Supplementary Agenda of Local Planning Panel meeting

LPP Report No. LPP29/20

Local Planning Panel

Date of Meeting: 28/10/2020

4 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - ALTERATIONS AND ADDITIONS TO RESIDENTIAL AGED CARE FACILITY - 1-3 MYRA STREET AND 73-77 ALEXANDRIA PARADE, WAITARA

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

DA No:	DA/192/2020 (Lodged on 13 March 2020)
Description:	Demolition of structures and alterations and additions to an existing residential aged care facility
Property:	Lot 2 DP 323073, Lots C, D, E, F DP 432793, Lot 2 DP 1030828 Nos. 1-3 Myra Street and Nos. 73-77 Alexandria Parade, Waitara
Applicant:	Boffa Robertson Group
Owner:	Mrs Eva Klein
Estimated Value:	$11,122,502
Ward:	B

· The application involves the demolition of two dwelling houses and the subsequent construction of a northern and western extension to an existing residential aged care facility.

· The existing residential aged care facility is located across four allotments on the corner of Alexandria Parade and Myra Street and was approved under DA/716/2006.

· The proposal development does not comply with “Clause 40(a) and Clause 40(c) Development Standards - minimum sizes and building height of State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 as the development would exceed the height of buildings standard and is not compliant with the development standard requiring the rear 25% of the site to be 1 storey in height. The extent of the non-compliance with the height of buildings standard is equal to a 16.8% exceedance of the 8-metre height control. The development would have a built form of up to three stories in the rear 25% of the site.

· As the development exceeds the height of buildings standard by more than 10% and is non-compliant with a non-numerical development standard, the Hornsby Shire Local Planning Panel is the delegated authority which is required to determine the proposal.

· A total of two submissions have been received in respect of the application.

· It is recommended that the application be approved.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT the Hornsby Shire Council Local Planning Panel assume the concurrence of the Secretary of the Department of Planning and Environment pursuant to Clause 4.6 of the Hornsby Local Environmental Plan 2013 and approve Development Application No. DA/192/2020 for demolition of structures and alterations and additions to an existing residential aged care facility at Lot 2 DP 323073, Lots C, D, E, F DP 432793, Lot 2 DP 1030828, Nos. 1-3 Myra Street and Nos. 73-77 Alexandria Parade, Waitara subject to the conditions of consent detailed in Schedule 1 of LPP Report No. LPP29/20

BACKGROUND

On 6 December 2006 Council approved Development Application No. DA/716/2006 for the demolition of an existing nursing home and the erection of a seniors living development containing 79 beds at 75-77 Alexandria Parade and 1 Myra Street Wahroonga. Subsequent to this approval, a modification was approved under DA/716/2006/A to remove a condition of consent requiring sill heights to be raised on certain windows.

On 3 October 2019, Pre-lodgement Meeting PL/62/2019 was held at Council’s administration building regarding the proposed extension of the existing residential care facility via the addition of a northern and western building wing, an eastern ground floor extension and a redesigned vehicular and pedestrian entry off Myra Street. The development discussed under PL/62/2019 was subsequently lodged with Council as DA/192/2020 and is the subject of this development application.

SITE

The subject site comprises 6 allotments on the corner of Alexandra Parade and Myra Street Wahroonga, being Nos. 73–77 Alexandra Parade and Nos. 1-3 Myra Street. An existing Residential Aged Care Facility (RACF) is located on No. 1 Myra Street and Nos. 75-77 Alexandra Parade, with detached single dwelling houses located on No. 73 Alexandria Parade and No. 3 Myra Street.

In total, the combined site area is equal to 5,074.2m².

The existing RACF comprises of a three-storey building, with the lowest ground floor level comprising a ‘basement’ style parking area and assorted services. The ground floor and first floor of the building are the residential floors of the building, being predominately accommodation rooms and rooms associated with the service and care of the residents.

The site experiences a fall of approximately 2m towards the rear, north western corner of the site.

The site is located adjacent to the North Shore Rail Line.

The site is not burdened or benefitted by any easements or restrictions.

The site is not bushfire or flood prone.

The site does not contain a heritage listed item and is not located within a heritage conservation area. The site adjoins heritage listed items at No. 772 Alexandria Parade (Street Trees and Bushland) and No. 758 Myra Street (Trees), as identified in Schedule 5 Environmental Heritage of the Hornsby Local Environmental Plan 2013. The development site is also adjacent to the Wahroonga (North) Heritage Conservation Area.

PROPOSAL

The development proposes the extension of the existing RACF to increase the capacity from 79 to 116 beds. This would be achieved via the demolition of the existing dwelling houses on No. 73 Alexandria Parade and No. 3 Myra Street and the construction of a northern and western building wing.

The northern building wing would comprise a 3-storey building addition, generally as follows:

· The lower ground floor would comprise 13 accommodation rooms, a dining room, lounge room, servery, open courtyard and various service orientations rooms, including a laundry, kitchen and staff rooms.

· The ground floor would comprise 12 accommodation rooms, a dining room, sitting area, west facing balcony, servery and various service orientated rooms including a utility room, admin area and redesigned reception area. The Myra Street building entry would be reconfigured to include an updated vehicular entry, ambulance bay and car parking provision.

· The first floor would comprise 12 accommodation rooms, a servery, sitting areas, west facing terrace and various service rooms.

The western building wing would comprise a 3-storey building addition, generally as follows:

· The lower ground floor would comprise a loading area, storage areas and a plant room.

· The ground floor would comprise 6 accommodation rooms, activity room, servery, dining area and various service rooms

· The first floor would comprise 7 accommodation rooms, bathroom, servery, dining area, north facing terrace and various service orientated rooms.

Various internal modifications would be made to the floor plans of the existing RACF to accommodate the addition of the building wings however these are primarily within the existing footprint of the building, with the exception of the enclosing of an east facing balcony to create a ‘wellness centre’.

Externally, significant changes are proposed to the existing landscaping to suit the extended design and provide a more functional rear open space area. Further landscaping treatments are proposed to the northern building frontage to integrate the built form with the existing vegetated streetscape of Myra Street. In total, 27 trees would be removed by the development.

ASSESSMENT

The development application has been assessed having regard to the Greater Sydney Region Plan – A Metropolis of Three Cities, the North District Plan and the matters for consideration prescribed under Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the Act). The following issues have been identified for further consideration.

1. STRATEGIC CONTEXT

1.1 Greater Sydney Region Plan - A Metropolis of Three Cities and North District Plan

The Greater Sydney Region Plan - A Metropolis of Three Cities has been prepared by the NSW State Government to guide land use planning decisions for the next 40 years (to 2056). The Plan sets a strategy and actions for accommodating Sydney’s future population growth and identifies dwelling targets to ensure supply meets demand. The Plan also identifies that the most suitable areas for new housing are in locations close to jobs, public transport, community facilities and services.

The NSW Government will use the subregional planning process to define objectives and set goals for job creation, housing supply and choice in each subregion. Hornsby Shire has been grouped with Hunters Hill, Ku-ring-gai, Lane Cove, Mosman, North Sydney, Ryde, Northern Beaches and Willoughby to form the North District. The Greater Sydney Commission has released the North District Plan which includes priorities and actions for Northern District for the next 20 years. The identified challenge for Hornsby Shire will be to provide an additional 4,350 dwellings by 2021 with further strategic supply targets to be identified to deliver 97,000 additional dwellings in the North District by 2036.

The proposed development would be consistent with the Greater Sydney Region Plan - A Metropolis of Three Cities and North District Plan, by providing additional services to support a growing aged population.

2. STATUTORY CONTROLS

Section 4.15(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 Local Environmental Plan 2013

The proposed development has been assessed having regard to the provisions of the Hornsby Local Environmental Plan 2013 (HLEP).

2.1.1 Zoning of Land and Permissibility

The subject land is zoned R2 Low density residential under the HLEP. The objectives of the R2 zone are:

· To provide for the housing needs of the community within a low-density residential environment.

· To enable other land uses that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents.

The proposed development is defined as a ‘residential care facility’ which is not permissible within the R2 Low density residential zone. Notwithstanding, State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 permits development for the purposes of a residential care facility on any land zoned primarily for urban purposes. The R2 Low density residential zone is primarily an urban zoning and as the SEPP prevails to the extent of any inconsistencies between environmental planning instruments, residential care facilities are permitted with development consent.

2.1.2 Height of Buildings

Clause 4.3 of the HLEP provides that the height of a building on any land should not exceed the maximum height show for the land on the Height of Buildings Map. The maximum permissible height for the subject site is 8.5 metres. The proposal does not comply with this provision.

However, it is noted that Clause 40 Development Standards - minimum sizes and building height of State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 provides that the height of all buildings must be 8 metres or less for the construction of a RACF in a zone where residential flat buildings are not permitted (such as the sites R2 zoning). Clause 40 of the SEPP prevails over Clause 4.3 of the HLEP. Consequently, the height of buildings development standard within the HLEP does not apply to the development. An assessment of the proposal against the requirements of Clause 40 of the SEPP is provided in Section 2.2.2 of this report.

2.1.3 Earthworks

The objective of Clause 6.2 Earthworks of the HLEP is to ensure that earthworks for which development consent is required will not have a detrimental impact on environmental functions and processes, neighbouring uses, cultural or heritage items or features of the surrounding land.

The proposed development would require excavation of up to 3.2 metres in depth in the northern portion of the site. This excavation is required to create level floor plates between the existing building and the proposed northern wing and is designed to be a continuation of the existing cut approved under DA/716/2006. The proposed cut would be deepest in the north eastern corner of the site, and gradually taper away as the site falls to the rear. In total, 1800m³ of soil is required to be excavated to facilitate the development and as such, an assessment of the requirements listed under Clause 6.2(3) of the HLEP is required to be undertaken before development consent is granted. An assessment of these requirements is provided in the table below:

Matter for Consideration	Comment
(a) The likely disruption of, or any detrimental effect on, drainage patterns and soil stability in the locality of the development	The proposed excavation is largely a continuation of an existing cut adjacent to the northern boundary of the site. As the land falls to the western rear boundary, the required excavation is reduced so that the existing levels at all boundaries are maintained. Consequently, it is considered that the natural drainage patterns would remain largely consistent with the existing topography. With respect to soil stability, the application seeks to retain stability of the soil via tiered retaining walls adjacent to the northern front boundary with Myra Street and a single retaining wall located adjacent on the northern side boundary. To ensure that these retaining walls are adequately designed to ensure soil stability, appropriate conditions of consent are recommended in Schedule 1 of this report for the retaining walls to be designed by a suitably qualified engineer and constructed as part of the development.
(b) The effect of the development on the likely future use or redevelopment of the land	The proposed cut would facilitate the likely future use of the land as an RACF as it would permit the construction of level floor plates, which are highly desirable with a building of this type. Should the RACF use cease at a future time, the proposed earthworks would not sterilise the site from redevelopment.
(c) The quality of the fill or the soil to be excavated, or both	The excavation is primarily located within the annexed low-density residential allotment, No. 3 Myra Street. Council’s records indicate that No. 3 Myra Street has a history of residential use and consequently it’s likely that the soil to be excavated would be similar to VENM material. However, it is noted that the demolition of the dwelling house on No. 3 Myra is a potential source of contamination, should the dwelling contain contaminates, such as potential asbestos material. Consequently, conditions of consent have been recommended in Schedule 1 of this report that all material is to be appropriately classified prior to removal from the site, and that all material is to be disposed of in accordance with the supplied waste management plan.
(d) The effect of the development on the existing and likely amenity of adjoining properties	The proposed excavation would have short term amenity impacts during construction to adjoining properties. Appropriate conditions of consent have been recommended in Schedule 1 of this report for the control of these impacts during the construction phase. Post construction, the existing levels an all properties boundaries would be conserved and consequently, there would be negligible long-term impacts to adjoining allotments.
(e) The source of any fill material and the destination of any excavated material	No fill material is proposed to be imported to the site, with any filling being constructed with reused excavated material. The supplied waste management plan nominates that excavated material will be disposed of at Kimbriki Resource Centre and Greenwood Landfill which is considered to be appropriate.
(f) The likelihood of disturbing relics	It is considered to be unlikely that any relics would be disturbed as the site has previously been cleared and developed and no known relics or sites of archaeological interest are within the vicinity of the development site.
(g) The proximity to, and potential for adverse impacts on, any waterway, drinking water catchment or environmentally sensitive area	The site is not located in close proximity to any of the items referred to under criterion (f).
(h) Any appropriate measures proposed to avoid, minimise or mitigate the impacts of the development	As discussed above, Schedule 1 of this report contains recommended conditions to minimise the impact of the earthworks during construction. Additionally, it is recommended that a dilapidation report be prepared for the adjoining residential allotment, No. 5 Myra Street as the excavation is located in close proximity to the boundaries of this site.

Subject to the imposition of the conditions described above, it is considered that the development would be consistent with the objectives of Clause 6.2 Earthworks of the HLEP.

2.1.4 Heritage

The objective of Clause 5.10 of the HLEP is:

(a) To conserve the environmental heritage of Hornsby.

(b) To conserve the heritage significance of heritage items and heritage conservation areas, including associated fabric, settings and views.

(c) To conserve archaeological sites.

(d) To conserve Aboriginal objects and Aboriginal places of heritage significance.

Whist the site is not located in a heritage conservation area and does not contain a heritage listed item, it is adjacent to heritage listed items No. 772 Alexandria Parade (Street Trees and Bushland) and No. 758 Myra (Street Trees) as identified in Schedule 5 Environmental Heritage of the HLEP. The development site is also adjacent to the Wahroonga (North) Heritage Conservation Area.

In assessing the heritage impacts of the proposal, it is noted that the proposal seeks to alter the built form within the subject site only. The adjoining environmental heritage items preserve the scenic and remnant environmental landscape elements of the Wahroonga area. The proposal would have negligible impact on these items or the heritage conservation area and would not adversely impact the continued heritage value of these items. Further, it is noted that the supplied landscape plan contains vegetation planting areas in both the Myra Street and Alexandria Parade frontages, which would assist in providing a vegetated backdrop to the two heritage listed items.

The proposal meets the desired outcome of Clause 5.10 of the HLEP and Part 9.4.1 of the HDCP Development in the Vicinity of Heritage Items and Heritage Conservation Areas and is considered acceptable.

2.1.5 Exceptions to Development Standards

The application has been assessed against the requirements of Clause 4.6 of the HLEP. This clause provides flexibility in the application of the development standards in circumstances where strict compliance with those standards would, in any particular case, be unreasonable or unnecessary and it can be demonstrated that sufficient environmental planning grounds are present to justify contravening a development standard. The development is consistent with the development standards contained within the HLEP (to the extent that Clause 4.3 does not apply to the development), however the development does not comply with development standards stipulated by Clause 40 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004. Matters related to the non-compliance of development standards contained within the SEPP are discussed in Section 2.2.2 of this report, which includes an assessment of Clause 4.6 of the HLEP.

2.2 State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing for Seniors or People with Disability) 2004

State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 (SEPP Seniors) is the overriding planning instrument for the development of housing for aged and disabled people in NSW and provides for hostels, residential care facilities (nursing homes) self-contained dwellings and multi-storey buildings. SEPP Seniors is comprehensive in scope including land use planning provisions, design principles, development standards and standards specifically to meet the housing needs of aged and disabled people. SEPP Seniors also includes design guidelines for infill development.

For the purposes of assessment against SEPP Seniors, the proposed development is defined as a ‘Residential Care Facility’. The assessment of the proposal in accordance with the relevant requirements of SEPP Seniors is provided as follows:

An assessment of the proposal with respect to the other relevant clauses of SEPP Seniors is provided in the table below:

Clause 30: Site Analysis
A consent authority must not consent to a development application made pursuant to this Chapter unless the consent authority is satisfied that the applicant has taken into account a site analysis prepared by the applicant in accordance with this clause	A site analysis has been provided which satisfactorily meets the requirements of this clause.
Clause 33: Neighbourhood amenity and streetscape
(a) Recognise the desirable elements of the location’s current character (or, in the case of precincts undergoing a transition, where described in local planning controls, the desired future character) so that new buildings contribute to the quality and identity of the area, and	The prevailing character of the immediate locality is of a low-density residential neighbourhood with detached dwelling houses of 1-2 storeys in height within a landscaped setting. As the building is located on a corner, two frontages are present, and a broad section of the development is therefore visible from the public domain. The Myra Street frontage would be generally consistent with the prevailing streetscape character, as the proposed northern building extension would present as a 2-storey building with a pitched roof, with sufficient landscaping treatment within the front setback. The ridge height would be similar to the existing ridge height of the RACF and acceptable with respect to the scale of the dwelling located at No. 5 Myra Street. Whilst it is noted that the proposed porte cochère, entrance signage and reception/ building entry area would be inconsistent with the surrounding residential nature of the site, it is noted that the RACF currently has an entrance in this location and the proposed amendments to this entrance would enhance building legibility, further define the entrance point and provide a more useable entrance bay. No objections are raised to these features. The Alexandria Parade elevation currently contains the carpark entry, access to services and a flat roofed section of the building adjacent to the western boundary. The proposed design would remove the flat roof section in favour of a pitched roof which is considered to be a better built outcome and more consistent with the surrounding development. Vegetation on this elevation partially screens the ground floor services and improves the integration of the building into the streetscape.
(b) Retain, complement and sensitively harmonise with any heritage conservation areas in the vicinity and any relevant heritage items that are identified in a local environmental plan, and	As discussed in Section 2.1.4 of this report, it is considered that the proposed development would be compatible with the surrounding heritage items and adjoining conservation area.
(c) Maintain reasonable neighbourhood amenity and appropriate residential character by: (i) Providing building setbacks to reduce bulk and overshadowing, and	Shadow diagrams show acceptable impacts to adjoining residential properties with regards to overshadowing, and the building setbacks are considered to be acceptable with regard to sunlight access.
(ii) Using building form and siting that relates to the site’s land form, and	The proposed alterations and additions relate to the existing landform created by the previously approved RACF, in that a cut is proposed adjacent to the Myra Street boundary, that gradually tapers off as the lot falls to the west. Similarly, the proposed northern and western building wing are sited to be generally consistent with the existing RCF.
(iii) Adopting building heights at the street frontage that are compatible in scale with adjacent development, and	The building height along Myra Street is generally in keeping with the adjacent development. It is noted however, that this is largely due to the extensive excavation in the northern portion of the site. The building height fronting Alexandra Parade is does not comply with the 8-metre height limit by 1.3 metres and is 3 storeys in appearance. This is discussed in further detail below in this table.
(iv) Considering, where buildings are located on the boundary, the impact of the boundary walls on neighbours, and	No buildings would be located on the boundaries of the site.
(d) Be designed so that the front building of the development is set back in sympathy with, but not necessarily the same as, the existing building line, and	The northern building wing, porte cochère and ground floor wellness centre would be located forward of the established front building setback. The remainder of the proposed additions would be located at a setback consistent with the established building line. No objections are raised to the structures located forward of the established building line as in the case of the northern building elevation, the setback is largely consistent with the dwelling house located at No. 5 Myra Street and sufficient landscaping is proposed to screen the building from the streetscape. The porte cochère assists in defining the entry to the building and creates a covered pick up drop off area. Further, the ambulance bay is located under this structure. The wellness centre would be created by enclosing an existing balcony and consequently, the enclosure of this area would not further increase the building footprint.
(e) Embody planting that is in sympathy with, but not necessarily the same as, other planting in the streetscape, and	Proposed landscaping within the street frontages is considered to be acceptable and sympathetic to the vegetated streetscapes of Myra Street and Alexandria Parade.
(f) Retain, wherever reasonable, major existing trees, and	The proposal would remove 3 trees that are considered to be major existing trees. The merits of the removal of these trees are discussed in Section 3.1 of this report
(g) Be designed so that no building is constructed in a riparian zone	Compliant.
Clause 34: Visual and acoustic privacy
The proposed development should consider the visual and acoustic privacy of neighbours in the vicinity and residents by: (a) Appropriate site planning, the location and design of windows and balconies, the use of screening devices and landscaping, and	A detailed assessment of the privacy impacts of the proposal is contained within Section 2.9.3 of this report.
(b) Ensuring acceptable noise levels in bedrooms of new dwellings by locating them away from driveways, parking areas and paths.	New bedrooms would largely be located away from driveway areas and no concerns are raised in this regard.
Clause 35: Solar access and design for climate
The proposed development should: (a) Ensure adequate daylight to the main living areas of neighbours in the vicinity and residents and adequate sunlight to substantial areas of private open space, and	Shadow diagrams indicate compliance.
(b) Involve site planning, dwelling design and landscaping that reduces energy use and makes the best practicable use of natural ventilation solar heating and lighting by locating the windows of living and dining areas in a northerly direction.	The proposed development would increase northern glazing exposure, as compared to the current RACF. Natural ventilation opportunities are possible with openable windows adjoining living areas.
Clause 37: Crime prevention
The proposed development should provide personal property security for residents and visitors and encourage crime prevention by: (a) Site planning that allows observation of the approaches to a dwelling entry from inside each dwelling and general observation of public areas, driveways and streets from a dwelling that adjoins any such area, driveway or street, and	The supplied statement of environmental effects provides commentary on the CPTED principals applied to the development, including methods for passive surveillance, access control via a reception area and territorial reinforcement via the use of consistent colour schemes, building design and landscaping. Council considers that the proposed development adequately addresses the requirements listed under Clause 37 and considers the proposal acceptable in this regard.
(b) Where shared entries are required, providing shared entries that serve a small number of dwellings and that are able to be locked, and
(c) Providing dwellings designed to allow residents to see who approaches their dwellings without the need to open the front door.
Clause 38: Accessibility
The proposed development should: (a) Have obvious and safe pedestrian links from the site that provide access to public transport services or local facilities, and	As discussed within this table, the proposed Myra Street entrance treatment would provide for obvious pedestrian access to the building and the development is adequately serviced by pedestrian links to Waitara Station.
(b) Provide attractive, yet safe, environments for pedestrians and motorists with convenient access and parking for residents and visitors.	The development application was supported by a Traffic Impact Statement, prepared by Traffix - Traffic and Transport Planners, dated 24 February 2020. This report concluded that the proposed development was satisfactory and supported the development on transport planning grounds. Council’s assessment raises no matters of concern, subject to the imposition of conditions recommended in Schedule 1 of this report.
Clause 39: Waste Management
The proposed development should be provided with waste facilities that maximize recycling by the provision of appropriate facilities.	The proposed development will rely on existing waste management arrangements and the bin storage room at the basement level. Council’s assessment raises no objection to the continued use of the basement and private waste collection services for waste management subject to the imposition of the conditions recommended in Schedule 1 of this report.
Clause 40: Development Standards- minimum sizes and building height
A consent authority must not consent to a development application made pursuant to this Chapter unless the proposed development complies with the standards specified in this clause.
(2) Site size: must be at least 1,000 sqm	Compliant.
(3) Site frontage: must be at least 20 metres wide measured at the building line.	Compliant.
(4) Height in zones where residential flat buildings are not permitted If the development is proposed in a residential zone where residential flat buildings are not permitted: (a) The height of all buildings in the proposed development must be 8 metres or less, and Note. Development consent for development for the purposes of seniors housing cannot be refused on the ground of the height of the housing if all of the proposed buildings are 8 metres or less in height. See clauses 48 (a), 49 (a) and 50 (a).	Non-Compliant. See discussion below.
(b) A building that is adjacent to a boundary of the site (being the site, not only of that particular development, but also of any other associated development to which this Policy applies) must be not more than 2 storeys in height, and Note. The purpose of this paragraph is to avoid an abrupt change in the scale of development in the streetscape.	Whilst the building is of a three-storey built form, the topmost floor is setback from the boundaries where the building is located adjacent to a boundary. This includes the northern and western side boundaries. At the rear of the site, the building is of a three-storey built form however sufficient setback exists between the building and the boundary that an abrupt change in scale is not apparent.
(c) A building located in the rear 25% area of the site must not exceed 1 storey in height.	Non-compliant. See discussion below.
(5) Development applications to which clause does not apply Subclauses (2), (3) and (4) (c) do not apply to a development application made by any of the following: (a) The Department of Housing, (b) Any other social housing provider.	Not Applicable to this development.
Division 2 Residential Care Facilities- standards concerning accessibility and usability
Note. Development standards concerning accessibility and useability for residential care facilities are not specified in this Policy. For relevant standards, see the Commonwealth aged care accreditation standards and the Building Code of Australia.	An Access Report prepared by Formiga 1, dated 20 January 2020 accompanied the development. The Report concludes that “compliance with the provisions of the BCA is readily achievable”. Appropriate conditions of consent to this affect are recommended in Schedule 1 of this report.
Clause 48: Standards that cannot be used to refuse development consent for residential care facilities
(a) Building height: if all proposed buildings are 8 metres or less in height (and regardless of any other standard specified by another environmental planning instrument limiting development to 2 storeys), or	Not applicable, the height of the development exceeds 8 metres in height.
(b) Density and scale: if the density and scale of the buildings when expressed as a floor space ratio is 1:1 or less	The floor space of the development as outlined in the SEE is 1.08:1. Whilst it is noted that the FSR exceeds the standard, it is also noted that no FSR is applicable to the site under the HLEP. Scale is controlled within the zone by Part 3.1 Scale of the Hornsby Development Control Plan via a floor area control. Part 3.1 sets maximum floor areas based upon the allotment size. The controls of Part 3.1 cannot be readily applied to the development of an RACF as they were created with the primary purpose of controlling the scale of dwelling houses and associated structures and would be too restrictive when applied to the development of an RACF. Notwithstanding the above, the proposed building additions are of a similar scale to the previously approved RACF, being no more than 3 storeys and generally within the same building height. No objections area raised to the total floor area of the development.
(c) Landscaped area: if a minimum of 25m² of landscaped area per residential care facility bed is provided,	15.7m² of landscaped area is provided per residential bed as per the definition contained within SEPP Seniors. In addition to the provided ground floor landscaping, various balconies and terraces are available for the residents which have a total area of 212m². It is noted that the previously approved RACF, does not provide 25m² of landscaping area per resident. It is further noted that the proposed landscape plans indicate a complete redesign of the existing landscaped recreation area at the rear of the site to enable this space to be more functional and useful to the residents. It is considered that the redesign of this recreation area, the addition of several balconies and the landscaping treatment in the northern portion of the site are acceptable and will offer a high level of amenity to the residents.
(d) Parking for residents and visitors: if at least the following is provided: (i) 1 Parking space for each 10 beds in the residential care facility (or 1 parking space for each 15 beds if the facility provides care only for persons with dementia), and (ii) 1 Parking space for each 2 persons to be employed in connection with the development and on duty at any one time, and (iii) 1 Parking space suitable for an ambulance.	The parking rates are compliant.
Clause 55: Residential care facilities for seniors required to have fire sprinkler systems
A consent authority must not grant consent to carry out development for the purpose of a residential care facility for seniors unless the proposed development includes a fire sprinkler system	A condition of development consent to this effect is included in Schedule 1 of this report.

2.2.1 Location and access to facilities (Clause 26)

The proposed development is located 390 metres from the entrance to Waitara Railway Station which can be accessed via a footpath from the development site directly to the train station. The footpath traverses a shallow gully region with an average grade of 1:35. No stairs, sudden inclines or declines or breaks in the pathway are present. Consequently, the development is compliant with the access requirements stipulated by Clause 26 and is considered acceptable as per the method prescribed within Clause 26(2).

2.2.2 Variation of Development Standards – Clause 4.6 Written Request

The proposed development does not comply with two development standards contained within SEPP Seniors. Specifically, the development does not comply with Clause 40(4)(a) and Clause 40(4)(c). For clarity, a copy of Cluse 40(4) is provided below:

(4) Height in zones where residential flat buildings are not permitted If the development is proposed in a residential zone where residential flat buildings are not permitted—

(a) The height of all buildings in the proposed development must be 8 metres or less, and

(b) A building that is adjacent to a boundary of the site (being the site, not only of that particular development, but also of any other associated development to which this Policy applies) must be not more than 2 storeys in height, and

(c) A building located in the rear 25% area of the site must not exceed 1 storey in height.

The development site is zoned R2 Low density residential under the HLEP. Residential flat buildings are not a permitted land use within the zone and as a consequence the development controls relating to scale in Clause 40(4) are applicable to the development. It is noted that with respect to Clause 40(4)(b) the development is compliant and no variation to this part of the development standard is required.

2.2.2.1 Nature of non-compliance

The extent of the non-compliance with Clause 40(4)(a) and 40(4)(c) are as described below.

Clause 40(4)(a) – Height of Buildings

The SEPP defined the height of a building as follows:

Height in relation to a building, means the distance measured vertically from any point on the ceiling of the topmost floor of the building to the ground level immediately below that point.

The proposed development would breach the 8m height of buildings development standard on the western building elevation, with a maximum building height of 9.35m. It is noted that the existing RACF is non-compliant with the 8m building height, and the proposed western building extends the existing noncompliant ceiling height to the west. As the topography of the site falls to the western boundary, the non-compliance extends to the 9.35m maximum adjacent to the western building façade. It is noted that the written request outlines that a height non-compliance is present in both the northern and western building elevations. However, a subsequent redesign of the proposal during the assessment process removed the noncompliant northern building portion and only the western non-compliance remains.

Clause 40(4)(c) – 1 Storey in rear 25% of the site

Clause 40(4)(c) states that “a building located in the rear 25% area of the site must not exceed 1 storey in height”.

The proposed development would include 3 storey building elements located in the rear 25% of the site which does not comply with the development standard. Non-compliant building elements are located on both the western and northern building wings and comprise of balconies attached to the northern building wing and residential floor area on the western wing.

For the purpose of calculating the rear 25% of the site, the northern boundary of the site is taken to be a shared side boundary with No.5 Myra Street and the western boundary is taken to be a side boundary with 71 Alexandria Parade, due to the orientation of the buildings on these allotments, and the prevailing allotment pattern. All boundaries adjoining No. 71A Myra Street are taken to be rear boundaries.

2.2.2.2 Written Requests

The applicant has made two submissions in support of a variation to the development standard in accordance with Clause 4.6 of the HLEP. Numerous New South Wales Land and Environment Court (NSW LEC) planning principles and judgements have detailed the method in which variations to development standards should be approached. The first of note is Initial Action Pty Ltd v Woollahra Municipal Council [2018] NSWLEC 118 in which Preston CJ provides that:

[13] The permissive power in cl 4.6(2) to grant development consent for a development that contravenes the development standard is, however, subject to conditions. Clause 4.6(4) establishes preconditions that must be satisfied before a consent authority can exercise the power to grant development consent for development that contravenes a development standard.

[15] The first opinion of satisfaction, in cl 4.6(4)(a)(i), is that the applicant’s written request seeking to justify the contravention of the development standard has adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated by cl 4.6(3). These matters are twofold: first, that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case (cl 4.6(3)(a)) and, secondly, that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard (cl 4.6(3)(b)). The written request needs to demonstrate both of these matters.

Council must therefore be satisfied that the written request addresses both the unreasonable and unnecessary test and demonstrates sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard. In the matter of Baron Corporation Pty Limited v Council of the City of Sydney [2019] NSWLEC 61 where upon appeal to a judge of the Land Environment Court Preston CJ, his honour held:

[78] The consent authority’s consideration of the applicant’s written request, required under cl 4.6(3), is to evaluate whether the request has demonstrated the achievement of the outcomes that are the matters in cl 4.6(3)(a) and (b). Only if the request does demonstrate the achievement of these outcomes will the request have “adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated” by cl 4.6(3), being the requirement in cl 4.6(4)(a)(i) about which the consent authority must be satisfied. The request cannot “adequately” address the matters required to be demonstrated by cl 4.6(3) if it does not in fact demonstrate the matters.”

This was later reaffirmed by the court of appeal in Rebel MH Neutral Bay Pty Limited v North Sydney Council [2019] NSWCA 130.

The above decisions and judgments describe how a written request must be written by the applicant, and the method in which consent authorities are to assess such a request. With specific reference to this development application, the written requests to vary the development standards contained within Clause 40(4)(a) and Clause 40(4)(c) were prepared by Evolution Planning to support the proposal. The written requests provided both reasoning as to why compliance with the standard was both unreasonable and unnecessary and provided environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard. These matters are discussed in the sections below, specific to each development standard.

Unreasonable or Unnecessary

There are five common methods by which an applicant can demonstrate that compliance with a development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the development. Initially proposed for objections under clause 6 of SEPP 1 in the decision of Wehbe v Pittwater Council [2007] NSWLEC 827 Pearson C summarised and applied these methods to written requests made under Clause 4.6 in Four2Five Pty Ltd v Ashfield Council [2015] NSWLEC 1009 [61-62]. These five methods are generally as follows:

· The objectives of the development standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard.

· The underlying objective or purpose is not relevant to the development.

· That the objective would be defeated or thwarted if compliance was required.

· That the development standard has been virtually abandoned or destroyed by the Council’s own actions in departing from the standard.

· The zoning of the land is unreasonable or inappropriate.

It is not necessary to demonstrate that a development meets multiple methods as listed above, and the satisfaction of one can be adequate to demonstrate that the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary.

Clause 40(4)(a) – Height of buildings

The written request prepared by Evolution Planning seeks to demonstrate that it is unreasonable or unnecessary to comply with the objectives of the Height of Buildings development standard as the objectives of the standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard.

SEPP Seniors does not provide direct objectives for the height of buildings development standard and merely states a numerical value that is to be complied with. In the absence of a direct objective of the development standard the written request by Evolution Planning as sought to establish that related objectives within SEPP Seniors and the HLEP are satisfied by the proposed development. The relative objectives chosen are as follows:

· The Objectives of Chapter 3 Development for Seniors Housing.

· The relevant design principles related to Neighbourhood Amenity and Streetscape.

· The advisory note under Clause 44(b).

· The relative Height of Buildings objective under the Hornsby Local Environmental Plan 2013.

It is noted that the adoption of relative objectives for the height of buildings standard is a standard practice, and a method that was recently deemed to be acceptable in the judgement of Walsh C Thompson Health Care Pty Limited v Ku-ring-gai Council [2020] NSWLEC 1363 at 29.

In reviewing the written request Council concurs that the development would achieve the objectives of Chapter 3 Development for seniors housing, as these relate to the facilitation of the provision of additional housing for seniors.

Additionally, Council concurs that the development would be generally consistent with the relevant design principles related to neighbourhood amenity and streetscape contained within Division 2 Design Principles of SEPP Seniors, as outlined in Section 2.2 of this report.

With respect to the advisory note under Clause 40(4)(b), this note states that “the purpose of this paragraph is to avoid an abrupt change in the scale of development in the streetscape”. The note is provided in response to the development standard which requires buildings adjoining boundaries to be no more than 2 storeys in height. If this note is applied to the height of buildings standard, it can be considered that the purpose of setting a maximum building height for RACFs within a low-density environment is also to ensure that the scale is consistent with the surrounding development. No objections are raised to the change in scale between the RACF and the adjoining western residence with respect to the height of the RACF. The building does reduce in scale as it approaches the western side boundary and is of a 2 storey form adjacent to the boundary.

Finally, the written request seeks to demonstrate compliance with the objectives of the height of buildings development standard contained within Clause 4.3 of the HLEP. Whilst this standard is not applicable to the development, the objective of this clause can be assessed with respect to the development. The objectives of Clause 4.3 of the HLEP is “to permit a height of buildings that is appropriate for the site constraints, development potential and infrastructure capacity of the locality.”

The written request addresses the clause as follows:

The proposed breaches to the height standard are considered to be entirely consistent with the objective for height under the LEP given the main reason for the breach is the site constraint related to the fall in topography to the west and the necessity to provide level internal floorplates.

In assessing the proposal against the objective of Clause 4.3 of the HELP, Council notes that the applicant has identified that the requirement for level floor plans relative to the existing RACF and notes that the constraints of the site tend to hinder the attainment of this design objective.

With respect to the objective of Clause 4.3, is it considered that the proposed building height is appropriate with respect to the infrastructure capacity of the locality and in relation to the existing RACF. It is considered that the proposed height of the western extension whilst non-compliant, would allow for the development potential of the expanded RACF to be realised, and assist in providing additional seniors housing in an accessible area. Amenity impacts to the surrounding residential environment are considered to be acceptable, and the proposed building height does not permit the generation of any significant amenity impact to any adjoining residential allotment. It is considered that the written request adequately demonstrates that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary and that the objectives of the adopted standards are achieved notwithstanding the numerical non-compliance.

Clause 40(4)(c) - a building located in the rear 25% area of the site must not exceed 1 storey in height

The written request prepared by Evolution Planning seeks to demonstrate that it is unreasonable or unnecessary to comply with the objectives of the rear 25% development standard as the objectives of the standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard.

SEPP Seniors does not provide direct objectives for the development standard and merely states a numerical value that is to be complied with. In the absence of a direct objective of the development standard the written request by Evolution Planning seeks to establish that related objectives within SEPP Seniors are satisfied by the proposed development. The relative objectives chosen are as follows:

· The Objectives of Chapter 3 Development for Seniors Housing.

· The relevant design principles related to Neighbourhood Amenity and Streetscape.

· The advisory note under Clause 44(b).

With respect to the advisory note under Clause 40(4)(b), this note states that “the purpose of this paragraph is to avoid an abrupt change in the scale of development in the streetscape”. The note is provided in response to the development standard which requires buildings adjoining boundaries to be no more than 2 storeys in height. If this note is applied to the rear 25% standard, it can be considered that the purpose of setting a maximum number of buildings stories for a RACFs within a low-density environment is also to ensure that the scale is consistent with the surrounding development and to provide a transition between the RACF and neighbouring development at the rear of the site.

In this regard it is noted that the majority of the open space area of the development is located in the rear of the site and provides a visual and physical buffer between the RACF and the rear boundary. Upon the establishment of landscaping the scale change between the RACF and the rear boundary will be less pronounced. Additionally, all new building elements that are over 1 storey in the rear portion of the site would be fitted with privacy devices to prevent amenity impacts to adjoining residential properties, and the supplied Acoustic Assessment Report prepared by Acoustic Logic, dated 24 July 2020 details that the use of these areas would not permit the generation of excessive noise subject to operational procedures and installation of appropriate acoustic devices. It is considered that the written request adequately demonstrates that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary and that the objectives of the adopted standards are achieved notwithstanding the numerical non-compliance.

Environmental Planning Grounds

In addition to demonstrating that compliance is unreasonable or unnecessary, Clause 4.6(3)(b) requires that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard. In demonstrating that sufficient environmental planning grounds exist it must be demonstrated that the planning grounds are particular to the circumstances of the development on the subject site (summarised from Four2Five Pty Ltd v Ashfield Council [2015] NSWLEC 1009 [60].

Clause 40(4)(a) – Height of buildings

In demonstrating the environmental planning grounds, the written request notes the following with respect to the non-compliant building height:

The proposed variation under Clause 4.6 is considered to be justified on the following environmental

planning grounds:

· The proposed breaches to the height standard arise mainly as a result of the site constraint related to the fall in topography to the west and the necessity to provide level internal floorplates. The same constraint resulted in an approved development which exceeds 8m and the same design approach has been adopted.

· No significant adverse impacts will be introduced on neighbouring properties as a result of the proposed breaches to the height standard.

· The proposed additions, including the parts of the development which breach the height standard, are considered to be a logical, practical design response to the expansion of the building which already breaches the height standard at similar locations.

· This logical approach to the design is consistent with the Objects of the Act in terms of the promotion of the “orderly and economic use and development of land.

· The proposed breaches to the height standard do not hinder other Objects of the Act in terms of:

(f) To promote the sustainable management of built and cultural heritage (including Aboriginal cultural heritage).

(g) To promote good design and amenity of the built environment.

· Council’s position of demanding strict compliance of the height standard where it previously allowed similar heights in response to the topographic conditions of the site is not considered to be a reasonable one, particularly when the proposed breaches may be justified in accordance with clause 4.6.

· The proposed development satisfies the adopted related objectives for height under SEPP(Seniors) and LEP 2013.

Council considers that the environmental planning grounds stated within the written request are sufficient with respect to Clause 4.6(3)(b) and that the stated grounds are specific to the proposed development and the circumstances of the development site. It is therefore considered that the written request adequately demonstrates compliance with the clause and is acceptable in this regard.

Clause 40(4)(c) - a building located in the rear 25% area of the site must not exceed 1 storey in height

In demonstrating the environmental planning grounds, the written request notes the following with respect to the non-compliant number of stories in the rear 25% of the site:

· The proposed balconies on the northern wing support the Objectives of the SEPP related to “development of housing that is located and designed in a manner particularly suited to both those seniors who are independent, mobile and active as well as those who are frail, and other people with a disability regardless of their age.”; in terms of providing amenable and accessible outdoor space conveniently located to serve common lounge areas.

· No significant adverse amenity related impacts, such as loss of privacy or noise, will be introduced as a result of the non-complying parts of the building, including the proposed balconies at the northern wing.

· If the ADG were to be applied to assess the separation distances of the proposed non-compliant balconies at the western end of the northern wing, the balconies would comply with the design criteria of 9m to the boundary (including 3m extra which is added to sites which are adjacent to a lower density zone), except for a small portion of the ground floor west facing balcony. This balcony is considered to be satisfactory from a privacy perspective given the presence of screen planting of up to 6m and since any potential sightlines in that direction would fall over the roof of the dwelling and largely enclosed external private open space area associated with the dwelling at 71A Alexandra Parade.

· The proposed non-compliance associated with the western wing addition relates to a part of the building which is setback ~13.38m from the neighbouring boundary and sits partly behind a compliant two storey part of the building.

· The proposed massing; scale, articulation and modulation of the building in the location of the non-compliant part is considered to be appropriate to the site condition and the site context.

· The degree of non-compliance is not considered to be significant.

· The parts of the development which breach the standard, are considered to be a logical, practical design response to the expansion of the building which already breaches the standard; This logical approach to the design is consistent with the Objects of the Act in terms of the promotion of the “orderly and economic use and development of land.

· The proposed breaches to the height standard do not hinder other Objects of the Act in terms of:

(f) To promote the sustainable management of built and cultural heritage (including Aboriginal cultural heritage).

(g) To promote good design and amenity of the built environment.

Public Interest and Clause 4.6(4)

Clause 4.6(4) states that development consent must not be granted for development that contravenes a development standard unless:

(a) The consent authority is satisfied that:

(i) The applicant’s written request has adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated by subclause (3), and

(ii) The proposed development will be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the particular standard and the objectives for development within the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out, and

(b) The concurrence of the Planning Secretary has been obtained

With regard to part (i), the written requests are considered to adequately address the matters required to be demonstrated as outlined above.

With regard to part (ii), the proposed development is considered to be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the particular standard and the objectives for development of seniors housing as contained with the SEPP

With regard to (b) the concurrence of the Planning Secretary has been obtained.

2.3 State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

The application has been assessed against the requirements at State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (ISEPP). This Policy contains State-wide planning Controls for developments adjoining Rail Corridors. The development adjoins the North Shore Rail Line. The application was referred to Sydney Trains for comment as per the requirements of the ISEPP. Sydney Trains as the delegated rail authority reviewed the development application and responded to Council on 1 May 2020 with concurrence conditions. These recommended conditions have been included in Schedule 1 of this report.

2.4 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 Remediation of Land

The policy provides guidelines for the remediation of contaminated land for the purpose of reducing the risk of harm to human health or any other aspect of the environment. Clause 7 requires Council to consider whether land is contaminated prior to granting consent to the carrying out of any development on that land.

Should the land be contaminated Council must be satisfied that the land is suitable in a contaminated state for the proposed use. If the land requires remediation to be undertaken to make the land suitable for the proposed use, Council must be satisfied that the land will be remediated before the land is used for that purpose.

The site has been historically used for residential purposes and is not located in the immediate vicinity of any potential contamination sources. It is not likely that the site has experienced any significant contamination, and further assessment under SEPP 55 is not required.

2.5 State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017

State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017 (Vegetation SEPP) commenced 25 August 2017 and aims to protect the biodiversity and amenity values of trees within non-rural areas of the state.

Part 3 of the Vegetation SEPP states that a development control plan may make a declaration in any manner relating to species, size, location and presence of vegetation. Accordingly, Part 1B.6.1 of the Hornsby Development Control Plan 2013 (HDCP) prescribes works that can be undertaken with or without consent to trees.

Section 3.1 of this report provides an assessment in accordance with Part 1B.6.1 of the HDCP.

2.6 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 Advertising and Signage

The aims of the Policy are to ensure that advertising and signage is compatible with the desired amenity and visual character of an area, to provide effective communication in suitable locations and to ensure signage is of high-quality design and finish. The proposed development includes the erection of 3 x free standing illuminated signs (one facing Myra Street and two facing Alexandria Parade) and a non-illuminated temporary marketing sign.

SEPP 64 defines a ‘business identification sign’ as a sign that identifies or names a building or the nature of the business. The proposed signage complies with the definition of business identification signs under SEPP 64 with the exception of the “marketing sign” which would be defined as an advertising structure.

Division 1 Clause 9 of SEPP 64 indicates that the Policy does not apply to ‘business identification signs. However, the Policy requires that the consent authority must consider the assessment criteria within Schedule 1 of SEPP 64 when assessing any sign. An assessment of the application with regard to SEPP 64 is provided below:

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64
Control		Requirement	Assessment
Division 1, 2 and 3 development controls
Objectives		Does the proposal satisfy the objectives in Clause 3 of the SEPP?	Yes
Schedule 1 – Assessment Criteria (to be considered for all advertising structures including “business identification signs”)
Character of the area	Is the proposal compatible with the existing or desired future character of the area or locality in which it is proposed to be located?		Yes, the proposal is consistent with the character of the immediate locality and is of an appropriate scale with respect to the surrounding development.
	Is the proposal consistent with a particular theme for outdoor advertising in the area or locality?		Yes, the proposal is similar to existing signage within the broader area.
Special areas	Does the proposal detract from the amenity or visual quality of any environmentally sensitive areas, heritage areas, natural or other conservation areas, open space areas, waterways, rural landscapes or residential areas		No, the signage would identify the RACF and is of an appropriate scale to not detract from the adjoining heritage listed items and conservation area.
Views and vistas	Does the proposal obscure or compromise important views?		No
	Does the proposal dominate the skyline and reduce the quality of vistas?		No
	Does the proposal respect the viewing rights of other advertisers?		Yes
Streetscape, setting or landscape	Is the scale, proportion and form of the proposal appropriate for the streetscape, setting or landscape?		Yes
	Does the proposal contribute to the visual interest of the streetscape, setting or landscape?		Yes
	Does the proposal reduce clutter by rationalising and simplifying existing advertising?		The proposal replicates the existing signage on site.
	Does the proposal screen unsightliness?		No
	Does the proposal protrude above buildings, structures or tree canopies in the area or locality?		No
	Does the proposal require ongoing vegetation management?		No
Site and building	Is the proposal compatible with the scale, proportion and other characteristics of the site or building, or both, on which the proposed signage is to be located?		Yes, the signage is appropriately sized and compatible with the building design.
	Does the proposal respect important features of the site or building, or both		Yes
	Does the proposal show innovation and imagination in its relationship to the site or building, or both?		The proposed signage is of an appropriate design for the site.
Associated devices and logos	Have any safety devices, platforms, lighting devices or logos been designed as an integral part of the signage or structure on which it is to be displayed?		Yes, all signs are internally illuminated and the “marketing sign” is not illuminated.
Illumination	Would illumination result in unacceptable glare?		An appropriate condition, in line with the “Draft Transport Corridor Outdoor Advertising and Signage Guidelines” has been included in Schedule 1 of this report to ensure appropriate lighting levels.
	Would illumination affect safety for pedestrians, vehicles or aircraft?		An appropriate condition, in line with the “Draft Transport Corridor Outdoor Advertising and Signage Guidelines” has been included in Schedule 1 of this report to ensure appropriate lighting levels.
	Would illumination detract from the amenity of any residence or other form of accommodation?		An appropriate condition, in line with the “Draft Transport Corridor Outdoor Advertising and Signage Guidelines” has been included in Schedule 1 of this report to ensure appropriate lighting levels
	Can the intensity of the illumination be adjusted, if necessary?		Yes - An appropriate condition, has been included in Schedule 1 of this report to ensure compliance with the “Draft Transport Corridor Outdoor Advertising and Signage Guidelines” in relation to time of day brightness levels
	Is the illumination subject to a curfew?		No
Safety	Would the proposal reduce the safety for any public road?		No
	Would the proposal reduce the safety for pedestrians or bicyclists?		No
	Would the proposal reduce the safety for pedestrians, particularly children, by obscuring sightlines from public areas?		No

2.7 State Regional Environmental Policy No. 20 Hawkesbury-Nepean River

The site is located with the catchment of the Hawkesbury Nepean River. Part 2 of this Plan contains general planning considerations and strategies requiring Council to consider the impacts of development on water quality, aquaculture, recreation and tourism.

Subject to the implementation of sediment and erosion control measures and stormwater management to protect water quality, the proposal would comply with the requirement of the Policy. No changes are proposed in this regard.

2.8 Section 3.42 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 - Purpose and Status of Development Control Plans

Section 3.42 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 states that a DCP provision will have no effect if it prevents or unreasonably restricts development that is otherwise permitted and complies with the development standards in relevant Local Environmental Plans and State Environmental Planning Policies.

The principal purpose of a development control plan is to provide guidance on the aims of any environmental planning instrument that applies to the development; facilitate development that is permissible under any such instrument; and achieve the objectives of land zones. The provisions contained in a DCP are not statutory requirements and are for guidance purposes only. Consent authorities have flexibility to consider innovative solutions when assessing development proposals, to assist achieve good planning outcomes.

2.9 Hornsby Development Control Plan 2013

The proposed development has been assessed having regard to the relevant desired outcomes and prescriptive requirements within the Hornsby Development Control Plan 2013 (HDCP) As discussed below.

2.9.1 Community Housing

The desired outcome of Part 7.2.1 Seniors Housing of the HDCP is for “Development with a bulk, scale and intensity that is compatible with the character of the area”. This is supported by the prescriptive measure that “Development for Seniors Housing should comply with the planning controls in State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 (as amended).” An assessment of the proposal against the planning controls of SEPP Seniors is contained within the body of this report.

2.9.2 Bulk and Scale

Part 3.1 Scale of the HDCP provides controls for the development of R2 Low density residential zoned land. The controls within Part 3.1 are designed to relate to the construction of dwelling houses and related structures and are not readily applicable to the construction of a RACF. SEPP Seniors contains controls relating to the construction of an RACF which more readily relate to the structure. These controls supersede the requirements of Part 3.1 of the HDCP and are discussed within Section 2.2 of this report.

2.9.3 Privacy

The desired outcome of Part 3.1.6. Privacy of the HDCP is for development that is designed to provide reasonable privacy to adjacent properties. The development adjoins residential development on the northern and western building elevations, with windows and balconies that may present privacy impacts to adjoining residences located on the northern and western adjoining allotments.

With respect to the northern building addition, northern facing windows have the potential to generate privacy impacts to the adjoining residential allotment, with further privacy impacts potentially arise from the elevated balconies in the north western portion of the site. To ensure that a reasonable level of privacy is established and maintained between the subject site and No. 5 Myra Street, appropriate conditions of development consent requiring the erection of privacy screens on all north facing windows has been recommended in Schedule 1 of this report, with the exception of the 3 easternmost window columns and ground floor windows, as these windows would overlook the roofline of No. 5 Myra street or the boundary fencing.

In assessing the privacy impact of the proposed north western balconies, it is noted that due to existing improvements to No. 71A Alexandria Parade to the west, there is limited opportunity for overlooking into the POS of this adjoining allotment. With respect to views towards No. 5 Myra Street from the balconies, it is noted that the applicant has detailed that some overlooking is possible into the rear POS of this site, however due to the setback of these balconies from the northern elevation, a separation of 19m is present between the observer and the northern boundary. Comparison is drawn between the Apartment Design Guide requiring a separation of 9m for privacy reasons. However, it is noted that the zoning of the site, and the adjoining No. 5 Myra Street is low density residential, and residential flat buildings are not a permitted land use in this zone. It is therefore considered that raising the balustrading to a minimum of 1.7m above the FFL of the balconies for the northern elevation is appropriate and would assist in establishing a reasonable level of privacy for the adjoining residential allotment.

With respect to western facing windows on the western building elevation, these windows are affixed with privacy screens and consequently, reasonable privacy would be maintained.

Subject to the imposition of conditions described above, it is considered that the proposal is consistent with the desired outcome of Part 3.1.6 Privacy of the HDCP.

2.9.4 Heritage

Part 9.4.1 Heritage of the HDCP contains planning controls for development undertaken adjacent to Heritage Listed items and Heritage Conservation Areas. As discussed in Section 2.1.4 of this report the proposal meets the desired outcome of Part 9.4.1 Development in the Vicinity of Heritage Items and Heritage Conservation Areas and is considered acceptable

2.9.5 Noise

The development was supported by an Acoustic Assessment Report prepared by Acoustic Logic, dated 24 July 2020, and a Noise Emission from External Terraces report, prepared by Acoustic Logic, dated 1 September 2020. These reports detailed expected noise emissions and provided recommendations to ensure appropriate noise levels are maintained. Council’s assessment raised no objection to the proposal, subject to the imposition of the conditions recommended in Schedule 1 of this report including conditions limiting the amount of noise that is permitted to be generated during operation of the RACF and the requirement that acoustic certification be provided prior to occupation.

2.9.6 Waste Management

The proposed development is currently privately serviced by a waste contracting company. No changes are proposed to this arrangement. Council’s assessment of the proposal identifies that suitable arrangements are in place for operational waste management and that the existing facilities on site are of a suitable size and configuration to cater for the increased waste load.

2.10 Section 7.12 Contributions Plans

Hornsby Shire Council Section 7.12 Contributions Plan 2019-2029 applies to the development as the estimated costs of works is greater than $100,000. Should the application be approved, an appropriate condition of consent is recommended requiring the payment of a contribution in accordance with the Plan.

3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

Section 4.15(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 Tree and Vegetation Preservation

The proposed development would require the removal of 27 Trees as described within the supplied Arboricultural Impact Assessment Report, prepared by Earthscape Horticultural Services., dated Jan 2020. Of these trees, 8 trees are identified as being of very low retention value, 15 trees are of moderate retention value and 4 are trees of high retention value.

No objections are raised to the removal of trees identified as being of very low - moderate retention value, subject to the appropriate replanting of trees on site to maintain the landscaped character of the area and offset the environmental loss of these trees. It is noted that over 50 new trees are proposed to be planted on the site, which is considered to be an appropriate replacement value for these trees.

The trees identified as being of high retention value Trees 23, 25 and 27 would be located in the rear, north western corner of the site, with Tree 12 being located in the front Alexandria Parade setback. Two Water Gum trees are proposed to be replanted in the front setback to maintain streetscape appearance as viewed from Alexandria Parade.

With regard to Trees 23, 25 and 27, Council requested further information from the applicant in regard to the preservation of these trees. In response the applicant provided a Landscape Design Statement, prepared by James Pfeiffer Landscape Architects, dated 23 July 2020, which outlined the rationale for the removal of these trees and the overall landscape design. The objectives of the landscape plans were outlined, which included overall project goals and matters specific to the redesign of the rear open space area. With respect to the potential retention of these trees, the landscape design statement outlined the objective to provide multiple outdoor ‘rooms’ or spaces that can be utilised by the residents and the heightened requirements of the open space areas for seniors including slip/ trip free areas, level surfaces and requirements of the dementia patients. Council notes the concerns with respect to the maintenance issues associated with the retention of these tress and considers that the provision of high quality and hazard reduced outdoor spaces for the residents is sufficient planning justification to permit the removal and replacement of these trees with more suitable species. Appropriate conditions of consent to this effect are recommended in Schedule 1 of this report.

3.1.2 Stormwater Management

The proposed development seeks to dispose of additional stormwater generated by the development via the utilisation of the existing detention basin, with a final disposal on Alexandria Parade. No objections are raised to this proposed system, subject to the imposition of conditions recommended in Schedule 1 of this report.

3.2 Built Environment

3.2.1 Traffic

The car parking rates provided in the HDCP references SEPP Seniors for Residential Aged Care on-site parking requirements. SEPP Seniors has a parking requirement of 1 car space per 10 beds and 1 car space per 2 staff. Based on the number of beds and staff members (116 beds and 30 staff upon completion of the development), the required parking would be 27 spaces. 27 parking spaces are provided, including 1 disabled parking space and an ambulance space, which is in accordance with the parking requirements.

The supplied Traffic Impact Statement, prepared by TRAFFIX and dated 24 February 2020, estimates that the proposed development will have a nett increase in traffic generation of 5 vehicle trips per hour in the AM and PM peak hour. With the consideration of vehicle trips for residential aged care facilities do not normally coincide with network peak hours, traffic generation is not considered to be an issue with the proposed development.

Appropriate conditions of consent with respect to traffic and vehicle management are during construction and operation are recommended in Schedule 1 of this report.

3.3 Social Impacts

The residential care facility would improve housing choice in the locality by providing a range of house hold types and permitting people who require residential care to remain within the area. The location of the RACF within an “accessible area” further provides for positive social outcomes by permitting easy and equitable access to the development and the required supporting services.

3.4 Economic Impacts

The proposal would have a minor positive impact on the local economy by generating an increase in demand for local services and providing further employment opportunities to the community, both during construction and during operation of the expanded complex.

4. SITE SUITABILITY

Section 4.15(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 or flood prone land. 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 as detailed within the body of this report.

5. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Section 4.15(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 1 April 2020 and 16 April 2020 in accordance with the Hornsby Community Participation Plan. During this period, Council received 2 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

Two submissions objected to the development, generally on the grounds that the development would result in:

· Privacy Impacts.

· Noise.

· Construction Impacts to adjoining dwellings.

· Vegetation Removal.

· Devaluation of adjoining properties.

· Traffic Impacts.

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 Devaluation of Adjoining Properties

A submission has been received raising concerns that the development would negatively impact property values of nearby properties.

In addressing this concern, Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and SEPP Seniors does not require Council to take into consideration the impact of a development on the value of nearby properties. Nonetheless, Council acknowledges that the RACF development generally complies with the development standards of SEPP Seniors and is designed with regard to the low-density character of the area.

6. THE PUBLIC INTEREST

Section 4.15(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 development would be in the public interest.

CONCLUSION

The application proposes the demolition of structures and alterations and additions to an existing residential aged care facility.

The development generally meets the desired outcomes of State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 and Council’s planning controls and is satisfactory having regard to the matters for consideration under Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Council received 2 submissions during the public notification period. The matters raised have been addressed in the body of the report.

Having regard to the circumstances of the case, approval of the application is recommended.

The reasons for this decision are:

· The proposed development generally complies with the requirements of the relevant environmental planning instruments, including State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004, the Hornsby Local Environmental Plan 2013 and the relevant requirements of the Hornsby Development Control Plan 2013.

· The written requests to vary the development standards contained within Clause 40(4)(a) and Clause 40(4)(c) of State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 is well founded. Strict compliance with the development standards are unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case and there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify the variation to the development standards.

· The proposed development does not create unreasonable environmental impacts to adjoining development with regard to traffic impacts, visual bulk, overshadowing, solar access, amenity or privacy.

Note: At the time of the completion of this planning report, no persons have made a Political Donations Disclosure Statement pursuant to Section 10.4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 in respect of the subject planning application.

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER

The officer responsible for the preparation of this report is Ben Jones.

Cassandra Williams

Major Development Manager - Development Assessments

Planning and Compliance Division

Rod Pickles

Manager - Development Assessments

Planning and Compliance Division

Attachments:

1.⇩	Locality Map
2.⇩	Architectural Plans
3.⇩	Landscape Plans
4.⇩	Shadow Diagrams
5.⇩	Clause 4.6 - Rear 25% of Site
6.⇩	Clause 4.6 - Height

File Reference: DA/192/2020

Document Number: D08013714

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:

Approved Plans:

*Plan No.*	*Plan Title*	*Drawn by*	*Dated*	*Council Reference*
1822/DA01 Issue P	Site Plan	Boffa Robertson Group	23/07/2020
1822/DA03 Issue U	Lower Ground Floor	Boffa Robertson Group	24/07/2020
1822/DA04 Issue U	Ground Floor Plan	Boffa Robertson Group	24/07/2020
1822/DA05 Issue U	First Floor Plan	Boffa Robertson Group	24/07/2020
1822/DA06 Issue L	Roof Floor Plan	Boffa Robertson Group	24/07/2020
1822/DA07 Issue P	East Elevation	Boffa Robertson Group	24/07/2020
1822/DA08 Issue P	South Elevation	Boffa Robertson Group	24/07/2020
1822/DA09 Issue P	North and West Elevation	Boffa Robertson Group	24/07/2020
1822/DA08 Issue L	Sections	Boffa Robertson Group	24/07/2020
19-009-CP01 Issue E	Landscape Concept Plan	James Pfeiffer Landscape Architects	03/02/2020
19-009-CP02 Issue D	Landscape Concept Plan	James Pfeiffer Landscape Architects	03/02/2020
19056-SW01	Lower Ground Stormwater Layout Plan	Michael Ell	06/12/2019
19056-SW02	Lower Ground Stormwater Layout Plan (2)	Michael Ell	06/12/2019
19056-SW03	Stormwater details	Michael Ell	06/12/2019
19056-SW04	Erosion and sediment control plan	Michael Ell	06/12/2019
19056-SW05	Erosion and sediment control details	Michael Ell	06/12/2019
T19-072501 [E] Sheet 1	Tree Protection Plan	Earthscape Horticultural Services	26/07/2019
T19-072501 [E] Sheet 2	Tree Protection Plan	Earthscape Horticultural Services	26/07/2019

Supporting Documentation:

*Document Title*	*Prepared by*	*Dated*	*Council Reference*
Landscape Design Statement	James Pfeiffer Landscape Architect	23/07/2020	D07970869
Arboricultural Impact Assessment Report	Earthscape Horticultural Services	January 2020	D07970864, D07970865
Waste Management Plan	Boffa Robertson Architects	31/07/2020	D07970862
Construction Traffic Management Plan	Traffix Traffic and Transport Planners	July 2020	D07970861
Acoustic Assessment Report	Acoustic Logic	24/07/2020	D07970859
Noise Emission from External Terraces report	Acoustic Logic	01/09/2020	D07994124
Sydney Trains Letter of Concurrence	Sydney Trains	1 May 2020	D08014769

2. Amendment of Plans

a) To comply with Councils requirement in terms of privacy, the approved plans are to be amended as follows:

i) A 1.5-metre-high close-form privacy screen to prevent views into the neighbouring residential allotment must be erected on all windows on the northern elevation as indicated in red on the approved plans;

a. The screen must have no individual openings more than 30mm wide and have a total of all openings less than 30% of the surface area of the screen or be of a form that prevents any views from an elevated position down into any neighbouring allotment.

ii) The northern elevation of the elevated terraces / balconies located in the north western corner of the site must have a privacy screen affixed that is no less than 1.7 metres above the FFL of the balconies.

b) These amended plans must be submitted with the application for the Construction Certificate.

3. Removal of Trees

This development consent permits the removal of trees identified for removal on the approved Tree Protection Plans T19-072501 [E] Sheet 1 and T19-072501 [E] Sheet 2, prepared by Earthscape Horticultural Services, dated 26 July 2019.

Note: The removal of any other trees from the site requires separate approval by Council in accordance with Part 1B.6 Tree and Vegetation Preservation of the Hornsby Development Control Plan, 2013.

4. Construction Certificate

a) A Construction Certificate is required to be approved by Council or a Private Certifying Authority prior to the commencement of any construction works under this consent.

b) The Construction Certificate plans must be consistent with the Development Consent plans.

5. Section 7.12 Development Contributions

(a) In accordance with Section 4.17(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the Hornsby Shire Council Section 7.12 Development Contributions Plan 2019-2029, $111,225 must be paid towards the provision, extension or augmentation of public amenities or public services, based on development costs of $11,122,502.

(b) The value of this contribution is current as of 7 October 2020 If the contributions are not paid within the financial quarter that this consent is granted, the contributions payable will be adjusted in accordance with the provisions of the Hornsby Shire Council Section 7.12 Development Contributions Plan and the amount payable will be calculated at the time of payment in the following manner:

$C_PY	=			$C_DC x CPI_PY
				CPI_DC

Where:

$C_PY is the amount of the contribution at the date of Payment.

$C_DC is the amount of the contribution as set out in this Development Consent.

CPI_PY is the latest release of the Consumer Price Index (Sydney – All Groups) at the date of Payment as published by the ABS.

CPI_DC is the Consumer Price Index (Sydney – All Groups) for the financial quarter at the date of this Development Consent.

(i) Prior to the issue of the Subdivision Certificate where the development is for subdivision.

(ii) Prior to the issue of the first Construction Certificate where the development is for building work.

(iii) Prior to issue of the Subdivision Certificate or first Construction Certificate, whichever occurs first, where the development involves both subdivision and building work.

(iv) Prior to the works commencing where the development does not require a Construction Certificate or Subdivision Certificate.

Note: It is the professional responsibility of the Principal Certifying Authority to ensure that the monetary contributions have been paid to Council in accordance with the above timeframes.

Note: The Hornsby Shire Council Section 7.12 Development Contributions Plan may be viewed at www.hornsby.nsw.gov.au or a copy may be inspected at Council’s Administration Centre during normal business hours.

6. Retaining Walls

To ensure the stability of the site, structural details of all required retaining walls must be prepared by a suitably qualified structural or civil engineer, with the input of a geotechnical engineer, as required, and be submitted with the application of the Construction Certificate.

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

7. Building Code of Australia

Detailed plans, specifications and supporting information is required to be submitted to the certifying authority detailing how the proposed building work achieves compliance with the National Construction Code - Building Code of Australia. All building work must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the National Construction Code - Building Code of Australia.

8. Fire Safety Schedule

a) A schedule of all proposed essential fire safety measures to be installed in the building (e.g. hydrants, hose reels, emergency warning systems etc.) shall be submitted with the construction certificate application. The schedule shall distinguish between existing and proposed fire safety measures.

b) All details of the proposed fire sprinkler system, as required by Clause 55 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004, must be prepared by a suitably qualified person and submitted to the principal certify authority prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

9. Sydney Water – Approval

This application must be submitted to Sydney Water for approval to determine whether the development would affect any Sydney Water infrastructure, and whether further requirements are to be met.

Note: Building plan approvals can be obtained online via Sydney Water Tap in^TMthrough www.sydneywater.com.au under the Building and Development tab.

10. Dilapidation Report

a) A ‘Dilapidation Report’ is to be prepared by a chartered structural engineer detailing the structural condition of the adjoining property at Lot 3 DP 323073, No. 5 Myra Street, Wahroonga.

b) A copy of the ‘Dilapidation Report’ must be submitted to Council and the PCA with the application for the construction certificate.

11. Stormwater Drainage

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

a) Connected directly to the existing drainage system via the onsite detention system.

12. 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 34.8 cubic metres, and a maximum discharge (when full) of 22 litres per second;

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

c) Discharge from the detention system must 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.

13. Internal Driveway/Vehicular Areas

The driveway and parking areas on site must be designed and a Construction Certificate issued in accordance with Australian Standards AS2890.1, AS2890.2, AS3727 and the following requirements:

a) Design levels at the front boundary shall be obtained from Council if a private accredited certifier is engaged to obtain a construction certificate for these works.

b) Design levels at the front boundary be obtained from Council.

c) All parking areas and driveways are to be sealed to an all-weather standard, line marked and signposted;

d) Car parking, loading and manoeuvring areas to be used solely for nominated purposes;

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

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

14. Vehicular Crossing

a) A separate application under the Local Government Act 1993 and the Roads Act 1993 must be submitted to Council for the installation of a new vehicular crossing and the removal of any redundant crossing. The vehicular crossing must be constructed in accordance with AUS-SPEC Specifications (www.hornsby.nsw.gov.au/property/build/aus-spec-terms-and-conditions) and the following requirements:

i) Design levels at the front boundary must be obtained from Council for the design on the internal driveway.

ii) Any redundant crossings must be replaced with integral kerb and gutter.

iii) The footway area must be restored by turfing.

b) Evidence of the approved vehicular crossing application must be submitted with the Construction Certificate.

Note: An application for a vehicular crossing can only be made to one of Council’s Authorised Vehicular Crossing Contractors. You are advised to contact Council on 02 9847 6940 to obtain a list of contractors.

15. Construction Management Plan (CMP)

To assist in the protection of the public, the environment and Council’s assets, a separate Construction Management Plan must be prepared by a suitably qualified environmental consultant in consultation with a qualified traffic engineer and AQF 5 arborist, and submitted to Council’s Compliance Team at:

https://www.hornsby.nsw.gov.au/property/build/applicationforms for review and approval.

The CMP must include the following details:

a) A Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) including the following:

i) The order of construction works and arrangement of all construction machines and vehicles being used during all stages.

ii) The CTMP plans shall be in accordance with all other plans submitted to Council as part of this development proposal.

iii) A statement confirming that no building materials, work sheds, vehicles, machines or the like shall be allowed to remain in the road reserve area without the written consent of Hornsby Shire Council.

iv) The Plan shall be in compliance with the requirements of the Roads and Maritime Services Traffic control at work sites Manual 2018 and detail:

a. Public notification of proposed works.

b. Long term signage requirements.

c. Short term (during actual works) signage.

d. Vehicle Movement Plans, where applicable.

e. Traffic Management Plans.

f. Pedestrian and Cyclist access and safety.

v) Traffic controls including those used during non-working hours. Pedestrian access and two-way traffic in the public road must be able to be facilitated at all times.

vi) Details of parking arrangements for all employees and contractors, including layover areas for large trucks during all stages of works. The parking or stopping of truck and dog vehicles associated with the development will not be permitted other than on the site and the plan must demonstrate this will be achieved.

vii) Confirmation that a street ‘scrub and dry’ service will be in operation during all stages of works.

viii) Proposed truck routes to and from the site including details of the frequency of truck movements for all stages of the development.

ix) Swept path analysis for ingress and egress of the site for all stages of works.

x) Site plans for all stages of works including the location of site sheds, concrete pump and crane locations, unloading and loading areas, waste and storage areas, existing survey marks, vehicle entry, surrounding pedestrian footpaths and hoarding (fencing) locations.

xi) The total quantity and size of trucks for all importation and exportation of fill on site throughout all stages of works, and a breakdown of total quantities of trucks for each stage of works.

xii) The number of weeks trucks will be accessing and leaving the site with excavated or imported fill material.

xiii) The maximum number of trucks travelling to and from the site on any given day for each stage of works.

xiv) The maximum number of truck movements on any given day during peak commuting periods for all stages of works.

xv) The source site location of any proposed fill to be imported to the site, for all stages of works.

xvi) The Plan must state that the applicant and all employees of contractors on the site must obey any direction or notice from the Prescribed Certifying Authority or Hornsby Shire Council in order to ensure the above.

xvii) If there is a requirement to obtain a Work Zone, Out of Hours permit, partial Road Closure or Crane Permit, the Plan must detail these requirements and include a statement that an application to Hornsby Shire Council will be made to obtain such a permit.

b) A Construction Waste Management Plan detailing the following:

i) Details of the importation or excavation of soil and fill, the classification of the fill, disposal methods and authorised disposal depots that will be used for the fill.

ii) Asbestos management requirement and procedures for removal and disposal from the site in accordance with AS 2601–2001 The demolition of structures, and the Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2005.

iii) General construction waste details including construction waste skip bin locations and litter management for workers.

c) A Tree Protection Plan (TPP) prepared by an AQF 5 Arborist in accordance with any approved Arboricultural Impact Assessment and tree location plans, detailing the following:

i) A site plan showing tree protection zones (TPZ) and structural root zones (SRZ) of trees to be retained and specific details of tree protection measures inclusive of distances (in metres) measured from tree trunks.

ii) Construction methodology to avoid damage to trees proposed to be retained during construction works.

iii) Specifications on tree protection materials used and methods within the TPZ or SRZ.

iv) Location of dedicated material storage space on site outside of TPZ’s and SRZ’s for retained trees.

e) A Construction Noise and Vibration Management Plan (CNMP) which includes:

i) Existing noise and vibration levels within the proximity of the proposed development site.

ii) Details of the extent of rock breaking or rock sawing works forming part of the proposed development works.

iii) The maximum level of noise and vibration predicted to be emitted during each stage of construction.

iv) The duration of each stage of works where the maximum level of noise and vibration are predicted to be emitted for.

v) Details of mitigation measures, inclusive of respite periods, that will meet acoustic standards and guidelines at each stage of works.

vi) Details of a complaints handling process for the surrounding neighbourhood for each stage of works.

f) Identification of approved sediment and erosion control measures.

g) The CMP must detail the contact information for developers, builder, private certifier and any emergency details during and outside work hours.

16. Appointment of a Project Arborist

a) To ensure the trees that must be retained are protected, a project arborist with AQF Level 5 qualifications must be appointed to assist in ensuring compliance with the conditions of consent and provide monitoring reports as specified by the conditions of consent.

b) Details of the appointed project arborist must be submitted to Council and the PCA with the application for the construction certificate/subdivision works certificate.

17. Satisfaction of Sydney Trains Requirements

The applicant must submit written evidence of compliance with the conditions of concurrence issued by Sydney Trains, prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

18. Erection of Construction Sign

a) A sign must be erected in a prominent position on any site on which any approved work is being carried out:

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

ii) 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.

iii) Stating that unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited.

b) The sign is to be maintained while the approved work is being carried out and must be removed when the work has been completed.

19. 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; and/or

c) Involve the enclosure of a public place or part of a public place; and/or

d) Have been identified as requiring a temporary hoarding, fence or awning within the Council approved Construction Management Plan (CMP).

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

20. Toilet Facilities

a) To provide a safe and hygienic workplace, toilet facilities must be available or be installed 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.

b) Each toilet must:

i) Be a standard flushing toilet connected to a public sewer; or

ii) Be a temporary chemical closet approved under the Local Government Act 1993; or

iii) Have an on-site effluent disposal system approved under the Local Government Act 1993.

21. Identification of Survey Marks

A registered surveyor must identify all survey marks in the vicinity of the proposed development. Any survey marks required to be removed or displaced as a result of the proposed development shall be undertaken by a registered surveyor in accordance with Section 24 (1) of the Surveying and Spatial Information Act 2002 and following the Surveyor General’s Directions No.11 – "Preservation of Survey Infrastructure".

22. Erosion and Sediment Control

To protect the water quality of the downstream environment, 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 may be issued for any non-compliance with this requirement without any further notification or warning.

23. Installation of Tree Protection Measures

To ensure the health and longevity of trees on the site are maintained throughout construction, tree protection measures must be installed by the engaged AQF 5 project arborist in accordance with Section 10 of the Arboricultural Impact Assessment Report, prepared by Earthscape Horticultural Services, dated January 2020, the approved tree protection plans and the relevant requirements of AS 4970-2009. Protection of trees on development sites.

a) Upon completion of the installation of tree protection measures, the project arborist must submit a certificate to the PCA confirming that the tree protection measures have been installed in accordance with the requirements of this consent.

24. Garbage Receptacle

a) A garbage receptacle must be provided at the work site before works begin and must be maintained until all works are completed.

b) The garbage receptacle must have a tight-fitting lid and be suitable for the reception of food scraps and papers.

c) The receptacle lid must be kept closed at all times, other than when garbage is being deposited.

d) Food scraps must be placed in the garbage receptacle and not in demolition and construction waste bins.

REQUIREMENTS DURING DEMOLITION AND CONSTRUCTION

25. Construction Work Hours

All works 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.

26. Demolition

To protect the surrounding environment, all demolition work must be carried out in accordance with Australian Standard AS2601-2001 The demolition of structures and the following requirements:

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

b) Demolition works, where asbestos material is being removed, must be undertaken by a contractor that holds an appropriate licence issued by SafeWork NSW in accordance with the Work Health and Safety Regulation 2017 and be appropriately transported and disposed of in accordance with the Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2014; and

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

27. Environmental Management

To prevent sediment run-off, excessive dust, noise or odour emanating from the site during the construction, 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.

28. Street Sweeping

a) To protect the surrounding environment, Street sweeping must be undertaken following sediment tracking from the site along the surrounding roads during works and until the site is established.

b) The street cleaning services must undertake a street ‘scrub and dry’ method of service and not a dry sweeping service that may cause sediment tracking to spread or cause a dust nuisance.

29. Council Property

To ensure that the public reserve is kept in a clean, tidy and safe condition during construction works, no building materials, waste, machinery or related matter is to be stored on the road or footpath.

30. Disturbance of Existing Site

During construction works, the existing ground levels of open space areas and natural landscape features, including natural rock-outcrops, vegetation, soil and watercourses must not be altered unless otherwise nominated on the approved plans.

31. Landfill

The importation of fill material associated with earthworks, or structural or engineering works, is not permitted as part of this consent.

32. Excavated Material

All excavated material removed from the site must be classified by a suitably qualified environmental consultant in accordance with the NSW Environment Protection Authority’s Waste Classification Guidelines and Protection of the Environment Operations (Waste) Regulation 2014 prior to disposal to a licensed waste management facility. Tipping dockets for the total volume of excavated material that are received from the licensed waste management facility must be provided to the principal certifying authority prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

33. Survey Report

A report(s) must be prepared by a registered surveyor and submitted to the principal certifying authority:

a) Prior to the pouring of concrete at each level of the building certifying that:

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

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

b) Confirming that the waste collection vehicle turning area complies with Australian Standard AS2890.1-2004 and AS20890.2-2002 for small rigid vehicles (SRV).

34. Waste Management Details

Requirements of the approved Waste Management Plan shall be complied with during all site preparation works, demolition and throughout all construction works. When implementing the Waste Management Plan, the developer is to ensure:

a) The disposal of any demolition and construction waste must be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the Protection of Environment Operations Act 1997

b) All waste on site is to be stored, handled and disposed of in such a manner as to not create air pollution, offensive noise or pollution of land and water as defined by the Protection of Environment Operations Act 1997.

c) Generation, storage, treatment and disposal of hazardous waste is conducted in accordance with the relevant waste legislation administered by the EPA and relevant Occupational Health and Safety legislation administered by SafeWork NSW

d) All waste generated (including excavated materials) which cannot be reused or recycled must be transported to a facility which can lawfully accept it

e) All materials and resources that are to be stored on site during construction works are contained on the site. The provisions of the Protection of Environment Operations Act 1997 must be complied with when placing/stock piling loose material, disposal of concrete waste or activities which have potential to pollute drains and water courses

f) The storage of waste and recycling containers must be within the boundaries of the development site at all times. Public footways and roads must not be used for the storage of any waste and must be kept clear of obstructions during all construction works.

35. Maintenance of Public Footpaths

Public footpaths must be maintained for the duration of works to ensure they are free of trip hazards, displacements, breaks or debris to enable pedestrians to travel along the footpath safely.

36. Compliance with Construction Management Plan

The Council approved Construction Management Plan must be complied with for the duration of works, unless otherwise approved by Council.

37. Prohibited Actions within the Fenced Tree Protection Zone

The following activities are prohibited within the approved fenced tree protection zones unless otherwise approved by Council:

a) Soil cutting or filling, including excavation and trenching

b) Soil cultivation, disturbance or compaction

c) Stockpiling storage or mixing of materials

d) The parking, storing, washing and repairing of tools, equipment and machinery

e) The disposal of liquids and refuelling

f) The disposal of building materials

g) The siting of offices or sheds

h) Any action leading to the impact on tree health or structure

38. Maintaining the Health of Trees Approved for Retention

The appointed project arborist must monitor and record any and all necessary actions required to maintain tree health and condition for trees to be retained on the subject site.

39. Maintaining Tree Protection Measures

Tree Protection Measures must be maintained by the project arborist in accordance with this consent for the duration of works.

40. Approved Works within Tree Protection Zone Incursions

To protect the health and longevity of trees to be retained, all work within the Tree Protection Zone of trees to be retained, must be undertaken in accordance with the relevant requirements of Section 10 of the Arboricultural Impact Assessment Report, prepared by Earthscape Horticultural Services, dated January 2020 and the following;

a) Where tree root pruning is required for the installation of piers, driveway or underground services, the pruning must be overseen by the engaged AQF 5 project arborist and must be undertaken as follows:

i) Using sharp secateurs, pruners, handsaws or chainsaws with the final cut being clean.

b) Where the building footprint enters or transects the Tree Protection Zones of trees to be retained sensitive construction techniques in the form of screw pilings or piers, cantilevered or suspended slab design to create a 100mm clearance above existing soil grade must be employed to the satisfaction of the project arborist.

c) Any required excavations within the Tree Protection Zone of trees to be retained that are not associated with installation of services must be undertaken as follows:

i) Excavations associated with the basement and building footprint and within the Tree Protection Zone of trees to be retained must be overseen by the AQF 5 project arborist for the first 1m of depth and be undertaken manually to locate roots and allow for any required pruning.

d) No changes of grade within the Tree Protection Zone of trees to be retained, are permitted unless specifically nominated on the approved plans.

e) To minimise impacts within the Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) of trees to be retained on the approved plans, the installation of services must be undertaken as follows:

i) The AQF 5 project arborist must be present to oversee the installation of any underground services which enter or transect the tree protection zone.

ii) The installation of any underground services which either enter or transect the designated TPZ must utilise directional drilling only

iii) For manually excavated trenches the AQF 5 project arborist must designate roots to be retained. Manual excavation may include the use of pneumatic and hydraulic tools.

f) Where scaffolding is required, ground protection must be installed beneath the scaffolding in the following order:

i) Installation of a 100mm deep layer of woodchip.

ii) Installation of geotextile fabric ground covering.

iii) Installation of scaffold boarding above the woodchip and geotextile fabric.

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

41. Damage to Council Assets

To protect public property and infrastructure, any damage caused to Council’s assets as a result of the construction or demolition of the development must be rectified by the applicant in accordance with AUS-SPEC Specifications (www.hornsby.nsw.gov.au/property/build/aus-spec-terms-and-conditions. Rectification works must be undertaken prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, or sooner, as directed by Council.

42. Completion of Landscaping

A certificate must be submitted to the PCA 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.

43. Acoustic Certification

On completion of all works and prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, the certifier is to be provided with a certificate from a qualified acoustic consultant certifying that all acoustic works have been completed in accordance with the Acoustic Assessment Report prepared by Acoustic Logic, dated 24 July 2020, the Noise Emission from External Terraces report, prepared by Acoustic Logic, dated 1 September 2020, and the conditions of this consent.

44. Project Arborist Certification

The engaged AQF 5 project arborist must submit to the principal certifying authority a certificate that all the completed works have been carried out in compliance with the approved plans and specifications for tree protection.

Certification must include a statement of overall site attendance, the condition of the retained trees, details of any deviations from the approved tree protection measures and their impacts on trees.

Note: Copies of monitoring documentation may be required by Council during and at the completion of works.

45. Retaining Walls

All retaining walls must be constructed as part of the development and prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

46. Submission of Excavated Material Tipping Dockets to Principal Certifying Authority

Tipping dockets for the total volume of excavated material that are received from the licensed waste facility must be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

47. Creation of Easements

The following easements are to be created on the title of the property in accordance with 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 property 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 documents;

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 onsite 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;

48. 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).

49. External Lighting

a) To protect the amenity of adjacent premises, all external lighting must be designed and installed in accordance with Australian Standard AS 4282 Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting.

b) Certification of compliance with this Standard must be obtained from a suitably qualified person and submitted to the PCA with the application for the Occupation Certificate.

50. 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.

51. Waste Management Certification

A report must be prepared by an appropriately qualified person and submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority detailing the following:

a) A comparison of the estimated quantities of each waste type against the actual quantities of each waste type.

Note: Explanations of any deviations to the approved Waste Management Plan is required to be included in this report

b) That at least 60% of the waste generated during the demolition and 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.

c) All waste was taken to site(s) that were lawfully permitted to accept that waste.

52. Completion of Internal Driveway/Vehicular Areas

The driveway and parking areas on site must be constructed in accordance with Australian Standards AS2890.1, AS2890.2, AS3727 and the following requirements:

a) Design levels at the front boundary shall be obtained from Council if a private accredited certifier is engaged to obtain a construction certificate for these works.

b) Design levels at the front boundary be obtained from Council.

c) All parking areas and driveways are to be sealed to an all-weather standard, line marked and signposted;

d) Car parking, loading and manoeuvring areas to be used solely for nominated purposes;

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

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

53. Preservation of Survey Marks

A certificate by a Registered Surveyor must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority, certifying that there has been no removal, damage, destruction, displacement or defacing of the existing survey marks in the vicinity of the proposed development or otherwise the re-establishment of damaged, removed or displaced survey marks has been undertaken in accordance with the Surveyor General’s Direction No.11 Preservation of Survey Infrastructure.

54. Fire Safety Statement – Final

In accordance with the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulation 2000, upon completion of the building, the owner must provide Council with a certificate in relation to each fire safety measure implemented in the building.

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

55. Use of Premises

The development approved under this consent shall be used as a residential care facility and not for any other purpose without Council’s separate written consent.

56. Signage

The signage approved under this consent must not, flash, move or display electronic images.

57. 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’ certifying each essential service installed in the building.

58. Noise

All noise generated by the proposed development must be attenuated to prevent levels of noise being emitted to adjacent premises which possess tonal, beating and similar characteristics or which exceeds background noise levels by more than 5dB(A).

a) To ensure that the use of the external terraces on any elevated balcony does not permit the generation of excessive noise, and to comply with the recommendations of the Noise Emission from External Terraces report prepared by Acoustic Logic, dated 1 September 2020, the following conditions apply with respect to any elevated balcony or terrace:

i) The use of any balcony or terrace is only permitted between the hours of 7:00am and 10pm;

ii) No amplified music is permitted on any balcony / terrace;

iii) The following maximum limits apply to the use of the following areas:

· Terrace 1, Ground Floor - 17 People

· Terrace 1, Level 1 - 14 People

· Terrace 2, Ground Floor - 25 People

· Terrace 2, Level 1 - 25 People

59. Waste Management

The waste management on site must be in accordance with the following requirements:

a) All commercial (non-residential) 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.

b) All commercial tenants must have a sufficient number of bins to contain the volume of waste and recycling expected to be generated between collection services.

c) Waste collection services must not take place outside the following hours: 6am to 8pm weekdays and 8am to 8pm weekends.

60. Signage – Lighting Requirements

a) Luminance levels must comply with the following requirements in the table below:

Lighting Condition	Requirement
Day Time Luminance	6000 cd/m²
Morning/ Evening/ Twilight and Inclement Weather	500 cd/m²
Night Time	350 cd/m²

Note: Luminance means the objective brightness of a surface as measured by a photometer, expressed in candelas per square metre (cd/m2). Levels differ as digital signs will appear brighter when light levels in the area are low. Luminance levels should comply with Australian Standard AS4282 Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting.

b) No lighting is permitted to be erected in conjunction with the approved “marketing signage” as described on the approved site plan.

61. Marketing Signage – Limitation of Timeline of Consent

To preserve the residential amenity of the surrounding area, the signage structure described as “marketing signage” on the approved site plan must be demolished no later than 24 months from the date of this consent. The erection of any other signage for marketing purposes is not permitted without Council’s separate written consent.

CONDITIONS OF CONCURRECE - SYDNEY TRAINS

The following conditions of consent are from the nominated State Agency pursuant to Section 4.13 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and must be complied with to the satisfaction of that Agency.

62. Sydney Trains Condition of Consent - 1

The proposed development is to comply with the deemed-to-satisfy provisions in the Department of Planning’s document titled Development Near Rail Corridors and Busy Roads- Interim Guidelines.

63. Sydney Trains Condition of Consent - 2

Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate the Applicant is to provide structural details that the concrete slab or footings will be protected by a vapour barrier membrane. A copy of this detail is to be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority with the application for a Construction Certificate.

64. Sydney Trains Condition of Consent - 3

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

65. Sydney Trains Condition of Consent - 4

Prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate, the following rail specific items are to be submitted to Sydney Trains for review and endorsement:

a) Construction Methodology

The Principal Certifying Authority is not to issue the Construction Certificate until it has received written confirmation from Sydney Trains that this condition has been complied with.

66. Sydney Trains Condition of Consent - 5

If required by Sydney Trains, prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate a Risk Assessment/Management Plan and detailed Safe Work Method Statements (SWMS) for the proposed works are to be submitted to Sydney Trains for review and comment on the impacts on rail corridor. The Principal Certifying Authority is not to issue the Construction Certificate until written confirmation has been received from Sydney Trains confirming that this condition has been satisfied.

67. Sydney Trains Condition of Consent - 6

The applicant shall not at any stage block the corridor access gate on Alexandria Parade, and should make provision for easy and ongoing 24/7 access by rail vehicles, plant and equipment to support maintenance and emergency activities.

68. Sydney Trains Condition of Consent - 7

Copies of any certificates, drawings, approvals/certification or documents endorsed by, given to or issued by Sydney Trains or RailCorp must be submitted to Council for its records prior to the issuing of the applicable Construction Certificate or Occupation Certificate.

69. Sydney Trains Condition of Consent - 8

The Applicant must ensure that at all times they have a representative (which has been notified to Sydney Trains in writing), who:

a) oversees the carrying out of the Applicant’s obligations under the conditions of this consent and in accordance with correspondence issued by Sydney Trains;

b) acts as the authorised representative of the Applicant; and

c) is available (or has a delegate notified in writing to Sydney Trains that is available) on a 7 day a week basis to liaise with the representative of Sydney Trains, as notified to the Applicant.

70. Sydney Trains Condition of Consent - 9

Without in any way limiting the operation of any other condition of this consent, the Applicant must, during demolition, excavation and construction works, consult in good faith with Sydney Trains in relation to the carrying out of the development works and must respond or provide documentation as soon as practicable to any queries raised by Sydney Trains in relation to the works.

71. Sydney Trains Condition of Consent - 10

Where a condition of consent requires consultation with Sydney Trains, the Applicant shall forward all requests and/or documentation to the relevant Sydney Trains external party interface team. In this instance the relevant interface team is North Interface and they can be contacted via email on North_Interface@transport.nsw.gov.au.

72. Sydney Trains Condition of Consent - 11

Any conditions issued as part of Sydney Trains approval/certification of any documentation for compliance with the Sydney Trains conditions of consent, those approval/certification conditions will also form part of the consent conditions that the Applicant is required to comply with.

- 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 4.17 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 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.

Tree and Vegetation Preservation

Hornsby Development Control Plan 2013 Tree and Vegetation Preservation provisions have been developed under Council’s authorities contained in State Environmental Planning Policy (Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas) 2017 and the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

In accordance with these provisions a person must not cut down, fell, uproot, kill, poison, ringbark, burn or otherwise destroy the vegetation, lop or otherwise remove a substantial part of the trees or vegetation to which any such development control plan applies without the authority conferred by a development consent or a permit granted by Council.

Fines may be imposed for non-compliance with the Hornsby Development Control Plan 2013.

Note: A tree is defined as a long lived, woody perennial plant with one or relatively few main stems with the potential to grow to a height greater than three metres (3m). (HDCP 1B.6.1.c).

Disability Discrimination Act

The applicant’s attention is drawn to the existence of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992. 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 1992. 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.

Telecommunications Act 1997 (Commonwealth)

If you are aware of any works or proposed works which may affect or impact on Telstra’s assets in any way, you are required to contact: Telstra’s Network Integrity Team on Phone Number 1800810443.

Asbestos Warning

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

www.environment.nsw.gov.au

www.adfa.org.au

www.safework.nsw.gov.au

Alternatively, telephone the SafeWork NSW on 13 10 50.