.  Enquiries regarding the issue of a construction certificate can be made to Council’s Customer Services Branch on 9847 6760.

 

·          A principal certifying authority to be nominated and Council notified of that appointment prior to the commencement of any works.

 

·          Council to be given at least two days written notice prior to the commencement of any works.

 

·          Mandatory inspections of nominated stages of the construction inspected.

 

·          An occupation certificate to be issued before occupying any building or commencing the use of the land.

 

Long Service Levy 

 

In accordance with Section 34 of the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986, a ‘Long Service Levy’ must be paid to the Long Service Payments Corporation or Hornsby Council.

 

Note:   The rate of the Long Service Levy is 0.35% of the total cost of the work.

 

Note:   Hornsby Council requires the payment of the Long Service Levy prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

 

Disability Discrimination Act

 

The applicant’s attention is drawn to the existence of the Disability Discrimination Act.  A construction certificate is required to be obtained for the proposed building/s, which will provide consideration under the Building Code of Australia, however, the development may not comply with the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act.  This is the sole responsibility of the applicant.

 

Advertising Signage – Separate DA Required

 

This consent does not permit the erection or display of any advertising signs.  Most advertising signs or structures require development consent.  Applicants should make separate enquiries with Council prior to erecting or displaying any advertising signage.

 

Subdivision Certificate Requirements – Deleted

Subdivision – Lodgement of Plan  - Deleted

Fees and Charges – Subdivision

 

All fees payable to Council as part of any construction, compliance or subdivision certificate or inspection associated with the development (including the registration of privately issued certificates) are required to be paid in full prior to the issue of the subdivision certificate.  Any additional Council inspections beyond the scope of any compliance certificate required to verify compliance with the terms of this consent will be charged at the individual inspection rate nominated in Council's Fees and Charges Schedule.

 

Dial Before You Dig

 

Prior to commencing any works, the applicant is encouraged to contact Dial Before You Dig on 1100 or www.dialbeforeyoudig.com.au for free information on potential underground pipes and cables within the vicinity of the development site.

 

Asbestos Warning

 

Should asbestos or asbestos products be encountered during demolition or construction works you are advised to seek advice and information should be prior to disturbing the material. It is recommended that a contractor holding an asbestos-handling permit (issued by WorkCover NSW) be engaged to manage the proper handling of the material. Further information regarding the safe handling and removal of asbestos can be found at:

 

www.environment.nsw.gov.au

www.nsw.gov.au/fibro

www.adfa.org.au

www.workcover.nsw.gov.au

 

Alternatively, telephone the WorkCover Asbestos and Demolition Team on 8260 5885.

 

Unit Numbering

 

Unit numbering can only be authorised by Council.  Before proceeding to number each premise in the development, the allocation of numbers is required to be obtained from Council's Planning Division.  The authorised numbers are required to be displayed in a clear manner at or near the main entrance to each premise.


 

Planning Report No. PLN25/12

Date of Meeting: 16/05/2012

 

9        DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - PROPOSED TWO STOREY MIXED-USE DEVELOPMENT COMPRISING SIX COMMERCIAL AND RETAIL UNITS,  TWELVE RESIDENTIAL UNITS AND BASEMENT CAR PARKING
25 - 29 TURNER ROAD, BEROWRA HEIGHTS
   

 

 

Development Application No:

DA/1384/2011

Description of Proposal:

Proposed two storey mixed-use development comprising six commercial and retail units,  twelve residential units and basement car parking

Property Description:

Lot 100 DP 1043150, Nos. 25 – 29 Turner Road, Berowra Heights

Applicant:

Yimlook No 2 Pty Ltd

Owner:

Yimlook No 2 Pty Ltd

Statutory Provisions:

Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994

Business A (General) Zone

Estimated Value:

$ 2.6 million

Ward:

A

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT Development Application No. 1384/2011 for a proposed two storey mixed-use development comprising six commercial and retail units,  twelve residential units and basement car parking at Lot 100 DP 1043150, Nos. 25 – 29 Turner Road, Berowra Heights be approved subject to the conditions of consent detailed in Schedule 1 of Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN25/12.

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

1.         The application proposes the construction of a two storey mixed use development comprising six commercial/retail units and two residential units on the ground floor and ten residential units on the first floor with basement car parking.

 

2.         The proposal generally complies with the provisions of the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 and Council’s Business Lands Development Control Plan.

 

4.         111 submissions have been received in respect of the application upon notification and 31 submissions received upon re-notification of the application.

 

5.         It is recommended that the application be approved.

 

HISTORY OF THE SITE

 

On 13 November 2001, Council approved DA/2023/2001 for the subdivision of one allotment into two. The subject property (Lot 100 DP 1043150) was created as a result of this subdivision.

 

On 18 December 2002, Council refused DA/1838/2002 for the erection of a three-storey residential flat building comprising twenty-eight units and basement car parking. An appeal was lodged with the Land and Environment Court against Council’s refusal of the application. On 11 July 2003 the Land and Environment Court dismissed the appeal.

 

On 3 March 2004, Council refused DA/1906/2003 for the erection of a three-storey mixed use development comprising ten commercial units, sixteen residential units and basement car parking.

 

On 3 August 2005, Council refused DA/1587/2004 for the erection of a three-storey mixed used development comprising seven commercial units, fifteen residential units and basement car park.

 

On 6 April 2006, Council adopted the revised Turner Road Commercial Centre Masterplan. The subject property is subject to the requirements of the Masterplan.

 

On 6 October 2010, Council approved a medium density multi-unit housing development on the site comprising ten, two-storey townhouses with basement car parking.

 

HISTORY OF THE APPLICATION

 

The subject development application was lodged with Council on 16 December 2011. The development initially incorporated a part three storey mixed-use development comprising thirteen residential units and six retail/commercial units. Upon notification of the development application, Council received 111 submissions objecting to the proposal.

 

Council Officers subsequently conducted meetings with the applicant and residents regarding the matters raised in the community submission. The applicant amended the proposed in response to the issues raised and submitted amended plans for a two-storey mixed use development comprising six commercial/retail units and twelve residential units.  Council received 31 submissions in response to the exhibition of the amended plans.

 

THE SITE

 

The subject property is a vacant allotment located on the south-western side of Turner Road at its intersection with Kita Road and Cambewarra Crescent. It has an area of 2458m2.

 

The site is ‘L’ shaped, with frontages of 88 metres and 51 metres to Turner and Kita Roads, respectively. The allotment slopes gradually (2.9 % slope) towards the northern corner at the junction of the three roads. One mature pine tree is located within the road reserve at the northern corner of the site.

 

A right-of-carriageway burdens the south-eastern and south-western section of the site benefitting the shopping centre (Lot 101 DP 1043150 and CP/SP47866) at the rear. The right-of-carriageway is 11.5 metres wide along the south-eastern boundary narrowing down to 6.2 metres across part of the south-western boundary. This right-of-way (ROW) provides access to the site, the hardware store (Lot 101) and the basement carpark of the shopping centre (CP/SP47866).

 

The width of the constructed driveway pavement within the ROW is 6.7 metres. A landscape strip and a concrete footpath also form part of the ROW and provide pedestrian access to the sites at the rear. The concrete footway is 2.4 metres wide.

 

The site is surrounded by predominantly single and two storey dwellings located on Kita Road and on the opposite side of Turner Road.  The Berowra Village Centre and Marketplace shopping centre are in close proximity and the site is adjoined to the rear by a retail hardware store. Commercial developments in the business precinct comprise a mixture of one and two storey buildings.

 

THE PROPOSAL

 

The proposal involves the erection of a two storey mixed-use development on the site including six commercial/retail units and twelve residential units. Two residential units would be located on the ground floor and the remaining ten residential units on the upper floor. The car parking for the development is to be primarily accommodated within the basement with thirteen commercial/retail car spaces located at the ground floor level.  A landscaped public open space area is proposed at the corner of Turner Road and Kita Road and would be utilised in conjunction with the retail or commercial uses.

 

The details of the development are provided below:

 

Commercial Component:

 

The ground floor commercial units are to be directly accessed from Turner Road. The two retail units at the corner of Turner Road and Kita Road are to be accessed via the pedestrian entrance from Kita Road. Secondary entrances to the commercial units and public toilets are provided at the rear fronting the right-of-way. The commercial/retail units vary in size between 105m2 and 154m2.

 

The gross floor area of the commercial/retail premises including the services is 850.7m2.

 

Residential Component:

 

The development involves the construction of twelve residential units.

 

The two residential units on the ground floor would have individual access from Kita Road. The units would include courtyard spaces at the rear (south-east) and would be separated from the commercial use.

 

Ten residential units are proposed to be located on the upper floor. The units are to be accessed via a lift located in the common lobby leading to a 1.4 metre wide open air walkway on the upper floor acting as the circulation corridor for the residences. The units would be north-south or east-west orientated with balconies fronting Turner Road or Kita Road. The bedrooms of the north-south orientated units would front a secondary private open space area (open air) adjoining the circulation corridor. The private open space areas would be screened from the corridor via a 1.5 metre high privacy screen and planter boxes.

 

The gross floor area of the residential component is 1426.4m2.


Car parking and access

 

The proposal retains the existing access to the site from Turner Road via the right-of-way. A ramp is proposed at the south-western end of this right-of-way leading to the basement. A total of twenty-two residential spaces, three visitors’ parking spaces and twenty-five commercial/retail car spaces are proposed at the basement level with disabled car spaces. Thirteen covered car spaces dedicated for commercial use and one loading bay are proposed to be located adjoining the driveway at the ground floor level.

 

The 6.7 metre wide driveway located along the south-eastern boundary is to be widened and upgraded as a part of the development. This would result in the replacement of part of the existing landscape strip and concrete pathway on the south-eastern boundary by a variable width pathway in the same location.

 

ASSESSMENT

 

The development application has been assessed having regard to the ‘Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036’, the ‘North Subregion (Draft) Subregional Strategy’ and the matters for consideration prescribed under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the Act).  The following issues have been identified for further consideration.

 

1.   STRATEGIC CONTEXT

 

1.1       Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036 and (Draft) North Subregional Strategy

 

The Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036 is a broad framework to secure Sydney’s place in the global economy by promoting and managing growth.  It outlines a vision for Sydney to 2036; the challenges faced, and the directions to follow to address these challenges and achieve the vision.  The Draft North Subregional Strategy acts as a framework for Council in its preparation of the Comprehensive LEP by the end of 2012.

 

The Draft North Subregional Strategy sets the following targets for the Hornsby LGA by 2031:

 

·     Employment capacity to increase by 9,000 jobs; and

 

·     Housing stock to increase by 11,000 dwellings.

 

The proposed development would be consistent with the draft Strategy by providing twelve additional dwelling units that would contribute towards housing choice in the locality. The development would also result in the generation of additional jobs in the locality by providing commercial and retail units.

 

2.         STATUTORY CONTROLS

 

Section 79C(1)(a) requires Council to consider any relevant environmental planning instruments, draft environmental planning instruments, development control plans, planning agreements and other prescribed matters.

 

2.1       Hornsby Local Environmental Plan 1994

 

The subject land is zoned Business A (General) Zone under the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 (HSLEP).  The objectives of the zone are:

 

(a)       to encourage economic growth and employment opportunities.

 

(b)       to accommodate the retail, commercial and social needs of the community.

 

(c)        to encourage development that improves the health, vitality, cultural environment and social environment within the area.

 

The proposed uses are defined as “business premises”, “shops” and “multi-unit housing” under the HSLEP and are permissible in the zone with Council’s consent.

 

The proposed development involves a mixed-use development in a business zone. The proposal would support and strengthen the economy of the businesses in the locality. It would accommodate the social needs of the community and improve the health, vitality, cultural and social environment of the area. Given the above, it is considered that the proposal is consistent with the zone objectives.

 

Clause 15(2) of the HSLEP prescribes that the maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of development for the purpose of mixed use, comprising multi-unit housing and other developments within the Business A zone is 1:1 for the development as a whole and 0.6:1 for such part of the development as comprises multi-unit housing.  The applicant addresses this requirement as follows:

 

·       FSR for the entire development: 0.93:1

 

·       FSR for the residential component: 0.58:1

 

Clause 18 of the HSLEP sets out heritage conservation provisions for Hornsby Shire. The street trees within the Turner Road reserve and the property at No. 24 Turner Road are listed as heritage items of local significance pursuant to Schedule D of the HSLEP.  A heritage assessment of the impact of the development identifies that no trees within the road reserve directly adjoin the site. The proposal would not have any impact on the heritage listed trees. The house at No. 24 Turner Road is located on the opposite side of the road and at a considerable distance from the proposed development. Accordingly, it is concluded that the development would not result in any adverse impact on the heritage significance of this item and is assessed as satisfactory in this regard.

 

2.2       State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 - Remediation of Land

 

The application has been assessed against the requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55.  This Policy provides State-wide planning controls for soil contamination and proposed remedies.

 

The site has been vacant and does not have a history of land uses which would typically result in soil contamination. Accordingly, no further assessment in this regard is considered necessary.

 

2.3       State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

 

The application has been assessed against the requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX)   2004.

 

The proposal includes a BASIX Certificate for the proposed units and is considered to be satisfactory.

2.4       Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 – Hawkesbury Nepean River

 

The application has been assessed against the requirements of Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 (SREP 20). This Policy provides controls to protect the environment of the Hawkesbury-Nepean system, including its water quality. SREP 20 addresses matters related to water quality, significant vegetation habitats, extraction, environmental heritage and scenic quality, recreation and tourism, and agriculture.

 

The proposal is consistent with the environmental capability of the site and includes a satisfactory Stormwater Management Plan. Subject to implementation of recommended conditions relating to sediment and erosion control, the development would prevent adverse impacts on water quality. The development complies with SREP 20 in this regard.

 

2.5       Berowra Cowan Development Control Plan

 

The application has been assessed against the requirements of the Berowra Cowan Development Control Plan. The Plan aims to provide a detailed planning strategy and development guidelines to protect the natural and built environment of the Berowra Cowan area. The compliance of the proposal with the relevant strategies within this DCP is discussed below:

 

2.5.1    Residential Strategy

 

The proposed development complies with the Residential Strategy element of the DCP as it would provide medium/high density shop-top housing in an area which is connected to a bus route and is located in close proximity to the commercial, retail and medical facilities of Berowra Heights.

 

2.5.2    Commercial Strategy

 

The Commercial Strategy of the DCP identifies that development should make efficient use of under-utilized land and encourage integration of housing within the business precincts wherever possible. The Turner Road Commercial Centre Masterplan, incorporated in the Berowra Cowan Development Control Plan, applies to the subject site. The proposal complies with this requirement by providing a mixed use development integrating commercial and residential uses in accordance with Masterplan.

 

2.6       Business Lands Development Control Plan

 

The application has been assessed against the requirements of the Business Lands Development Control Plan (BLDCP). The BLDCP applies to the site, being located in a Business A Zone.

 

As discussed above, the Turner Road Commercial Centre Masterplan applies to the site. The compliance of the overall proposal with the masterplan incorporated in the BLDCP is discussed in Section 2.7 of this report.


 

2.6.1    Residential Development

 

The BLDCP encourages shop-top housing within a business zone that integrates with the relevant commercial precinct. The proposed development complies with the objectives of the element in this regard.

 

Private Open Space

 

The BLDCP does not include any prescriptive measures regarding provision of private open spaces for shop-top housing. Notwithstanding, balconies and secondary private open space areas have been provided for each unit with a minimum area of 14 m2. Given that the units form part of shop-top housing and vary in size between 85 and 125 m2, the provision of the private open space is considered to be satisfactory.

 

Storage Areas

 

The development includes storage spaces for the residential units at the basement level and is considered to be satisfactory.

 

Communal open space

 

The BLDCP does not require the provision of communal open space for the residential component of the development. The site is located in close proximity to a public open space and park at the corner of Berowra Waters Road and Turner Road. This open space would be available to address the needs of the future occupants.

 

Solar Access and Natural Ventilation

 

The BLDCP does not include any prescriptive measures regarding provision of solar access to the dwelling units within mixed-use developments.

 

The living areas of all units would receive three hours of solar access between 9 am and 3 pm during winter solstice.  Furthermore, the primary private open space areas of the majority of the units would be north and east facing, receiving 3 hours of solar access during the winter solstice.  The north-facing private open space areas would include pergolas and operable louvers to provide shade when required. The rear yards of units 1 and 2 (located on the ground floor) would be overshadowed during the winter solstice. However, the front yards would receive sufficient solar access during the day. Given this, the application is assessed as satisfactory.

 

The east-west facing units and the corner units would receive appropriate cross-ventilation.  The applicant advises that north-south orientated units fronting Turner Road, on the upper floor, would receive cross ventilation through the bedrooms which open into the secondary private open space area at the rear. This is considered acceptable.

 

2.7       Turner Road Commercial Centre Masterplan

 

The Turner Road Commercial Centre Masterplan  as contained within the Berowa/Cown, Business Lands and Medium Density Multi-Unit Housing DCPs, provides planning principles, strategies and the specific development controls for the locality. Compliance of the proposal with the development controls within the Masterplan is discussed below:

 

2.7.1    Desired Future Character

 

The Masterplan envisages the continuation of commercial uses within the Turner Road Commercial Centre and identifies the subject property to be suitable for two-storey mixed use (commercial/residential) development with medium density shop-top housing on the upper floor, below ground car parking, landscape treatment  and integration with the adjoining shopping complex.

 

The application proposes a building on the site which resembles the profile as delineated in the Masterplan. It incorporates commercial/retail uses on the ground floor with access via the existing driveway off Turner Road. The commercial uses would integrate with the adjoining retail commercial uses in the precinct. The shop-top housing resembles medium density developments elsewhere in the Shire and would incorporate satisfactory amenity for the future residents.

 

It is considered that the proposal would be consistent with the Metropolitan Strategy by improving housing choice in the locality and achieve the desired future character of the precinct as envisaged in the Masterplan.

 

2.7.2    Design Objectives and Height

 

The development would result in a two-storey development blending with the adjoining low-density areas in accordance with the two storey maximum height limit and design objectives of the Masterplan. The design would result in a well defined corner treatment with a raised parapet and fin walls forming a landmark element.

 

The development proposes a height of 5 metres for the commercial and residential units on the ground floor and 3 metres for the upper level units.  The development would present an overall height of 8 metres which would increase to 10.3 metres at the corner. The Masterplan does not stipulate any height limit for the precinct in metres.  However, the proposed height is comparable to the two storey building at the corner of Berowra Water Road and Turner Road (Berowra Village Shopping Centre) which has a maximum height of 10.6 metres. Given the mixed use nature and the prominent location, the height of the building is considered to be satisfactory and the development would not overshadow public areas or streets.

 

The proposal incorporates earth colours for the facades that would blend with the Berowra Shopping Village at the corner of Turner and Berowra Waters Road. Appropriate landscaping is proposed at the corner of Turner Road and Kita Road to activate the frontage and provide an extended public open space. The proposal would provide outdoor liveable space in accordance with active living principles.

 

2.7.3    Building Design

 

The proposed development would comply with the desired form within the Masterplan as it incorporates ground floor retail and commercial premises. It provides landscaped areas in accordance with the Masterplan and an active street frontage with pedestrian access to the ground floor units and the commercial premises from the street.

 

The building design would be contemporary with skillion roof and a well articulated façade. The flat roof would assist to reduce the overall bulk with the parapet at the corner being the highest element. The corner element would be screened to some extent by the existing pine tree and would present a desirable design outcome for the site. The front elevations of each of the units would incorporate a balcony at the upper level intercepted by projecting solid walls. The lower floor would incorporate glass walls on the ground floor to reflect the commercial use. The materials and colours used would include face brick and rendered finishes as encouraged by the Masterplan. The proposal incorporates underground parking that does not protrude above natural ground, reducing the overall bulk of the development.

 

2.7.4    Setbacks

 

The Masterplan specifies zero setbacks to street frontages and a 10 metre setback to the corner of Kita Road and Turner Road.  The development complies with the above setbacks by proposing an open space at the corner with a 10 metres setback from the boundary, zero setbacks to Turner Road and a setback of 1.5 metres from the southern boundary. This would ensure active street frontage along with scope for landscaping at the corner.

 

2.7.5    Street Level Design

 

The design of the development includes a well articulated façade to achieve a varied built form to avoid a monotonous streetscape. The design would maintain a continuous frontage as desired in the Masterplan and clearly define the corner.

 

2.7.6    Safety and Security

 

The development is designed to provide an active street frontage. Balconies and windows are provided at the front and the rear respectively for passive surveillance by residents. The commercial uses are separated from the residential uses wherever possible to provide additional security for the residents.

 

The development is assessed as satisfactory against safety and security provisions as outlined within the Masterplan.

 

2.7.7    Acoustics

 

The design of the development and the site layout incorporates the following acoustic attenuation measures:

 

·       The living areas are located fronting Turner Road with bedrooms located at the rear.

 

·       The commercial uses are located on the ground floor and the residential uses on the upper floor.

 

·       The ground floor residential units are setback from the Kita Road frontage.

 

·       The applicant advises in the Statement of Environmental Effects that the construction and design of the development complies with Council’s “Code of Practise for Sound Insulation-External Noise Component” and Council’s “Code of Practise for Sound Insulation-Internal Noise Component”.

 

The above design elements would contribute towards maintaining acoustic privacy for future occupants. It is noted that the rear yards of units 1 and 2 would be located in close proximity of the vehicular ramp to the basement.  To reduce adverse acoustic impact on the residents due to the vehicular access, a condition of consent would require the construction of a 1.8 metre high solid fence along the boundary separating the backyard of unit 2 from the basement ramp and the adjoining shopping complex.

 

A condition is also recommended requiring the building to be designed and constructed to comply with the criteria as outlined within Code of Practise for Sound Insulation of Residential Buildings, for all noise intrusion from external noises (including mechanical services noise from within the development itself) with windows and doors closed.

 

Subject to the implementation of the above conditions, the application is assessed as satisfactory with regard to acoustic privacy.

 

2.8     Car Parking Development Control Plan

 

The application has been assessed against the requirements of Council’s Car Parking Development Control Plan. The following table sets out the proposal’s compliance with the prescriptive requirements of the Plan:

Car Parking Development Control Plan

Control

Proposal

Requirement

Compliance

Total Car parking - residential

22

22

Yes

Total Car parking – visitors

3

3 @ 1 per 5 units

Yes

Total Car parking – retail/commercial

38

38@1 per 20 m2 of GLFA

Yes

 

As indicated in the above table, the development complies with the prescriptive requirements of the Car Parking DCP with regard to the total number of car spaces provided on site. The car spaces for the commercial component have been calculated assuming that all the developments would be utilised as retail premises in the future. The commercial and residential parking areas are proposed to be physically separated. Conditions of consent would also require that residential visitors have 24 hours access to the visitors’ spaces which can be acheived by an intercom system.

 

A loading bay is provided adjoining the right-of-way in close proximity to the entrance. The loading bay is capable of accommodating a medium-rigid delivery vehicle and a 9.7 metre long garbage truck. The driveway would be widened to accommodate the turning circle for the garbage truck and this is assessed as satisfactory. The proposal also complies with the relevant Australian Standards with regard to aisle widths and the ramp gradients and is assessed as satisfactory with regard to access, parking and loading/unloading facilities.

 

2.9       Access and Mobility Development Control Plan

 

The proposed development has been assessed having regard to the relevant performance and prescriptive design requirements within Council’s Access and Mobility Development Control Plan (the Mobility DCP)

 

The development includes one adaptable unit with barrier free access from the basement via the lift and the common access way. Toilet facilities are provided on the ground floor for all commercial units with disabled access.

 

The residential parking space corresponding to the adaptable unit is 3.2 metres wide and is assessed as satisfactory. The proposal does not include 4 disabled spaces for the commercial component. Accordingly, a condition of consent is recommended that the construction certificate plans should include 4 disabled spaces in the basement/ground floor and the spaces be widened to 3.2 metres.

 

Subject to the implementation of the above conditions, the development is considered acceptable with regard to disabled access.

 

2.10     Waste Management and Minimisation Development Control Plan

 

The proposal includes a shared bin area for the ten residential units on the upper floor. The bin area is proposed to be located within 6 metres of the entrance to the site. The shared commercial bin area is proposed to be located adjoining the residential bin storage area, but separated by a wall. 

 

The proposal includes a waste management plan and details of on-going waste management with garbage truck access for Council’s 9.7 metre long truck within the site to collect the waste.  The truck would be parked within the loading bay with the commercial and residential bin areas located adjacent to the parking area.

 

The two residential units on the ground floor would include individual bins and the garbage collection would occur at the Kita Road frontage.  The application is assessed as satisfactory in this regard.

 

2.11     Sustainable Water Development Control Plan

 

Subject to sediment and erosion control measures being implemented on site during construction, the proposal would comply with the requirements contained within the Sustainable Water Development Control Plan.

 

2.12     Section 94 Contributions Plan

 

Council’s Section 94 Plan applies to the development as it would result in the generation of additional residential and commercial floor space and car parking requirements on the site.  The requirement for a monetary Section 94 contribution has been imposed as a recommended condition of development consent.

 

3.   ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

 

Section 79C(1)(b) of the Act requires Council to consider “the likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impacts in the locality”.

 

3.1       Natural Environment

 

3.1.1    Trees

 

The proposed development would not necessitate the removal of any trees from the site. A significant pine tree is located on the landscape verge at the corner of Turner Road and Kita Road. A condition of consent is recommended regarding the retention of the tree.

 

Subject to the implementation of the above condition the development would not have any adverse impact on the natural environment.

 

3.1.2    Water

 

The proposed development would drain to Kita Road via an on-site detention system proposed under the commercial car spaces adjoining the driveway at the rear. A pump-out system is proposed for draining water from the basement.

2              

Subject to compliance with the conditions regarding stormwater management on the site and appropriate sediment-erosion control measures being implemented, the proposal would not have an adverse impact on the water quality of the Hawkesbury-Nepean Catchment.

 

3.2       Built Environment

 

The matters in relation to the impact of the development on the built environment have been discussed in section 2 of this report. The additional matter of traffic generation is discussed below.

 

3.2.1    Traffic Generation

 

The submitted Traffic Report indicates that the residential component of the development would generate 8 vehicular trips during AM peak hour.

 

In accordance with Guide to Traffic Generating Developments published by NSW Transport Roads and Maritime Services, the proposed development would result in a trip generation of 29 vehicles during the AM peak, assuming that all units would be developed as speciality shops. Therefore, the total traffic anticipated to be generated by the mixed-use development during the AM peak hour would be 37 vehicle trips. Council’s traffic assessment of the proposed concludes that the traffic generation of 37 vehicle trips during the peak periods would not have a major impact on the existing road network.

 

Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) crash data indicates one crash at the intersection of Turner Road, Kita Road and Cambewarra Crescent in the last five years of available crash data.  Therefore, the intersection is not inherently unsafe.

 

Council’s traffic assessment recommends that the Kita Road frontage to the development be sign posted as “NO PARKING”.  The provision of “NO PARKING” would be subject to Hornsby Local Traffic committee concurrence and would discourage residents and customers from parking on Kita Road and to maintain the two lanes for traffic. Should the development application be approved, Council’s Traffic Branch would be advised to progress the above recommendation.

 

The development would provide satisfactory parking arrangements within the site and would not significantly increase traffic generation in the locality.  Council’s engineering assessment of the traffic impacts of the development is considered to be satisfactory. 

 

3.3       Social Impacts

 

The proposed development would result in an additional 750m2 of gross leasable commercial/retail floor space within the locality in accordance with the Turner Road Commercial Centre Masterplan which in turn would generate employment in the area.

 

The development would also improve housing choice in the locality by providing twelve additional residential-units in the form of shop-top housing.  This is consistent with the draft North Subregional Strategy.

 

3.4       Economic Impacts

 

The proposed development would result in an increase in the total commercial/retail floor space within the Turner Road commercial centre contributing to the vitality of the Centre as a place to work and shop.

 

4.   SITE SUITABILITY

 

Section 79C(1)(c) of the Act requires Council to consider “the suitability of the site for the development”.

 

The land is not subject to bushfire risk or flooding. No further assessment with regard to bushfire is required.

 

The site is considered to be suitable for the proposed development. The suitability of the site for the proposed development is discussed in detail in section 2.7 of this report.

 

5.         PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

 

Section 79C(1)(d) of the Act requires Council to consider “any submissions made in accordance with this Act”.

 

5.1       Community Consultation

 

The proposed development was placed on public exhibition and was notified to adjoining and nearby landowners between 12 January 2012 and 16 February 2012 in accordance with Council’s Notification and Exhibition Development Control Plan.  During this period, Council received 111 submissions from 103 residents including 110 letters of objections and 1 letter of support. The application was amended to address the matters raised in the community submissions and was renotified between 1 March 2012 and 15 March 2012. During this period, Council received 31 submissions from 27 residents objecting to the development. The map below illustrates the location of those nearby landowners who made a submission that are in close proximity to the development site.


 

 

NOTIFICATION PLAN

 

 

 

•      PROPERTIES NOTIFIED

 

 

 

 

X     SUBMISSIONS

         RECEIVED

 

 

          PROPERTY SUBJECT OF DEVELOPMENT

 

Note:

Multiple submissions have been received from the owners of 7 properties upon initial

notification

Multiple submissions have been received from the owners of 4 properties upon re-notification

48  submissions are out of map range

Owners of 24 properties have not provided postal addresses

 

111 submissions objected to the initial development, generally on the following grounds:

 

·       8.5 metres height of the proposed development.  The objections also comment that the maximum height limit for medium density multi-unit housing developments is restricted to 7 metres and the development does not comply with this requirement;

 

·       The application would result in unacceptable impact on traffic in the area;

 

·       Berowra Heights does not need any further retail or commercial premises;

 

·       Medium density townhouse type developments are suitable for the site;

 

·       The development would result in insufficient on-site car parking provision resulting in cars being parked within the IGA shopping complex, in front of the hardware store and on the street;

 

·       The parking requirements cannot be assessed without knowing the future uses of the units;

 

·       The location of car space number 15 is close to the basement ramp and is considered unsafe;

 

·       The residential units lack satisfactory amenity;

 

·       The units do not include sufficient private open space;

 

·       No communal open space has been provided in conjunction with the development;

 

·       The private open space areas for the residential units would be overshadowed during winter solstice;

 

·       The development would overshadow adjoining dwellings and public spaces;

 

·       The adaptable unit does not have a direct barrier free access to the basement car park;

 

·       The proposal does not include a detailed plan of the commercial units on the ground floor;

 

·       The proposal would cause inappropriate impact on evacuation of residents during bushfires;

 

·       The area does not have sufficient water for bushfire fighting purposes. This development would aggravate the situation;

 

·       The development would be unsafe and increase accidents in the area;

 

·       The building design style is not in keeping with the area;

 

·       The proposed landscaping is not satisfactory;

 

·       Council’s planning report regarding DA/616/2010 supports that further commercial development is not required in Berowra Heights;

 

·       Insufficient details have been provided regarding the ownership of the right-of-carriageway and easement. It is likely that the provisions of the right-of-carriageway are restricted to the current owners of 25-29 Turner Road;

 

·       The elevations for the eastern side and western side have been incorrectly marked;

 

·       No provisions for garbage storage and collection have been provided;

 

·       The development does not cater for delivery vehicles and the location of the loading dock is unsafe;

 

·       The parking and manoeuvring areas do not comply with the relevant Australian Standards;

 

·       The balconies of the units at the corner of Turner and Kita road would overlook onto the backyard of the property at the corner of Kita Road, Turner Road and Cambewarra Crescent;

 

·       The site should be retained as open space;

 

·       The development would be located in close proximity to a newly constructed mobile tower and would not be close to the railway line;

 

·       The underground car park would be prone to flooding;

 

·       The development would result in lack of safe pedestrian movement;

 

·       The balconies would be used as drying areas;

 

·       The area of the right-of-carriageway should be deleted when calculating the floor space ratio;

 

·       The proposal is inconsistent with State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65, Business Lands Development Control Plan, Berowra Cowan Development Control Plan, Medium Density Multi-Unit Housing Development Control Plan;

 

·       The development includes an unsatisfactory stormwater management plan and would create unreasonable pressure to the water supply in the locality;

 

·       The development would result in loss of significant trees;

 

·       The development application has not been correctly notified;

 

·       The uses of the commercial development would utilise the parking spots allocated to No. 16 Kita Road;

 

Additionally, one of the objections has raised issues in relation to a mobile phone tower proposed to be located on 16 Kita Road. The objection is not considered relevant to the current application.

 

As stated earlier in the report, the application has been amended to reduce the height to two-storeys. The amended application was renotified and 31 submissions were received from 27 residents. The submissions reiterate the above objections and additionally raised the following concerns:

 

·       The draft HSLEP 2011 specifies the height limit on the site to be 8.5 metres;

 

·       The topography of the site is such that the overall height for Unit 1 would be 8.8 metres which is unacceptable;

 

·       Taking the topography of the land into consideration, the ceiling height for the ground floor should be increased, which would then increase the number of stairs and reduce the available open space in the upper floor;

 

·       The proposal would result in removal of the pedestrian walkway;

 

·       The driveway is not suitable for the site and the intensity of the development;

 

·       Reversing of garbage trucks to and from the right-of-way is not appropriate.

 

The merits of the matters raised in community submissions have been addressed in the body of the report with the exception of the following:

 

5.1.1    Inconsistencies with State Policies and Development Control Plans and non-compliance with the height limit

 

The height of the proposed development is two storeys. Therefore State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 and the Residential Flat Design Code do not apply to the development.

 

HSLEP does not incorporate any height limit for the site. The height of the development is specified as two-storeys in the Turner Road Commercial Centre Masterplan. The matter has been discussed in detail in Section 2.7 of this report. The Medium Density Multi-Unit Housing Development Control Plan does not apply to land zoned Business A.  Therefore, the applicable height limits for medium density multi-unit housing developments do not apply to this site.

 

The minor numerical non-compliances with regard to car parking dimensions can be rectified by conditions of consent.

 

5.1.2    Incorrect floor levels in plans

 

The floor levels, contours and the ceiling heights have been assessed as correct and satisfactory.

 

5.1.3    Insufficient information regarding the right-of-carriageway

 

The existing ROW forms part of the subject site and benefits the Marketplace Shopping Centre and the hardware store. The documents in relation to the Deposited Plan pertaining to the site are considered to be correct and sufficient. No further owners’ consent or approvals are required prior to determination of the development application.

 

5.1.3    Details of commercial units

 

The plans submitted with the application indicate that up to six commercial or retail units can be accommodated within the site. The parking for the development has been calculated considering all units to have a retail use with a higher parking demand. The proposal complies with Council’s Car Parking Development Control Plan in this regard.  Future internal fit-outs could be approved as complying developments pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008.

 

 

 

 

5.1.4    Impact of the balconies on the privacies of the adjoining properties

 

A number of submissions raise concerns that the north facing balconies would overlook onto the properties on the opposite side of Turner Road. It is noted that the front façade of the dwelling-houses on the opposite side of Turner Road would be located at a distance of 22 – 30 metres from the development. Further, only front setback areas would be visible from the balconies. Given that these areas do not form the private open space areas, the impact on the privacy of these properties is considered to be negligible.

 

One submission raises concerns that the balconies for units 5 and 6 would overlook onto the rear yard of the property at the corner of Kita Road, Turner Road and Cambewarra Crescent (diagonally opposite to the site). The dwelling-house is located at a distance of 60 metres from the corner of the development. The property in question includes a solid fence at the corner and is screened by existing trees. The owner of the property has advised that the trees are declining.  However, the trees provide a dense screen and currently exist at the corner. The balconies for unit 5 would be further screened by the existing pine tree at the corner of the site.

 

Given the separation distance, the fencing and the landscape screen, it is considered that the private open space areas of the proposed units would not impact on the privacy of the dwelling house located on the diagonally opposite corner.

 

The proposed development generally follows the building footprint as delineated in the Turner Road Commercial Centre Masterplan. The development includes majority of the balconies fronting the street to avoid direct overlooking opportunities and to maximise the amenity of the future occupants.

 

5.1.5    Economic Impact assessment in DA/616/2010 and need for retail premises

 

A number of submissions have indicated that in the planning report for DA/616/2010, Council supported the justification that further retail uses are not required in the area.

 

The applicant for the previous development application on the site (DA/616/2010) had submitted documentation to Council justifying that further retail or commercial use is not required for the area. Council agreed to the justification based on the figures provided at the time of assessment of DA/616/2010 acknowledging that the application did not comply with ‘Desired Future Character’ as envisaged in the Turner Road Commercial Centre Masterplan.

 

However, the site is zoned for business proposes under the HSLEP and Council’s planning controls provide incentives for employment generating development that contributes to vitality of the Centre.  It should be acknowledged that the provision of additional commercial/retail units may improve the function of the Centre as a place to work and shop.  Additional commercial units would also provide greater opportunities for persons to work closer to home.


 

5.1.6    Bushfire evacuation

 

The site does not constitute bushfire prone land. Therefore, no further consideration of bushfire is required for assessing any development application on the site under the provisions of the Act.

 

5.1.7    Water Supply

 

The water supply in the area and any impact of development on water supply is assessed by Sydney Water. The applicant is required to demonstrate that adequate services are available for the development prior to issue of the construction certificate or the occupation certificate. This would include letters of approval from the relevant public authorities including Sydney Water.

 

5.1.8    Incorrect notification

 

The proposal was notified in accordance with Council’s Notification and Exhibition Development Control Plan which requires adjoining property owners to be notified in writing, erection of a yellow notice on the site and advertisement in the local newspaper.  The initial notification period was extended as requested by residents of the locality.

 

The amended application was re-notified and individual letters were sent to all property owners who objected to the development and included postal addresses in the submissions.

 

5.2       Public Agencies

 

The proposal was not referred to any public agencies for comments.

 

6.   THE PUBLIC INTEREST

 

Section 79C(1)(e) of the Act requires Council to consider “the public interest”.

 

The public interest is an overarching requirement, which includes the consideration of the matters discussed in this report.  Implicit to the public interest is the achievement of future built outcomes adequately responding to and respecting the future desired outcomes expressed in environmental planning instruments and development control plans.

 

The application is considered to have satisfactorily addressed Council’s and relevant agencies’ criteria and would provide a development outcome that, on balance, would result in a positive impact for the community.  Accordingly, it is considered that the approval of the proposed mixed-use development would be in the public interest.

 

7.   CONCLUSION

 

The proposal seeks approval for the erection of a two-storey mixed-use development including six commercial/retail units on the ground floor and twelve residential units including two on the ground floor and ten on the first floor with basement car parking. The proposal retains the existing right-of-way within the site and provides vehicular access to the development via the driveway.

 

The proposed development is to be located within a precinct affected by the Turner Road Commercial Centre Masterplan within Council’s Business Lands Development Control Plan. The nature of the development complies with the “Desired Future Character” as envisaged by the Masterplan.

 

The proposal is consistent with Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20, Hornsby Local Environmental Plan 1994, Council’s Business Lands, Car Parking, Sustainable Water and Access and Mobility Development Control Plans.

 

Approval of the application is recommended.

 

Note:  At the time of the completion of this planning report, no persons have made a Political Donations Disclosure Statement pursuant to Section 147(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in respect of the subject planning application.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rod Pickles

Manager - Assessment Team 2

Planning Division

 

 

 

 

James Farrington

Acting Executive Manager - Planning

Planning Division

 

 

Attachments:

1.View

Locality Plan

 

 

2.View

Site Plan

 

 

3.View

Landscape Plans

 

 

4.View

Floor Plans

 

 

5.View

Elevations, Sections and Shadow Plans

 

 

 

 

File Reference:           DA/1384/2011

Document Number:   D01884864

 


SCHEDULE 1

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS

 

The conditions of consent within this notice of determination have been applied to ensure that the use of the land and/or building is carried out in such a manner that is consistent with the aims and objectives of the relevant legislation, planning instruments and Council policies affecting the land and does not disrupt the amenity of the neighbourhood or impact upon the environment.

 

Note:  For the purpose of this consent, the term ‘applicant’ means any person who has the authority to act on or the benefit of the development consent.

 

Note:  For the purpose of this consent, any reference to an Act, Regulation, Australian Standard or publication by a public authority shall be taken to mean the gazetted Act or Regulation, or adopted Australian Standard or publication as in force on the date that the application for a construction certificate is made.

1.   Approved Plans and Supporting Documentation

The development must be carried out in accordance with the plans and documentation listed below and endorsed with Council’s stamp, except where amended by Council and/or other conditions of this consent:

 

Plan No.

Drawn by

Dated

Site/Roof Plan – A01 Issue D

Gus Fares Architects

3/04/2012

Basement and Ground Floor Plan – A02 Issue D

Gus Fares Architects

3/04/2012

First and Second Floor Plan and views – A03 Issue B

Gus Fares Architects

3/04/2012

Elevations and Daylight Access - A04 Issue D

Gus Fares Architects

3/04/2012

Sections and Shadow Diagrams – A05 Issue B

Gus Fares Architects

3/04/2012

Site Survey plan

S.Mark Bowler and Associates

1/12/2009

Landscaping Plan for Ground Floor

Grand Landscaping Design

Dec 2011

Landscaping Plan for First Floor

Grand Landscaping Design

Dec 2011

Erosion and Sediment Control Plan and Details D01-A

Australian Consulting Engineers

2/12/2011

Basement Stormwater Plan and Details D02-B

Australian Consulting Engineers

14/12/2011

Ground Floor Stormwater Plan and Drainage Details D03-B

Australian Consulting Engineers

14/12/2011

 

 

 

Document No.

Prepared by

Dated

BASIX Certificate 405978M_02

Department of Planning

19/03/2012

Traffic and Parking Statement Ref 11.12.069

Traffic Solutions Pty Ltd

13/12/2011

Waste Management Plan

Gus fares Architects

1/12/2011

2.   Amendment of Plans

i.       The approved plan no. A02 Issue C prepared by Gus fares Architects dated 19/03/2012 is to be amended as follows:

 

a.      Four disabled car parking spaces are to be included in the car parking area and dedicated for non-residential use.

 

b.      Adaptable parking spaces are to be designed in accordance with AS/NZS 2890.6:2009 Parking facilities Part 6: Off-street parking for people with disabilities. 

 

Note: The parking spaces R12 and C4 are to be widened or include a shared zone to comply with condition 2(i)(b).

 

c.      Parking spots V3 and C15 are to be widened to comply with AS/NZS 2890.1:2004 – Off-street car parking.

 

Note: The parking spaces are located adjacent to a fixed partition and require widening to comply with Condition 2(i)(c).

 

ii.       The approved “Elevations and Daylight access” Plan A04 Issue D prepared by Gus Fares dated 3/04/2012 be amended to correctly label the “East” and “West” elevations as marked in red.

 

iii.      The following approved plans must be amended to incorporate the layouts included in A02 – Issue D and A03 Issue B prepared by Gus fares Architects dated 3/04/2012 and the amendments as specified in condition 2(i):

 

Plan No.

Prepared by

Dated

Landscaping Plan for Ground Floor

Grand Landscaping Design

Dec 2011

Landscaping Plan for First Floor

Grand Landscaping Design

Dec 2011

Basement Stormwater Plan and Details D02-B

Australian Consulting Engineers

14/12/2011

Ground Floor Stormwater Plan and Drainage Details D03-B

Australian Consulting Engineers

14/12/2011

 

 

 

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

3.   Building Code of Australia

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

4.   Contract of Insurance (Residential Building Work)

In the case of residential building work for which the Home Building Act, 1989 requires there to be a contract of insurance in force in accordance with Part 6 of that Act, that such a contract of insurance is in force before any building work authorised to be carried out by the consent commences.

3   

Note:   This condition does not apply to the extent to which an exemption is in force under Clause 187 or 188 of the Act, subject to the terms of any condition or requirement referred to in Clause 187(6) or 188(4) of the Act, or to the erection of a temporary building.

5.   Notification of Home Building Act, 1989 Requirements

Residential building work within the meaning of the Home Building Act, 1989 must not be carried out unless the principal certifying authority for the development to which the work relates (not being Council) has given Council written notice of the following information:

 

a.         In the case of work for which a principal contractor is required to be appointed:

 

i.        The name and licence number of the principal contractor.

ii.       The name of the insurer by which the work is insured under Part 6 of that Act.

 

b.         In the case of work to be done by an owner-builder:

 

i.        The name of the owner-builder.

ii.       If the owner-builder is required to hold an owner-builder’s permit under that Act, the number of the owner-builder’s permit.

 

Note:   If arrangements for doing the residential building work are changed while the work is in progress so that the information notified becomes out of date, further work must not be carried out unless the principal certifying authority for the development to which the work relates (not being Council) has given Council written notification of the updated information.

6.   Water/Electricity Utility Services

The applicant must submit written evidence of the following service provider requirements:

 

a.         Energy Australia – a letter of consent demonstrating that satisfactory arrangements have been made to service the proposed development.

 

b.         Sydney Water – the submission of a ‘Notice of Requirements’ under s73 of the Sydney Water Act 1994.

 

Note:   Sydney Water requires that s73 applications are to be made through an authorised Sydney Water Servicing Coordinator.  Refer to www.sydneywater.com.au or telephone 13 20 92 for assistance.

7.   Traffic Management Plan

A Traffic Management Plan for the construction phase of the development must be prepared and submitted for approval by the Principle Certifying Authority.

8.   Acoustic requirements

            The plans must include design details to comply with the following criteria as outlined within Code of Practise for Sound Insulation of Residential Buildings, for all noise intrusion from external noises (including mechanical services noise from within the development itself) with windows and doors closed:

 

Internal space

Time Period

Repeatable Maximum

LAeq(1 hour)

Living Areas

Day or Night

Equal to or <40dBA

Sleeping Areas

Day (7 am to 10 pm)

Equal to or <40dBA

Night (10 pm and 7 am)

Equal to or <35dBA

 

Note: Repeatable maximum is the highest tenth percentile hourly A-weighted LAeq noise level.

 

A “Certificate of Compliance” prepared by a suitably qualified consultant must be provided with the plans.

9.   Design of outdoor area near existing tree to be protected

Pavers, landscaping elements and planters in the outdoor area in the near vicinity of tree No. T1 as identified in the Ground Floor Plan A-02 Issue D Dated 3/04/2012 must not impact on the critical root zone of the tree as specified in Condition 14 of this development consent.

 

Construction details for pavers and planter boxes are to be submitted with the construction certificate plans to demonstrate compliance with this requirement.

 

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

10. Erection of Construction Sign

A sign must be erected in a prominent position on any site on which building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out:

 

a.         Showing the name, address and telephone number of the principal certifying authority for the work,

 

b.         Showing the name of the principal contractor (if any) for any demolition or building work and a telephone number on which that person may be contacted outside working hours, and

 

c.         Stating that unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited.

 

Note:   Any such sign is to be maintained while the building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out, but must be removed when the work has been completed.

11. Protection of Adjoining Areas

A temporary hoarding, fence or awning must be erected between the work site and adjoining lands before the works begin and must be kept in place until after the completion of the works if the works:

 

a.         Could cause a danger, obstruction or inconvenience to pedestrian or vehicular traffic.

 

b.         Could cause damage to adjoining lands by falling objects.

 

c.         Involve the enclosure of a public place or part of a public place.

 

Note:   Notwithstanding the above, Council’s separate written approval is required prior to the erection of any structure or other obstruction on public land.

12. Toilet Facilities

Toilet facilities must be available or provided at the works site before works begin and must be maintained until the works are completed at a ratio of one toilet for every 20 persons employed at the site.  Each toilet must:

 

a.         be a standard flushing toilet connected to a public sewer; or

 

b.         be a temporary chemical closet approved under the Local Government Act, 1993; or

 

c.         have an on-site effluent disposal system approved under the Local Government Act, 1993

13. Erosion and Sediment Control

Erosion and sediment control measures must be provided and maintained throughout the construction period in accordance with the manual ‘Soils and Construction 2004 (Bluebook)’, the approved plans, Council specifications and to the satisfaction of the principal certifying authority.  The erosion and sediment control devices must remain in place until the site has been stabilised and revegetated.

 

Note:   On the spot penalties up to $1,500 may be issued for any non-compliance with this requirement without any further notification or warning.

14. Tree Protection Barriers

Tree protection fencing must be erected around trees numbered T1 as shown on the approved “Basement and Ground Floor Plan – A02 Issue D” to be retained at a 4 metre setback.  The tree fencing must be constructed of 1.8 metre ‘cyclone chainmesh fence’ or star pickets spaced at 2 metre intervals, connected by a continuous high-visibility barrier/hazard mesh at a height of 1 metre.

 

 

REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION

15. Construction Work Hours

All work on site (including demolition and earth works) must only occur between 7:00am and 5:00pm Monday to Saturday.

 

No work is to be undertaken on Sundays or public holidays.

16. Environmental Management

The site must be managed in accordance with the publication ‘Managing Urban Stormwater – Landcom (March 2004) and the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 by way of implementing appropriate measures to prevent sediment run-off, excessive dust, noise or odour emanating from the site during the construction of the development.

17. Street Sweeping

Street sweeping must be undertaken following sediment tracking from the site along Turner Road and Kita Road during works and until the site is established.

18. Works near Trees

All required tree protection measures are to be maintained in good condition for the duration of the construction period.

 

All works (including driveways and retaining walls) within four metres of any tree required to be retained (whether or not on the subject property, and pursuant to this consent or the Tree Preservation Order), must be carried out under the supervision of an ‘AQF Level 5 Arborist’ and a certificate submitted to the principal certifying authority detailing the method used to preserve the tree.

 

Note:  Except as provided above, the applicant is to ensure that no excavation, filling or stockpiling of building materials, parking of vehicles or plant, disposal of cement slurry, waste water or other contaminants is to occur within 4 metres of any tree to be retained.

19. Council Property

During construction works, no building materials, waste, machinery or related matter is to be stored on the road or footpath.  The public reserve is to be kept in a clean, tidy and safe condition at all times.

20. Landfill

Landfill must be constructed in accordance with Council’s ‘Construction Specification, 2005’ and the following requirements:

 

a.         All fill material imported to the site is to wholly consist of Virgin Excavated Natural Material (VENM) as defined in Schedule 1 of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 or a material approved under the Department of Environment and Climate Change’s general resource recovery exemption.

 

b.         A compaction certificate is to be obtained from a geotechnical engineer verifying that the specified compaction requirements have been met.

21. Excavated Material

All excavated material removed from the site must be classified in accordance with the NSW Environment Protection Authority’s Environmental Guidelines – Assessment, Classification and Management of Liquid and Non-Liquid Wastes prior to disposal to an approved waste management facility and reported to the principal certifying authority.

22. Right-of-Way

The right-of-way benefitting the adjoining properties Lot 101 DP 1043150 and CP/SP 47866 must be maintained at all times during the construction works on the site and upon completion of the development.

23. Construction Noise Management

The construction works must be undertaken in accordance with the “Interim Construction Noise Guidelines – 2009” published by DECCW.

24.       Waste Management

Waste management during the construction phase of the development must be undertaken in accordance with the approved Waste Management Plan. Additionally written record of the following items must be maintained during the removal of any waste from the site and such information submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority within fourteen days of the date of completion of the works:

a.         The identity of the person removing the waste.

 

b.         The waste carrier vehicle registration.

 

c.         Date and time of waste collection.

 

d.         A description of the waste (type of waste and estimated quantity).

 

e.         Details of the site to which the waste is to be taken.

 

f.          The corresponding tip docket/receipt from the site to which the waste is   transferred (noting date and time of delivery, description (type and quantity) of waste).

 

g.         Whether the waste is expected to be reused, recycled or go to landfill.

 

Note: In accordance with the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, the definition of waste includes any unwanted substance, regardless of whether it is reused, recycled or disposed to landfill.

 

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

4              

Note:  For the purpose of this consent, a reference to ‘occupation certificate’ shall not be taken to mean an ‘interim occupation certificate’ unless otherwise stated.

25. Fulfilment of BASIX Commitments

The applicant must demonstrate the fulfilment of BASIX commitments pertaining to the development.

26. Sydney Water – s73 Certificate

A s73 Certificate must be obtained from Sydney Water.

27. Stormwater Drainage

The stormwater drainage system for the development must be designed and constructed in accordance with Council’s Civil Works – Design and Construction Specification 2005 and the following requirements:

 

·          Connected directly to Council’s street drainage system via the on site detention system.

28. On Site Stormwater Detention

An on-site stormwater detention system must be designed by a chartered civil engineer and constructed in accordance with the following requirements:

 

a.          Have a capacity of not less than 50m3, and a maximum discharge (when full) of 59 litres per second.

 

b.          Have a surcharge/inspection grate located directly above the outlet.

 

c.          Discharge from the detention system to be controlled via 1 metre length of pipe, not less than 50 millimetres diameter or via a stainless plate with sharply drilled orifice bolted over the face of the outlet discharging into a larger diameter pipe capable of carrying the design flow to an approved Council system.

29. Internal Driveway/Vehicular Areas

The driveway and parking areas on site must be designed in accordance with Australian Standards 2890.1, 2890.2, 3727 and the following requirements:

 

a.         All vehicles are to leave the site in a forward direction.

 

30. Traffic Control Plan

A Traffic Control Plan (TCP) must be prepared by a qualified traffic controller in accordance with the Roads & Traffic Authority’s Traffic Control at Worksites Manual 1998 and Australian Standard 1742.3 for all work on a public road and be submitted to Council.  The TCP must detail the following:

 

a.         Arrangements for public notification of the works.

 

b.         Temporary construction signage.

 

c.         Permanent post-construction signage.

 

d.         Vehicle movement plans.

 

e.         Traffic management plans.

 

f.          Pedestrian and cyclist access/safety.

31. Damage to Council Assets

Any damage caused to Council’s assets as a result of the construction of the development must be rectified in accordance with Council’s written requirements and at the sole cost of the applicant.

32. Creation of Easements

The following matters must be nominated on the plan of subdivision under s88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919:

 

a.         The creation of an appropriate "Positive Covenant" and "Restriction as to User" over the constructed on-site detention system and outlet works, within the lots in favour of Council in accordance with Council’s prescribed wording.  The position of the on-site detention system is to be clearly indicated on the title.

 

b.         To register the OSD easement, the restriction on the use of land “works-as-executed” details of the on-site-detention system must be submitted verifying that the required storage and discharge rates have been constructed in accordance with the design requirements.  The details must show the invert levels of the on site system together with pipe sizes and grades.  Any variations to the approved plans must be shown in red on the “works-as-executed” plan and supported by calculations.

 

Note:   Council must be nominated as the authority to release, vary or modify any easement, restriction or covenant.

 

33. Streetscape planting

a.      Streetscape planting works along Turner Road verge must include planting of 4 x Tristaniopsis laurina (water gum) trees

b.      Streetscape planting works along Kita Road verge must include the planting of 4 x Callistemon citrinus (bottlebrush) trees.

Note:        The minimum pot size should be 75 litre Tree to be placed in mulched area 1 metre square

34. Planter Boxes / On slab planting

To ensure a sustainable landscaping outcome for the site, on slab planter boxes must include the following:

 

·          Waterproofing;

 

·          Subsoil drainage (proprietary drainage cell, 50mm sand and filter fabric);

 

·          Automatic irrigation facilities;

 

·          Minimum 500mm deep planting soil for shrubs and a  minimum 1000 mm deep planting soil for trees and palms; and

 

·          At least 75mm mulch thickness.

35. Completion of Landscaping

A certificate must be provided by a practicing landscape architect, horticulturalist or person with similar qualifications and experience certifying that all required landscaping works have been satisfactorily completed in accordance with the approved landscape plans.

 

Note:   Advice on suitable species for landscaping can be obtained from Council’s planting guide ‘Indigenous Plants for the Bushland Shire’, available at www.hornsby.nsw.gov.au.

36. External Lighting

All external lighting must be designed and installed in accordance with Australian Standard AS 4282 – Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting.  Certification of compliance with the Standard must be obtained from a suitably qualified person.

37. Installation of Privacy Devices

·          A 1.5 metre high close-form solid screen is to be erected on the southern and eastern boundaries adjoining Units 1 and 2 as indicated in red on the approved plans to maintain privacy of the yards of these premises.

 

·          A 1.8 metre high solid fence is to be built along the boundary separating the backyard of unit 2 from the basement ramp and the adjoining shopping complex as marked in red on the approved Ground Floor Plan.

38. Works as Executed Plan

A works-as-executed plan must be prepared by a registered surveyor and submitted to Council for completed road pavement, kerb & gutter, public drainage systems, driveways and on-site detention system.  The plan must be accompanied by a certificate from a registered surveyor certifying that all pipelines and associated structures lie wholly within any relevant easements.

39. Waste Management

a.         A report must be prepared by an appropriately qualified person, certifying the following:

·       A comparison of the estimated quantities of each waste type against the actual quantities of each waste type has been made;

 

·       Any deviations from the Waste Management Plan (including, but not limited to, types of waste, quantities of waste, destinations of waste, reuse and recycling achieved) have been explained;

 

·       All waste was taken to site(s) that were lawfully permitted to accept that waste;

 

·       At least 60% of the waste generated during the construction phase of the development was reused or recycled.

 

Note:  If the 60% diversion from landfill cannot be achieved in the Construction Stage, the Report is to include the reasons why this occurred and certify that appropriate work practices were employed to implement the approved Waste Management Plan. The Report must be based on documentary evidence such as tipping dockets/receipts from recycling depots, transfer stations and landfills, audits of procedures etc. which are to be attached to the report.

 

b.         The communal waste/recycling storage area indicated in the approved “Ground Floor Plan” must include water/hose for cleansing, graded floors with drainage to sewer, robust doors, sealed/impervious surfaces, adequate lighting and ventilation.

 

c.         Each dwelling-unit must be provided with an indoor waste/recycling cupboard for the interim storage of a minimum one day’s waste generation with separate containers for general waste and recyclable materials.

 

d.         There must not be any steps on the between the loading bay and the bin rooms.

40. Garbage Collection Easement

For the purpose of waste collection, an easement entitling Council, its servants and agents and persons authorised by it to enter upon the subject land and to operate thereon, vehicles and other equipment for the purposes of garbage collection must be granted to Council by the owner of the land. 

 

Note:  The easement must be in a form prescribed by Council and must include covenants to the effect that parties will not be liable for any damage caused to the subject land or any part thereof or to any property located therein or thereon by reason of the operation thereon of any vehicle or other equipment used in connection with the collection of garbage and to the effect that the owner for the time being of the subject land shall indemnify the Council, its servants, agents and persons authorised by it to collect garbage against liability in respect of any such claims made by any person whomsoever.

41.      s94 Infrastructure Contributions

The payment to Council of a contribution of $70428.15* for twenty-nine employees towards the cost of infrastructure identified in Council’s Development Contributions Plan 2007-2011.

 

Note: * The value of contribution is based on a rate of $2437 per employee, derived from a rate of one employee per 30sqm commercial floor area and is current as at 15 March 2012.  The contribution will be adjusted from this date in accordance with the underlying consumer price index for subsequent financial quarters.  It is recommended that you contact Council to ascertain the indexed value of the contribution prior to payment.

42.      s94 Infrastructure Contributions 

The payment to Council of a contribution of $162213.15 for eleven additional dwellings towards the cost of infrastructure identified in Council’s Development Contributions Plan 2007-2011 in accordance with the following table:

 

Note: *    The value of contribution is current as at 15 March 2012.  The contribution will be adjusted from this date in accordance with the underlying consumer price index for subsequent financial quarters.


It is recommended that you contact Council to confirm the value of the contribution prior to payment.

43. Construction for a safe environment

The site must include the following elements to provide a safer environment for the residents:

 

a.         An intercom system be installed at gate locations to ensure screening of persons entering dwellings.

 

b.         The entryway to the site be illuminated in high luminance at all times.

 

c.         Front and rear yard spaces of each dwelling be illuminated with high luminance by motion sensor lighting.

 

d.         The common driveways and basement areas are to be illuminated with low luminance at all times.

 

e.         Anti-graffiti paint be used for the walls adjacent to Kita and Turner Roads and the southern boundary.

 

f.          Robust materials which cannot be forced or breached with minimised maintenance requirements are to be used for construction work in the common areas.

 

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

44. Use of Premises

The ground floor of the development approved under this consent shall be used as “commercial” and “retail” premises (except residential units 1 and 2) and not for any other purpose without Council’s separate written consent.

 

The visitors to the residential premises must have 24 hours access to the parking area.

45. Hours of Operation

The hours of operation of the commercial and retail units located within the ground floor of the premises are restricted to those times listed below:

 

Monday to Wednesday       7:30 am to 6 pm

Thursday                            7:30 am to 9 pm

Friday                                 7:30 am to 6pm

Saturday, Sunday

& Public Holidays               8:30 am to 6pm

46. Landscaping Establishment and Maintenance

The landscape works must be maintained into the future to ensure the establishment and successful growth of plant material to meet the intent of the landscape design. This must include but not be limited to watering, weeding, replacement of failed plant material and promoting the growth of plants through standard industry practices.

 

All of the approved landscaping for the development must be continually maintained to ensure the appropriate presentation of the development.

47. Car Parking and Deliveries

All car parking must be constructed and operated in accordance with Australian Standard AS 2890.1 – 2004 – Off Street Car Parking and Australian Standard 2890.2 - 2002 – Off Street Commercial and the following requirement:

 

a.         All parking areas and driveways are to be sealed to an all weather standard, line marked and signposted.

 

b.         Car parking, loading and manoeuvring areas to be used solely for nominated purposes.

 

c.         All vehicular entry on to the site and egress from the site shall be made in a forward direction.

48. Noise

The level of total continuous noise emanating from operation of the premises including all plant and air conditioning units (LAeq) (measured for at least 15 minutes) in or on the above premises, must not exceed the background level by more than 5dB(A) when measured at all property boundaries.

49.   Fire Safety Statement - Annual

On at least one occasion in every 12 month period following the date of the first ‘Fire Safety Certificate’ issued for the property, the owner must provide Council with an annual ‘Fire Safety Certificate’ to each essential service installed in the building.

50. Maintenance of Wastewater Device

All wastewater and stormwater treatment devices (including drainage systems, sumps and traps) must be regularly maintained in order to remain effective.  All solid and liquid wastes collected from the device must be disposed of in accordance with the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997.

51. Waste Management

·       All commercial tenants must keep written evidence on site of a valid contract with a licensed waste contractor(s) for the regular collection and disposal of the waste and recyclables that are generated on site.

·       The residential component and non-residential component of the development must have separate and self-contained waste management systems. Commercial tenants must be prevented (via signage and other means) from using the residential waste/recycling bins and vice versa.

 

- END OF CONDITIONS -

 

 

ADVISORY NOTES

 

The following information is provided for your assistance to ensure compliance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, other relevant legislation and Council’s policies and specifications.  This information does not form part of the conditions of development consent pursuant to Section 80A of the Act.

 

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 Requirements

 

·       The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 requires:

 

·       The issue of a construction certificate prior to the commencement of any works.  Enquiries regarding the issue of a construction certificate can be made to Council’s Customer Services Branch on 9847 6760.

 

·       A principal certifying authority to be nominated and Council notified of that appointment prior to the commencement of any works.

 

·       Council to be given at least two days written notice prior to the commencement of any works.

 

·       Mandatory inspections of nominated stages of the construction inspected.

 

·       An occupation certificate to be issued before occupying any building or commencing the use of the land.

 

Long Service Levy

 

In accordance with Section 34 of the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986, a ‘Long Service Levy’ must be paid to the Long Service Payments Corporation or Hornsby Council.

 

Note:   The rate of the Long Service Levy is 0.35% of the total cost of the work.

 

Note:   Hornsby Council requires the payment of the Long Service Levy prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

 

Tree Preservation Order

 

To ensure the maintenance and protection of the existing natural environment, it is an offence to ringbark, cut down, top, lop, remove, wilfully injure or destroy a tree outside 3 metres of the approved building envelope without the prior written consent from Council. 

 

Note:   A tree is defined as a single or multi-trunked wood perennial plant having a height of not less than three (3) metres, and which develops many branches, usually from a distance of not less than one (1) metre from the ground, but excluding any plant which, in its particular location, is a noxious plant declared as such pursuant to the Noxious Weeds Act 1993.  This definition of ‘tree’ includes any and all types of Palm trees.

 

All distances are determined under British Standard BS 5837: 2005, “Trees in Relation to Construction – Recommendations”.

 

Fines may be imposed for non-compliance with Council’s Tree Preservation Order.

 

Disability Discrimination Act

 

The applicant’s attention is drawn to the existence of the Disability Discrimination Act.  A construction certificate is required to be obtained for the proposed building/s, which will provide consideration under the Building Code of Australia, however, the development may not comply with the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act.  This is the sole responsibility of the applicant.

 

Covenants

 

The land upon which the subject building is to be constructed may be affected by restrictive covenants.  Council issues this approval without enquiry as to whether any restrictive covenant affecting the land would be breached by the construction of the building, the subject of this consent.  Applicants must rely on their own enquiries as to whether or not the building breaches any such covenant.

 

Dial Before you Dig

 

Prior to commencing any works, the applicant is encouraged to contact Dial Before You Dig on 1100 or www.dialbeforeyoudig.com.au for free information on potential underground pipes and cables within the vicinity of the development site.

 

House Numbering

 

House numbering can only be authorised by Council.  Before proceeding to number each premise in the development, the allocation of numbers is required to be obtained from Council's Planning Division.  The authorised numbers are required to be displayed in a clear manner at or near the main entrance to each premise.

 

Advertising Signage – Separate DA Required

 

This consent does not permit the erection or display of any advertising signs.  Most advertising signs or structures require development consent.  Applicants should make separate enquiries with Council prior to erecting or displaying any advertising signage.

 


 

Planning Report No. PLN30/12

Date of Meeting: 16/05/2012

 

10      DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - DEMOLITION OF A TENNIS COURT AND SUBDIVISION OF ONE ALLOTMENT INTO TWO LOTS 17 CANNAN CLOSE CHERRYBROOK   

 

 

Development Application No:

DA/186/2012

Description of Proposal:

Demolition of a tennis court and subdivision of one allotment into two lots

Property Description:

Lot 1035, DP 812942, 17 Cannan Close, Cherrybrook

Applicant:

Mr Alex Du

Owner:

Mrs Suying Chen

Statutory Provisions:

Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994

Residential A (Low Density)

Estimated Value:

$7, 500

Ward:

B

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT Development Application No. DA/186/2012 for demolition of a tennis court and subdivision of one allotment into two lots at Lot 1035 DP 812942, 17 Cannan Close, Cherrybrook be approved subject to the conditions of consent detailed in Schedule 1 of Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN30/12.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

1.         The application proposes demolition of a tennis court and subdivision of one allotment into two lots.

 

2.         The existing dwelling on proposed Lot A would exceed the maximum 0.4:1 floor space ratio development standard of the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994.  The applicant has made a submission pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards to vary the standard.  The submission is considered well founded and is supported.

 

3.         Twenty seven (27) submissions have been received in respect of the application.

 

4.         It is recommended that the application be approved.

 

 

 

 

HISTORY OF THE SITE

 

On 12 May 1989, Council approved DA/608/1988 for residential subdivision of Woodgrove Avenue, Castle Hill creating 41 residential lots, a public reserve dedication and a residue lot.  This subdivision created the lots within Darlington Drive, Cannan Close, and Greywood Street.

 

On 20 June 1990, Council approved DA/74/1989 for subdivision creating 35 residential lots, 2 residue lots and construction of a section of the County Link Road.

 

The subject site comprises of Lot 108 (788m2) of DP 806547 (created under DA/608/1988) and approved Lot 1035 (812m2) created under DA/74/1989.  DA/74/1989 was amended during application for a Subdivision Certificate to consolidate Lot 108 with approved Lot 1035 at the request of the applicant to enhance allotment building platforms.

 

THE SITE

 

The site is located on the northern side of Cannan Close at the end of the cul-de-sac and experiences an average gradient of 7% from the front, south-eastern corner to the north-eastern corner.

 

The site is an irregular trapezoidal shaped allotment with curved front boundary and has an area of 1468.5m2

 

An existing two-storey brick dwelling-house is located on the eastern side of the site and a tennis court is located on the western side of the site.  An easement to drain water exists at the north-western corner of the site.

 

The surrounding area is primarily low density residential with one and two storey dwelling-houses.  The site is approximately 250 metres south of New Line Road.

 

THE PROPOSAL

 

The application proposes the demolition of an existing tennis court and the Torrens Title subdivision of one allotment into two lots.

 

Proposed Lot A is a trapezoidal-shaped allotment with a curved frontage to Cannan Close, an area of 911.89m2 and an average gradient of 5.7% from the south-eastern corner to the north-western corner.  The existing two storey brick dwelling-house would be retained on the lot.

 

Proposed Lot B would be positioned in lieu of the existing tennis court to be demolished, have an area of 556.72m2, a 13.11 metre frontage to Cannan Close and an average gradient of 4.1% from the southern boundary to the northern boundary.

 

Six trees exempt under Council’s Tree Preservation Order would likely be removed to facilitate future development of the newly created allotment.    

 

ASSESSMENT

 

The development application has been assessed having regard to the ‘Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036’, the ‘North Subregion (Draft) Subregional Strategy’ and the matters for consideration prescribed under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the Act).  The following issues have been identified for further consideration.

 

1.   STRATEGIC CONTEXT

 

1.1       Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036 and (Draft) North Subregional Strategy

 

The Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036 is a broad framework to secure Sydney’s place in the global economy by promoting and managing growth.  It outlines a vision for Sydney to 2036; the challenges faced, and the directions to follow to address these challenges and achieve the vision.  The Draft North Subregional Strategy acts as a framework for Council in its preparation of the Comprehensive LEP by the end of 2012.

 

The Draft North Subregional Strategy sets the following targets for the Hornsby LGA by 2031:

 

·     Employment capacity to increase by 9,000 jobs; and

 

·     Housing stock to increase by 11,000 dwellings.

 

In the preparation of Council’s Housing Strategy, it was acknowledged that there is existing capacity to provide additional dwellings under Council’s existing controls, including through subdivision in low density residential zones.  The development application would be consistent with Council’s Housing Strategy by providing additional housing opportunity to assist in achieving the dwelling targets under the Metropolitan Plan.

 

2.   STATUTORY CONTROLS

 

Section 79C(1)(a) requires Council to consider “any relevant environmental planning instruments, draft environmental planning instruments, development control plans, planning agreements and regulations”.

 

2.1       Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994

 

The subject land is zoned Residential A (Low Density) under the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 (HSLEP).  The objectives of the zone  zone are:

 

(a)     to provide for the housing needs of the population of the Hornsby area.

 

(b)     to promote a variety of housing types and other land uses compatible with a low density residential environment.

 

(c)     to provide for development that is within the environmental capacity of a low density residential environment.

 

The proposed development is defined as ‘subdivision’ and ‘demolition’ under the HSLEP and is permissible in the zone with Council’s consent.

 

Clause 14 of the HSLEP prescribes a minimum lot area of 500m2 for subdivision in the Residential A zone.  The proposed subdivision complies with this requirement.

 

Clause 15 of the HSLEP prescribes that the maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of development within Residential A Zones is 0.4:1.  The FSR of the existing dwelling-house on proposed Lot A of 0.51:1 is in non-compliance with the development standard.  The applicant has made a submission to vary the development standard pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards.  Refer to discussion in Section 2.2. 

 

Clause 18 of the HSLEP sets out heritage conservation provisions for Hornsby Shire.  Clause 18 is not applicable to this application as the subject property is not located within a Heritage Conservation Area or in the vicinity of a heritage item.

 

2.2       State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards

 

The application has been assessed against the requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards (SEPP 1).  This Policy provides flexibility in the application of development standards in circumstances where strict compliance with those standards would be unreasonable or unnecessary or tend to hinder the attainment of the objectives of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

The Land and Environment Court has expressed the view that there are five different ways in which an objection may be considered well founded and the approval of the objection may be consistent with the aims of the Policy as follows:

 

1.      The objectives of the standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard;

 

2.      The underlying objective or purpose of the standard is not relevant to the development and therefore compliance is unnecessary;

 

3.      The underlying object of purpose would be defeated or thwarted if compliance was required and therefore compliance is unreasonable;

 

4.      The development standard has been virtually abandoned or destroyed by the Council’s own actions in granting consents departing from the standard and hence compliance with the standard is unnecessary and unreasonable;

 

5.      The zoning of the particular land is unreasonable or inappropriate so that a development standard appropriate for that zoning is also unreasonable and unnecessary, as it applies to the land and compliance with the standard would be unreasonable and unnecessary.  That is, the particular parcel of land should not have been included in the particular zone.

 

In regard to whether the objection may be well founded, the applicant contends, in summary that:

 

Albeit the proposed retained dwelling-house’s non-compliance with the 0.4:1 FSR standard, the proposed development is planned and designed to perform favourably in relation to the objectives of the FSR standard.

 

The retained existing dwelling on proposed lots, which relates aptly in proportion to the neighbouring residential properties in the surrounding area of Cherrybrook Precinct, provides a compatible external appearance in height, visual bulk, landscaping, building setbacks, and external elements with the objective of this standard.

 

The proposed subdivision of the land ensures the retained existing dwelling as well as the future development on both allotments have no adverse overlooking to neighbouring residential properties and their private open space areas are adapted to the proposed development with appropriately designed building setbacks, floor plan layouts, subdivision layouts, orientation of the landscape areas, and the placement and sizing of the building envelope.

 

The proposed building envelope and siting also ensures that good portions of northern solar access are maintained to No. 15 Cannan Close.  Reasonable portions of solar access will be maintained to the window openings and rear outdoor open space area of the adjoining residential property at No. 15 Cannan Close in mid winter.

 

The proposed subdivision development is consistent with the stated zoning objectives under Clause 7 of Part 2 – Zoning Controls of the HSLEP 1994, in that the proposed retained existing dwelling house is compatible in design, bulk and scale with adjoining and nearby residential properties in the Cherrybrook Precinct and the proposed subdivision will provide for a compatible land use.

 

If Council insisted on strict compliance with the maximum floor space ratio development standard, such a decision would hinder the attainment of the objectives of the EP&A Act in that the promotion and co-ordination of the orderly and economic use and development of land would be discouraged as it would prevent the execution of a subdivision and future construction of a dwelling-house.

 

While the proposed subdivision does not comply with the maximum floor space ratio development standard contained in Clause 15 of the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994, it satisfies the stated and essential objectives of the development standard and the broader planning and zoning objectives for the locality.

 

Compliance with the development standard is as a result unnecessary and unreasonable in the circumstances of the case, and granting of the development application on this ground is warranted.  

 

The matters listed above have been taken into consideration in assessing the merits of the SEPP 1 objection.  Clause 15 of the HSLEP (Floor Space Ratio) states that the objective of the provision is:

 

“To control the intensity and scale of development of land so that the development will be in accordance with the land’s environmental capacity and zone objectives”.

 

The dwelling-house on the site is an existing structure.  There are no changes proposed to the bulk and scale of the building.  In this regard, the intensity and scale of the development remains unchanged, albeit the size of the allotment is reduced in area from 1468.5m2 to 911.86m2.

 

The proposal complies with the 500m2 development standard contained within Clause 14 (Density) and meets the prescriptive measures of the Private Open Space, Solar Access, Privacy, Allotment Layout, Allotment Design, and Setback elements with the exception of an existing rear setback encroachment.  These issues are addressed further in Section 2.4 of this report.  In this regard, the proposal would provide acceptable amenity for the existing dwelling-house, the newly created allotment and existing surrounding properties.

 

The existing dwelling-house is similar in bulk and scale with other dwelling in the streetscape and Cherrybrook locality.  The subject site could accommodate a dwelling of 430m2 under the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and complying development).  Notwithstanding that the existing dwelling-house exceeds the development standard under the SEPP by 33m2, the provisions of the SEPP demonstrate that a dwelling-house of a similar bulk and scale could be erected under the Complying Development provisions of the Policy.  In this regard, the existing dwelling would be in accordance with the land’s environmental capacity and consistent with the scale of emerging dwelling-houses in the area and existing dwellings in the streetscape.  The development therefore meets the objectives of the FSR development standard and the zone objectives. 

 

The submitted SEPP 1 objection is therefore considered well founded in respect to the above Principle No. 1 as the objectives of the FSR standard are achieved.

 

2.3       Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20:  Hawkesbury – Nepean Rivers

 

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 aims to protect the environment of the Hawkesbury – Nepean Rivers system by ensuring that the impacts of future land uses are considered in a regional context.

 

The site is located within the catchment of the Hawkesbury – Nepean Rivers.  Part 2 of Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 contains general planning considerations and strategies, and requires Council to consider the impact of any proposal on water quality, riverine scenic quality, aquaculture, recreation and tourism.

 

Given the location of the site, water quality is the only relevant issue for the assessment of the proposal.  The proposed development would have negligible impacts on the water quality of the catchment area as the density and scale of the additional allotment and dwelling under construction would be consistent with the environmental capacity of the site.

 

2.4       Residential Subdivision DCP

 

The proposed development has been assessed having regard to the relevant performance and prescriptive design requirements within Council’s Residential Subdivision Development Control Plan (Residential Subdivision DCP).  The following table sets out the proposal’s compliance with the prescriptive measures of the Plan:


 

Residential Subdivision Development Control Plan

Control

Proposal

Requirement

Compliance

Site Area

1468.5m2

N/A

N/A

Density

FSR (Lot A)

0.51:1

0.4:1

No

Allotment Size

Lot A

Lot B

 

911.86m2

556.72m2

 

500m2

500m2

 

Yes

Yes

Allotment Layout and Design

Average site gradient

Lot A

Lot B

 

5.7%

4.1%

 

20%

20%

 

Yes

Yes

Lot orientation

Lot A

Lot B

 

N50E

N50E

 

N20oW to N300E or E20oN to E30oS

 

Yes

Yes

Existing Dwelling (Lot A)

Site cover

37%

40%

Yes

Private open space

135m2

120m2

Yes

Private Open Space – Minimum Dimension

 

8m

 

5m

 

Yes

Setbacks

Front (Southern)

Side (Eastern)

Side (Western)

Rear (Northern)

 

9m

1m

2m

1m

 

6m

1m

1m

3m

 

Yes

Yes

Yes

No

Landscaping

47%

45%

Yes

Car Parking

2 Spaces

2 spaces

Yes

 

2.4.1    Allotment Layout and Design

 

The proposed subdivision would result in a lot orientation of N50E which would allow adequate solar access for the private open space of the existing and future dwelling-house without compromising the solar access of existing neighbouring developments.

 

There would be an acceptable level of amenity provided in respect to privacy of a future dwelling-house on proposed Lot B and private open space for the future and existing dwelling-house.

 

Proposed Lot B would accommodate for a 200m2 indicative building envelope that would be compliant with the prescriptive measures of the Setback and Private Open Space elements.  The proposed lot would facilitate development that is consistent with the capacity of the site and the low density residential zone.  In this regard, the proposal meets the objectives of the Allotment Layout element and is considered acceptable.

 

2.4.2    Density

 

Submissions have been received raising concerns that the proposed subdivision would result in the existing dwelling-house being excessive in bulk and scale.

 

Subdivision would not result in a change to the built form of the existing dwelling-house and therefore, the amenity impacts on adjoining residential properties would be consistent with existing development.  However, notwithstanding this consistency, it is acknowledged that subdivision would provide the opportunity for an additional dwelling thus increasing the overall bulk and scale of the development on the site.

 

The applicant has submitted indicative building envelopes for proposed Lot B.  It is acknowledged that the submitted building envelopes would not restrict any future development to the built form indicated.  However, the building envelopes submitted demonstrate that the proposed new allotment would be capable of accommodating a two-storey dwelling-house of a bulk and scale commensurate with the bulk and scale of existing low density residential development in the Cherrybrook locality or streetscape.

 

2.4.3    Setbacks

 

The 1m rear boundary setback of the existing dwelling-house does not comply with the 3m prescriptive measure of the Setbacks element.  The rear boundary would not be altered by the proposed subdivision and the rear setback of the existing dwelling on proposed Lot A is an existing encroachment.  In this regard, the visual and amenity impacts on adjoining properties would be consistent with the existing development and is considered acceptable in respect to the Setbacks element objectives.

 

2.4.4    Privacy

 

Submissions have been received raising concerns regarding loss of privacy generated by the removal of trees on proposed Lot B and the erection of a future dwelling-house.

 

The first floor of the existing dwelling-house on proposed Lot A contains bedrooms and a study. There are no living areas that would overlook adjoining properties that would lead to loss of privacy.

 

The design of a dwelling-house on proposed Lot B would be required to have regard for the privacy of adjoining properties under a future development application or complying development proposal.

 

Notwithstanding that the existing trees would provide a level of screening from proposed Lot B to the opposite dwellings on Cannan Close, there is over 24 metres of separation from the front property boundary of the proposed Lot and the habitable areas of the nearest opposite dwelling on Cannan Close.  In this regard, the loss of privacy for properties (opposite) as a result of a future dwelling-house would be negligible. 


 

2.4.5    Solar Access

 

The north/south orientation of the allotments would allow the subject and adjoining properties to receive a minimum of 3 hours of sunlight for north facing windows and 4 hours of sunlight for private open space on 22 June (Winter Solstice) as prescribed by the Solar Access element.

 

2.4.6    Private Open Space

 

Submissions have been received raising concerns regarding insufficient private open space for the existing dwelling-house as a result of the proposed subdivision.

 

It is acknowledged that the private open space of the existing dwelling-house on Lot A would be reduced as a result of the proposed subdivision.  However, the private open space has an area of 135m2, a minimum dimension of 8 metres and is directly accessible from the living areas of the dwelling-house.  The indicative building envelope for proposed Lot B demonstrates that the proposed allotment layout and design would allow for a minimum of 120m2 of private open space with a minimum dimension of 5 metres.

 

In this regard, the proposal would comply with the prescriptive measures for private open space under the Dwelling House DCP and is considered acceptable.

 

2.4.7    Landscaping

 

The existing dwelling-house on proposed Lot A would retain 47% landscaped area which complies with the 45% prescriptive measure of the Landscaping element.

 

There are 14 trees located at the front of proposed Lot B of which 6 are exempt from Council’s Tree Preservation Order.  The remaining trees have been identified as affected by the future development for a dwelling-house. 

 

Submissions have been received raising concerns regarding the visual impact of the loss of trees resulting from the development of a future dwelling-house on proposed Lot B.  The driveway for a future dwelling-house would necessitate the removal of trees.  However, there is sufficient area for some trees to be retained or for new trees to be replanted to a scale that is consistent with the existing landscaping at the adjacent frontages of properties in Cannan Close.

 

2.4.8    Drainage Control

 

An inter-allotment drainage easement would be required to service the proposed development as the property slopes to the rear.  The applicant has submitted title documents confirming that the subject allotment has the benefit of a drainage easement contained within DP 806547.

 

2.4.9    Section 94 Contributions

 

The applicant would be required to make a payment of a contribution for one additional lot towards the cost of transport and traffic management, library and community facilities, civic improvements, stormwater drainage, bushfire protection and Section 94 administration in accordance with Sections 94, 94B and 94C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Hornsby Shire Council’s Development Contributions Plan 2004-2010.  This requirement is addressed as a condition of consent.


 

2.5       Cherrybrook Precinct Development Control Plan

 

The Cherrybrook Precinct DCP provides a detailed planning strategy and guidelines for development within the Cherrybrook Precinct.  The Cherrybrook Masterplan aims to ensure that residential subdivision promotes the garden suburb character of the Cherrybrook Precinct while the Residential Strategy aims to protect residential amenity through setback, height and acoustic requirements.

 

Notwithstanding that the proposed subdivision would result in reduced lot sizes, the lot orientation and allotment shapes remain generally consistent with the subdivision pattern of the Cherrybrook Masterplan.

 

The objective of the Residential Strategy is:

 

“To provide for a variety of housing types and other compatible land uses and protection of residential amenity.”

 

The proposed subdivision would create an additional allotment to provide additional housing opportunities.  The proposal is sympathetic to the amenity of future and existing residents in respect to privacy, solar access, and provision of private open space.

 

The existing dwelling-house on proposed Lot A complies with the prescriptive measures of the Setbacks element with the exception of an existing rear setback encroachment.  Proposed Lot B would accommodate a building envelope that would enable the construction of a future dwelling-house that is consistent with the character of the Cherrybrook locality.

 

3.         ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

 

Section 79C(1)(b) of the Act requires Council to consider “the likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impacts in the locality”.

 

3.1       Natural Environment

 

There are 14 trees located at the front of proposed Lot B of which 6 are exempt from Council’s Tree Preservation Order.  The remaining trees have been identified as affected by the future development for a dwelling-house.  The removal of the remaining trees would have negligible impacts on the natural environmental as they do not form part of any Ecologically Endangered Community or critical habitat for native fauna.

 

3.2       Built Environment

 

The proposed subdivision is consistent with the pattern of infill development occurring within the surrounding low density residential area.

 

3.3       Social Impacts

 

The proposal would not result in a social impact.

 

 

 

 

 

3.4       Economic Impacts

 

The proposal would have a minor positive impact on the local economy in conjunction with other new low density residential development in the locality by generating an increase in demand for local services.

 

4.   SITE SUITABILITY

 

Section 79C(1)(c) of the Act requires Council to consider “the suitability of the site for the development”.

 

The subject site has not been identified as bushfire prone, flood prone or environmentally sensitive lands.  The site is considered to be capable of accommodating the proposed development.  The scale of the proposed development is consistent with the capability of the site and is considered acceptable.

 

5.   PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

 

Section 79C(1)(d) of the Act requires Council to consider “any submissions made in accordance with this Act”.

 

5.1       Community Consultation

 

The proposed development was placed on public exhibition and was notified to adjoining and nearby landowners between 5 March 2012 and 5 April 2012 in accordance with Council’s Notification and Exhibition Development Control Plan.  During this period, Council received 27 submissions.  The map below illustrates the location of those nearby landowners who made a submission that are in close proximity to the development site.


 

NOTIFICATION PLAN

 

 

 

•      PROPERTIES NOTIFIED

 

 

 

 

X     SUBMISSIONS

         RECEIVED

 

 


          PROPERTY SUBJECT OF DEVELOPMENT

 

1 SUBMISSION RECEIVED OUT OF MAP RANGE

 

Twenty seven submissions objected to the development, generally on the following grounds that the development would result in:

 

·       Excessive bulk and scale of the existing dwelling;

·       Inconsistency with establish streetscape;

·       Increased traffic and demand for street parking;

·       The removal of trees;

·       Insufficient private open space for existing and future dwelling; and

·       Loss of privacy from future dwelling and removal of trees.

 

The merits of the matters raised in community submissions have been addressed in the body of the report with the exception of the following:

 

5.1.1    Streetscape

 

Submissions have been received raising concerns regarding the proposal being inconsistent with the established streetscape in respect to narrow road frontages, small lot sizes, and a future dwelling design which would be inconsistent with the established built form.

 

The proposed subdivision would result in a reduced frontage of the existing allotment.  The 13.1 metre frontage of proposed Lot B would be generally consistent with the frontages of the adjoining allotments at the end of the cul-de-sac at Nos. 19, 20 and 21 Cannan Close.  The adjoining allotments however, are fan shaped allotments that are larger towards the rear, which would make dwelling-houses appear to be less bulky in relation to their lots. 

 

The 556.7m2 lot size of proposed Lot B would be smaller than other allotments in Cannan Close.  However, subdivision is permissible within the Residential A zone and the proposal complies with the 500m2 development standard under Clause 14 (Density) of HSLEP 1994.

 

The proposed subdivision would provide for housing needs, promote a variety of housing types compatible with the low density residential environment, and provide for development that is consistent with the environmental capacity of a low density residential environment.  In this regard the development would meet both the Residential A zone objectives of HSLEP 1994 and the objectives of the Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036.

 

Notwithstanding that the existing dwelling-houses within Cannan Close were erected by the same developer with a similar built form, it would be unrealistic to expect that the current streetscape would remain in perpetuity.  The area is not identified as a heritage conservation area and demolition and dwelling-houses are permissible developments within the Residential A zone and applications for such developments could be progressed as development applications or Complying Development.

 

Proposed Lot B would be a regular rectangular shaped allotment that is not burdened by topographical or environmental constraints.  In this regard, a future dwelling-house could be designed and positioned on the newly created allotment that is consistent with the established built form in terms of height, setbacks, landscaping and private open space while retaining amenity to adjoining properties in respect to privacy and solar access.

 

5.1.2    Increased Traffic and Demand for Parking

 

Submissions have been received raising concerns regarding increased traffic volumes and demand for street parking generated by the proposed development.  The development would generate traffic that is within the capacity of a low density residential environment.  The allotment layout and design of proposed Lot B would allow for sufficient front setback areas to allow for visitor parking as demonstrated by the indicative building envelope.

 

The design of the existing road network within Cannan Close and the surrounding Cherrybrook area has had regard to the traffic volumes and demand for parking that would be consistent with the density permissible within the Residential A zone.

 

6.   THE PUBLIC INTEREST

 

Section 79C(1)(e) of the Act requires Council to consider “the public interest”.

 

The public interest is an overarching requirement, which includes the consideration of the matters discussed in this report.  Implicit to the public interest is the achievement of future built outcomes adequately responding to and respecting the future desired outcomes expressed in environmental planning instruments and development control plans.

 

The application is considered to have satisfactorily addressed Council’s and relevant agencies’ criteria and would provide a development outcome that, on balance, would result in a positive impact for the community by providing additional housing opportunities.  Accordingly, it is considered that the approval of the proposed subdivision and demolition would be in the public interest.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The application proposes demolition of a tennis court and subdivision of one allotment into two lots.

 

The existing dwelling on proposed Lot A does not comply with the 0.4:1 floor space ratio development standard of the HSLEP 1994.  Consequently, the application has been supported by a submission under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 seeking approval of a variation to this development standard.

 

The proposal generally complies with the requirements of Council’s Residential Subdivision DCP other than the maximum floor space ratio which is acceptable with regard to the well founded SEPP 1 submission.

 

The development complies with the 500m2 development standard under Clause 14 of HSLEP 1994, meets the Residential A zone objectives and is consistent with the objectives of the Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036.

 

Twenty seven submissions have been received in respect of the application.

 

It is recommended that the application be approved.

 

Note:   At the time of the completion of this planning report, no persons have made a Political Donations Disclosure Statement pursuant to Section 147 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in respect of the subject planning application.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Rod Pickles

Manager - Assessment Team 2

Planning Division

 

 

 

 

James Farrington

Acting Executive Manager - Planning

Planning Division

 

 

Attachments:

1.View

Locality Plan

 

 

2.View

Survey Plan

 

 

3.View

Floor Plan

 

 

4.View

Site Analysis

 

 

5.View

Subdivision Plan

 

 

6.View

Landscape Plan

 

 

 

 

File Reference:           DA/186/2012

Document Number:   D01897062

 

SCHEDULE 1

 

GENERAL CONDITIONS

 

The conditions of consent within this notice of determination have been applied to ensure that the use of the land and/or building is carried out in such a manner that is consistent with the aims and objectives of the relevant legislation, planning instruments and Council policies affecting the land and does not disrupt the amenity of the neighbourhood or impact upon the environment.

 

Note:  For the purpose of this consent, the term ‘applicant’ means any person who has the authority to act on or the benefit of the development consent.

 

Note:  For the purpose of this consent, any reference to an Act, Regulation, Australian Standard or publication by a public authority shall be taken to mean the gazetted Act or Regulation, or adopted Australian Standard or publication as in force on the date that the application for a construction certificate is made.

1.   Approved Plans and Supporting Documentation

The development must be carried out in accordance with the plans and documentation listed below and endorsed with Council’s stamp, except where amended by Council and/or other conditions of this consent:

 

Plan No.

Drawn by

Dated

Sheet 01 of 01

MXM Survey Pty Ltd

06.12.2011

A001-A006, A100-A102

Greg Pickworth

21.02.2012

2.         Removal of Existing Trees

This development consent only permits the removal of trees numbered 1 – 6 Cupressus species (Cypress Pine) as these trees are exempt from Council’s Tree Preservation Order as identified on Site Tree Location Plan.  The removal of any other trees requires separate approval under Council’s Tree Preservation Order.

 

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

 

The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the issue of a ‘Construction Certificate’ by either Hornsby Shire Council or an accredited certifier.  All necessary information to demonstrate compliance with the following conditions of consent must be submitted with the application for a construction certificate.

3.   Water/Electricity Utility Services

The applicant must submit written evidence of the following service provider requirements:

 

a.      Energy Australia – a letter of consent demonstrating that satisfactory arrangements have been made to service the proposed development.

 

Note:   Sydney Water requires that s73 applications are to be made through an authorised Sydney Water Servicing Coordinator.  Refer to www.sydneywater.com.au or telephone 13 20 92 for assistance.

 

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

4.       Erosion and Sediment Control

Erosion and sediment control measures must be provided and maintained throughout the construction period in accordance with the manual ‘Soils and Construction 2004 (Bluebook)’, the approved plans, Council specifications and to the satisfaction of the principal certifying authority.  The erosion and sediment control devices must remain in place until the site has been stabilised and revegetated.

 

Note:   On the spot penalties up to $1,500 may be issued for any non-compliance with this requirement without any further notification or warning.

5.   Erection of Construction Sign

A sign must be erected in a prominent position on any site on which building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out:

 

a.      Showing the name, address and telephone number of the principal certifying authority for the work,

 

b.      Showing the name of the principal contractor (if any) for any demolition or building work and a telephone number on which that person may be contacted outside working hours, and

 

c.      Stating that unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited.

 

Note:   Any such sign is to be maintained while the building work, subdivision work or demolition work is being carried out, but must be removed when the work has been completed.

 

 

REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION

6.   Council Property

During construction works, no building materials, waste, machinery or related matter is to be stored on the road or footpath.  The public reserve is to be kept in a clean, tidy and safe condition at all times.

7.   Construction Work Hours

All work on site (including demolition and earth works) must only occur between 7am and 5pm Monday to Saturday.

 

No work is to be undertaken on Sundays or public holidays.

8.   Works near Trees

All works (including driveways and retaining walls) within 4 metres of any trees required to be retained (whether or not on the subject property, and pursuant to this consent or the Tree Preservation Order), must be carried out under the supervision of an ‘AQF Level 5 Arborist’ and a certificate submitted to the principal certifying authority detailing the method(s) used to preserve the tree(s).

 

Note:  Except as provided above, the applicant is to ensure that no excavation, filling or stockpiling of building materials, parking of vehicles or plant, disposal of cement slurry, waste water or other contaminants is to occur within 4 metres of any tree to be retained.

 

 

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A SUBDIVISION CERTIFICATE

 

The following conditions of consent must be complied with prior to the ‘Principal Certifying Authority’ issuing a ‘Subdivision Certificate’

9.   Sydney Water – s73 Certificate

A s73 Certificate must be obtained from Sydney Water.

10. Stormwater Drainage

The stormwater drainage system for the development must be designed and constructed in accordance with Council’s Civil Works – Design and Construction Specification 2005 and the following requirements:

 

a.      Connected directly to the existing interallotment drainage system that drains to Councils piped drainage system in Darlington Drive.

 

b.      An inter-allotment stormwater drainage system to service the proposed subdivision with pits being constructed in situ.

 

c.      The roof and stormwater drainage system from the existing dwelling to be connected to the proposed inter-allotment drainage system.

 

Note:    A construction certificate shall be obtained prior to the commencement of these works and are to be completed prior to the issue of a subdivision certificate.

11. Damage to Council Assets

Any damage caused to Council’s assets including the removal, damage, destruction, displacement or defacing of the existing survey marks as a result of the construction of the development must be rectified in accordance with Council’s written requirements and at the sole cost of the applicant.

12. Creation of Easements

The following matter(s) must be nominated on the plan of subdivision under s88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919

 

a.      An inter-allotment drainage easement(s) over each of the burdened lots.

 

Note:   Council must be nominated as the authority to release, vary or modify any easement, restriction or covenant.

13. Works as Executed Plan

A works-as-executed plan(s) must be prepared by a registered surveyor and submitted to Council for completed interallotment stormwater drainage system works.  The plan(s) must be accompanied by a certificate from a registered surveyor certifying that all pipelines and associated structures lie wholly within any relevant easements.

14. Demolition of Existing Tennis Court

The existing tennis court and any structure that traverses the proposed allotment boundary shall be demolished prior to the release of the subdivision certificate.  All disturbed areas shall be reinstated with turf.

15. Boundary Fencing

Fencing must be erected along all property boundaries behind the front building alignment to a height of 1.8 metres.

 

Note:   Alternative fencing may be erected subject to the written consent of the adjoining property owner(s).

16. s94 Infrastructure Contributions

The payment to Council of a contribution of $20, 000 for one additional lot towards the cost of infrastructure identified in Council’s Development Contributions Plan 2007-2011.

 

Note:  *   The value of contribution is capped at $20,000 per additional lot in accordance with Ministerial Direction (Section 94E of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979) issued on 16 September 2010.  In the event that this Direction is repealed or amended, Council will apply the value of the contribution from the date of this consent, adjusted from this date in accordance with the underlying consumer price index for subsequent financial quarters.

It is recommended that you contact Council to confirm the value of the contribution prior to payment.

 

 

- END OF CONDITIONS -

 

 

 

ADVISORY NOTES

 

The following information is provided for your assistance to ensure compliance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, other relevant legislation and Council’s policies and specifications.  This information does not form part of the conditions of development consent pursuant to Section 80A of the Act.

 

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 Requirements

 

·       The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 requires:

 

·       The issue of a construction certificate prior to the commencement of any works.  Enquiries regarding the issue of a construction certificate can be made to Council’s Customer Services Branch on 9847 6760.

 

·       A principal certifying authority to be nominated and Council notified of that appointment prior to the commencement of any works.

 

·       Council to be given at least two days written notice prior to the commencement of any works.

 

·       Mandatory inspections of nominated stages of the construction inspected.

 

·       An occupation certificate to be issued before occupying any building or commencing the use of the land.

 

Subdivision Certificate Requirements

 

A subdivision certificate application is required to be lodged with Council containing the following information:

 

·       A surveyor’s certificate certifying that all structures within the subject land comply with the development consent in regard to the setbacks from the new boundaries.

 

·       A surveyor’s certificate certifying that all services, drainage lines or access are located wholly within the property boundaries.  Where services encroach over the new boundaries, easements are to be created.

 

·       Certification that the requirements of relevant utility authorities have been met.

 

·       A surveyor’s certificate certifying finished ground levels are in accordance with the approved plans.

 

Note:   Council will not issue a subdivision certificate until all conditions of the development consent have been completed.

 

Fees and Charges – Subdivision

 

All fees payable to Council as part of any construction, compliance or subdivision certificate or inspection associated with the development (including the registration of privately issued certificates) are required to be paid in full prior to the issue of the subdivision certificate.  Any additional Council inspections beyond the scope of any compliance certificate required to verify compliance with the terms of this consent will be charged at the individual inspection rate nominated in Council's Fees and Charges Schedule.

 

Dial Before You Dig

 

Prior to commencing any works, the applicant is encouraged to contact Dial Before You Dig on 1100 or www.dialbeforeyoudig.com.au for free information on potential underground pipes and cables within the vicinity of the development site.

 

House Numbering

 

House numbering can only be authorised by Council.  Before proceeding to number each premise in the development, the allocation of numbers is required to be obtained from Council's Planning Division.  The authorised numbers are required to be displayed in a clear manner at or near the main entrance to each premise.

 

Tree Preservation Order

 

To ensure the maintenance and protection of the existing natural environment, it is an offence to ringbark, cut down, top, lop, remove, wilfully injure or destroy a tree outside 3 metres of the approved building envelope without the prior written consent from Council. 

 

Note:   A tree is defined as a single or multi-trunked wood perennial plant having a height of not less than three (3) metres, and which develops many branches, usually from a distance of not less than one (1) metre from the ground, but excluding any plant which, in its particular location, is a noxious plant declared as such pursuant to the Noxious Weeds Act 1993. 

 

Fines may be imposed for non-compliance with Council’s Tree Preservation Order.

 

 

 


 

Executive Manager's Report No. PLN32/12

Planning Division

Date of Meeting: 16/05/2012

 

11      REPORTING VARIATIONS TO DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS   

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

In accordance with the Department of Planning and Infrastructure’s Planning Circular PS 08-14, Council is required to report variations to development standards for development applications approved under delegated authority, which relied upon State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 - Development Standards (SEPP 1).

 

PURPOSE

 

The purpose of this report is to advise Council of determined development applications under delegated authority involving a SEPP 1 variation to a development standard for the period 1 January to 31 March 2012.

 

DISCUSSION

 

The Department of Planning and Infrastructure’s Circular B1, issued in March 1989, requested that council’s monitor the use of the Director-General’s assumed concurrence under SEPP 1 on a quarterly basis.  This reporting requirement remains effective.

 

Monitoring of variations to development standards is important in that it enables the Department and councils to obtain an overview of the manner in which established development standards are being varied and whether the assumed concurrence is being used as intended.  This enables Council and the Department to determine whether development standards are appropriate, or whether changes are required.

 

The Department issued Circular PS 08–014 on 14 November 2008. The purpose of the Circular was to remind councils of their responsibilities to monitor the use of the Director-General’s assumed concurrence under SEPP 1. Councils were reminded of the need to keep accurate records of the use of SEPP 1 and to report on a quarterly basis.

 

The Circular also provides that councils are required to adopt the following four measures:

 

1.      Establish a register of development applications determined with variations in standards under SEPP 1.

 

2.      Require all development applications where there has been a variation greater than 10% in standards under SEPP 1 to be determined by full council (rather than general manager or nominated staff member).

 

3.      Provide a report to each council meeting on the development applications determined where there had been a variation in standards under SEPP 1.

 

4.      Make the register of development applications determined with variations in standards under SEPP 1 available to the public on the council’s website.

 

In accordance with Point 3 of the Department’s Circular, attached is a list of development applications determined under delegated authority involving a SEPP 1 variation to a development standard for the period 1 January 2012 to 31 March 2012.

 

A copy of the attachment to this report is also reproduced on Council’s website.

 

BUDGET

 

There are no budget implications.

 

POLICY

 

This report addresses Council’s reporting obligations on development applications determined where there has been a variation in standards under SEPP 1.

 

CONSULTATION

 

There was no consultation required in the preparation of this report.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT the contents of Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN32/12 be received and noted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

James Farrington

Acting Executive Manager - Planning

Planning Division

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.View

SEPP 1 Return

 

 

 

 

File Reference:           F2004/07599

Document Number:   D01900178

 


 

Executive Manager's Report No. PLN33/12

Planning Division

Date of Meeting: 16/05/2012

 

12      CHANGES TO THE STATE GOVERNMENT'S LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN MAKING PROCESS   

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

The NSW Government is seeking feedback on proposed changes to the plan making process under Part 3 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment (EP&A) Act, 1979 which will:

 

·       Delegate the plan making powers for routine Local Environmental Plans (LEPs) to councils; and

 

·       Allow independent reviews of decisions at key stages of the plan making process.

 

It is recommended that a submission be forwarded to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure (DP&I) noting that the proposal for making changes to the plan making process maybe premature given the status of the independent review of the EP&A Act and providing the following comments:

 

·       The proposal to delegate minor LEP amendments to councils and reduce the time taken to make a LEP is supported.  Parliamentary Counsel (PC) should be removed from plan drafting process for minor LEPs to further expedite the plan making process;

 

·       Council does not support the proposal for a pre-Gateway review as it is best placed to balance local interests against State and regional interests; 

 

·       The proposed timeframes for councils to determine whether to progress a planning proposal do not provide adequate time for Council to continue its current practice of holding an informal exhibition prior to seeking a Gateway Determination; and

 

·       The right of a proponent or council to request a review of a Gateway Determination is appropriate having regard to the Planning Assessment Commission’s (PAC’s) established role and function.  The Gateway process should be refined to clarify the role and function of the LEP Review Panel as it is not performing the function originally envisaged.

 

PURPOSE

 

The purpose of this report is to identify the proposed changes to the plan making process under Part 3 of the EP&A Act, 1979 and outline their implications for Hornsby Shire.


 

BACKGROUND

 

In July 2011, the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure announced the establishment of a Planning Review Panel (PRP) to oversee a review of the EP&A Act with the intent of providing independent advice to the NSW Government in drafting new planning legislation for the State.  The Review is being conducted in four stages, namely the Listening and Scoping, Issues Paper, Green Paper and White Paper (accompanied by draft legislation) stages.  The latter two stages are yet to be completed.  The DP&I previously advised that the Green Paper would be released by the end of April 2012 with the details of timing of the release of the White Paper to be released in due course.

 

At its meeting on 2 November 2011, Council considered Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN75/11 concerning the review of the NSW Planning System.  The report discussed the top 10 issues faced by Council in the implementation of the EP&A Act including suggestions for the drafting of new legislation.  Council resolved to forward a submission to the PRP for its consideration as part of the listening and scoping stage of the Review and that a copy of the submission be forwarded to Local Members of Parliament for their information.  In accordance with Council’s resolution, a submission was forwarded to the PRP and copies sent to Local Members of Parliament.

 

At its meeting on 1 February 2012, Council considered Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN18/12 reviewing the NSW Planning System Review Issues Paper, entitled, The way ahead for planning in NSW?  Council resolved to forward a submission to the PRP commending it on the consultation undertaken to date and noting that the issues identified in the Issues Paper include those identified by Council in its previous submission to the Review.  In accordance with Council’s resolution, a submission was forwarded to the PRP.

 

Notwithstanding the PRP is yet to finalise the independent review of the EP&A Act, the DP&I is seeking feedback on proposed changes to the plan making process under Part 3 of the Act.  The Discussion Paper (copy attached) detailing the proposed changes to the plan making process is on public exhibition until 4 May 2012.

 

A submission has been forwarded to the Department seeking an extension of time to make a submission to enable Council to consider the Discussion Paper at a Council Meeting.

 

DISCUSSION

 

The following discussion provides a summary of the local plan making process, identifies proposed changes to same and their implications for Hornsby Shire.

 

Local Plan Making

 

Part 3 of the EP&A Act provides the requirements for the making of a LEP.  A LEP is usually initiated by a council but can also be initiated by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure.  For council initiated LEPs, council is the relevant planning authority (RPA) responsible for preparing the Plan.  Where the Minister initiates the process, the Minister will appoint the Director-General, or some other person or body prescribed by the regulations, including a Joint Regional Planning Panel (JRPP) to prepare the Plan.

 

The first step in preparing a LEP is the preparation of a planning proposal.  A planning proposal is a document that explains the intended effect of the proposed LEP and also justifies the making of the Plan.  The planning proposal can be prepared by the RPA, or by a proponent for the proposed LEP.  In either event, the RPA must be satisfied with the planning proposal such that it is prepared to forward it to the Minister for review (i.e. Gateway Determination). 

 

The purpose of a Gateway Determination is to ensure there is sufficient justification early in the process to proceed with a planning proposal.  The Gateway Determination is intended as a check point for planning proposals before significant resources are committed to carrying out technical studies and investigations.  A specialist LEP Review Panel reviews the planning proposal and makes recommendations as to its merit.  A Gateway Determination is then issued by the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure (or delegate) and specifies whether a planning proposal is to proceed, and if so, in what circumstances.  The circumstances include:

 

·       Whether the proposal will proceed, with or without variation, and whether it should be resubmitted;

 

·       The level of community consultation required (i.e. 14 days public exhibition for low impact proposals and 28 days for major plans);

 

·       Input from State and Commonwealth Public Authorities;

 

·       The necessity for a public hearing by the RPA or other body; and

 

·       The appropriate timeframes for the various stages of the proposal.

 

At the conclusion of the public exhibition period, the RPA must consider any submission made in respect of the planning proposal.  The RPA can vary the proposal as a consequence of its consideration of submissions made during public exhibition, or for any other reason.  Determination of whether the planning proposal should be re-exhibited will be made by the Department.  Otherwise, upon submission of the planning proposal to the Department, the next step in preparing a LEP is its legal drafting.  The drafting of a LEP is undertaken by PC upon receipt of instructions from the Department.  After the legal instrument has been drafted, the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure (or delegate) may make a LEP.  The decision to make a LEP is given effect by publishing the LEP (including maps) on the NSW legislation website.

 

Changes to the Plan Making Process

 

The NSW Government is seeking feedback on proposed changes to the plan making process under Part 3 of the EP&A Act which will:

 

·       Delegate the plan making powers for routine LEPs to councils; and

 

·       Allow independent reviews of decisions at key stages of the plan making process.

 

Delegating Plan Making Powers to Councils: Currently, only the Minister for Planning can make a LEP following the process outline above.  The Department has advised that to streamline the plan making process, it is proposed to delegate the Minister’s plan making powers to councils in certain circumstances.  LEPs proposed to be routinely delegated to councils to finalise include:


 

·       spot rezonings consistent with an endorsed strategy;

·       reclassifications of land supported by an open space study;

·       heritage LEPs supported by an endorsed study;

·       amending references to documents/agencies, minor errors and anomalies; and

·       mapping alterations/corrections.

 

The Department would continue to request PC to draft the legal instrument.  However, council would deal directly with PC throughout the drafting process, including agreeing to the final wording of a plan.  Council would advise the Department when the Plan is made and the Department would request notification on the NSW legislation webpage through PC.

 

Implications for Hornsby Shire: Council’s submission in response to the Listening and Scoping stage of the NSW Planning System Review identified that the plan making provisions of the EP&A Act are not adequately responsive to the need to address minor local planning issues.  It often takes a year to make a minor LEP such as correcting obvious anomalies.  There are pinch points in the current plan making process, such as the need to obtain drafting advice from PC, that result in significant time delays with minimal added value.  Council’s submission identified that the new planning system should:

 

·       include delegation of plan making powers to local government for minor LEPs.    JRPPs and/or the PAC could be vested with the responsibility to review the consistency of more significant LEPs with State and Regional Strategies; and

 

·       remove PC from the process where local plans are consistent with model plans.  Alternatively, independent legal advice should be able to be obtained instead of having to obtain PC advice for minor LEPs.

 

This raises questions about the advancement of the proposed changes to the plan making process ahead of the NSW Planning System Review.  Notwithstanding, the DP&I should be commended for proposing to delegate minor LEP amendments to councils to reduce the time taken to make a LEP.  Council’s position that PC should be removed from the plan drafting process for minor LEPs would further expedite the plan making process and should be re-iterated to the DP&I as part of any submission on the proposed plan making process changes.

 

Implementation of the proposed amendments would require Council to nominate the name and position of the officer(s) to whom delegations would be granted by the Minister (or his delegate) to finalise a LEP.  Should the proposed amendments be implemented, it would be appropriate to nominate the General Manager and Executive Manager, Planning Division.

 

Independent Reviews of Decisions: The Department has advised that to improve plan making procedures, it is proposed to formalise the existing practice of seeking independent reviews for some rezoning proposals.  The plan making reviews are:

 

·       Pre-gateway Reviews - a request by a proponent before a planning proposal has been forwarded for a Gateway Determination; and

 

·       Gateway Reviews - a request by a council or a proponent following a Gateway Determination but before community consultation on the planning proposal has commenced.

 

Pre-gateway Reviews:  The Department proposes to allow an independent review by a JRPP or PAC to be sought by proponents on decisions made by councils before a planning proposal is forwarded to the DP&I for a Gateway Determination.  Proposed reviews of council decisions must be within 40 days of the decision or where  a council has not made a decision, after 60 days of the proponent’s request or up to 40 days after the end of the 60 day period. The Department has advised that any request for review would first need to pass a strict eligibility assessment by the DP&I, including that proposals would achieve orderly planning outcomes and be consistent with an endorsed local, regional or State strategy.

 

Where deemed eligible, the DP&I would forward the proposal, a report and any additional submissions provided by council to a JRPP or PAC for a review of the merits of the proposal.  The JRPP or PAC may then recommend the proposal be submitted for a Gateway Determination.  Where a Gateway Determination is issued in support of progression of the proposal, it would be progressed in accordance with the existing process.  However, the Minister may decide to appoint an alternate RPA (usually the Director-General) after consulting the council.

 

Gateway Reviews: The Department proposes to allow an independent review by a PAC to be sought by a council or a proponent on decisions made by the LEP Review Panel after a Gateway Determination has been issued.  If the Gateway Determination is either not to proceed or to resubmit the planning proposal, a council or a proponent may request a review 40 days after the determination or before the public exhibition has been commenced, which ever comes first.  If the Gateway Determination is to proceed with the planning proposal but imposes unsatisfactory requirements, the council or a proponent has 14 days from being notified by the Department to request a review.

 

Where a request for a Gateway review is received, the Minister or Director-General would request advice from the PAC and be required to consider the advice and any additional submissions provided by council or proponent before making a decision on whether to alter the Gateway Determination.  Where an alternate Gateway Determination is issued for progression of the proposal, it would be progressed in accordance with the existing process.

 

Additional information in support of the planning proposal and a fee to cover administrative assessment costs would be required to enable either type of review.

 

Implications for Hornsby Shire: The right of a proponent to request a pre-Gateway review of a council determination not to progress a planning proposal is a new right not currently available to proponents.  Council is currently the sole arbiter concerning whether to progress a proponent initiated planning proposal.  If Council declines the request, the proponent has no right of review or appeal. 

 

It could be argued that a right of review is a fair and reasonable proposition and should be considered by Council.  However, the proposal is for the JRPP or PAC to review the merits of the proposal.  Councils are required to consider and balance State, regional and local interests in determining whether to progress a planning proposal.  While a JRPP and the PAC would also be required to consider and balance the same interests, they have a different composition to that of councils and have the potential to attract similar criticisms to that as the previous Part 3A provisions under the EP&A Act.  It is contended that Council is best placed to understand local nuances and balance local interests against State and regional interests.  Accordingly, Council should be responsible for determining whether a planning proposal should be progressed.

 

Council’s current practice of reviewing a proponent initiated plan is first to notify surrounding property owners of the proposal and to invite public comment over a period of 21 days.  This exhibition is not intended to fulfil the public exhibition requirements of the EP&A Act but rather to obtain community opinion on the proposal before Council considers the strategic implications of the proposal and decides whether to progress the matter.

 

Taking into consideration the period of time it takes to exhibit a planning proposal and report the matter to Council, the proposal for an independent review of the merits of the planning proposal where council has not made a submission 60 days after the proponent’s initial request would not provide adequate time for Council to continue its current practice of holding an informal exhibition.  Notwithstanding that Council should not support a pre-Gateway review of a council determination or non determination of a planning proposal, the minimum time period in which a proponent can request an independent review should be extended to a minimum of 90 days.

 

The right of a proponent or council to request a review of a Gateway Determination is appropriate given the LEP Review Panel role and function aims to primarily consider a proposal’s consistency with State and regional strategies.  The PAC is well placed to review same having regard to its established role and functions.  Accordingly, Council’s submission should support the Gateway review of the Department’s determination.

 

Council’s submission prepared in response to the Listening and Scoping stage of the NSW Planning System Review identified that the implementation of the Gateway process should be refined as it is not performing the function originally envisaged.  In some instances, the LEP Review Panel is deferring a determination until all supporting planning studies have been undertaken rather than giving the planning proposal an “in principle approval” having regard to consistency with State and regional plans.  This may potentially result in a council spending its time and resources undertaking planning studies that are subsequently not supported by the PRP.  Council submitted that the new planning system should establish guidelines concerning the role and function of the LEP Review Panel to require the Panel to issue a formal Gateway Determination, or not, based on the consistency of the proposal with State and regional plans.

 

This again raises questions about the advancement of the proposed changes to the plan making process ahead of the NSW Planning System Review.  Notwithstanding, Council’s submission concerning the role and function of the PRP should be re-iterated to the DP&I as part of any submission on the proposed plan making process changes.

 

CONCLUSION

 

This report provides a summary of the local plan making process, identifies proposed changes to same and their implications for Hornsby Shire.

 

It is recommended that a submission be forwarded to the DP&I noting that the proposal for making changes to the plan making process may be premature given the status of the independent review of the EP&A Act and identifying the implications for Hornsby Shire.

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT a submission be forwarded to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure noting that the proposal for making changes to the plan making process maybe premature given the status of the independent review of the of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act and identifying the implications for Hornsby Shire identified in Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN33/12.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jason Rawlin

Acting Manager - Town Planning Services

Planning Division

 

 

 

 

James Farrington

Acting Executive Manager - Planning

Planning Division

 

 

Attachments:

1.View

Discussion Paper

 

 

 

 

File Reference:           F2004/07218-03

Document Number:   D01906720

 


 

Executive Manager's Report No. PLN34/12

Planning Division

Date of Meeting: 16/05/2012

 

13      EXHIBITION OF DRAFT HORNSBY DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN   

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

Changes to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (EP&A Act) 1979 require that only one Development Control Plan (DCP) apply to a parcel of land.  Accordingly, all of Council’s existing 32 DCPs are required to be amalgamated into one comprehensive DCP within the same timeframe for the preparation of Council’s new Standard Instrument based Local Environmental PlanThe draft Hornsby Development Control Plan (HDCP) 2012 has been prepared to complement the draft Hornsby Local Environmental Plan (HLEP).

 

To prepare the draft HDCP, Council’s existing DCPs were reviewed to:

 

·       Provide consistency with the draft HLEP;

·       Reflect recent planning studies and legislation;

·       Consolidate controls and delete repetition;

·       Remove outdated or obsolete controls and references; and

·       Provide links to policy and legislation.

 

Public exhibition of draft HDCP 2012 is required to satisfy the plan making provisions of the EP&A Act and ensure the community has an opportunity to comment on the Plan.  Accordingly, it is recommended that Council endorse the draft HDCP 2012 for public exhibition for a period of 60 days, to be exhibited concurrently with the draft HLEP.

 

PURPOSE

 

The purpose of this report is to present the HDCP 2012 for endorsement for public exhibition.

 

BACKGROUND

 

A DCP is a detailed planning document which reflects Council’s expectation for the local government area.  The provisions of a DCP must be consistent with the provisions of any relevant LEP.  However, a DCP may operate to confine the intensity of development otherwise permitted by a LEP.  There are currently 32 DCPs that apply to the Hornsby Local Government Area (LGA).

 

Section 74C of the EP&A Act prescribes that only one DCP may apply to a parcel of land.  The purpose is to reduce the complexity of development controls by ensuring that DCPs do not conflict with each other or with the relevant LEP.  If Section 74C is not complied with, all DCPs that apply to the land will be rendered invalid and have no effect.  Clause 289A of the EP&A Regulation 2000 requires that these provisions be complied with when a Standard Instrument based LEP is prepared.

 

At its meeting on 7 March 2012, Council considered Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN19/12 seeking endorsement to exhibit a revised draft HLEP prepared in accordance with the Standard Instrument and addressing conditions of the Section 65 certificate issued by the Department of Planning and Infrastructure (DP&I).  The report notes that the preparation of Council’s new LEP has principally been a process of transferring the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan (HSLEP) 1994 into the new LEP format.  The report also notes that additional planning studies have been undertaken and have informed the new LEP so as to respond to regional strategies and the requirements for the preparation of a Standard Instrument based LEP. 

 

Council resolved to endorse the revised LEP and that the DP&I be required to revise the Section 65 Certificate to enable it to be placed on public exhibition.  Council is now in receipt of certification from the DP&I enabling the draft HLEP to be placed on exhibition.  It is anticipated that the draft HLEP will be placed on public exhibition in June/July 2012 and submitted to the DP&I for finalisation in late 2012.

 

Therefore, all 32 existing DCPs that apply to Hornsby Shire need to be amalgamated to comply with the requirement that only one DCP apply to land.  In addition, the DCP is required to be prepared to be consistent with the format of Council’s Standard Instrument based LEP and should be progressed concurrently to ensure the DCP comes into effect upon the gazettal of the draft HLEP.

 

DISCUSSION

 

Draft Hornsby Development Control Plan (HDCP) 2012 seeks to provide development guidelines to promote sustainable development.  It is a comprehensive new document that has been prepared to complement the new draft HLEP.  Although not every prescriptive measure from the Council’s existing DCPs has been transferred to draft HDCP 2012, the intent and desired outcome of these provisions has been.

 

The following discussion identifies the strategy for the preparation of the draft HDCP, the structure of the draft Plan, presents the main provisions of the draft Plan and identifies how key translation issues have been resolved.

 

1.      Strategy for Preparation

 

The planning provisions of Council’s existing 32 DCPs have formed the basis of the draft HDCP.  However, the provisions have been reviewed to:

 

·       Provide consistency with the draft HLEP;

·       Reflect recent planning studies and legislation;

·       Consolidate controls and delete repetition;

·       Remove outdated or obsolete controls and references; and

·       Provide links to policy and legislation.

 

Provide consistency with the draft HLEP:  The existing DCP provisions have been modified to reflect the new zones, land uses, definitions and development standards within the draft HLEP.  In addition, new controls have been drafted to support new provisions of the draft HLEP, including:

 

·       Tree and Vegetation Preservation controls to specify when approval is required;

·       storey height controls to supplement the new building height controls of the draft HLEP (expressed in metres);

·       built form controls to replace floor space ratio (FSR) provisions in Residential zones;

·       controls for new permissible uses in Rural zones, including Garden Centres and Secondary dwellings; and

·       controls for Sex Service Premises in recognition of their permissibility in Industrial zones.

 

Reflect recent planning studies and legislation:  There are a number of recent local planning studies and State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs) that apply to development in Hornsby Shire that should be reflected in the new DCP.  The policies that have a significant influence on the drafting of the DCP include:

 

·       Hornsby Shire Housing Strategy and DCP;

·       Hornsby Shire River Settlements and Foreshores Review;

·       Hornsby Shire Heritage DCP Review;

·       Hornsby Shire Integrated Land Use and Transport Strategy (ILUTs);

·       SEPP No.65 – Residential Flat Design Code;

·       SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009;

·       SEPP (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008; and

·       SEPP (Infrastructure) 2007.

 

Consolidate controls and delete repetition:  The preparation of the new DCP has enabled a number of controls repeated throughout the existing DCPs to be consolidated.  For example, the general environmental controls that apply to all development types are now consolidated into one part of the DCP.  To further improve the usability of the document, existing DCP controls were reviewed to provide clear desired outcomes and prescriptive measures.  The DCP is to be accompanied by a separate comprehensive development application submission guideline enabling the DCP to focus on the key guidelines for development.

 

Remove outdated or obsolete controls and references:  The preparation of the draft HDCP has provided an opportunity to remove outdated or obsolete controls and references. 

 

Provide links to policy and legislation:  A key strategy adopted in the drafting of the HDCP has been to include references and links to policy and legislation rather than repeating these provisions.  This ensures that the DCP will remain up to date with adopted policies and legislative requirements.  This should improve the usability of the document.  For example, the draft HDCP includes references to adopted Australian Standards. 

 

2.      Structure of Draft HDCP 2012

 

The draft HDCP (available for viewing on Council’s website hornsby.nsw.gov.au/hdcp) comprises 9 parts and annexures.  The DCP structure incorporates general environmental controls for all applications in one part (Part 1 – General), while the remaining 8 parts provide land use and area based controls. 

 

A summary of the new structure is provided below.  Also attached is a series of tables (Attachment 1) identifying how Council’s existing DCPs have been translated into the new DCP structure.

 

DCP Part

Applicability

Part 1 – General

All land

Part 2 – Rural

Land in Rural Areas

Part 3 – Residential

Land in Residential Zones

Part 4 – Business

Land in Business Zones

Part 5 – Industrial

Land in Industrial Zones

Part 6 – Subdivision

Subdivision of all land

Part 7 – Community

Development involving childcare centres, schools, places of public worship, community housing, telecommunications, temporary events, and health service facilities

Part 8 – River Settlements

Land in River Settlements

Part 9 – Heritage

Development involving heritage items, conservation areas and aboriginal archaeology

Annexures

Contains detailed provisions referenced in the DCP

 

Each DCP Part is divided into sections and comprises desired outcomes and prescriptive measures.  Desired outcomes are statements that describe the outcome sought by the control.  Prescriptive measures are requirements that are likely to achieve the desired outcome.

 

In summary, a development application would be required to address Part1 - General of the DCP and typically address at least one other part.  For example, an application for a dwelling house on an existing lot in the R2 Low Density Residential zone would address Part 1 - General and Part 3.1 -Dwelling House. 

 

3.      Draft HDCP 2012 Provisions

 

The following discussion provides an overview of each part of the draft HDCP.  It also identifies some of the key translation issues and modifications to Council’s existing DCP controls.

 

Part 1 – General

 

Part 1 provides general controls that apply to all Development Applications.  Part 1A explains the purpose of the DCP, including the objectives, strategic context and relationships to other plans and policies.  Part 1B provides administrative provisions including how to use the DCP, Notification and Exhibition requirements and Tree and Vegetation Preservation controls.  Part 1C establishes the general development controls for all development, including controls for the natural environment, built environment and hazards.  A summary of the key sections under the Part is provided below.

 

1B.4 Submitting an Application: The Section outlines information required to accompany a development application.  The Section refers to a separate comprehensive DA submission guideline to assist in the preparation of an application.

 

1B.5 Notification and Exhibition: The Section replaces the Notification and Exhibition DCP.  Key differences between the existing DCP provisions and those contained in the section are as follows:

 

·       The HDCP requires a notification sign to be erected on the site of all notifable DAs.  This is not currently required for smaller applications such as dwelling houses. 

 

·       The exhibition period for all Integrated Development is proposed to be increased to 30 days, consistent with the minimum period required for Nominated Integrated Development under the EP&A Act. 

 

·       The exhibition period for all advertised local development is proposed to be 14 days, consistent with the minimum period required under the EP&A Act

 

·       A provision has been included that allows Council to extend the minimum exhibition period for local development from 14 days to 21 days where there is significant community interest in the application. 

 

1B.6 Tree and Vegetation Preservation:  The Section is required to satisfy the Tree and Vegetation provisions of the draft HLEP.  The draft HLEP requires a DCP to prescribe trees and vegetation that are protected and to outline the approval regime for work to same.

 

At its meeting on 20 April 2011, Council considered Executive Manager’s Report No. EN2/11 concerning the tree and vegetation chapter of the draft HDCP and resolved to adopt tree and vegetation management principles for inclusion in the draft Plan.  The Section of the draft DCP is generally consistent with the adopted principles.  However, modifications are proposed to exempt vegetation relating to the clearing of bushland with an area of less than 30 sqm on Rural zoned land or an area of less than 10 sqm in urban areas.  The draft HDCP includes additional criteria for exempt bushland removal to ensure it does not impact on environmentally sensitive lands.

 

1C.1.1 Biodiversity:  The Section replaces Council’s existing controls on sensitive land and flora and fauna protection.  A key additional provision is the introduction of prescribed minimum buffer zones for significant vegetation types.  Development should not include buildings, structures and earthworks within the minimum buffer zones. 

 

1C.1.2 Stormwater Management:  The Section replaces Council’s existing controls on drainage, soil and water management and the Sustainable Water DCP.  However, a modification is proposed to the water quality controls.  The existing DCP provisions require that “New development should not contribute to significant down stream impact on water quality” and lists measures to minimise water quality impacts such as water harvesting, grass swales and permanent detention basins.  These controls are proposed to be replaced with quantifiable water quality targets.  In urban areas, the water quality targets recommended are from the national best practice guideline “Evaluating Options for Water Sensitive Urban Design (2009)”.  For non urban areas, the water targets are “Australian and New Zealand Guidelines for Fresh and Marine Water Quality (2000)” (ANZECC).  This would require larger scale urban developments and intensive rural activities to be accompanied by a water sensitive urban design strategy (or similar) with any application.

 

1C.1.3 Watercourses: The Section replaces Council’s existing controls for urban streams.  Development in the vicinity of streams may be Integrated Development under the Water Management Act, 2000.  The DCP controls have been modified to reflect the NSW Department of Water guidelines on riparian corridors that require a core riparian area and a 10 metre wide vegetated buffer.

 

1C.2.1 Transport and Parking: The Section replaces existing controls for vehicle access and parking and the Car Parking DCP.  However, a modification is proposed to the car parking rates.  There are two parking rates proposed, one for land within 800 metres of a railway station and another for all other sites.  The parking rates require less parking near railway stations to promote the use of sustainable modes of transport.  The parking rate for residential accommodation has been modified to reflect the number of bedrooms in any unit, rather than the total floor space.  In addition, the parking rate for a restaurant within 800 metres of a railway station has been modified to reflect the retail rate to facilitate changes of use.  The amended parking rates have been developed in accordance with the recommendations of Council’s Integrated Landuse and Transport Strategy. 

 

New controls for car share parking are also proposed.  These provisions would not become operative until such time that Council adopts a detailed car share parking policy, details of which would be reported to Council for its consideration prior to the DCP coming into effect.

 

1C.2.2 Accessible Design:  The Section replaces the Access and Mobility DCP.  The detailed provisions in the existing DCP are no longer required as most new building work is required to comply with the accessibility provisions of the Building Code of Australia (BCA) and the Disability (Access to Premises – Buildings) Standards 2010

 

1C.2.3 Waste Management: The Section replaces the Waste Minimisation and Management DCP.  A key change to the existing provisions is a modification to the waste minimisation target from 60% to 76% for demolition and construction waste to reflect current State Government targets. 

 

A significant modification is also proposed to garbage truck sizes.  The existing DCP controls require high density residential flat buildings with 17 or more dwellings to provide a waste storage room in the main building and within 10 metres of a waste collection point.  This is consistent with the SEPP No.65 Residential Flat Design Code.  Council requires high density residential developments (traditionally 6 storeys and higher) to design for a large truck, 9.7 metres long with a clearance of 4.5 metres.  However, the Housing Strategy DCP controls for 5 storey residential flat buildings in Council’s Housing Strategy precincts were designed to accommodate a small garbage truck in the basement.  The large truck prescribed in Council’s current guidelines may have significant impacts on the built form.  Accordingly, to facilitate a high quality streetscape not dominated by waste storage facilities at the property frontage, the draft HDCP requires provisions to be made for on-site access for a small waste collection vehicle.  Council’s Waste Management Team has confirmed that various contractors can provide a small waste collection vehicle to collect waste. 

 

The additional cost of servicing a unit would initially be approximately 30% more, with the cost increase diminishing somewhat as the number of 5 storey developments occur.  This cost increase could be borne by the development or absorbed by all ratepayers given the community benefit of providing high quality development in Council’s Housing Strategy Precincts. 

 

1C.2.4 Effluent Disposal: The Section replaces the effluent disposal provisions in the Rural Lands DCP.  The controls have been updated to reflect current legislative requirements.

 

1C.2.5 Noise and Vibration:  The Section replaces the existing controls on acoustics.  The controls have been updated to reflect current legislative requirements.  New controls have been included on construction noise management.

 

1C.2.6 Air Quality:  The Section includes new controls on air quality that reflect current legislative requirements. 

 

1C.2.8 Building Sustainability:  The Section replaces the existing controls on energy efficiency.  The controls have been enhanced to include water conservation provisions in non-residential buildings and reflect the existing provisions of the Sustainable Water DCP.

 

1C.2.10 Services and Lighting:  The Section replaces the existing controls on tennis courts (lighting) and satellite dishes.  New controls have been included on the integration of services within a development.

 

1C.2.11 Signage:  The Section replaces the Outdoor Advertising DCP.  A number of the existing controls have been superseded by the provisions of SEPP No. 64 Advertising and Signage.

 

1C.2.12 Avoiding Isolated Sites:  The Section includes new controls to reflect the NSW Land and Environment Court Planning Principles on isolated sites.

 

1C.3 Hazards:  The Section replaces existing controls on fire hazard, drainage and soil and water management (acid sulphate soils and land contamination).  The controls have been updated to reflect current legislative requirements, including sea level rise.

 

Part 2 – Rural

 

Part 2 provides controls for development of land in Rural areas.  This includes controls for rural buildings, rural landuses, village masterplans, controls for Dural Village and Extractive Industries.

 

2.1 Rural Buildings:  The Section replaces the existing controls for buildings within the Rural Lands DCP.  The controls generally reflect the NSW Rural Housing Code.  This ensures that the building controls that apply to complying development and a development application are similar.  For example, new controls have been introduced for small lots (<4000m2).  The new controls provide reduced setbacks for existing undersized lots that allow for an open rural landscape while also recognising the difficulty in achieving the setbacks that apply to the larger lots.  The side boundary setback for larger lots (>4000m2) is also decreased from 15 metres to 10 metres to reflect the side boundary setbacks in the NSW Rural Housing Code.

 

2.2 Rural Landuses:  The Section replaces the existing controls for rural land uses within the Rural Lands DCP.  The section transfers controls on intensive plant agriculture, dams, animal boarding or training establishments, rural industry and rural workers dwellings.  The Section also provides controls for garden centres, plant nurseries, landscaping material supplies, secondary dwellings and tourist and visitor accommodation to reflect their introduction as permissible uses in the draft HLEP.

 

New controls have been introduced to provide separation between sensitive landuses and rural activities that supplement the setback controls.  For example, when a dwelling is located adjacent to horticulture, the new building may require an increased boundary setback to minimise potential landuse conflict.

 

2.3 Village Masterplans:  The Section includes masterplans for Dural Village, Galston and Wisemans Ferry.  The existing Glenorie Village masterplan has not been included as most of the detail in the plan relates to The Hills LGA and development in the area is adequately guided by the relevant zone and issue controls of the draft HDCP.

 

2.4 Dural Village:  The Section replaces the Dural Village DCP.  The controls have been drafted to generally reflect the NSW Housing Code.  This ensures that the building controls that apply to complying development and development requiring development consent are similar.  Additional controls for non-residential landuses have been incorporated that reflect the provisions of the draft HLEP.

 

2.5 Extractive Industries:  The Section replaces the Extractive Industries Maroota DCP.  The controls have been modified having regard to the updated provisions that apply to similar developments in The Hills LGA, to the west of Old Northern Road.

 

Part 3 – Residential

 

Part 3 provides controls for development within residential zones including controls for dwelling houses, medium density housing and residential flat buildings.

 

3.1 Dwelling Houses: The Section replaces the Dwelling-House DCP and applies to the R2 Low Density Residential Zone.  The controls are designed to generally reflect the NSW Housing Code.  This ensures that the building controls that apply to complying development and a development requiring development consent are similar.

 

For example, the draft HLEP building height control of 8.5 metres is supplemented by a maximum height of 2 storeys + attic.  In response to the removal of Floor Space Ratio (FSR) controls from the draft HLEP, the draft HDCP includes floor area, site coverage and landscape controls.  The setback and privacy controls have been modified to more closely reflect the NSW Housing Code.  New controls have also been included on view sharing.

 

3.3 Medium Density Housing:  The Section replaces the Medium Density Multi-Unit Housing DCP and applies to the R3 Medium Density Residential Zone.  The Section includes form based controls for medium density housing, similar to the strategic approach adopted for the Housing Strategy DCP.

 

For example, the draft HLEP building height of 10.5 metres is supplemented by a maximum height of 2 storeys + attic, with an allowance for a basement projection.  In response to the removal of FSR controls from the draft HLEP, the draft HDCP includes controls for footprint, setback and articulation.  The boundary setbacks and building separations required for medium density housing have also been increased.  This encourages a consolidated building footprint in a landscaped setting.

 

There are three different medium density housing forms anticipated namely, conventional townhouses facing a side boundary with parking at grade, townhouses with basement parking, and low rise residential flat buildings.  The form based controls result in a range of dwelling yields consistent with the definition of medium density in the Metropolitan Strategy.  The density achieved would vary depending on the application of the built form controls.  Removal of the FSR controls provides an incentive to provide parking within a basement and improve the landscape setting of the development.  The inclusion of basement parking provides more efficient dwelling yields than that currently achieved under Council’s Medium Density Multi-Unit Housing DCP

 

Other controls introduced for medium density housing reflect the provisions within the NSW Housing Code, Residential Flat Design Code or Council’s Housing Strategy DCP.  For example, the minimum open space area of 24m2 required for a townhouse reflects the principal private open space area required for a dwelling house under the NSW Housing Code.

 

3.4 Residential Flat Buildings (3 Storeys):  The Section replaces the Medium/High Density Multi-Unit Housing DCP and applies to the R4 High Density Residential Zone with a height limit of 12 metres identified on the draft HLEP Height of Buildings map.  The Section includes form based controls for 3 storey flat buildings, similar to the strategic approach adopted for the Housing Strategy DCP.

 

For example, the draft HLEP building height of 12 metres is supplemented by a maximum height of 3 storeys, with an allowance for a basement projection.  The draft HDCP includes controls for footprint, setback and articulation.  This encourages a consolidated building footprint in a landscaped setting.  The boundary setbacks have been marginally increased, with the exception of the top storey setback control that has been replaced with a new control on façade articulation.  New separation controls have also been included that reflect the Residential Flat Design Code.

 

3.5 Residential Flat Buildings (5 Storeys):  The Section replaces the part of the Housing Strategy DCP relating to 5 Storey Residential Development.  There have been some formatting changes to the planning controls to reflect the structure of the draft HDCP.  In addition, there are some modifications proposed to the controls that address issues identified during the preparation of the DCP.  The key modifications to the controls include changes to setback, building separation and masterplan provisions.

 

Setbacks to side boundaries have been amended.  The existing Housing Strategy DCP controls permit balconies to encroach to within 4 metres of a side boundary if there is no impact on the achievement of daylight access, visual privacy and acoustic privacy.  The minimum side boundary setback has been revised to 6 metres and may be reduced to 4 metres for a maximum of a third of the building width.  This would better assist in achieving the separation provisions of the Residential Flat Design Code.  Setbacks to laneways have also been introduced with a new control proposed to maintain a minimum setback of 6 metres to an existing laneway. 

 

Building separation provisions have been amended.  A new control requires developments that face a side or rear boundary with an undeveloped site to provide half of the building separation required by the Residential Flat Design Code.  In addition, it is proposed to increase the minimum building separation for developments on the same site from 6 to 9 metres.

 

Landscaping controls have been amended to prescribe the extent of landscaping required between two or more buildings on a development site.  The Fisher Avenue, Pennant Hills precinct plan has also been amended.  In response to concerns raised by the Pennant Hills District Civic Trust, a servicing strategy has been introduced and a Traffic Management Improvement Plan proposes to restrict traffic to the precinct to left in/ left out from Trebor Road.

 

3.6 Residential Flat Buildings (6 or more Storeys):  The Section replaces the High Density Multi Unit Housing DCP.  This Section includes form based controls for residential flat buildings of 6 or more storeys, similar to the strategic approach adopted for the Housing Strategy DCP.  There are two different forms of building anticipated, high rise residential flat buildings in a landscaped setting or buildings in a mixed use setting (i.e. Pound Road precinct).

 

The draft HLEP building heights are supplemented by storey controls prepared generally on the basis of a residential storey height of 3 metres, with a 1.5 metre allowance for roof articulation and a 1 metre basement projection (except Pound Road).  The draft HDCP includes controls for footprint, setback and articulation.  New building separation controls are included that reflect the Residential Flat Design Code.  The key modifications to the controls include changes to setback and masterplan provisions.

 

The masterplans for the Orara Street and College Crescent Precincts have been deleted as the precincts are substantially developed and height controls are included in the draft HLEP.  Furthermore, the Orara Street masterplan is no longer required as the public park promoted by the masterplan is now proposed to be zoned RE1 Public Recreation in the draft HLEP.  An updated masterplan has been included for the Pound Road precinct to reflect recent buildings.

 

Part 4 – Business

 

Part 4 provides controls for development of land in a Business Zone.  This includes general controls for Business lands, controls for the Mixed Use (Housing Strategy) precincts, Town Centre Masterplans and controls for Hornsby Town Centre.

 

4.1 Commercial Centres Hierarchy:  The Section replaces the Commercial Centres hierarchy element in the Business Lands DCP.  The hierarchy is similar to the existing controls, albeit updated to reflect new terminology in the Metropolitan Strategy and the Hornsby Kuring-gai Subregional Employment Study.

 

4.2 Business Lands:  The Section replaces the Business Lands DCP, part of the Industrial Land DCP and some area based DCPs (Dural Service Centre, Berowra Cowan, Brooklyn, and Pennant Hills DCPs).  The controls apply to all business zoned lands, with the exception of the Housing Strategy Precincts and Hornsby Town Centre.  The existing DCP controls have been modified taking into account the controls adopted for the Mixed Use (Housing Strategy) precincts. 

 

The draft HLEP building heights are supplemented by storey controls, generally on the basis of a typical commercial storey height of 4 metres, a residential storey height of 3 metres and an allowance for roof articulation.  The draft HLEP has retained FSR controls to control the intensity of development.  The key modifications to the controls include changes to setback, podium and privacy provisions.

 

Setbacks at the interface of a residential and business zone have been introduced.  Where setbacks are not specified on a setback diagram, the controls require a minimum setback of 1 metre for buildings up to 8.5 metres and 3 metres for buildings above 8.5 metres.  Greater setbacks may be required for upper storeys to address new building separation controls between residential uses.

 

Podium controls have been introduced to maintain a pedestrian friendly scale at the street frontage.  Privacy and security controls have also been introduced.  This would facilitate compliance with the Residential Flat Design Code.

 

4.3 Town Centre Masterplans:  The Section replaces the town centre masterplans within the Business Lands DCP and some area based DCPs.  The town centre masterplans that have been retained include Berowra (Pacific Highway), Galston, Mount Colah and Pennant Hills.  The Asquith and Beecroft masterplans have been deleted as they have been replaced by the Housing Strategy Key Principles Diagrams.

 

The Berowra Heights (Turner Road) masterplan has been deleted.  It is no longer required as the commercial zoned areas are substantially developed and appropriate built form controls are included elsewhere in the HDCP.  The masterplan provisions that relate to the medium density zone cannot be implemented due to court approved development consents.  The built form controls for medium density housing in the draft HDCP would apply.

 

The Brooklyn masterplan has also been deleted as it is covered by the Business Lands and Heritage provisions of the draft HDCP.  Key issues such as heights, street setbacks and design principles for infill development have been included in the DCP.  The Epping masterplan has been deleted as the area is currently under review.  In the interim, key issues such as heights, street setbacks and design principles for infill development have been included in the DCP.  The Mt Kuring-gai masterplan is no longer required due to the recent Aldi development. 

 

4.4 Mixed Use Precincts:  The Section replaces the part of the Housing Strategy DCP relating to Mixed Use Development.  There have been some formatting changes to the planning controls to reflect the structure of the draft HDCP. 

 

4.5 Hornsby Town Centre:  The Section replaces the Hornsby Town Centre DCP.  There have been some formatting changes to the planning controls to reflect the structure of the draft HDCP.  Key changes include the introduction of Desired Future Character Statements for the three precincts in the Hornsby Town Centre.  These have been derived from the existing strategy and precinct design elements in the existing DCP.

 

Part 5 – Industrial

 

Part 5 provides controls for development of land in the IN1 General Industrial and IN2 Light Industrial zones.  The Part includes general controls for Industrial lands and controls for Sex Services Premises.

 

5.1 Industrial Land:  The Section replaces the Industrial Lands DCP and part of the Dural Service Centre DCP.  These controls apply to all IN1 and IN2 zoned land.

 

The draft HLEP building heights are supplemented by storey controls, prepared generally on the basis of a typical industrial storey height of 4.5 metres and an allowance for roof articulation.  The draft HLEP has retained FSR controls to control the intensity of development.  The key changes to controls include the introduction of landuse controls and modification of setback provisions.

 

The existing DCP control for ancillary office space that applies to the Dural Service Centre is applied to all Industrial Land.  New controls are introduced for industrial retail outlets to reflect the introduction of the land use as a permissible form of development in Industrial zones under the draft HLEP.

 

Minor changes are proposed to the setback controls.  It is proposed to increase the local road setback from 3 to 5 metres.  Existing larger setbacks at Mt Kuring-gai and Dural Service Centre are maintained.  A prescriptive control is also proposed requiring a 5 metre landscaped setback between industrial developments and a sensitive area (eg. residential zone interface).  A larger setback is proposed at the western interface of the Asquith Industrial area to reflect previous zoning changes.

 

5.2 Sex Services Premises:  The Section includes new controls that apply to Sex Services Premises (brothels) that are proposed to be permitted with consent in IN1 and IN2 zones under the draft HLEP.

 

The draft HLEP contains provisions for the location of Sex Services Premises.  The draft HDCP controls require developments to be modest in scale and discreet in design to limit potential adverse environmental impacts.  The controls reflect recognised planning principles for the location of brothels. 

 

Part 6 – Subdivision

 

Part 6 provides specific additional controls for the subdivision of land and a masterplan for Cherrybrook.

 

6.1 General Provisions:  The Section includes new general subdivision controls that would apply to any subdivision application.  The Section requires that any proposed subdivision should demonstrate that the newly created allotments would be capable of accommodating the construction of landuses permitted within that zone and in accordance with the controls within the DCP.

 

6.2 Residential Subdivision:  The Section replaces the Residential Subdivision DCP.  The controls have been modified to reflect the amended DCP controls for dwelling houses in the draft HDCP.

 

Minimum lot width controls have been introduced to facilitate development that is compatible with the subdivision pattern.  Land with a minimum lot size of 500sqm requires a minimum width of 12 metres, while land with a minimum lots size of 600sqm requires a minimum width of 15 metres. 

 

6.3 Rural Subdivision:  The Section replaces the subdivision provisions within the Rural Lands DCP.  These controls have been modified to reflect the amended DCP controls for rural buildings in the draft HDCP. 

 

New controls are proposed for primary production lots in recognition of the mandated introduction of the Rural Subdivision provisions of the draft HLEP.  The Rural Subdivision clause permits undersized lots where such a lot does not contain an existing dwelling or permit a dwelling to be constructed. 

 

6.4 Accessway Design:  The Section consolidates the existing controls on accessway design that apply to subdivisions in the R2 Low Density Residential zone and Rural zones.

 

Minor changes are proposed to the minimum accessway width.  For example, for small subdivision applications (of 1-3 lots), the minimum accessway width is decreased from 4 to 3.5 metres.  This reflects variations to the accessway controls that are currently being approved by Council allowing a landscape strip to be provided along one side the driveway.

 

6.5 Road Design:  The Section requires any public road to be designed in accordance with Council’s Civil Work Specifications

 

6.6 Subdivision Masterplans:  The Section replaces the Subdivision Masterplans provided within the area based DCPs.  The subdivision masterplan for Cherrybrook has been retained.  The Berowra Crown land masterplans are no longer appropriate and have been deleted as they were prepared prior to current environmental legislation, including Planning for Bushfire Protection and updated Biodiversity provisions.  The subdivision masterplans provide an unrealistic expectation as to the likely subdivision pattern that could be approved.  The Lingellen Street (Berowra) and Westleigh masterplans are no longer required as properties in the vicinity are now largely developed.

 

Part 7 – Community

 

Part 7 provides specific controls for developments such as childcare centres, schools, places of public worship, community housing, telecommunications, temporary events, and health service facilities.

 

7.1 Community Uses:  The Section replaces the Community Uses DCP and applies to childcare centres, schools and places of public worship.  The key changes include modification to building scale and child care centre intensity provisions.

 

Child care centre intensity (number of children) controls have been modified.  The enhanced play space rate  has been amended for child care centres of up to 60 children in a residential zone.  The existing DCP controls require an enhanced play space rate to be applied to all children in larger child care centres, including a minimum outdoor play space rate of 15sqm per child rather than 7sqm as prescribed by the Children Services Regulation.  It is proposed that the enhanced play space rate be applied to each additional child above 30 in a dwelling house or for each additional child above 40 children for a purpose built centre.

 

7.2 Community Housing:  The Section clarifies controls that apply to Seniors Housing, Boarding Houses and Group Home applications.  These uses are mandated as permissible in some zones under the draft HLEP resulting in the ability to lodge an application for such development under the LEP rather than the applicable SEPP. 

 

7.3 Telecommunications:  The Section includes new controls on telecommunications facilities that reflect existing legislation and best practice guidelines. 

 

7.4 Temporary Events:  The Section includes new controls on temporary events. 

 

7.5 Health Services Facility:  The Section replaces the Residential – Medical Support DCP and applies to the specialist medical precinct to the west of Hornsby Hospital. 

 

The draft HLEP building height of 8.5 metres is supplemented by a maximum height of 2 storeys.  The draft HLEP has included a 0.5:1 FSR to control the intensity of development.  These controls are generally consistent with the existing controls for the precinct.  However, the requirement for development to have a “residential character” has been removed in response to the emerging commercial character of the precinct and recent development consents.

 

Setback controls have also been slightly modified.  The front boundary setback is proposed to be reduced from 6 to 4 metres, while a secondary boundary setback of 4 metres has been retained.  New controls require landscaping of the primary and secondary frontages. 

 

Part 8 – River Settlements

 

Part 8 provides controls for development of land in the River Settlements, including general controls for buildings, river settlement landuses (boat sheds, jetties and seawalls) and River Settlement Masterplans (Berowra Waters and Kangaroo Point).  The controls replace the existing River Settlements DCP, Dangar Island DCP and part of the Brooklyn DCP.

 

The controls respond to the recommendations of the River Settlements and Foreshores Review.  The draft HLEP building height of 10.5 metres has been supplemented by a maximum height of 2 storeys. The HLEP has retained a 0.3:1 FSR to control the intensity of development for land zoned E4 Environmental Living.    New controls are provided on view sharing and Tourist and Visitor Accommodation.

 

Part 9 – Heritage

 

Part 9 provides controls for development that may impact on heritage items or areas.  This includes controls for heritage administrative matters, heritage items, heritage conservation areas, land in the vicinity of heritage, development of land (including undisturbed land) that may contain an Aboriginal relic or place.  The Part also provides specific controls for the Beecroft Heritage Precinct (Housing Strategy) area.

 

9.1 Heritage Administration:  The Section provides controls for heritage conservation including when development consent is required and when a heritage assessment report or conservation management plan is required.

 

9.2 Heritage Items:  The Section provides detailed controls for the development of heritage items.  The Section includes new controls on adaptive re-use, subdivision, rural heritage items and commercial heritage items.

 

9.3 Heritage Conservation Areas:  The Section provides detailed controls for development within heritage conservation areas (HCAs).  This includes new controls for the Wahroonga (North) HCA.  It also includes amended controls for the Beecroft HCA, where new precinct boundaries and controls have been developed.  New controls have been included for demolition and subdivision applications within a HCA.

 

9.4 Development in the Vicinity of Heritage Items and HCAs:  The Section provides new controls to guide development in the vicinity of heritage items or areas.

 

9.5 Aboriginal Heritage:  The Section provides new controls to guide development of land that may contain an Aboriginal relic.  The Section replaces the aboriginal heritage provisions that are currently in the HSLEP 1994 and are unable to be transferred into the draft HLEP as the Heritage Conservation provisions are mandated by the Standard Instrument.  The proposed controls reflect current best practice guidelines. 

 

9.6 Beecroft Heritage Precinct:  The Section replaces the part of the Housing Strategy DCP relating to Heritage Precinct Development.  There have been some formatting changes to the planning controls to reflect the structure of the draft HDCP.  In addition, there have been some modifications to the controls to ensure compatibility with changes proposed to the other housing strategy precincts.  In general, these controls require increased building setbacks and separations.

 

STATUTORY CONSIDERATIONS

 

Statutory considerations have previously been discussed under the heading of background.  In summary, the DCP has been prepared in the required form under the EP&A Regulations.  The next step in preparation of the draft HDCP is to place the draft HDCP on public exhibition.  The EP&A Regulations requires that a draft DCP be publicly exhibited for a minimum period of 28 days.  The strategy for consultation is discussed later in this report.

 

BUDGET

 

The preparation of Council’s new draft Hornsby DCP 2012 has been prepared with resources allocated to the Town Planning Service Branch under the adopted Strategic Planning Program.

 

CONSULTATION

 

Consultation with relevant Council staff from the Planning, Environment and Works Divisions has been undertaken throughout the process of preparing the new DCP.  A Planning Division working party was established comprising assessment officers and Managers and Executive Manager, Planning Division.  In addition, a peer review of the draft HDCP has been undertaken by independent planning consultants. 

 

In March 2012, a Councillor briefing was held to present the process, key issues and recommendations for the preparation of the draft HDCP.  At the conclusion of the briefing it was generally agreed that the draft Plan be reported to Council for endorsement for public exhibition concurrently with the draft HLEP.

 

CONSULTATION STRATEGY

 

At its meeting on 7 March 2012, Council resolved to endorse a revised draft HLEP for public exhibition.  The DP&I has now certified the draft plan pursuant to Section 65 of the EP&A Act and it is anticipated that it will be placed on public exhibition in June/ July 2012.  The draft HDCP supplements the operation of the draft HLEP.  Accordingly, the draft HDCP is proposed to be exhibited concurrently with the draft HLEP for a minimum period of 60 days.  A consultation strategy is provided at Attachment 2 to the report.  In summary, notice of the public exhibition of the DCP would be by:

 

·       inclusion of an advertisement in local newspapers at the start of, and during, the exhibition;

 

·       advertising on the Council website for the duration of the exhibition period;

 

·       notifying relevant State Government agencies and adjoining councils by letter at the start of the exhibition period;

 

·       notifying relevant community interest and industry groups by letter at the start of the exhibition period; and

 

·       notifying all landowners of the exhibition of the draft HLEP and HDCP.

 

In addition, all Council Divisions will be given an opportunity to review the final draft HDCP and provide comments during the exhibition period.

 

A report on submissions will be presented to Council for its consideration following the exhibition period.  To ensure the exhibition of the draft HDCP 2012 in a timely manner, Council should delegate authority to the General Manager to endorse exhibition material, including information brochures for distribution to the community.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The preparation of the draft Hornsby DCP 2012 provides development guidelines that promote sustainable development.  It is a comprehensive new document that has been prepared to complement with the new draft HLEP and responds to the EP&A Act requirements that only one DCP can apply to a parcel of land.

 

It is recommended the draft Hornsby DCP 2012 (available for viewing at Council’s website hornsby.nsw.gov.au\hdcp) be endorsed for public exhibition.

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT:

 

1.         Council endorse the draft Hornsby Development Control Plan 2012 for public exhibition.

 

2.         The draft Hornsby Development Control Plan 2012 be exhibited for a minimum of sixty days concurrently with the draft Hornsby Local Environmental Plan in accordance with the consultation strategy attached to Executive Managers Report No. PLN34/12.

 

3.         The General Manager be delegated authority to endorse exhibition material, including the preparation of an Information Brochure for distribution to the community.

 

4.         The General Manager be authorised to make changes to the draft Hornsby Development Control Plan 2012 prior to exhibition to correct minor errors, omissions or formatting. 

 

5.         Following exhibition of the draft Hornsby Development Control Plan 2012, a report on submissions received in response to the public exhibition be presented to Council for its consideration.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jason Rawlin

Acting Manager - Town Planning Services

Planning Division

 

 

 

 

James Farrington

Acting Executive Manager - Planning

Planning Division

 

 

Attachments:

1.View

Translation of Existing DCPs into draft HDCP

 

 

2.View

Consultation Strategy

 

 

 

 

File Reference:           F2007/00707

Document Number:   D01907329

   


 

Executive Manager's Report No. WK18/12

Works Division

Date of Meeting: 16/05/2012

 

14      EXPRESSION OF INTEREST NO EOI 1/2012 - DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF ADDITIONS AND IMPROVEMENTS TO THE ROSELEA COMMUNITY CENTRE     

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

At the Ordinary Meeting held on 21 December 2011, Council considered Executive Manager’s Report No. CC75/11 regarding the proposed redevelopment of the Roselea Community Centre, Pennant Hills Road, Beecroft and resolved, inter alia, that ‘Tenders be called for in respect of Option 6A, seeking separate prices for Stage 1 and Stage 2 of the construction’.

 

Further to this resolution, expressions of interest (EOI) have now been called in accordance with the Local Government Act in order to select a number of suitably qualified and experienced contractors.  Following an evaluation it has been recommended that Council invite the following five, from a total of 23 conforming submissions received, to submit tenders for the refurbishment of the Roselea Community Centre.

 

AJ Bristow & Sons

Builtform Constructions

Projectcorp Australia

Rapid Constructions

Zadro Constructions

 

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE

 

The purpose of this Report is to provide a recommendation for Council’s consideration in respect of EOI No. 1/2012 - Expression of Interest for the design and construction of additions and improvements to the Roselea Community Centre.

 

DISCUSSION

 

EOI No. 1/2012 was called to select a short list of consultant/contractor partnerships from which tenders can be sought for the refurbishment of the Roselea Community Centre.  A summary of all submissions together with full evaluation details have been placed on file (Trim Folder F2012/00003).  Excepting this Report, the summary and details of the EOI’s received are to be treated as confidential in accordance with the Local Government Act.

 

Twenty three (23) conforming EOI submissions were received from the following companies:

 

AJ Bristow & Sons

Armat Constructions

Avant Constructions

Axis Constructions

Builtform Constructions

Cash McInnes Projects

Clifford Constructions

Coleman & Fairburn

Farindon Constructions

GW Building

Keystone Projects

Parkview Group

Perich Constructions

Projectcorp Australia

Proline Building

Rapid Constructions

Safin P/L

Streetbuild Ryter

Sudiro Constructions

Sydney Design

Uniport Australia

Walton Constructions

Zadro Constructions

 

The following criteria have been used for the evaluation of the EOI’s:

 

·         Skills, qualifications and experience of the project team - Satisfactory level of skills, qualifications and experience of all significant staff, consultants and contractors and the availability of these resources.

 

·         Past Performance and Experience - Evidence that tenderers have satisfactorily completed projects similar in nature to that required by a potential contract (type, size and value of work) and that they are competent to carry out the works pertaining to the contract in a workmanlike manner and to the satisfaction of the Principal.

 

·         Organisational Structure - Company organisational plan, management, responsibilities and reporting structure.

 

·         Occupational Health and Safety Systems - Evidence of a comprehensive OH&S Policy and documented management system and/or evidence of certification to AS/NZS ISO 4801:2001.

 

·         Quality Assurance Systems - Evidence of a comprehensive quality assurance management system and/or evidence of certification to AS/NZS ISO 9001:2008.

 

·         Financial Capacity - Satisfactory financial check relative to the level of work to be carried out.  Current contractual commitments allow for production on time.

 

·         Sustainability - Evidence of a comprehensive environmental management system and/or evidence of certification to AS/NZS ISO 14001:2004.  Energy efficiency design initiatives proposed for this project

 

These criteria were assessed on information provided with each submission or additional information provided by the organisation.

 

The attached Confidential Memo WD D and C 9/12 provides a summary of the evaluation. Full details of the tender evaluation are also on file.

 

From the results of the evaluation it is recommended that Council invite the following organisations to tender for the refurbishment of the Roselea Community Centre:

 

·       AJ Bristow & Sons P/L

·       Builtform Constructions P/L

·       Projectcorp Australia P/L

·       Rapid Constructions P/L

·       Zadro Constructions P/L

 

It is proposed that tenders be called in late May following Council’s resolution on this report.

 

BUDGET

 

There are no budgetary implications associated with this Report.  The results of the tender process will be reported back to Council and budgetary implications of the tender will be reported at that time.

 

POLICY

 

There are no policy implications associated with this Report.

 

CONSULTATION

 

The tender has been evaluated in consultation with Council’s Manager Community Services, Mr David Johnston, Engineer Construction, Mr Steven Crowe and Building Services Co-ordinator, Mr Darren Lister.

 

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER

 

The officer responsible for the preparation of this Report is the Manager Design and Construction, Mr Rob Rajca – who can be contacted on 9847 6675.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

THAT:

 

1.     Council invite A J Bristow & Sons P/L, Builtform Constructions P/L, Projectcorp Australia P/L, Rapid Constructions P/L and Zadro Constructions P/L to submit tenders for the Refurbishment of the Roselea Community Centre, Beecroft.

 

2.      The results of the tender be reported back to Council.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Robert Stephens

Executive Manager

Works Division

 

 

 

 

Gary Bensley

Executive Manager

Corporate and Community Division

 

 

Attachments:

1.

Confidential Memo - WD D and C 9/12 - Expression of Interest No. EOI 1/2012 - Expression of Interest for the Design and Construction of  Additions and Improavements to the Roselea Community Centre, Beecroft - This attachment should be dealt with in confidential session, under Section 10A (2) (d) of the Local Government Act, 1993. This report contains commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed (i) prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it; or (ii) confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the council; or (iii) reveal a trade secret.

 

 

 

 

File Reference:           F2012/00003

Document Number:   D01905481

 


 

Executive Manager's Report No. WK20/12

Works Division

Date of Meeting: 16/05/2012

 

15      PACIFIC HIGHWAY - CHANGE OF NAME TO PEATS FERRY ROAD   

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

As part of the of reclassification of Pacific Highway in Hornsby CBD, Council in 2002 resolved to rename the section of the highway in Hornsby CBD between George Street and Bridge Road as Peats Ferry Road.   The name change could not be effected at the time as there were a number of issues which needed to be resolved with the then Roads and Traffic Authority, now Roads and Maritime Services (RMS). Prior to hand over, gazettal of the reclassified former highway sections of the road network in Hornsby and negotiation of maintenance responsibility boundaries was required.  All outstanding issues have been resolved and the relevant sections of the former Pacific Highway have now been handed over to Council.

 

Some information regarding the proposed reclassification of Pacific Highway that was originally reported to Council in report WK41/02 has since been superseded. The reclassification now includes an additional section of the highway between Galston Road and Jersey Street North that has since been downgraded from state highway to regional road.  This report recommends that Council extend the proposal to rename Pacific Highway as Peats Ferry Road between George Street and Bridge Road, Hornsby as per the previous resolution and in addition include the section of former highway between Bridge Road and Jersey Street North, Asquith.  In accordance with the process outlined in the Roads (General) Regulation 2000 of the Roads Act, Council is required to invite written submissions from the public regarding the proposed name change.

 

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVE

 

The purpose of this report is to advise Council of the intent to call for written submissions from the public on the proposal to rename Pacific Highway between George Street, Hornsby and Jersey Street North, Asquith as Peats Ferry Road.

 

DISCUSSION

 

Background

 

At the Ordinary Meeting of 12 June 2002, Council considered a report regarding the RMS proposal for the following changes to the road hierarchy in Hornsby:-

 

·       Pacific Highway between George Street and Bridge Road, from State Road to Local Road; 

·       Bridge Road between Pacific Highway and Jersey Street North, from Local Road to State Road;

·       Pacific Highway between Galston Road and Jersey Street North, from State Road to Regional Road;

·       George Street between Pacific Highway and Bridge Road, from Regional Road to State Road. 

·       Bridge Road between George Street and Jersey Street North, from Regional Road to State Road.

·       Jersey Street North – Bridge Road to Pacific Highway, from Regional Road to State Road.

 

The proposal for the above changes to the road hierarchy were accepted and adopted by Council at the Ordinary Meeting of 12 June 2002 (WK41/02).  The current adopted road hierarchy for the above respective roads is shown on the RMS map attached to this report (Attachment 1). 

 

In addition to the change in road hierarchy, RMS had also requested that Council consider a change of name for the section of Pacific Highway between George Street to Bridge Road with the change in road classification since the Road Act does not permit a local street to be called a highway.  Pursuant to Part 162 of the Road Act, 1993 and in accordance with the powers delegated to it, Council also resolved to rename the local section of the Pacific Highway between George Street and Bridge Road as Peats Ferry Road in honour of George Peat who had opened a trail between his land holdings on the Hawkesbury River and Old Berowra Road, giving him a land route to Sydney.

 

In addition to the section of Pacific Highway through Hornsby Town Centre, the section of the highway between Galston Road and Jersey Street North was also downgraded from state highway (originally under the jurisdiction of the RTA) to regional road (now under the jurisdiction of Council).  For consistency and to enable logical numbering of street addressees, it is necessary for the proposed new name to also apply to the section of the Main Road 161 between Bridge Road and Jersey Street North at Asquith.  This is considered appropriate as this road was originally also part of Peats Ferry Road between Pearce’s Corner and the Hawkesbury River.  The proposed new name reflects the historical and heritage significance of the road.  The name change for the section of Pacific Highway between Bridge Road and Galston Road which is still a state highway requires consultation with RMS. 

 

Regulatory Requirements for Road Naming in NSW

 

Road naming is legislated under the Roads Act 1993.  This Act empowers the road authority with the rights to name it.  In the case of local roads, the relevant authority is Council.  The relevant authority for State Highways is RMS.

 

When a road naming authority wishes to rename a road they are required to follow the process outlined in the Roads Regulation 2008.  This regulation requires the authority to:

 

·       publish notice of its proposal in a local newspaper

·       serve notice of its proposal on Australia Post,

·       the Registrar General and Surveyor General (through the

·       Land and Property Management Authority) and, in the case of a classified road, on the RMS.

 

Although letters were sent to relevant regulatory authorities advising of Council's intent to change the name of the local section of Pacific Highway in Hornsby CBD to Peats Ferry Road, members of the public were not requested or invited to make submissions on the proposed name change.  Since all outstanding issues have since been resolved with RMS and the subject sections of the road have now been handed over to Council, a notice must published in a local newspaper inviting public submissions.  This notice must state that written submissions on the proposed name may be made to Hornsby Shire Council and must specify the address to which, and the date by which, any such submissions should be made.  If, after consideration of submissions, Council decides to proceed with the proposed name, it shall:

 

·       publish notice of the new name in the NSW Government Gazette and in a local newspaper;

·       inform Australia Post, the Registrar General, Surveyor General and, in the case of a classified section of the road, the RMS of the new name, giving sufficient particulars to enable the road to be identified

 

It is important to note that Council may not proceed with a proposal to name or rename a road if Australia Post, the Registrar General and Surveyor General (through the Land and Property Management Authority) or RMS (in the case of a classified road) objects to the name.  However, the Minister for Roads may overturn this objection.

 

To streamline the process, road naming authorities now only need to inform one contact within NSW Government (i.e. Team Leader Regional Cadastre Information Sourcing Land and Property Management Authority). This fulfils their requirements for notifying the Registrar General, Surveyor General and the Geographical Names Board. 

 

BUDGET

 

No impact on the budget

 

POLICY

 

Any actions will be in accordance with Council’s policies

 

CONSULTATION

 

No consultation was required during preparation of this report

 

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER

 

This officer responsible for the preparation of this report is Lawrence Nagy, Manager Traffic and Road Safety who can be contacted on 9847 6524