Agenda of Planning Meeting - 1 December 2010

Hornsby Shire Council	Agenda and Summary of Recommendations
Page 1

AGENDA AND SUMMARY OF RECOMMENDATIONS

PRESENT

NATIONAL ANTHEM

OPENING PRAYER/S

Rev. Karina Kreminski of Community Life Church, Cherrybrook will be opening the meeting in prayer.

Acknowledgement of RELIGIOUS DIVERSITY

Statement by the Chairperson:

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

ABORIGINAL RECOGNITION

Statement by the Chairperson:

"We recognise the traditional inhabitants of the land we are meeting on tonight, the Darug and Guringai Aboriginal people, and respect is paid to their elders and their heritage."

AUDIO RECORDING OF COUNCIL MEETING

Statement by the Chairperson:

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

APOLOGIES / LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Political Donations Disclosure

Statement by the Chairperson:

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

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

declarations of interest

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

confirmation of minutes

THAT the Minutes of the Planning Meeting held on 3 November, 2010 be confirmed; a copy having been distributed to all Councillors.

petitions

Mayoral Minutes

Notices of Motion

Rescission Motions

MATTERS OF URGENCY

ITEMS PASSED BY EXCEPTION / CALL FOR SPEAKERS ON AGENDA ITEMS

Note:

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

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATIONS

A Ward Deferred

A Ward

Page Number

Item 1 PLN80/10 Development Application - Subdivision - One lot into six - 59 Woodcourt Road, Berowra Heights

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Development Application No. 591/2010 for the demolition of an existing dwelling and outbuildings and the subdivision of one allotment into six allotments at Lot 2 DP 502390 (No. 59) Woodcourt Road Berowra Heights be refused for the reasons detailed in Schedule 1 of this report.

Page Number

Item 2 PLN81/10 Development Application - Industrial - Alterations and additions - 2A and 4 Kookaburra Road Hornsby Heights

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Development Application No. 1157/2010 for alterations and additions to an existing industrial premise including the addition of an upper floor level and extension to the rear of the building at Lot 4 DP 226427 (No 2A) and Lot 11 DP 701852 (No. 4) Kookaburra Road Hornsby Heights be refused for the reasons detailed in Schedule 1 of this report.

Page Number

Item 3 PLN90/10 Development Application - Subdivision of One allotment into two and erection of an Affordable Housing development comprising 36 units
8A Northcote Road Hornsby

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Development Application No. DA/746/2010 for a two lot subdivision and the construction of an affordable housing development comprising 36 units at Lot A DP 399538 (No. 8A) Northcote Road Hornsby be refused for the reasons detailed in the independent town planning consultant’s report – Nexus Environmental Planning Pty Ltd and reproduced in Schedule 1 of this report.

Page Number

Item 4 PLN68/10 Development Application - Change of use to a sex services premises (brothel) - 5/142 - 144 and 6/142 - 144 George Street, Hornsby

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Development Application No. 1027/2010 for change of use to a sex services premises (brothel) at Lot 5 and Lot 6 SP 6089, Units, 5 and 6, Nos. 142-144 George Street, Hornsby be approved subject to the conditions of consent detailed in Schedule 1 of this report.

B Ward Deferred

B Ward

C Ward Deferred

C Ward

Page Number

Item 5 PLN72/10 Development Application - Construction Of An Affordable Housing Development Comprising Eight Townhouses - 3 & 5 Fulbourne Avenue, Pennant Hills

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Development Application No. DA/1021/2010 for the demolition of existing dwellings and the construction of an affordable housing development comprising eight townhouses at Lot 16 and Lot 15 DP 10203 (Nos 3 & 5) Fulbourne Avenue, Pennant Hills be approved subject to the conditions of consent detailed in Schedule 1 of this report.

Page Number

Item 6 PLN82/10 Development Application - Erection of a dwelling house - 2 Dawson Street, Epping

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Development Application No. 1258/2010 for the demolition of a dwelling-house and the erection of a dwelling-house and associated works at Lot 1 DP 28300, No. 2 Dawson Street, Epping be approved subject to the conditions of consent detailed in Schedule 1 of this report.

Page Number

Item 7 PLN83/10 Development Application - Subdivision - Two lots into four - 11A and 15 Malton Road Beecroft

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Development Application No. 521/2010 for the Torrens title subdivision of two allotments into four allotments and the demolition of an existing dwelling and garage at Lot 5 DP 4551 and Lot 6 DP 4551, Nos. (11A & 15) Malton Road, Beecroft be refused for the reasons detailed in Schedule 1 of this report.

Page Number

Item 8 PLN88/10 Development Application - Erection of a dwelling-house - 40A Beecroft Road, Beecroft

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Development Application No. DA/1141/2010 for the erection of a dwelling-house on Proposed Lot 101 within Lot 3 DP 407029, No. 40A Beecroft Road, Beecroft be approved subject the conditions of consent detailed in Schedule 1 of this report.

General Business

Page Number

Item 9 PLN92/10 Draft Comprehensive Local Environmental Plan

RECOMMENDATION

THAT:

1. Council endorse the draft Comprehensive Local Environmental Plan attached to Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN92/10 for consultation with relevant authorities and adjoining councils pursuant to Section 62 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.

2. Should no objection or comments requiring significant amendment to the draft LEP be received from adjoining councils and/or the State Government agencies consulted pursuant to Sections 34A and Section 62 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, the General Manager be delegated authority to make a submission to the Department of Planning pursuant to Section 64 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 requesting certification to enable the draft LEP to be placed on public exhibition.

3. Upon certification for public exhibition, the draft Comprehensive Local Environmental Plan be exhibited for a minimum of sixty days in accordance with the consultation strategy attached to Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN92/10.

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

5. Following exhibition of the draft Comprehensive Local Environmental Plan, a report on submissions received in response to the public exhibition be presentation to Council for its consideration.

Page Number

Item 10 PLN93/10 Epping Town Centre Study - Update Report

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council receive and note the contents of Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN93/10.

Page Number

Item 11 PLN94/10 Kangaroo Point - Brooklyn Development Control Plan Amendments

RECOMMENDATION

THAT:

1. Council endorse for public exhibition the draft amendments to the Brooklyn Development Control Plan attached to Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN94/10 to limit the size of any future commuter berthing facility at Kangaroo Point to a maximum of 25 boats of up to 6m in length and within the existing wet lease area.

2. Public exhibition of the draft Brooklyn Development Control Plan amendments be undertaken for a minimum of 28 days in accordance with the consultation strategy contained in Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN94/10.

3. Following the exhibition, a report on submissions be presented to Council.

SUPPLEMENTARY AGENDA

confidential items

Questions of Which Notice Has Been Given

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

Planning Report No. PLN80/10

Date of Meeting: 1/12/2010

1 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - SUBDIVISION - ONE LOT INTO SIX
59 WOODCOURT ROAD, BEROWRA HEIGHTS

Development Application No:	DA/591/2010
Description of Proposal:	Demolition of Existing Structures and Subdivision of One Allotment into Six
Property Description:	Lot 2 DP 502390 (No. 59) Woodcourt Road Berowra Heights
Applicant:	McKittrick Fry and O’Hagan
Owner:	Sanjo Constructions Pty Ltd
Statutory Provisions:	Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 - Residential A (Low Density) Zone
Estimated Value:	Not Applicable
Ward:	A

RECOMMENDATION

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. The application proposes the demolition of the existing dwelling and outbuildings and the subdivision one allotment into six allotments.

2. The proposal does not comply with the “Urban Streams”, “Drainage Control” and “Vehicular Access” elements of the Residential Subdivision Development Control Plan. The application does not include adjoining owner’s consent for construction works to be undertaken on the driveway.

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

5. It is recommended that the application be refused.

HISTORY OF THE SITE

On 11 January 1993 Council refused DA/567/1992 for the erection of five duplexes and cluster housing on the subject property.

On 17 July 1996, Council resolved to adopt the Berowra-Cowan DCP. The proposed extension to Lingellen Street is embodied in the residential strategy of the Berowra-Cowan DCP. The rear of the subject site is affected by the proposed extension of Lingellen Street.

On 30 December 1996 Council refused DA/197/1996 for the subdivision of one allotment into two.

On 7 October 1998 Council approved DA/27/1998 for the extension of Lingellen Street subject to the applicant demonstrating lawful drainage over lot 1 DP 502390 (No. 62) Woodcourt Road. The subject property formed a part of this application. This development consent was not acted upon and it has subsequently lapsed.

On 15 March 2006 Council refused DA/1517/2005 for the subdivision of nine allotments to facilitate the extension of Lingellen Street. The subject property formed a part of this subdivision proposal.

THE SITE

The site is a battleaxe allotment with an area of 4502 sq metres (4332 sq metres excluding the access handle). The site is irregular in shape and has an average fall of 2 % from the southern corner to the northern corner. An open drainage channel traverses the site along the north-eastern boundary and the site falls towards this channel. The watercourse is piped underneath the driveway at its north-eastern corner.

The site is accessed via a 53 metre long driveway off Woodcourt Road which experiences a gentle fall of 4 % from the street towards the allotment. The width of the access handle for the site is 3.04 metres. Reciprocal rights-of-ways benefit the access handles for the subject property and the adjoining property at No. 61 Woodcourt Road (Lot 1 DP 502390). The resultant width of the access way for the subject property and the adjoining lot is 6.08 metres. The accesses handle tapers to 3 metres at the intersection of the access handle and the site.

The current improvements on the site comprise a dwelling house and two sheds. The property contains fifty-one trees including locally native, exotic and introduced species.

A 4.5m wide section of the site at the rear forms a part of the proposed extension to Lingellen Street. Council’s Berowra – Cowan DCP identifies the southern corner of the site as accommodating the turning head for this road as part of future development. A section of the adjoining properties to the south-west and south-east would also accommodate the Lingellen Street extension.

The properties adjoining the site comprise single and two storey low density residential dwellings constructed over a number of years.

THE PROPOSAL

The proposal involves the subdivision of one allotment into six allotments. Access to all the allotments would be gained via the 6 metre wide access handle which tapers to 3 metres at the entrance to the residual portion of the allotment. A 3 metre wide common driveway is proposed to be built within Lots 1 and 6 along the north-western boundary as an extension to the access handle. The driveway would also extend across the site from the north-western boundary to the south-east to act as common access for Lots 2, 3, 4 and 5.

A common turning area is proposed within Lot 6 to facilitate all vehicles to ingress and egress in a forward direction. A passing bay is also proposed at the entrance to the site, within Lot 1 to facilitate passing of two vehicles. The driveway width in this section would be 5 metres.

The site area for the proposed allotments (excluding rights-of way and turning areas) is:

· Lot 1: 609 sq metres

· Lot 2: 587 sq metres

· Lot 3: 714 sq metres

· Lot 4: 557.13 sq metres

· Lot 5: 546.83 sq metres

· Lot 6: 544.35 sq metres

The open stormwater channel would be accommodated within Lots 1, 2 and 3. A new culvert is proposed to be constructed at the point where the driveway crosses the watercourse. The proposal would require drainage construction works within the adjoining property at No.61 Woodcourt Road.

ASSESSMENT

The development application has been assessed having regard to the ‘2005 City of Cities Metropolitan Strategy’, the ‘North Subregion (Draft) Subregional Strategy’ and the matters for consideration prescribed under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the Act). Subsequently, the following issues have been identified for further consideration.

1. STRATEGIC CONTEXT

1.1 Metropolitan Strategy – (Draft) North Subregional Strategy

The Metropolitan Strategy is a broad framework to secure Sydney’s place in the global economy by promoting and managing growth. It outlines a vision for Sydney to 2031; the challenges faced, and the directions to follow to address these challenges and achieve the vision. The draft North Subregional Strategy acts as a framework for Council in the preparation of a new Principal LEP by 2011.

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

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

· Housing stock to increase by 11,000 dwellings.

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

2. STATUTORY CONTROLS

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

2.1 Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994

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

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

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

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

The proposed development is defined as “demolition” and “subdivision” under the HSLEP and is permissible in the zone with Council’s consent.

The development would facilitate the provision of housing for the population of the area and would be compatible with the low density residential environment. The proposal complies with objectives (a) and (b) of the zone in this regard. However, the proposal does not include sufficient driveway width for vehicular access to the site. It does not include appropriate stormwater drainage control measures to suit the subdivision and does not result in appropriate garbage truck turning areas to cater for the future residences on the site. The proposal in its current form would result in an adverse impact on the stormwater channel. Given the above, the development is not considered to be within the environmental capacity of the site and does not comply with objective (c) in this regard.

Clause 14 of HSLEP prescribes that the minimum size of allotments within the zone is 500 sq metres. The proposal complies with Clause 14 in this regard and is assessed as satisfactory.

Clause 18 of the HSLEP sets out provisions related to Heritage Conservation. The site does not contain a heritage item and is not located in a heritage conservation area nor is the site in the vicinity of a heritage item. Therefore no further assessment in this regard is necessary.

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

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

The land has been historically used for residential purpose. Therefore it is unlikely that the land would be contaminated and no further assessment in this regard is necessary.

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

The application has been assessed against the requirements of Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 (SREP 20). The compliance of the proposal with the Plan is discussed below.

2.3.1 Total catchment management, water quality and water quantity

The proposal has the potential to impact on water quality of the watercourse that traverses the site along the northern boundary. The applicant is unable to demonstrate that the development would not have any adverse impact on the open drainage channel and the adjoining properties with regard to the water quantity. The application does not include a satisfactory Soil and Water Management Plan for the site.

No details have been provided with regard to the creek rehabilitation in the future. Given the above, the proposal is not assessed as satisfactory against the development controls within SREP 20.

The matter is further discussed in section S 2.4.6 and 2.4.9 of this report.

2.4 Residential Subdivision Development Control Plan

The proposed development has been assessed having regard to the relevant performance and prescriptive design standards within Council’s Residential Subdivision Development Control Plan (RSDCP). The following table sets out the proposal’s compliance with the prescriptive measures of the Plan:

Residential Subdivision Development Control Plan

Control

Proposal

Requirement

Compliance

Density

Lot 1

Lot 2

Lot 3

Lot 4

Lot 5

Lot 6

609 m²

7 m²

714 m²

557.13 m²

546.83 m²

544.35 m²

500 m²

Yes

Building Envelope

Lot 1

Lot 2

Lot 3

Lot 4

Lot 5

Lot 6

200 m²

Yes

Private Open Space

Lot 1

Lot 2

Lot 3

Lot 4

Lot 5

Lot 6

120 m²

186 m²

120 m²

Yes

Landscaping

Lot 1

Lot 2

Lot 3

Lot 4

Lot 5

Lot 6

45%

Yes

Setbacks

Lot 1

Front(South-west)

Rear (watercourse)

North-western side No Yes

South-eastern side

Lot 2

Front(South-west)

Rear (watercourse)

North-western side No Yes

South-eastern side

Lot 3

Front(South-west)

Rear (watercourse)

North-western side No Yes

South-eastern side

Lot 4

Front(North-East)

Rear (proposed street)

Rear (to boundary)

North-western side No Yes

South-eastern side

Lot 5

Front(North-East)

Rear (proposed street)

Rear( to boundary)

North-western side No Yes

South-eastern side

Lot 6

Front(North-East)

Rear (proposed street)

Rear( to boundary)

North-western side No Yes

South-eastern side

10m

5-7m

10m

Yes

Access Provisions

3.06m

4m (min)

The compliance of the proposal with the objectives, performance criteria and prescriptive measures of the various elements within Council’s Residential Subdivision DCP are discussed below:

2.4.1 Density

The proposed allotments comply with the minimum allotment sizes and are considered acceptable with regard to density.

2.4.2 Design

The proposed allotments have regular shapes and are of sufficient size to accommodate a building envelope of 200 sq metres and the private open space area excluding the access handle, common driveways and common turning areas. The allotment design is considered satisfactory.

2.4.3 Setbacks

The proposal includes concept building envelopes within each lot. The applicant has demonstrated that the building envelopes within Lots 1 and 2 can maintain a 10 metre setback from the drainage channel and sufficient setback from the driveway providing access to the allotments. The proposed building envelope on Lot 3 does not comply with the setback from the open drainage channel. However, given that the building envelopes are concept only and could be amended as part of a separate development application for a dwelling, the non-compliance with regard to the setback from the watercourse is considered acceptable.

It is proposed that Lots 4, 5, and 6 would gain access via the access handle off Woodcourt Road. However, the design of these allotments also includes provision to accommodate the future road reserve (Lingellen Street) along the south-western setback.

Should the application be approved, a detailed assessment of the proposed setbacks for the dwellings on the future allotments would be undertaken under separate development applications.

2.4.4 Solar access

The allotments are orientated in a north-south direction. Wherever possible, the private open space areas would be orientated to receive sufficient solar access in future.

Any impact of overshadowing due to future dwellings on proposed allotments would be assessed under separate development applications.

2.4.5 Private Open Space & Landscaping

Each of the proposed allotments comprise sufficient area for use as private open space and landscaping. The private open space areas for Lots 3 and 4 are located within the side setback whereas the proposed area of private open space area for Lot 6 is comprised of two components.

Given that the building envelope design is conceptual only, the details of the usability of such areas can be assessed under separate development applications for dwelling houses on these allotments.

2.4.6 Drainage Control

Collected stormwater runoff would drain to the existing channel within the subject site. The application includes calculations regarding the hydraulic analysis for the catchment. An engineering assessment of the Stormwater Management Plan has been conducted and the proposed on-site detention system is not considered to be sufficient to mitigate flooding to downstream properties as a result of the proposed development.

The development does not comply with the “Drainage Control” element of the RSDCP is this regard and is not acceptable due to adverse impacts on the adjoining properties.

2.4.7 Vehicle Access

The site is accessed via a 53 metre long driveway off Woodcourt Road. The width of the access handle for the site is 3.04 metres. Reciprocal rights-of-ways benefit part of the access handles for the subject property and the adjoining property at No. 61 Woodcourt Road (Lot 1 DP 502390). The resultant width of the accessway for the subject property and the adjoining lot is 6.08 metres for the majority of the handle. However, as the right-of-way does not extend for the length of the handle, the ‘legal’ access narrows to 3.04 metres at the southern end of the handle.

The proposed development would require works to be undertaken along the entire width of the driveway. It is considered that due to the absence of a ‘right-of-access’, such works would require owner’s consent from the owner of No. 61 Woodcourt Road. The applicant provided legal opinion by a solicitor in this regard indicating that construction works could be undertaken on a common driveway with reciprocal ‘rights-of-ways’ without owner’s consent from the co-owner. However, the legal advice is considered to be incomplete as it does not incorporate the relevant case-law which forms the basis of such advice and has no included details of the benefits of the R.O.W. under the 88B instrument.

Given the above, it is considered that driveway works cannot be undertaken on the common driveway to enable progress of the development due to lack of owners consent from the adjoining neighbours at No. 61 Woodcourt Road. Pursuant to Section 78A of the Act, it is considered that the application has not been lawfully made in the absence of owners consent and therefore Council cannot approve the application.

It is also noted that the proposal does not include a construction management plan demonstrating how access would be maintained for both sites during construction works, specifically, the works required for the culvert over the drainage channel.

2.4.8 Waste Minimisation and Management

The proposed development would require the provision of garbage truck access to the site to service each of the proposed allotments as the site does not have a street frontage and locating the bin collection area on the driveway would have an adverse impact on the amenity of the neighbouring property.

Garbage trucks are heavy rigid vehicles with a length of 11.5 metres and a width of 2.5 metres plus side mirrors. The 6 metre wide driveway is sufficient for the garbage truck access. However, the access handle tapers to 3 metres at the entrance to the site before widening again to form a 5 metre wide passing bay. The Australian Standard AS 2890.2-2002 Parking Facilities Part 2: Off-street commercial vehicle facilities requires driveways to have a minimum width of 3.5 metres for garbage truck access.

It is considered that the garbage trucks would be able to pass through the 3 metre wide section as it is short in length and the departure from the Australian standard is acceptable in the circumstances. However, the proposal does not include any details of garbage truck turning areas within the site and does not demonstrate that the garbage trucks could ingress and egress the site is a forward direction. The turning circles would have an impact on the allotment sizes and no further assessment can be conducted in this regard due to insufficient information. Consequently, the proposal is not acceptable in the current form.

2.4.9 Urban Streams

An open drainage channel traverses the northern boundary of the site and is piped further downstream (west). Details of the watercourse crossing have been provided and are considered acceptable. A flood analysis has demonstrated that the overland flow path would not impact on the proposed building envelopes or the private open space areas. The location of the dwelling houses and the private open space areas within the future allotments would be assessed under future development applications.

The following information is required prior to further assessment of the impact of the proposal on the drainage channel:

· An open drainage channel Rehabilitation Plan prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced consultant.

· A Vegetation Management Plan.

· A Soil and Water Management Plan.

· Scaled plans prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced consultant identifying the location of the piped drainage system and points of discharge to the open drainage channel system.

The above information has not been provided to Council and consequently the impact of the development on the drainage channel cannot be assessed.

2.5 Berowra Cowan Development Control Plan

The proposed development has been assessed having regard to the relevant performance and prescriptive design standards within Council’s Berowra Cowan Development Control Plan. The compliance of the proposal with the strategies of this DCP is discussed below:

2.5.1 Residential Strategy

The residential release area masterplan within the residential strategy requires that a 4.5 metre wide section along the rear boundary of the site be reserved to accommodate the future extension of Lingellen Street. The rear setbacks of proposed Lots 4, 5 and 6 would be affected by this road reserve.

The applicant has addressed this requirement by proposing the 4.5 metre wide road reserve along the south-western boundary of the property. The concept building envelopes within Lots, 4, 5 and 6 are proposed to be setback 3 metres from this road reserve. A portion of the turning head is also proposed at the southern corner of the allotment. The proposal is assessed as satisfactory with regard to the residential strategy.

Should the residential strategy not be realised (i.e. the road reserve not be constructed), the development could proceed subject to the applicant addressing the other deficiencies identified in this report.

2.5 Car Parking Development Control Plan

The proposed allotments include sufficient area to accommodate two car spaces in the future and are considered acceptable in this regard. The matters in relation to vehicular access are discussed in detail in section 2.4.7 of this report.

2.6 Sustainable Water Development Control Plan

The matter is discussed in Section 2.4.9 of this report. No further assessment is considered necessary under this DCP.

2.7 Section 94 Contributions Plan

Council’s Section 94 Contributions Plan applies to the development as five additional allotments are proposed. Should the application be approved, a contribution under the Plan would be recommended as a condition of consent.

3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

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

3.1 Natural Environment

3.1.1 Trees

The proposed development would necessitate the removal of nine trees from the site.

Council’s assessment of the proposal included a detailed examination of the existing trees on site. None of the trees proposed to be removed are identified as significant trees. Some trees along the southern boundary are considered significant and would not be affected by the development. The retention of these trees would not restrict future development on any of the proposed allotments. The proposal is assessed as satisfactory with regard to the impact on existing trees.

3.1.2 Watercourse

This matter has been discussed in section 2.4.9 of this report.

3.2 Built Environment

The impact of the proposed allotments on the built environment has been discussed in detail in Section 2.4 of this report.

The proposed development would generate a maximum of fifty four daily traffic movements (at nine per additional dwelling house) in accordance with the RTA’s Guide to traffic Generating Developments. Council’s traffic assessment concludes that the additional traffic generation on the local road network would be satisfactory.

The additional vehicular movements would have an impact on the acoustic environment of the adjoining neighbouring properties. Should the application be approved, conditions requiring the construction of fence along the boundary could mitigate such impacts.

3.3 Social Impacts

The proposal would not have a negative social impact.

3.4 Economic Impacts

The proposal would have a minor positive impact on the local economy in conjunction with other new low density residential development in the locality by generating an increase in demand for local services.

4. SITE SUITABILITY

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

4.1 Bushfire

The land is not subject to bushfire risks.

4.2 Flooding

An open drainage channel traverses the northern boundary of the property. The applicant has prepared a flood study for the site. It is considered that the proposed subdivision could be accommodated on the site and would not be adversely impacted by flooding.

However, the proposal does not include sufficient information for a complete assessment with regard to the rehabilitation of the open drainage channel. The proposal also does not demonstrate that a suitable on-site detention system can be provided on the site to improve the impact of stormwater water lows on the downstream properties.

Given that the proposal, in its current form, does not demonstrate that it is able to respond appropriately to the constraints of the site, it is concluded that the development is not suitable for the site.

5. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

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

5.1 Community Consultation

The proposed development was placed on public exhibition and was notified to adjoining and nearby landowners between date and date in accordance with Council’s Notification and Exhibition Development Control Plan. During this period, Council received four 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

Four submissions were received, each objecting to the development generally on the grounds that the development would result in:

· increase traffic flow along the access handle;

· on-street parking of vehicles creating nuisance along the street frontage;

· non-compliant width of access handle with no landscaping provisions or provisions for emergency vehicle access;

· unacceptable sight distances for vehicles accessing the driveway;

· reduces safety of adjoining neighbours due to increased traffic flow on the street;

· unacceptable drainage provisions;

· unacceptable noise due to passing vehicles and no fencing provision along the accessway;

· the removal of native trees;

· no provision of garbage truck access to the site resulting in bins been stacked along the frontage of neighbouring properties; and

· unacceptable impact on neighbouring properties due to vehicle headlights.

In addition, the following observations have been made within the submissions received:

· The location of the power lines that would service the future development and the visual impact of those additional power lines on the adjoining properties.

· The applicant does not have legal rights to access the common driveway.

· The development would require stormwater related works to be undertaken within the Council controlled easement at No. 61 Woodcourt Road. Owner’s consent from the neighbouring property has not been obtained in this regard.

· The kerb and guttering works should be undertaken as a part of this application.

· The development would result in undersized allotments once the restriction as to user (Lingellen Street extension) on each land is excluded from the land area.

· The private open space areas are proposed to be located on the overland flow path.

· The proposed “V drain” should not be included as a part of the right-of-carriageway for Lots 1 to 6.

· No landscape plan submitted with the application.

· Drainage lines must not impact on the trees proposed to be retained.

· The open drainage channel traversing the property and the adjoining property should be piped to improve the flooding situation.

· Details of culvert have not been provided.

· The erosion and sediment control plan is not satisfactory.

· No details of proposed fencing to deflect stormwater has been provided.

· Access to the new lots should be obtained from Lingellen Street.

· Vehicular access to the neighbouring property should be provided at all stages of construction works.

· Adequate lighting and paved pedestrian accessway should be provided on the accessway.

· Construction work hours should be specified in the conditions of consent.

· The right-of-way tapers to 3 metres at the entrance to the battleaxe handle from No. 59 Woodcourt Road.

· The trees and power pole within No. 61 Woodcourt road cannot be removed/relocated without the consent of the owner of that allotment.

· The drainage calculations and the location of the 1:100 year floodline are incorrect.

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 Owner’s consent for stormwater related works

It is considered that under the provisions of Section 59A and section 191A of the Local Government Act 1993, Council has the authority to enter upon privately owned land to undertake authorised works related to drainage/sewerage etc. Section 193 and 194 of the Local Government Act 1993 also provides that Council may authorise a person to perform such functions.

Given that the easement traversing No. 61 Woodcourt Road is controlled by Council, the developer, being authorised by Council, could enter the premises to undertake works on behalf of Council. Consent of owner of No. 61 Woodcourt Road would not be required for these works.

5.1.2 Construction work hours, noise, fencing, kerb and gutter

Should the application be approved, conditions of development consent would regularise the construction work hours, kerb and guttering along Woodcourt Road frontage the noise generated from the premises and the future fencing along the boundaries.

5.1.3 Landscape plan

A landscape plan has not been submitted with the development application. Should Council wish to approve the application, it is recommended that it do so having considered an appropriate landscape plan.

5.1.4 Piping of the drainage channel

It is considered that the drainage channel should remain open in future with the 1:100 year flow contained in it.

5.2 Public Agencies

The development application is not Integrated Development under the Act. The application was not referred to any public agencies for comments.

6. THE PUBLIC INTEREST

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

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

The application has not satisfactorily addressed Council’s criteria and would not 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 subdivision would not be in the public interest.

CONCLUSION

The proposal seeks approval for the demolition of the existing buildings and the subdivision of one lot into six lots.

The site gains access via a part 6 metre wide, part 3 metre wide access handle. A watercourse traverses the northern boundary of the site. The shared access handle partly has reciprocal rights-of-way with No. 61 Woodcourt Road. The application does not include owner’s consent from the adjoining neighbour regarding works to be undertaken within the driveway. Consequently, it is considered that the development application has not been lawfully made and Council is not in a position in which it could lawfully approve the development application.

The proposal does not include details of garbage truck access to the site, details of rehabilitation of the creek and the proposed on-site-detention system for the development is not considered suitable. Given the above, a complete assessment of the application cannot be undertaken and the proposal, in its current form is not considered to be suitable for the site.

Council officers have made numerous attempts to achieve a mutually acceptable outcome on the site. The applicant has not been able to address Council officers’ technical concerns and consequently, refusal of the development application is recommended.

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

Rod Pickles

Manager - Assessment Team 2

Planning Division

Paul David

Manager - Subdivision & Development Engineering Services

Planning Division

Scott Phillips

Executive Manager

Planning Division

Attachments:

1.View	Locality Plan
2.View	Subdivision Plan
3.View	Stormwater Drainage Plan

File Reference: DA/591/2010

Document Number: D01517528

SCHEDULE 1

1. Pursuant to the provision of Section 78A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, it is considered that the development application has not been lawfully made as the consent of the owner of 61 Woodcourt Road, Berowra has not been provided to Council in writing.

2. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(a)(i) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, the proposed development does not comply with objective (c) of the Residential A (Low Density) zone within the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 in that the proposal has not demonstrated that the site has the environmental capacity to support the development.

3. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(a)(i) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, the proposal does not comply with Clause 6 of the Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 and the “Drainage Control” element of Council’s Residential Subdivision Development Control Plan as the proposed on-site detention system is not sufficient for mitigation of flooding to downstream properties.

4. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(a)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, the proposal would require construction works to be undertaken within the common driveway providing access to the site. Consent of the owner of the adjoining property at No. 61 Woodcourt Road (Lot 1 DP 502390) has not been obtained in this regard.

5. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, the application failed to demonstrate the following:

a. Sufficient garbage truck access to the site and garbage truck turning areas on the site in accordance with Australian Standard AS 2890.2-2002 Parking Facilities Part 2: Off-street commercial vehicle facilities.

b. A satisfactory Rehabilitation Plan for the open drainage channel.

c. A satisfactory Vegetation Management Plan for the drainage channel traversing the site.

d. A satisfactory Soil and Water Management Plan for the site.

e. The location of the piped drainage system the discharge points to the open drainage channel system.

f. A satisfactory Construction Management Plan relating to the proposed works on the driveway to demonstrate that access to the neighbouring property at No. 61 Woodcourt Road would be maintained at all times during construction works.

6. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(c) of the Act, the proposal, in its current form, is not considered to be suitable for the site as it does not demonstrate that an appropriate form of development can be achieved without adverse impact on the natural and built environment of the locality.

7. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(e) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, it is considered that the proposed development would set an undesirable precedent for similar inappropriate development and is therefore not in the public interest.

- END OF REASONS FOR REFUSAL -

Planning Report No. PLN81/10

Date of Meeting: 1/12/2010

2 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - INDUSTRIAL - ALTERATIONS AND ADDITIONS
2A AND 4 KOOKABURRA ROAD HORNSBY HEIGHTS

Development Application No:	DA/1157/2010
Description of Proposal:	Alterations and additions to an existing industrial development including the addition of an upper floor level and extension to the rear of the building
Property Description:	Lot 4 DP 226427 (No 2A) and Lot 11 DP 701852 (No. 4) Kookaburra Road Hornsby Heights
Applicant:	Habitat Australia Pty Ltd
Owner:	Tanran Holdings Pty Ltd Habitat Australia Pty Ltd
Statutory Provisions:	Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 - Industrial B (Light) Zone
Estimated Value:	$ 800,000
Ward:	A

RECOMMENDATION

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. The application proposes alterations and additions to an existing industrial development by adding three industrial units on the upper floor, construction of an upper level car park and increasing the gross floor area and height of the premises.

2. The proposal complies with the provisions of Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994, however, does not comply with a number of prescriptive measures within Council’s Industrial Lands Development Control Plan.

3. A total of 133 submissions from 123 residents have been received in respect of the application.

4. It is recommended that the application be refused.

HISTORY OF THE SITE

On 9 April 1979, Council approved a development application for a two storey factory building with work/storage area and amenities located on the ground floor and an office located on first floor at No. 4 Kookaburra Road. At that time, the property was zoned Industrial 4(b1) under the Hornsby Planning Scheme Ordinance, 1977. The approved building had a gross floor area of 552.38 sq metres with 11 car spaces. There was no evidence of physical commencement and the consent subsequently lapsed.

On 15 May 1979, Council approved DA/94/1979 for the erection of a factory building at No. 2B Kookaburra Road (located at the rear of No. 4) for the manufacture of timber frames. There was no evidence of physical commencement and the consent subsequently lapsed.

On 16 November 1981, Council approved DA/274/1981 for the erection of a factory building on No. 2B and No. 4 Kookaburra Road. The proposal involved the erection of an L shaped single storey factory building with a total floor area of 848 sq metres and 15 car spaces on the ground floor. Works under this application were physically commenced on the site.

In 1984, the properties at No. 4 Kookaburra Road and No. 2B Kookaburra Road were consolidated into one allotment, thereafter the site was known as No. 4 Kookaburra Road.

On 28 August 1985, Council approved DA/87/84 for the demolition of the residence that was located on the site and the erection of three additional factory units on the upper floor of the existing industrial development at No. 4 Kookaburra Road. The foundations for the development approved under this development consent were physically commenced and recognised as such in later Court documents. The details of the approved development are provided below:

· Alteration to the three factory units on the ground floor (Approved under DA/274/1981) and provision of 19 car spaces.

· Mezzanine office spaces adjoining units 1, 2 and 3

· Three additional industrial units with mezzanine office spaces on the first floor of the existing development and 10 car spaces.

· The total floor area generated by the development is 1862 sq metres.

· The resultant floor space ratio (FSR) of the approved development is 0.97:1.

· A 4.1 metres wide ramp located adjoining the northern boundary provided vehicular access to the first floor with a maximum grade of 1:5.

· Units 4 and 5 on the first floor adjoin the southern boundary of the site.

· The building extends from the northern to the southern boundary of No. 4 Kookaburra Road.

Physical works have commenced on the site pursuant to this development consent, which was confirmed in the Land and Environment Court Judgement pertaining to DA/116/1994.

On 23 March 1995, DA/116/1994 was lodged with Council for an industrial development at No. 2A and 4 Kookaburra Road.

The proposal involved the following:

· A single storey addition to the existing factory building at No. 4 Kookaburra Road (approved under DA/87/1984) including alterations to the existing awning, provision of 15 car spaces, landscaping and a loading area.

· Demolition of the dwelling house at No. 2A Kookaburra Road and extension to the existing factory building with 4 car spaces and loading bay areas.

· The proposed factory building at the rear to be accessed via the access handle located along the southern boundary of the site.

· The factory building located at the front of the site to be used for furniture assembly, wood waste and storage and the factory building located at the rear to be used for machinery maintenance.

An appeal was subsequently lodged with the Land and Environment Court against Council’s deemed refusal of this application. The appeal was upheld on 23 March 1995.

The approved development resulted in a combined gross floor area of 2062 sq metres with 458 sq metres of additional area being generated at the rear and an additional 527 sq metres in the central portion of the site. Physical works under this approval were commenced within the statutory period. The central portion of the factory building at No. 4 Kookaburra Road has been completed. The building extensions to the rear (No. 2A) have not commenced other than preparation/earthworks.

The factory building on the front allotment (No. 4 Kookaburra Road) is currently used for furniture manufacturing and assembly.

The site is currently affected by three operative development consents, DA/274/1981, DA/87/1984 and DA/116/1994.

DA/1245/2008 and DA/87/1984/A have been previously lodged with Council seeking approval for expansion of industrial floor area on the site. Both the development applications have subsequently been withdrawn.

On 7 April 2010, Council resolved that a report be prepared outlining the potential to rezone the Kookaburra Road Industrial Precinct to a residential zone.

On 1 September 2010, Council considered a report regarding the opportunities and constraints concerning the rezoning of the Kookaburra Road Industrial Precinct at Hornsby Heights for residential uses and resolved the following:

“THAT a planning proposal to rezone properties Nos. 2A-14 Kookaburra Road, Hornsby Heights from Industrial B (Light) to Residential be included in the Strategic Planning Programme for 2011/12 with appropriate funds being allocated to the Town Planning Services Branch Budget in the September 2010 Quarterly Budget Review.”

On 17 September 2010, DA/1157/2010 for alterations and additions to the existing industrial building was lodged with Council.

THE SITE

The site comprises two allotments, No. 2A and No. 4 Kookaburra Road and is located on the eastern side of the road. The subject property is rectangular in shape and is generally flat in the front section with a downward slope towards the rear.

The site area of No. 4 Kookaburra Road is 1904 sq metres. The site area of No. 2A Kookaburra Road is 1367.5 sq metres. The total area of the combined site is 3301 sq metres.

Access to No. 4 Kookaburra Road (front lot) is via a driveway directly from the street. Access to No. 2A (located at the rear) is via a 4 metre wide access handle from Kookaburra Road situated along the southern boundary of the site. The access handle comprises a 3.5 metre wide driveway and a 0.5 metre wide landscape strip.

The current improvements on the site include a single storey factory building located on No. 4 Kookaburra Road. The factory building is used for manufacturing and assembly of furniture and wood storage. The factory building includes the assembly and manufacturing area, two large temporary mezzanine areas for storage of furniture and an office area. A loading dock is located in the front section of the building accessible to heavy rigid vehicles from Kookaburra Road. A car parking area is also located within the front setback which is currently used for storage of pallets. A 1.2 metre wide garden bed is located along the front boundary.

The gross floor area of the existing factory unit (including loading bay and excluding mezzanine areas) is 1373.6 sq metres.

The rear section of the site (No. 2A) is not used for industrial purpose. A storage shed and another enclosed shed exist in this portion of the site. Both sheds are dilapidated. In addition, the foundations of an approved factory building are located on the site. A number of trees are located at the rear of the site, however no trees are considered to be significant.

The site constitutes the southernmost portion of a small industrial area located in Hornsby Heights surrounded by low density residential developments. Three residences are located on the adjoining allotments to the south of the access handle. The residences at Nos. 2, 2C and 2D Kookaburra Road were constructed after the industrial building and the issue of development consents for the site. The allotment located immediately to the south of No. 2A Kookaburra Road is zoned residential and currently accommodates a residential development close to Galston Road at a considerable distance from the site. It is anticipated that in the future, a number of additional dwellings will be constructed on the property at 180 Galston Road.

An existing industrial building is located to the north of the site and is two storeys in height. The developments at the rear of the site constitute one and two storey residential dwellings that have access from Koala Place and Somerville Road. The rear yards of these residences adjoin the site, but are located at a lower level due to the fall of the land. The developments on the opposite side of the street are one and two storey dwelling houses.

THE PROPOSAL

The proposal involves the following:

· Retention of the existing factory building with internal alterations including demolition of the mezzanines and the office area.

· Demolition of the sheds and outbuildings at the rear.

· Construction of an L shaped single storey factory unit at the rear accessed via the existing access handle.

· The factory unit would include a mezzanine office space and a loading bay.

· Erection of three factory units on the first floor with individual office spaces and loading bays.

· Units 2 and 3 located on the upper floor level would be located along the northern boundary.

· Unit 1 would be located on the northern side, being setback 4 metres from the boundary.

· Retention of the existing loading dock for the factory unit fronting Kookaburra Road.

· Retention of the existing vehicular access to the ground level.

· Provision of a ramp along the northern boundary for access to the upper floor.

· Car parking comprising thirty spaces with seventeen spaces on the upper floor and thirteen spaces on the ground floor.

· The car parking spaces and turning bays on the upper floor would be located along the southern boundary extending over the access handle. This extended section would be supported by a colonnade at the ground level.

· Provision of outdoor eating areas on the upper floor.

· The proposed materials and colours would match the existing building.

· Details of the first uses of the units, hours of operation of the premises, delivery times, number of employees and signage are not included in this application.

· The details of the gross floor areas are described below:

Warehouse

Industrial Floor Area

Office and Amenities

Loading bay

Gross Floor Area

Unit 1

300 m²

23.2 m²= 7.7%

30 m²

293.2 m²

Unit 2

284.29 m²

23.11 m²= 8.3 %

30 m²

278.01 m²

Unit 3

361.9 m²

46 m²= 6.6 %

30 m²

355.41 m²

Unit 4

642.75 m²

46 m²= 6.9 %

30 m²

658.75 m²

Existing Area

1358.6 m²

No office propose

30 m²

1328.6 m²

Proposed Gross Floor Area : 2913.97 sq metres

Proposed FSR : 0.88:1

A comparison of the proposed development and the previously approved developments on the site is provided below:

· The existing front setback of the factory building is proposed to be retained, thus deleting the overhanging section of the upper floor as approved under DA/87/1984. The proposed front setback would be 22 metres from the frontage of the site instead of the approved 8.5 metres.

· The rear setback of the upper floor from the eastern (rear) boundary of No. 2A Kookaburra Road would be 6 metres instead of the approved 35 metres under DA/87/1984.

· A considerable section of the upper floor (62 metres in length) is proposed to be extended over the access handle of No. 2A Kookaburra Road resulting in a zero setback from the southern boundary of the industrial site. DA/116/1994 proposed a zero setback to the southern boundary for the single storey building at rear, but for a length of 18 metres.

· The access ramp to the upper floor units is proposed to be 6 metres wide with an approximate slope of 1:5.35. DA/87/1984 approved a 4 metre wide ramp with a slope of 1:5 on the same location.

· Vehicular access to the upper floor is restricted to Medium Rigid and Small Rigid Vehicles only.

· The height of the development would be the same as the approved development within No. 4 Kookaburra Road.

· The proposal would result in an increase of height of the approved development within the rear allotment (No. 2A Kookaburra Road). The maximum height of development approved within this allotment was 8 metres (DA/116/1994) adjoining the rear boundary. The proposed development would result in an increase in the height of the development to 9 metres adjoining the rear boundary plus a 1.8 metres high privacy screen.

ASSESSMENT

1. STRATEGIC CONTEXT

1.1 Metropolitan Strategy – (Draft) North Subregional Strategy

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

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

· Housing stock to increase by 11,000 dwellings.

The proposed development would be consistent with the draft strategy by providing additional jobs in the locality. The number of jobs to be generated would be estimated at the time of assessment of applications for future uses of the units.

1.2 Future Zoning- Kookaburra Road

Council at its meeting on 1 September 2010, resolved that a planning proposal to rezone properties Nos. 2A-14 Kookaburra Road, Hornsby Heights from Industrial B (Light) to Residential be included in the Strategic Planning Programme for 2011/12.

It is noted that rezoning the precinct would not require existing industrial operations to cease. Section 106 ‘Existing Use Rights’ of the Act, would enable any existing lawful industrial uses to continue even if the precinct is rezoned. It would also allow such industrial activities to be altered and expanded in the future.

The resolution for the rezoning of Kookaburra Road is not yet translated into a Draft Local Environmental Plan. Therefore, Council’s resolution cannot be taken into consideration during assessment of the application under the provisions of Section 79(c) of the Act.

2. STATUTORY CONTROLS

2.1 Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994

The subject land is zoned Industrial B (Light) zone under the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 (HSLEP). The objectives of the Industrial B zone are:

(a) to encourage economic growth and employment opportunities.

(b) to allow a broad range of light industrial, warehousing and other compatible land uses to locate within the area.

(c) to promote development that does not adversely impact upon the natural and built environment.

The proposed development is defined as “Light Industry” under the HSLEP and is permissible in the zone with Council’s consent.

The development would encourage economic growth and employment opportunities and complies with objective (a) of the zone. The development may have a negative impact on the built environment of the locality due to reasons detailed in this report. The development does not comply with the zone objectives (b) and (c) of the HSLEP in this regard.

The original development was assessed under the provisions of the Hornsby Planning Scheme Ordinance as satisfactory.

Clause 15 of the HSLEP prescribes that the maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of development within the Industrial B zone is 1:1. The applicant addresses this requirement by proposing a FSR of 0.88:1 which complies with this requirement.

2.2 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land (SEPP 55)

The application has been assessed having regard to SEPP 55 which requires that Council must not consent to the carrying out of any development on land unless it has considered whether the land is contaminated or requires remediation for the proposed use.

The site was zoned for industrial purposes in the 1970s and has been used for light industry since that time. Therefore the allotments are unlikely to be affected by contamination (other than that associated with light industrial activities) and it is considered that no further assessment with regard to SEPP 55 is required.

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

The application has been assessed having regard to the requirements of Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 (SREP 20). This Policy provides general planning considerations and strategies requiring Council to consider the impacts of this proposal on water and scenic quality, aquaculture, recreation and tourism.

Subject to the imposition of conditions regarding the implementation of erosion and sediment control measures on the site, the proposal would be consistent with the requirements of SREP 20.

2.4 Industrial Lands Development Control Plan

The proposed development has been assessed having regard to the relevant performance and prescriptive design requirements within Council’s Industrial Lands DCP. The following table sets out the proposal’s compliance with the prescriptive measures of the Plan:

Industrial Lands Development Control Plan
Control	Proposal	Requirement	Compliance
FSR	0.88:1	1:1	Yes
Height	2 storeys	2 storeys	Yes
Car parking (for No. 2A and No. 4)	30 spaces	30 spaces	Yes
Setbacks of the entire industrial development Front(Kookaburra Road) Side (North) Side (South) Rear	Existing 0 m 0 m 0 m	0 m 0 m 0 m	Yes No No
Outdoor recreation area	Minimum 10 m² provided	Minimum 10 m² and @1 m²/employee	Yes

As detailed in the above table, the proposed development does not comply with some prescriptive measures within Council’s Industrial Lands DCP. The matters of relevance are detailed below:

2.4.1 Density

The proposal would generate a gross floor area of 2913.7 sq metres and result in a FSR of 0.88:1 for the site. Whilst, the development numerically complies with the density requirements of the Industrial Lands DCP, it must also be assessed against other criteria and within the context of being located adjoining residential dwellings.

It is noted that the operative development consents on the site (DA/87/84 and DA/116/94) approved a total floor area of 3022 sq metres. The current proposal would generate less floor area when compared to the total area approved under previous development applications.

2.4.2 Design

The design of the development would result in a part two storey structure on No. 2A Kookaburra Road (rear allotment), which to date only has an approval for a single storey development.

A comparison of the impact of the design of the current proposal and that previously approved on the site has been undertaken with regard to the privacy of the adjoining residences, the streetscape presentation and the visual amenity. The design as approved under DA/87/84 involved the construction of three units on the upper level of the allotment at No. 4 Kookaburra Road, with a 4 metres setback from the residential developments to the south due to the location of the access handle for the rear allotment.

Under the current application, a major section of the development is proposed to be extended over the access handle for No. 2A Kookaburra Road. A single storey colonnade is proposed along the southern boundary with car parking on the upper deck. Such extension of the units would result in an insufficient setback from the existing residences and any future residences within the vacant residential allotment on the southern side of the site. This would also result in a lack of acoustic privacy and solar access to future dwelling houses on the adjoining allotments to the south and an unacceptable bulk and scale of the development when viewed from those residences. The design of the proposed development is not considered to be an improvement over the originally approved designs of the industrial development.

Further, it is also noted that the proposal includes an 11 metre high structure (9 metres + 1.8 metre high screen) adjoining the rear boundary, whereas the maximum height approved at the rear under DA/116/1994 was 8 metres. This is considered to be unacceptable having regard to the impact that such works would have on the amenity of adjoining residential properties to the rear of the site.

2.4.3 Setbacks

The proposed development would alter the front setback approved under DA/87/1984 by excluding the overhanging section of the first floor of the building. Instead of an 8.5 metre setback, the building would retain the existing 22 metres front setback from Kookaburra Road. This is considered to be an improvement over the previously approved design on the site.

The Industrial Lands DCP provides that the buildings may be built to the side or the rear on a zero building line except where a setback is required to screen buildings from sensitive areas such as residential premises. The upper level car park would be located having a zero setback from the southern boundary of No. 2A Kookaburra Road. It is considered that the reduced setback to the south would have negative visual and overshadowing impact on the future residences and is not acceptable.

The eastern boundary of the rear allotment (No. 2A) has an approved zero building setback for a single storey industrial development with no openings on the eastern façade, pursuant to DA/116/1994. The impact of this approved development on the residences within Koala Place has always been considered unacceptable to Council. It was the Land and Environment Court that deemed that the impact is acceptable as it would not result in overshadowing or negative acoustic impact. The Court further considered that the fall of the site in this area provides sufficient physical separation between the residences fronting Koala Place and the building.

DA/87/1984 approved a zero building setback to the rear boundary of No. 4 Kookaburra Road as the two storey development backed onto another industrial site and was sufficiently separated (35 metres) from the residences within Koala Place. The current development application merges the two development consents by proposing to extend over the approved roof slab under DA/116/1994. As a result, a two storey industrial development would now be setback 6 metres from the adjoining residences rather than 35 metres. The open roof area proposed on top of the approved building would be accessible from Units 2, 3 and the fire stairs and part of it would be utilised for employee recreation. The car parking area is also proposed to be extended to the eastern boundary. A privacy screen (1.8 metre high) has been proposed along the eastern boundary to mitigate negative privacy impacts on the adjoining residents. The applicant has provided sightline diagrams to indicate that a person standing on a property adjoining the eastern boundary would have no opportunities to view the upper level or be impacted by the visual bulk due to the increased height.

However, it is considered that the proposed development at the rear, being two metres higher than the Court approved development, would have a significant negative impact on the visual amenity of the surrounding residences. Further the use of the roofed area as a carpark, being so close to the residential premises would have a negative impact on the acoustic privacy of the adjoining residential properties and is not acceptable.

2.4.4 Landscaping

The Industrial Lands DCP requires that a minimum of 10 sqm area be provided for outdoor eating and seating for the employees.

The current proposal includes indoor lunch rooms for individual factory units and outdoor employee recreation areas at the rear of the site and adjoining Units 1 and 2 on the upper level. The provision of outdoor employee recreation areas in considered satisfactory. However, the location of the outdoor recreation area at the rear would have an adverse impact on the residential properties at the rear as discussed in section 2.4.3 of this report.

2.4.5 Vehicular access and parking

2.4.5.1 Parking

The proposed development would require thirty on-site car parking spaces (@ 1/ 100 sq metres). The details of the car parking requirements are as follows:

Unit	Gross Leasable Floor Area	Parking Spaces Required
Existing factory	1328.6 m²	13.2 spaces
1	293.2 m²	2.93 spaces
2	278.01 m²	2.78 spaces
3	355.41 m²	3.55 spaces
4	658.75 m²	6.58 spaces
Total		29 spaces

The proposal complies with the Industrial Lands DCP with regard to the total number of spaces provided on the site. The proposed modification includes seventeen car spaces on the upper floor. The number of car parking spaces is considered acceptable. However, the location of the upper level spaces is not acceptable being placed along the southern property boundary and against residential properties.

Loading bays are provided for individual units on the upper level, being directly accessible from the parking areas. The minimum width of the openings for loading bays is 3 metres which complies with the requirements of the DCP. This is considered satisfactory.

2.5.5.2 Traffic Generation

The proposed development would result in a reduction of the gross floor area on the site, when compared to the previously approved applications. Therefore, no further assessment with regard to traffic generation is required.

2.4.5.3 Vehicular Access

The modified development proposes vehicular access to the upper level via the approved ramp. The ramp is proposed to be 6 metres wide with a gradient of 1:5.35.

An assessment of the scaled plans has been undertaken and there appears to be a discrepancy in the levels shown on the submitted site plan which indicates the level at the boundary to be RL 100.52 and the ground and first floor levels being 193.28 and 199.28. No survey plan has been submitted to verify the levels on the site. The engineering assessment of the plans has been conducted based on the levels provided.

An engineering assessment of the proposed vehicular access has been conducted and summarised below:

· The vehicle manoeuvring was considered on the scaled plans of the upper storey of the proposal and it is noted that a MRV and a Small Rigid Vehicle (SRV) would be able to turn within the parking area of the upper floor. Should the application be approved, a condition would be recommended restricting vehicular access to the upper floor to MRV only.

· The proposed gradient of the ramp providing access to the upper floor does not comply with the relevant standards when assessed against AS2890.2 – 2002. The maximum ramp grade should not exceed 1 in 6.5 (15.4%) with a maximum change of grade of 1 in 16 (6.25%) in 7.0 metres of travel in accordance with Australian Standards AS 2890.2 for MRVs.

· It is noted that a ramp was approved in the same location under DA/87/1984. The modified ramp as proposed under this application is wider than that previously approved on the site under DA/87/1984 and includes a marginally improved gradient. However, it is also observed that the ramp gradients complying with the relevant Australians Standards may be achieved on this site by reducing the floor area of the existing factory building. Therefore, the proposed ramp grades are not considered acceptable in its current form.

· The transition in the ramp grades do not comply with the AS2890.2 requirements. This may result in a Medium Rigid Vehicle (MRV) scraping at transitions.

Given the above, the proposal is not considered acceptable with regard to vehicular access to the upper floor of the industrial building.

2.4.5.4 Pedestrian Access

It is noted that seven car spaces would be required for Unit 4 at the rear. The car spaces are not provided adjoining the unit (only three spaces provided at the rear). Similarly, the existing factory unit requires fourteen spaces which have not been provided in the front setback area. A number of users of these units would have to either park on the upper floor or in the front yard and then walk to the industrial units. No separate pedestrian access is provided to the upper floor which would result in pedestrians using the vehicular ramp or fire stairs. This is not considered acceptable with regard to safety of the users.

2.4.6 Waste Management

The proposed development includes bin storage areas on the upper level located along the southern boundary adjoining the access handle and separate bin collection areas on the ground floor for the existing unit and proposed unit 4.

Council’s assessment of waste management for the development concludes that the bin storage area and the truck turning area on the ground floor are acceptable with regard to access of a 12.5 metre long garbage truck. However, the Heavy Rigid Vehicles (HRV) would not be able to access the upper floor due to non-compliant ramp gradient. The factory units would require 1.5 cubic metre bins or larger which cannot be safely manoeuvred up and down ramps or for long distances.

The proposal does not include any details of garbage truck access to the upper level or alternate garbage disposal methods for the units on the upper floor. The proposal is not acceptable with regard to the location of the garbage disposal area on the upper floor.

2.4.7 Acoustics

The proposal does not include first uses of the industrial units. Should the current application be approved, the matters in relation to acoustic, dust and visual impacts would be assessed in detail under future development applications for the first uses of the subject property.

The proposed car parking area is to be located immediately adjoining the residential boundary of developments. It is considered that residents would be adversely impacted by noise from this car park, truck turning and loading and unloading of goods on a regular basis. The development would have a negative amenity impact on the neighbouring properties with regard to acoustic privacy due to the location of the upper level car park.

2.4.8 Drainage Control

The site contains an existing industrial building located on No. 4 Kookaburra Road. The applicant has advised that stormwater from the proposed first floor additions would be connected to the existing stormwater system.

Council’s Engineering assessment in this regard concludes that following:

· A stormwater drainage plan including an on-site detention system would be required for the proposal. The on-site detention system should be designed for all storms up to the 50 year ARI with the permissible site discharge from the developed site being limited to the pre-developed 1 in 5 year ARI discharge from the site.

· A pipeline is required to be designed and constructed to connect the site with a Council-controlled drainage system. In this regard, both the properties at No. 2A and No. 4 Kookaburra Road would benefit from an interallotment drainage easement. The applicant has not provided Council with copies of the registered dealings or deposited plans showing a legal right for No. 4 Kookaburra Road to drain through the pipeline.

The proposal is assessed as unsatisfactory with regard to stormwater drainage.

2.4.9 Solar Access

The DCP requires that all industrial developments should provide at least two hours of solar access to the private open spaces and at least three hours of solar access to the north facing windows of all adjoining residential properties between 9 am and 3 pm during winter solstice.

The subject site adjoins residential properties to its south. The applicant has submitted shadow diagrams for the proposed development which indicates that the development would overshadow the adjoining residences during the above period. A comparative analysis of the shadows cast on the existing dwellings by the approved development on the site and the proposed modification is provided in the table below:

	The proposal		The Approved Development Applications
Adjoining residences	Solar Access to Private Open Space	Solar Access to North facing Windows	Solar Access to Private Open Space	Solar Access to North Facing Windows
Dwelling on 2 Kookaburra Road (Lot A)
9 am	Yes	Overshadowing all north facing windows	Yes	Yes
12 noon	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
3 pm	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Dwelling on 2C Kookaburra Road (Lot B)
9 am	Yes	Overshadowing of north facing lounge room and two bedroom windows + verandah	Yes	Yes
12 noon	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
3 pm	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Dwelling on 2D Kookaburra Road (Lot C)
9 am	Yes	Overshadowing all north facing windows and verandah	Yes	Overshadowing of all north facing windows and verandah
12 noon	Yes	Overshadowing all north facing windows	Yes	Yes
3 pm	Yes	Garage and one north facing windows overshadowed	Yes	Garage and all north facing windows overshadowed

The above table indicates that the private open space areas of all the residences adjoining the development would receive three hours of solar access during Winter Solstice.

The table also indicates that the proposed development when compared to the approved industrial development would increase the overshadowing impacts on the residences adjoining the southern boundary of the industrial site. It is also noted that the overshadowing of the vacant residential allotment located at the rear of Lots 2, 2C and 2D Kookaburra Road would be increased as a result of the reduced setbacks and the reorientation of the units on the upper level.

The proposed development is not assessed as satisfactory with regard to solar access provisions and does not improve the design of the approved developments on the site. Further, it has the potential to deny solar access to a future residential development on the adjoining allotment and is not considered to be acceptable in this regard.

2.5 Car Parking Development Control Plan

The proposal has been assessed having regard to the relevant performance and prescriptive design requirements within Council’s Car Parking Development Control Plan. The DCP requires that parking be provided at 1 space per 100 sqm of Gross Leasable Floor Area (GLFA) for industrial use.

The compliance of the proposal with the relevant performance criteria is discussed in Section 2.4 of this report.

2.6 Access and Mobility Development Control Plan

The proposal has been assessed having regard to the relevant performance and prescriptive design requirements within Council’s Access and Mobility Development Control Plan. The development provides a continuous path of travel on both floors via the ramp.

However, no alterative pedestrian access is provided to the upper level factory units apart from the vehicular ramp. This is considered to be unsafe for future users of the site.

2.7 Waste Minimisation and Management Development Control Plan

The matters in relation to waste management on the site have been discussed under Section 2.4 of this report.

2.8 Sustainable Water Development Control Plan

The DCP aims to achieve the implementation of sustainable water practices into the management of development in the Hornsby Shire. These matters have been discussed in Section 2.3 of this report.

2.9 Section 94 Contributions Plan

Council’s Section 94 Plan applies to the development as it would result in the generation of additional industrial floor space on the site and section 94 contributions would be applicable in the event that Council was minded to approve the application.

3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

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

3.1 Natural Environment

3.1.1 Trees

The proposal would necessitate the removal of the trees located at the rear of the site. Council’s assessment of the existing trees on the site concludes that none of the trees proposed to be removed are significant.

3.1.2 Air Quality

The proposal is for the modification to an approved development for construction of industrial units. It does not include the first occupation and specific uses for the units. Should the application be approved, the impact of the future uses on the air quality would be assessed under separate development applications.

3.1.3 Water Quality

This matter has been discussed in section 2.3 of this report.

3.2 Built Environment

The matters in relation to impact of the proposed development on the streetscape, views and the traffic generation are discussed in detail in section 2.4 of this report.

The proposal does not comply with a number of development controls within Council’s Industrial Lands Development Control Plan and would not provide a better design outcome when compared to the approved developments on the site.

The residential developments adjoining this industrial precinct in Hornsby Heights currently experience some negative amenity impact due to the mixed land use of the area. The assessment of this application concludes that the current proposal would have an additional detrimental impact on the built environment of the locality and therefore the proposal is not acceptable in its current form.

3.3 Social Impacts

The social impacts of the development on the local and broader community have been considered with specific reference to the potential employment generation within the complex. It is estimated that the development would generate full time positions post construction. This is consistent with the North Subregion (Draft) Subregional Strategy that provides a target of 9,000 jobs within the Hornsby LGA by 2031.

3.4 Economic Impacts

The proposed development would result in an increase in the total industrial floor space within the industrial estate at Hornsby Heights. As discussed above, the development would result in employment generation and therefore result in a positive economic impact on the locality.

4. SITE SUITABILITY

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

4.1 Bushfire Risk

The land is identified as being subject to bushfire risk. The proposal was referred to the NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) for comments. No objections have been raised by the RFS and no specific conditions are recommended.

5. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

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

5.1 Community Consultation

The proposed development was placed on public exhibition and was notified to adjoining and nearby landowners between 30 September 2010 and 21 October 2010 in accordance with Council’s Notification and Exhibition Development Control Plan. During this period and after the completion of notification, Council received 133 written submissions from 123 residents.

The map below illustrates the location of those nearby landowners who made an identifiable written submission that are in close proximity to the development site.

NOTIFICATION PLAN
• PROPERTIES NOTIFIED	X SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED	PROPERTY SUBJECT OF DEVELOPMENT
69 Submissions are out of map range and addresses of 13 objectors not provided

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

· unacceptable upper level car park, being over 15 metres high;

· unacceptable truck movements in the locality;

· increased heavy traffic and accident potential;

· reduced safety of pedestrians, specially school going children;

· accidents due to heavy vehicles driving on the upper floor;

· privacy loss of adjoining residents at the rear due to the open car park and windows of the upper level factory unit;

· excessive height (five storeys) with adverse impact on adjoining properties;

· unwanted precedent for the area;

· overshadowing of adjoining residences;

· loss of property values;

· removal of trees;

· inappropriate impact on wild life and flora of the area;

· inappropriate setbacks from residential properties;

· adverse noise impacts from garbage disposal;

· building up to northern boundary and covering the windows of No. 6A Kookaburra Road and removing natural light;

· overdevelopment for the area;

· insufficient truck turning area;

· noise and light pollution to residences;

· pollution of nearby creeks and parks from run-off and spills;

· lack of landscaping along the street frontage; and

· pollution from dust and vehicle fumes.

In addition a number of submissions raised the following matters:

· request rezoning of the site to residential as it is surrounded on three sides by residential development;

· adverse impact on any potential residential development within No. 6A Kookaburra Road, should rezoning happen in the future;

· the development would not result in any benefit to the community;

· no details of stormwater management system has been provided;

· the height of the single storey structure at the rear is higher than that approved in 1994;

· the mezzanine floors should be counted as a storey;

· the shadow diagrams are incorrect;

· the height of the buildings and the rear setback as marked on the plans is incorrect;

· there is no existing easement at the rear of No. 2A Kookaburra Road;

· the original development has not commenced on the site;

· the area has no demand for additional industrial units;

· the existing industrial unit operates at odd hours and results in adverse impact on the adjoining residential area;

· the existing industrial unit does not comply with the conditions of the previously approved developments;

· basement parking should be allowed to reduce amenity impact;

· no soil testing has been done to demonstrate the stability of the foundation; and

· the proposed car spaces are going to be used to store pallets in the future.

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

5.1.1 Northern boundary windows

The proposed development would have a zero building setback to the northern boundary that adjoins an industrial building located at No. 6A Kookaburra Road. This building is also built to its southern boundary and includes openings on the southern façade. The approved plans under DA/39/1994 for the use of the factory as a precision engineering workshop indicate that the factory should be setback 1 metre from the southern boundary. Given this, it is considered that northern boundary windows should receive solar access from the approved development. However, considering the location of the wall of unit 2 and 3 in the current proposal, it is accepted that the development would have some detrimental impact on the solar access to the adjoining factory building.

5.1.2 Consistency of plans

The proposed modification does not include details of stormwater system on the site. However, the Statement of Environmental Effects submitted in support of the application indicates that stormwater from the upper level would be connected to the existing system on the site.

5.2 Public Agencies

The development application was referred to the Rural Fire Service for comment. The RFS’s comments have been discussed in section 4.1 of this report.

6. THE PUBLIC INTEREST

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

The application does not satisfy Council’s criteria and would provide a development outcome that, on balance, would not result in a positive impact for the community. Accordingly, it is considered that the approval of the development would not be in the public interest.

CONCLUSION

The application proposes alterations and additions to an existing industrial development by including upper level units, extending the units towards the rear, including an upper level carpark and reducing the building setback from the adjoining residential properties.

The site adjoins residential properties on the southern and eastern side and the proposal does not comply with a number of prescriptive measures within Council’s Industrial Lands Development Control Plan. The site is subject to two previously approved and operative development consents. The current application would not provide an improved development outcome when compared to the previously approved developments on the site.

The application has been assessed as unsatisfactory against the matters for consideration under Section 79C(1) of the Act, Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan and relevant State Environmental Planning Policies. The proposal as modified would not result in a positive impact on the natural and built environmental of the locality.

Refusal of the development application is recommended.

Rod Pickles

Manager - Assessment Team 2

Planning Division

Scott Phillips

Executive Manager

Planning Division

Attachments:

1.View	Locality Plan
2.View	Site Plan
3.View	Floor Plan
4.View	Elevations
5.View	Vehicle Turning Circles
6.View	Shadow Diagrams
7.View	Plan Approved under DA-87-1984
8.View	Plan Approved under DA-116-1994

File Reference: DA/1157/2010

Document Number: D01517538

SCHEDULE 1

REASONS FOR REFUSAL

1. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(a)(i) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, the proposal is inconsistent with objectives (b) and (c) of Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 as it would not result in a land use which is compatible within the area and would have adverse impact on the natural and built environment of the locality. The proposal is an overdevelopment for the site.

2. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(a)(iii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, the proposal does not comply with the ‘Setbacks’ element of the Industrial Lands Development Control Plan with regard to setbacks from sensitive land uses.

3. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(a)(iii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, the proposal does not comply with the elements: ‘Building Design’ of the Industrial Lands Development Control Plan as it would not integrate with the surrounding residential properties due to the bulk and scale of the structure.

4. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(a)(iii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, the proposal does not comply with the elements: ‘Acoustics’, ‘Solar Access’ and ‘Vehicle Access and Parking’ elements of the Industrial Lands Development Control Plan.

5. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, does not demonstrate satisfactory management of stormwater drainage in the site and the interallotment drainage system.

6. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, the application does not demonstrate satisfactory pedestrian access to the industrial units on the upper floor, methods of garbage disposal for the upper floor industrial units, survey plan indicating the property boundaries, the existing contours and the current improvements on the site.

7. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(e) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, it is considered that approval of the development would set an undesirable precedent for similar inappropriate development and is therefore not in the public interest.

- END OF REASONS FOR REFUSAL -

Planning Report No. PLN68/10

Date of Meeting: 1/12/2010

4 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - CHANGE OF USE TO A SEX SERVICES PREMISES (BROTHEL)
5/142 - 144 AND 6/142 - 144 GEORGE STREET, HORNSBY

Development Application No:	DA/1027/2010
Description of Proposal:	Change of use to a Sex Services Premises (Brothel)
Property Description:	Lot 5 and Lot 6 SP 6089, Units 5 and 6, Nos. 142-144 George Street, Hornsby
Applicant:	Mr Tom Song
Owner:	Cerialis Pty Ltd
Statutory Provisions:	Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 Business G (Town Centre Support)
Estimated Value:	Nil
Ward:	A

RECOMMENDATION

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. The application proposes the change of use of an existing industrial premise to a sex services premises (brothel).

2. The proposal complies with the requirements of the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994.

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

5. It is recommended that the application be approved.

HISTORY OF THE SITE

On 11 August 1966, Council granted Certificate of Consent No. 782 for the erection of a two storey factory at No. 142 George Street Hornsby. Since that time, Council has granted a number of consents for the use of units, advertising signage and the strata subdivision of individual units.

THE SITE

The 911.8m² rectangular site has an east-west axis and is located on the eastern side of George Street between Linda Street and Hunter Lane. It has a frontage to George Street of 20.2 metres, a variable depth of 44.7 - 45.9 metres and a frontage to Hunter Lane of 20.1 metres.

The site comprises two, two-storey buildings known as Block ‘A’ and Block ‘B’ containing six units in total. Units 5 and 6 are located within Block ‘B’ and have a gross floor area of 326m². Six car parking spaces are provided to Block ‘B’ with two spaces accessed via George Street and four spaces in a stacked configuration accessed via Hunter Lane.

Block ‘B’ is setback approximately 8.5 metres from George Street (west), 11.5 metres from Hunter Lane (east) and 0.075 metres from the southern side boundary.

Surrounding development comprises a mix of industrial and commercial uses, including a printing and copying business, a solar energy business, vehicle repair stations, motor vehicle industry uses and the like.

THE PROPOSAL

The proposal seeks approval for the change of use of Units 5 and 6 in Block ‘B’ to a sex services premises (brothel) and the erection of two business identification signs on the western and eastern elevations fronting George Street and Hunter Lane, respectively. The proposed development involves internal alterations to link the two units which are over two levels. The proposed development includes:

· Lower Floor: Reception, waiting area, two toilets, a kitchen and staff room and two service/work rooms.

· Upper Floor: Laundry, two toilets, and six service/work rooms.

The applicant has advised that the development proposes ten staff, one manager and one receptionist. The proposed hours of operation are 24 hours per day, seven days a week. The application includes a ‘Brothel Management Plan’ for the day to day running of the premises.

ASSESSMENT

1. STRATEGIC CONTEXT

1.1 Metropolitan Strategy – (Draft) North Subregional Strategy

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

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

· Housing stock to increase by 11,000 dwellings.

The proposed development would be consistent with the draft Strategy by providing additional jobs in the locality.

2. STATUTORY CONTROLS

2.1 Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994

The subject land is zoned Business G (Town Centre Support) under Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 (HSLEP). The proposed development is defined as ‘business premises’ under the HSLEP and is permissible in the zone with Council’s consent. The objectives of the Business G (Town Centre Support) zone are:

(a) to encourage economic growth and employment opportunities.

(b) to accommodate the commercial, service, housing and social needs of the local and regional community.

(c) to encourage development that supports the Hornsby Town Centre and improves the vitality, cultural environment and social environment of the Centre.

With regard to objective (a), the proposed development would encourage economic growth and employment opportunities in the locality.

With regard to objective (b), the proposed development would accommodate the commercial, service, and social needs of the local and regional community.

With regard to objective (c), the proposed development would supports the Hornsby Town Centre and improve the vitality, cultural environment and social environment of the Centre.

Accordingly, the proposed development is consistent with the zone objectives.

Clause 15 of the HSLEP prescribes that the maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of development within the Business G (Town Centre Support) zone is 1:1. The proposed development does not alter the existing footprint of the building on the site and complies with this control.

Clause 18 of the HSLEP sets out heritage conservation provisions within the Hornsby area. There is no heritage item located on the site, nor in the immediate vicinity of the site and the site is not located within a heritage conservation area.

2.2 Restricted Premises Act 1943

Brothels are governed by the Restricted Premises Act 1943. As a result of the amendments to the Act, it is no longer a criminal offence to keep a brothel. Council is required to consider a development application for a brothel in the same way as for other permissible development.

Council has not adopted a DCP or other planning controls to guide the orderly development of brothels. Accordingly, guidance has been drawn from the Restricted Premises Act 1943 to determine circumstances in which a brothel may not be appropriate in a locality. Section 17 of the Act enables Council’s to make application to the Land and Environment Court for premises not to be used as a brothel under certain circumstances and to seek an order directly from the Court to close down a brothel.

To determine whether the location of the site and the design of the premises is appropriate for the proposed use (a brothel) the following consideration would be undertaken:

· Whether the brothel is operating near or within view from a church, hospital, school or any place regularly frequented by children for recreational or cultural activities.

The proposed brothel is not located within view from a church, hospital, school or any place regularly frequented by children for recreational or cultural activities. Submissions to the development application raised concerns that located to the south of the development on the same street is an AMF Bowling Alley (approximately 90 metres from the site), a gym (approximately 214 metres from the site), and the PCYC (approximately 234 metres from the site), which are regularly used by school children in the area. Concerns were also raised with regard to the proximity to ‘Studio Artes’ - a community based service for adults with specific needs, offering arts, prevocational training and recreation located on the corner of Jersey Street and Bridge Street, approximately 260 metres (walking distance) from the proposed development and also a performance school and martial arts facility located in Hunter Street (Nos. 93 and 97).

The main entry for the AMF Bowling Alley, the gym and the PCYC is from George Street and there is a large separation of distance from the proposed brothel. The entry for the performance school and martial arts facility is from Hunter Street and no access is provided from Hunter Lane which ensures that the brothel would not be operating within view of any place regularly frequented by children for recreational or cultural activities.

· Whether the operation of the brothel causes a disturbance in the neighbourhood when taking into account other brothels operating in the neighbourhood or other land use within the neighbourhood involving similar hours of operation and creating similar amounts of noise and vehicular and pedestrian traffic.

The character of the area is that of an industrial/ commercial zone. There are no other brothels operating within the immediate area. Therefore, the presence of one brothel within the industrial/commercial building is not considered likely to change the character of the neighbourhood.

· Whether sufficient off-street parking has been provided if appropriate in the circumstances.

The proposal includes the provision of six car parking spaces, and has a parking shortfall of three car parking spaces in accordance with the requirements of Council’s Car Parking Development Control Plan. This matter is discussed further in section 2.4.1 of this report.

· Whether suitable access has been provided to the brothel.

Entry and Egress is provided from the Hunter Lane frontage and an additional exit is also provided at the George Street frontage. Each of the doors are partially screened from the public domain by the car parking areas.

· Whether the operation of the brothel causes a disturbance in the neighbourhood because of its size and the number of people working in it.

The proposed development has sought 24 hour trading, seven days per week, which is inconsistent with the ‘Acoustics’ element of Council’s Business Lands Development Control Plan. It is envisaged that the main operating times would be at night. The majority of the surrounding land uses do not during these hours and are therefore unlikely to conflict with the proposal during these times. In terms of hours of operation during the day, the proposed development is not considered likely to cause disturbance in the neighbourhood in that the entry point from Hunter Lane is set back from the street which results in visitors to the premises being less conspicuous, and the surrounding land use is predominantly industrial (vehicle repair stations) with some commercial. The submitted ‘Brothel Management Plan’ would also ensure that the development would not cause a disturbance in the neighbourhood.

· Whether the operation of the brothel interferes with the amenity of the neighbourhood.

With regard to the amenity of the neighbourhood, the proposed development is considered to be acceptable. The front of the building (George Street) is under stated in that it appears as part of the overall factory unit development and the building is well set back from the road reserve. The proposed signage is in accordance with the DCP requirements with only the street number and directional information to the rear door (as the brothel entry is in Hunter Lane) to be displayed. No other signage is proposed that would alert a passer-by to the fact that a brothel is operating in the building.

Based on the above assessment, the proposed development is considered to be acceptable subject to recommended conditions of consent.

2.3 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 Advertising and Signage

The proposal incorporates signage in the form of an illuminated light box adjacent to the door on both the Ge orge Street and Hunter Lane frontages. The proposed sign is considered to be consistent with the provisions of SEPP 64, in that it meets the objectives to be compatible with the desired amenity and visual character of the area and it satisfies the assessment criteria in Schedule 1 of the SEPP and is considered to be acceptable in terms of its impact.

2.4 Business Lands Development Control Plan

The proposed development has been assessed having regard to the relevant performance and prescriptive design standards within Council’s Business Lands Development Control Plan (Business Lands DCP). The following table sets out the proposal’s compliance with the prescriptive standards of the Plan:

Business Lands Development Control Plan
Control	Proposal	Requirement	Compliance
FSR	unchanged	1:1	Yes
Car parking	6 spaces	9 spaces	No
Signage Area	Sign 1 – 0.21m² Sign 1 – 0.14m²	4m² 4m²	Yes Yes

As detailed in the above table, the proposed development does not comply with the prescriptive standards for car parking within Council’s Business Lands DCP. The matters of non-compliance are detailed below, as well as a brief discussion on compliance with relevant performance standards.

2.4.1 Car Parking

The proposed development is for a sex services premise (brothel) which is defined as ‘business premises’ under the HSLEP. Block ‘B’ has a total floor area of 326m² and there are six parking spaces provided for the proposed development.

In accordance with Council’s Business Lands DCP and the Car Parking DCP, the parking requirement for ‘business premises’ is 1 space per 40m² GLFA. This gives a parking requirement of nine car parking spaces, resulting in a short fall of three car parking spaces for the development.

Previous approved uses in the Unit 5 include a warehouse and distribution centre which would require a minimum of two spaces and previous approved uses in Unit 6 include vehicle repair station, and second hand motor vehicle sales (motor showrooms) which would require a minimum of six and seven spaces respectively. As a result, previous approved uses on the site have included a similar parking shortfall and the proposed development does not exacerbate that situation.

The applicant seeks to justify the parking shortfall generally on the grounds that during daytime (business hours) less than six staff/customers would be on site at any one time and that after hours, on-street car parking is less constrained and some staff would share transport and/or use public transport.

Having regard to the applicant’s justification, the previous approved uses of the site, the proximity of the site to public transport and the proposed transport arrangements for the staff, it is considered that the car parking shortfall of three spaces does not warrant refusal of the application.

2.4.2 Acoustic

Council’s Business Lands DCP prescribes that the hours of operation of commercial activities should be between:

7.00am to 6.00pm Monday to Wednesday and Friday;

7.00am to 6.00pm Thursday;

8.00am to 4.00pm Saturday and

No work on Sundays

The applicant proposes to work outside of these hours, by operating 24 hours a day, seven days a week.

Based on the assessment that peak operation of the business would be at night, the majority of the surrounding land uses do not open late at night and therefore the business is unlikely to conflict with surrounding land uses as they do not operate during these times. In terms of hours of operation during the day, the proposed development is not considered likely to cause disturbance in the neighbourhood in that the entry point from Hunter Lane is set back from the street which results in visitors to the premises being less conspicuous, and the surrounding land use being non-residential in nature.

The Business G (Town Centre Support) zone primary objectives are “to encourage economic growth and employment opportunities”. The proposed development is anticipated to provide upward of thirty employment positions and is likely to contribute to the economic diversity of the Shire. However, to achieve a level of viability and sustainability the operating environment must, as with any other business activity, be tailored to the proposed development. In this regard, the variation sought in respect of hours of operation is not considered contrary to the primary objective of the zone for the following reasons:

· Extending the operating times would have no effect on the land use zoning in facilitating further economic activity;

· Extending the operating times would assist in securing the sustainability and viability of the business, which in turn secures employment positions; and

· Extending the operating times of the proposed development is not likely to have an impact on the employment generation capability of other businesses in the locality or the land use zoning.

Council has determined, via the adoption of prohibitive exclusion in other zones as provided by HSLEP, that brothels are only suited to the Business zoned lands (except the Business E zone). In this regard it is considered that unnecessarily restricting the operating hours would act as an impediment to the development which may undermine the zoning objectives.

Having regard to the circumstances of the case it is considered that the hours of operation provided in the DCP are both unnecessary and unreasonable in this instance. Accordingly, it is considered acceptable that the hours of operation be extended to permit 24 hour operation.

A number of submissions to the development raised objections on the basis of adverse economic impacts on surrounding businesses. This matter is addressed in Section 3.4 of this report.

2.4.3 Signage

The proposed signage is small and inconspicuous, detailing only the street number on each frontage and is not inconsistent with the requirements of the DCP. Notwithstanding, there is an existing pole sign and a top hamper sign on the George Street frontage of the site and it is recommended that if consent is granted that this signs be removed as they are not required for the development.

2.5 Car Parking Development Control Plan

The primary purpose of the DCP is to provide car parking controls for development. In accordance with Council’s Car Parking Development Control Plan, nine car parking spaces are required to be provided.

The non-compliance with the car parking requirements of this DCP is discussed in Section 2.4.1 of this report.

2.6 Outdoor Advertising Development Control Plan

The primary purpose of the DCP is to control the visual impact of advertisements and advertising structures on the environment and to provide adequate opportunities for the community to advertise their goods and/or services.

The application involves the erection of two illuminated wall signs, one on each frontage of the site. The area of the sign on the George Street frontage is 0.21m² and the area of the sign on the Hunter Lane frontage is 0.14m². The DCP provides the following development controls for wall signs:

(a) where it is illuminated, shall not be less than 2.6m above the ground;

(b) shall not extend laterally beyond the wall of the building to which it is attached;

(c) shall not project above the top of the wall to which it is attached;

(d) shall not have an area greater than 4 sqm. This includes window signs (painted or mounted);

(e) shall not cover any window or architectural projections.

The proposed signage is generally consistent with the above requirements except for (a) as the proposed signs would be located less than 2.6 metres above the ground. Accordingly, it is recommended that a condition of consent be imposed requiring the approved signage to be located not less than 2.6 metres above the ground.

2.7 Access and Mobility Development Control Plan

The primary purpose of this DCP is to ensure the requirements for equality of access under the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (DDA) are satisfied when building work is proposed.

The proposed development includes the provision of one service room at the ground floor level which is consistent with the objectives of the Access and Mobility Development Control Plan. In addition, a construction certificate is required to be obtained for the proposed building works which would provide consideration under the Building Code of Australia, and it is the applicant’s sole responsibility to comply with the requirements of the DDA.

2.8 Waste Minimisation and Management Development Control Plan

The primary purpose of this Development Control Plan is to provide planning strategies and controls to promote waste minimisation and management.

The 'Management Plan for the operation of the brothel submitted with application indicates that each room would have appropriate receptacles for used linen and lined waste containers for contaminated waste. It would be the responsibility of each sex worker to ensure the bagging and removal of contaminated waste at the conclusion of each consultation. Bagged waste removed from the work rooms at the conclusion of each consultation would be deposited in lined garbage receptacles provided within the premises. These receptacles would be emptied in securely tied liner bags and removed to the garbage receptacles provided for commercial waste collection. Appropriate conditions of consent are recommended to ensure compliance with the provisions of the DCP

3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

3.1 Natural Environment

The proposed development is confined within the footprint of the existing building and would not impact on the natural environment.

3.2 Built Environment

The proposed development would not alter the existing scale and density of development on the site and the proposed signage is located within the façade of the building.

3.3 Social Impacts

The social impacts of the development on the local and broader community have been considered with specific reference to the potential employment generation within the complex. It is estimated that the development would generate upward of thirty equivalent full time positions post construction. This is consistent with the North Subregion (Draft) Subregional Strategy that provides a target of 9,000 jobs within the Hornsby LGA by 2031.

There would be a number of multiplier effects that the development would provide throughout the local and regional economies. These multiplier effects would result from the sourcing of goods and services from suppliers to businesses within the complex as well as the increased consumption generated by the increase of employment in the area.

Despite being a lawful business in a zone that permits this land use activity, brothels must be carefully assessed to ensure that they do not result in adverse social impacts. In assessing the social impact of the development, brothels should not adjoin, or be clearly visible from non compatible land uses which may include residential development, places of worship, hospitals, schools, educational institutions for young people or places where children and adolescents regularly gather for recreational or cultural activities. The proposed development is not located near any of these land uses and this matter is discussed further in section 4 of this report.

3.4 Economic Impacts

The proposal would facilitate development of land within the Town Centre Support area of Hornsby, would create employment opportunities in the area and would have a positive economic impact on the locality.

Submissions raised concerns that the proposed brothel has the potential to have adverse economic impacts on adjoining businesses. Whilst an economic impact assessment was not submitted with the development application, no evidence has been provided to substantiate the objectors’ claim that the proposal would restrict or impact upon economic activity in the locality.

Whilst children and other young people may visit the adjoining businesses (printing shop and solar energy shop), both businesses have off street parking and most of their clientele travel by car. As a result young children are less likely to attend the businesses alone. Furthermore, the entrance to these business premises are on George Street and the entry to the brothel is on Hunter Lane. Given that brothel clientele are likely to be discrete, there would be little if any adverse impact on the adjoining businesses.

4. SITE SUITABILITY

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

There is no known hazard or risk associated with the site with respect to landslip, subsidence, flooding and bushfire.

The Land and Environment Court of New South Wales has established planning principles for the location of brothels. Those planning principles are discussed below to determine the suitability of the site for the purposed brothel.

· Brothels are a legal land use that benefits some sections of the community but offends others. Most people believe that the exposure of impressionable groups like children and adolescents to the existence of brothels is undesirable. The aim should therefore be to locate brothels where they are least likely to offend. However, criteria for locating brothels should not be so onerous as to exclude them from all areas of a municipality.

Brothels are defined as ‘business premises’ under the HSLEP and are only permissible in business zoned land with the exception of the Business E (Service Centre) zone. The proposal is considered to be a discreet establishment and would not be identifiable as a brothel. With the exception of altering the existing business identifications sign to that of a street address sign, there are no external changes proposed to the building. The proposed location is considered to be acceptable, in that the proposal is unlikely to create an adverse impact on any impressionable groups in the surrounding locality.

· Brothels should be located to minimise adverse physical impact, such as noise disturbance and overlooking. In this aspect they are no different from other land uses.

The proposed brothel is located within ‘Building B’ of an approved factory unit development. The assessment of the application has not identified any potential noise issues arising from the development. In terms of overlooking, there are no windows on the southern elevation to overlook the adjoining premises and the windows on the western elevation front George Street and the Great Northern Rail Line and on the eastern elevation front Hunter Lane. The windows on the first floor of the northern elevation front ‘Building A’ on the site. Therefore, noise and overlooking impacts would not arise in this instance.

· There is no evidence that brothels in general are associated with crime or drug use. Where crime or drugs are in contention in relation to a particular brothel application, this should be supported by evidence.

The development application was referred to the NSW Police for comment. The Police has not identified any evidence to suggest that this particular brothel would be related to crime or drug use.

· Brothels should not adjoin areas that are zoned residential, or be clearly visible from them. Visibility is sometimes a function of distance, but not always.

The subject site is located centrally within an existing commercial centre. The adjoining land use zone to the east is Industrial B (Light) zone. The nearest residential property is approximately 20 metres to the south, this dwelling is located within the Industrial B (Light) zone whilst the nearest residential property in a residential zone is approximately 150 metres to the north. The location of existing industrial/ commercial buildings between the nearest residential area and the site results in the proposal not being visible from those residential areas.

· Brothels should not adjoin, or be clearly visible from schools, educational institutions for young people or places where children and adolescents regularly gather. This does not mean, however, that brothels should be excluded from every street on which children may walk.

The site is not visible from schools, education institutions for young people or places where young people regularly gather. Submissions raised concerns that located to the south of the development on the same street is an AMF Bowling Alley (approximately 90 metres from the site), a gym (approximately 214 metres from the site), and the PCYC (approximately 234 metres from the site), which are regularly used by school children in the area. The proposed brothel does not adjoin these properties, nor is it visible from them, which is consistent with the planning principle. Whilst it is acknowledged that some youths may walk past the site on their way to the AMF Bowling Alley, the gym and/or the PCYC on George Street, the access to the premises is considered to be discreet with minimal signage. The planning principle also states that brothels should not be excluded from every street on which children may walk.

· The relationship of brothels to places of worship (which are likely to attract people who are offended by brothels) is a sensitive one. The existence of a brothel should not be clearly visible from places where worshippers regularly gather.

There is no known place of worship within the vicinity of the proposed brothel.

· There is no need to exclude brothels from every stop on a public transport route. However, it would not be appropriate to locate a brothel next to a bus stop regularly used by school buses.

There are no bus stops or public transport routes along George Street within the immediate vicinity of the subject site.

· Where a brothel is proposed in proximity to several others, it should be considered in the context that a concentration is likely to change the character of the street or area. In some cases this may be consistent with the desired future character, in others not.

There are no other brothels in the immediate area. Therefore, the proposed development is not considered likely to change the character of the street or area.

· The access to brothels should be discreet and discourage clients gathering or waiting on the street. Apart from areas where brothels, sex shop and strip clubs predominate, signage should be restricted to the address and telephone number.

Whilst the proposed brothel has a secondary frontage to a main road, access to the premises for clients and staff is from the frontage in Hunter Lane. The location of the premises would only be disclosed by a small light box sign that would carry the property street number ‘142’ on each street frontage.

Based on the above assessment of the proposal against the planning principles outlined in the Land and Environment Court of New South Wales for the location of brothels, the proposed brothel is considered to be suitable for the subject site.

5. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

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

5.1 Community Consultation

The proposed development was placed on public exhibition and was notified to adjoining and nearby landowners between 9 September 2010 and 30 September 2010 in accordance with Council’s Notification and Exhibition Development Control Plan. During this period, Council received eight 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
FIVE SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED OUT OF MAP RANGE

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

· Inappropriate location for a brothel;

· Proximity to the Library, AMF Bowling, a gym and the PCYC which are heavily used by school children;

· Proximity to Studio Artes - a community based service for adults with specific needs, offering arts, prevocational training and recreation;

· Proximity to residential homes/ units

· Hunter Lanes has numerous children activities e.g. dance clubs, taekwondo etc

· Potential to impact upon future plans for development on adjoining sites;

· Insufficient car parking on-site;

· Traffic and parking impacts;

· Impact on work experience programs offered by adjoining business to high schools, universities, TAFE colleges and design schools, and safety of children.

· Moral issues;

· Lack of community consultation.

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 Potential to impact upon future plans for development on adjoining sites

The proposed development is a permissible land use in the zone and has been assessed with regard to existing surrounding development in the locality. Any future land uses in the locality would be assessed on their merits.

5.1.2 Safety of Children

Submissions raised concerns that the development would compromise the safety of children particularly the children of customers and other business owners who may from time to time be in the street, and also impact on work experience programs offered by businesses.

Although children may at times accompany parents or guardians to other businesses existing in the street, there is no evidence that the establishment of a brothel would create a risk for children.

The presentation of the development is such that people would not be able to identify the use of the building as a brothel. Suitable off street parking and access is available and an adequate setback provided to ensure that clients would have no need to wait or gather on the street. Furthermore, most of the brothel’s trade would occur during hours when other businesses in the street are closed.

5.1.3 Moral Issues

Nearly all submissions received raise concerns on moral grounds, including statements that the development is undesirable, degrading to women, erodes community and Christian values, would be a focal point for undesirable people within community and the like.

There is considered to be two opposing views on the establishment of sex services premises (including brothels) with the common view being that they are immoral to some degree. However, the morality of a development is not a determinative planning consideration. Sex services premises (including brothels) are legitimate land uses regulated through environmental planning instruments under the EP&A Act. As such, the issue to be considered is not the morals of prostitution but whether or not the subject land is a suitable location for the establishment of a brothel.

The assessment of the development application does not comment on, nor have regard to the morality of the proposed use.

5.1.4 Lack of community consultation

The application was notified in accordance with Council’s Notification and Exhibition Development Control Plan which included an advertisement in the local newspaper. Several residents and commercial tenants contacted Council and requested additional time to make a submission. Council officers received and considered submissions received up to four weeks following the close of the notification period. It is considered that adequate community consultation of the proposed development has been undertaken.

5.2 Public Agencies

The application was referred to the following Agencies for comment:

5.2.1 NSW Police

The NSW Police Service raised no objections to the DA proposal. The Police noted that when and if a patron is ejected or refused entry they would be left outside the location presumably without being monitored by staff and a potential exists for that 'patron' to become hostile or have a negative impact on the neighbouring community. Accordingly, the Police recommend that the Brothel Management Plan should include provisions for staff to maintain visual observations of any 'ejected patron' and if necessary call the Police for assistance.

6. THE PUBLIC INTEREST

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

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 use of an existing commercial/industrial premise for the purpose of a sex services premises (brothel).

There has been some community reaction to the development questioning the morality of such a proposal. However, morality is not a determinative planning consideration. It is therefore not the role of Council to determine the morals of such a proposal, but to consider the appropriateness of the proposed location. The issues raised in public submissions do not give rise to the refusal of the application on planning grounds.

There are community concerns that the exposure of impressionable groups such as children and adolescents to the existence of brothels is undesirable and the aim is therefore to locate brothels where they are least likely to offend. The establishment of a brothel on commercial zoned land is considered appropriate and one where children are less likely to be exposed to such development.

The subject site is a location that does not adjoin and is not clearly visible from residential zones, places of worship, schools, childcare facilities or the like. The presentation of the building and retention of the industrial façade is such that the building would not be identifiable as a brothel. The development has been proposed in such a way as to minimise any offence to the general public and ultimately it is considered that the development would not create any significant detrimental impact.

Having regard to the merits of the proposal, the application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

Rod Pickles

Manager - Assessment Team 2

Planning Division

Scott Phillips

Executive Manager

Planning Division

Attachments:

1.View	Locality Plan
2.View	Architectural Plans

File Reference: DA/1027/2010

Document Number: D01496896

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 prepared by 3D Archplan

*Plan No.*	*Title*	*Issue*	*Dated*
A58-01	Site Plan/ Plan Layout	01	19 September 2009
A58-02	Lower Floor Plan	01	19 September 2009
A58-03	Upper Floor Plan	01	19 September 2009
A58-04	West, East & North Elevation	01	19 September 2009
A58-05	Section A, B & Light Box Detail	01	19 September 2009

Supporting Information

*Document Title*	*Prepared by*	*Dated*
Statement of Environmental Effects	Boston, Blythe Flemming	July 2010
Brothel Management Plan	Boston, Blythe Flemming	July 2010

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

2. Building Code of Australia

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

3. Fire Safety Upgrade

To ensure the protection of persons using the existing building and to facilitate egress from this building in the event of a fire, details must be submitted with the application for a construction certificate, detailing what works are necessary (if any) to bring it into full compliance with Parts C, D1, D2 and E of the Building Code of Australia.

4. Waste Management Plan

Prior to issue of the Construction Certificate, A Waste Management Plan Section One – Demolition Stage, Section Two – Design Stage, Section Three – Construction Stage and Section Four – Use and On-going Management as applicable, covering the scope of this project is required to be submitted to Council in accordance with the Waste Minimisation and Management Development Control Plan.

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

5. Erection of Construction Sign

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

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

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

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

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

6. Car Parking and Deliveries

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

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

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

7. Waste Management Plan – Work Practices

Appropriate work practices must be employed to implement the Waste Management Plan Section One – Demolition Stage and Section Three – Construction Stage as applicable.

REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION

8. Demolition

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

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

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

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

9. Council Property

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

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

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

10. External Lighting

All external lighting must be designed and installed in accordance with Australian Standard AS 4282 – Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting. Certification of compliance with the Standard must be obtained from a suitably qualified person.

11. Removal of Existing Signage

The existing pole sign and a top hamper sign on the George Street frontage of the site must be removed.

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

12. Advertising Signs

The advertising signage approved under this consent must not flash, move or display electronic image and must not be located less than 2.6m above the ground.

13. 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).

14. Operation of Brothel

The brothel must be operated in accordance with the NSW Health and WorkCover publication ‘Health and Safety Guidelines for Brothels in NSW (2001)’.

15. Brothel Management Plan

The Brothel Management Plan must include provisions for staff to maintain visual observations of any 'ejected patron' and if necessary call the Police for assistance.

16. On-Going Waste Management

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

a. Appropriate waste containers acceptable to the NSW Department of Health are to be placed in all work rooms for the collection and disposal of soiled articles such as condoms, tissues, gloves and the like. Such waste containers must have sliding lids to eliminate odours. All contaminated sharps, e.g. needles must be placed in non-reusable sharps containers which comply with Australian Standards AS 4031-1992 Non-reusable containers for the collection of sharp medical items used in health care areas for their disposal.

b. Space must be provided for the storage of waste bins prior to collection by a commercial waste contractors; the siting of which must have regard for potential amenity impacts and must be clear of the approved parking areas on site.

17. Fire Safety Statement - Annual

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

- END OF CONDITIONS -

ADVISORY NOTES

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

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 Requirements

The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 requires:

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

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

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

· Mandatory inspections of nominated stages of the construction inspected.

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

Long Service Levy

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

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

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

Disability Discrimination Act

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

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.

Asbestos Warning

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

www.environment.nsw.gov.au

www.nsw.gov.au/fibro

www.adfa.org.au

www.workcover.nsw.gov.au

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

Planning Report No. PLN72/10

Date of Meeting: 1/12/2010

5 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - CONSTRUCTION OF AN AFFORDABLE HOUSING DEVELOPMENT COMPRISING EIGHT TOWNHOUSES
3 & 5 FULBOURNE AVENUE, PENNANT HILLS

Development Application No:	DA/1021/2010
Description of Proposal:	Construction of an affordable housing development comprising eight townhouses and demolition of existing dwellings
Property Description:	Lot 16 and Lot 15 DP 10203 (Nos 3 & 5) Fulbourne Avenue, Pennant Hills.
Applicant:	Mr Ram Shanker Kangatharan C/- Glendinning Minto & Associates P/L
Owner:	Mr R S Kangatharan
Statutory Provisions:	Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 Residential A (Low Density) Zone State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009
Estimated Value:	$2.7 million
Ward:	C

RECOMMENDATION

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. The application proposes the demolition of two existing dwelling houses and the construction of an affordable housing development containing eight townhouses.

2. The proposal complies with the development standards contained within State Environmental Housing Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

3. Thirteen submissions have been received in respect of the application.

4. It is recommended that the application be approved.

THE SITE

The site comprises two allotments located on the southern side of Fulbourne Avenue. The site has an area of 2,089.5m², is of regular shape with a frontage of 41.5m and depth of 50.5m. The site has an average fall of 6% to the rear south western corner.

The site includes two existing single storey dwelling houses. A 1.8m wide stormwater drainage easement is located over the south east corner of the site. The trees on the site mainly include previously planted species other than a number of remnant trees in the western rear part of the site.

The surrounding locality comprises a low density residential area of single and two storey dwelling houses. The adjoining property at No. 1 Fulbourne Avenue on the corner of Yarrara Road operates as a child care centre. The adjoining dwelling house at No. 7 Fulbourne Avenue is an item of environmental heritage of local significance. The Main Northern Rail Corridor is located 45m east of the site parallel to Yarrara Road.

The site is located 500m north east of Pennant Hills shops and Railway Station.

THE PROPOSAL

The proposal includes the demolition of the two existing dwelling houses and the construction of eight townhouses comprising two x 2 storey duplex at the front of the site and a two storey building containing four townhouses at the rear of the site. The townhouses include four x 3 bedroom and four x 4 bedroom dwellings. Five townhouses include attached single storey garaging and living space. Open car parking spaces at the rear are proposed for three of the dwellings.

The proposal includes a central accessway that separates the two buildings at the frontage and provides access to the building at the rear.

ASSESSMENT

1. STRATEGIC CONTEXT

1.1 NSW State Plan

Priority of E6 of the NSW State Plan is ‘Housing Affordability’. The Plan notes that:

Strong economic growth for the last 10 years has seen home values rise dramatically across many parts of NSW. Alongside this however, there has been a corresponding increase in difficulty for many people in affording housing.

The Government considers housing affordability from two perspectives. Firstly, from the perspective of the first home buyer for whom purchasing a home is increasingly difficult. Secondly, from the perspective of the most vulnerable households – the frail aged, people with disabilities, people with mental illness and people at risk of homelessness – who face poor health, educational or other social outcomes due to high housing costs or overcrowding.

A key lever of Priority E6 was the introduction of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009. Being a recent planning initiative, Hornsby local government area is only now seeing development applications for this type of housing. Therefore, it is important to carefully consider development proposals in the context of this strategic planning objective as well as more established local planning controls.

1.2 Metropolitan Strategy – (Draft) North Subregional Strategy

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

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

· Housing stock to increase by 11,000 dwellings.

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

2. STATUTORY CONTROLS

2.1 Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994

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

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

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

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

The compliance of the development with the zone objectives must be read in the context of the aims of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009. An assessment of the application against the SEPP is held at section 2.2 of this report.

The proposed development is defined as ‘multi-unit housing’ under the HSLEP and is permissible in the zone with Council’s consent.

Clause 15 of the HSLEP prescribes that the maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of development within the Residential A zone is 0.4:1. The proposal exceeds this requirement and relies on the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 which permits a maximum floor space ratio of 0.75:1. To the extent of any inconsistency between the HSLEP and the SEPP, the provisions of the SEPP prevail.

Clause 18 of the HSLEP sets out heritage conservation provisions within the Hornsby area. The site adjoins an item of environmental heritage at No. 7 Fulbourne Avenue (house). The application includes a Heritage Impact Assessment of the proposed development. This matter is addressed in section 2.3 of this report.

2.2 State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009

The application has been assessed against the requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 (SEPP – Affordable Rental Housing). This Policy provides State-wide planning controls for delivery of affordable rental housing through planning incentives to increase rental housing close to business centres and to expand the role of non-profit housing providers. The Policy also provides for the retention of existing affordable housing and for housing support for disadvantaged people.

The Policy applies to the majority of Council’s residential land use zones for sites within 800 metres walking distance of a railway station or 400 metres of a bus stop with an hourly bus service.

For the subject site, the Policy provides for a maximum building height of 8.5m and a maximum floor space ratio of 0.75:1 with at least 50% of dwellings to be used for affordable rental housing for a period of 10 years.

Affordable housing is defined under the Policy according to a household income level being less than 120% of the median household income (Sydney Statistical Division). The affordable rental housing accommodation is to be managed by a registered community housing provider.

The Policy includes development standards and applies design criteria for low rise and high rise developments. For the subject site, the Seniors Living Policy: Urban Design Guidelines for Infill Development is to be taken into consideration, subject to the provisions being consistent with the Policy. The following table sets out the proposal’s compliance with the prescriptive standards of the Policy:

SEPP - Affordable Rental Housing
Control	Proposal	Requirement	Compliance
Site Area	2,089.5m²	450m²	Yes
Floor Space Ratio	0.60:1	0.75:1	Yes
Dwelling Size	141m² – 167m²	Min 95m² – 3 br +	Yes
Height	8.5m	8.5m	Yes
Car parking	10 spaces	4 spaces (0.5 per dwlg)	Yes
Solar Access	100%	70%	Yes
Deep Soil Zone	28%	15%	Yes
Landscaped Area	717m²	280m²	Yes

As detailed in the above table, the proposed development complies with the prescriptive standards within the Policy. Below is a brief discussion on compliance with design principles and best practice standards within the Urban Design Guidelines for Infill Development.

2.2.1 Responding to Context

The immediate locality is characterised mainly by single storey older style detached dwellings with open landscaped frontages in the streetscape. Front setbacks are variable and there is a mix of building materials and finishes and housing styles.

The proposed development provides a contemporary architectural form and includes a mix of materials and finishes. The development maintains the existing building alignment along the lower southern side of the street. The proposal introduces a new built form and style of housing but would maintain the existing pattern of buildings in the streetscape.

The development makes good use of internal/external spaces and incorporates sustainable building practices that are more efficient than the majority of existing dwellings in the locality.

2.2.2 Site Planning and Design

The site is of uniform shape and is situated on the lower side of the street. The site does not include any significant constraints to development other than the stormwater drainage easement across the south eastern corner of the site.

The proposed townhouses are oriented north south living and open space areas are primarily located on the northern elevation of the dwellings, to maximise solar access. The proposed dwelling design would achieve a high level of energy efficiency and amenity.

Separate driveways are provided for dwellings 1 and 4. A central accessway provides a shared pedestrian and vehicular access to the proposed rear dwellings and vehicular access for units 2 and 3. The dwellings at the frontage have independent pedestrian access.

2.2.3 Impacts on Streetscape

The proposal includes informal private open space within the front setback which is inconsistent with the streetscape.

The proposed buildings have a minimum front setback of 8.6m. The proposed private open space areas extend to within 2.8m of the front boundary and are enclosed with 1.2m high tubular steel fencing with brick piers. Being enclosed by 1.2m high fences, the front courtyards of units 1 to 4 are not intended to be used as formal private areas. Instead, the courtyards take advantage of the northern elevation and improve internal/external living and amenity. This results in a sustainable and environmentally efficient design outcome.

Landscaping for privacy is proposed at the immediate frontage. The proposed landscaping would provide effective screening of the private open space areas. The first floor component of the two front buildings would present as the dominant element in the streetscape.

Subject to implementation of the landscape plan the proposal is considered acceptable in respect to impact on the existing streetscape.

2.2.4 Impacts on Neighbours

The proposed development is considered acceptable in respect to privacy and amenity to the adjoining child care centre and the adjoining heritage listed dwelling subject to the construction of new boundary fencing. The proposed buildings would not overshadow neighbouring properties to the extent of any non-compliance with the Urban Design Guidelines For Infill Development.

The proposed rear townhouse building is setback 4.9m from the rear boundary. The ground floor levels of the proposed dwellings are 1.2m above natural ground level at the rear boundary. To minimise overlooking of adjoining properties from the rear patios, the proposal includes privacy screens 1.5m above the floor level fixed to the rear boundary fence. A 3m wide deep soil landscaping area is proposed along the rear of the development in compliance with the Policy. The proposed landscaping area includes planting along the boundary which would provide some screening of the development. The majority of the proposed deep soil zone at the rear of the site is proposed for lawn area.

To prevent overlooking of the adjoining rear properties, privacy louvers are proposed for the first floor windows. The privacy screening reduces the visual amenity impacts of rear open space areas of adjoining properties in Stevens Street.

The Urban Design Guidelines For Infill Development include controls for the rear 25% of the site to be single storey. However, the SEPP – Affordable Rental Housing provides for a building height of not more than 8.5m which prevails to the extent of the inconsistency with the Guidelines.

Having regard to the aims of the SEPP – Affordable Rental Housing, this is considered to be an acceptable outcome.

2.2.5 Internal Site Amenity

The fin walls of the proposed buildings give separation and identity to individual dwellings within the development.

Fences and landscaping provide suitable screening for proposed private open space areas. The use of louvers for first floor windows and balcony screens minimises privacy impacts within the development. The proposed private open space areas comply with the required 35m² of landscaping per dwelling.

Five of the eight dwellings have single car garages. The proposed open car parking spaces in the frontage of Units 6 and 7 are not allocated to those units and would detract from their amenity, as the ‘ownership’ of the spaces is in conflict with the front entries and immediate outlook of these units. Whilst car ownership is reduced for low income households as recognised by the Policy with the requirement for 0.5 spaces per dwelling, the provision of a separate common parking area should be of design to minimise amenity impacts. To address this impact, it is recommended that low height screen fencing be provided between unit 5 car space and unit 6 as well as unit 8 car space and unit 7.

The proposed design does not provide adequate space for landscape treatment to provide transition and separation between the internal driveway/shared pedestrian access and the dwelling entries, resulting in dominance of the central accessway which detracts from the architectural style of the development and amenity. It would be open to Council to require the removal of car parking spaces to improve this amenity. Whilst that would result in the development maintaining the required number of car parking spaces under SEPP – Affordable Rental Housing, a reduction in car parking is considered to be an inferior outcome due to the density of the development. Therefore on merit, the development is considered acceptable in its current form.

The proposed dwelling entries at the frontage and central access to the rear dwellings are clearly defined access points to the development. Casual surveillance of the access points is achieved within the development minimising opportunities for crime.

The site is in the vicinity of the rail corridor. The rail line is elevated in relation to the site and results in noise impacts. Rail Corp recommends noise mitigation measures for the proposed development, which have been included as a recommended condition of consent.

2.3 Heritage Development Control Plan

The site adjoins an item of environmental heritage at No. 7 Fulbourne Avenue (house) which is an item of local significance as an Inter-War weatherboard cottage.

Council’s Heritage Committee raised objections to the proposed development on grounds that the bulk and scale of the proposed development is out of character and not sympathetic with the adjoining heritage item.

A Heritage Impact Report was submitted in support of the application. The report notes:

The new buildings occupy a site adjoining the item and separated from it by some distance allowing for appropriate landscape separation. Additionally, the new buildings are set below the road level and have overall heights that are compatible with the adjoining development on both sides of the site. The increased density of development will not be highly obvious from the street due to the fall of the site and the screening effect of the retained vegetation.

The applicant notes the concerns of the Heritage Committee. However, the applicant considers that the merits of the application coupled with the minor impact on the heritage item are such that the proposal should be supported in its current form.

The officer’s assessment of the application concurs with the opinion of the applicant and therefore recommends that Council not require amendments to the design of the buildings. The development would be set back to enable landscaping to sufficiently screen the development to minimise impacts and would result in a development that relates positively to the streetscape.

3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

3.1 Natural Environment

The site includes twenty trees comprising a mix of exotic, introduced native and remnant trees.

The proposed development would necessitate the removal of six trees from the site. None of the trees to be removed are identified as ‘significant trees’. Tree No. 20, a Brush Box (Lophostemon confertus) located in the south eastern part of the site, is identified as good and worthy of preservation and is to be retained.

The submitted landscape plan includes locally indigenous plant species and is considered acceptable is respect to replacement of existing trees proposed for removal.

3.2 Built Environment

The design of the proposed townhouses provides for cost effective construction of energy efficient housing with functional floor plans and an acceptable standard of accommodation for large families. The proposed built form however is predicated on reduced car parking provision in accordance with the provisions of the SEPP – Affordable Rental Housing.

Given that 50% of the development is required for this purpose for a relatively short time (10 years) compared to the economic life of the development, the large 3 and 4 bedrooms dwellings are compromised by the comparative deficiency of the car parking provision for accommodation of this size. However, under Clause 14 of the Policy, a consent authority must not refuse consent to development on car parking grounds when 0.5 spaces per dwelling are provided. It is acknowledged that to facilitate affordable housing in the strategic context, inconsistencies may arise with local planning expectations.

The proposal retains the existing vehicle crossings in the street maintaining this aspect of the streetscape. The eastern crossing is adjacent to the adjoining child care centre. To ensure adequate sight distance at the frontage, the floor height of the garage for Unit 4 and its driveway are at an appropriate level with the footpath.

Bin storage is proposed within the respective dwelling areas. Collection at the road frontage is considered acceptable for the proposal.

The proposed development includes a mix of materials; sheet metal, face brick, weatherboard, aluminium louvers and privacy shutters. The mix of materials and proposed finishes complement the architectural style of the development and result in a high quality design that would enhance the existing streetscape.

3.3 Social Impacts

The proposed development would be of positive social impact in providing affordable rental accommodation particularly for large families, thus reducing social disadvantage and fostering inclusive and diverse communities. This is a key priority of the NSW State Plan.

3.4 Economic Impacts

The proposal would have a minor positive impact on the local economy in conjunction with other residential development in the locality by generating an increase in demand for local services.

4. SITE SUITABILITY

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

4.1 Flooding

The stormwater drainage easement over the south eastern part of the site is subject to an overland flow path for the 1 in 100 year flood. The proposed floor levels would be a minimum of 500mm above flood height. The submitted flood study recommends minor excavation work at the rear of proposed Units 7 and 8 to maintain pre-development flood levels.

Subject to implementation of the recommendations of the flood study the proposal would not adversely impact on downstream properties.

The development is otherwise considered suitable for the site.

5. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

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

5.1 Community Consultation

The proposed development was placed on public exhibition and was notified to adjoining and nearby landowners between 7 September and 30 September 2010 in accordance with Council’s Notification and Exhibition Development Control Plan. During this period, Council received thirteen submissions. The map below illustrates the location of those nearby landowners who made a submission that are in close proximity to the development site.

NOTIFICATION PLAN
• PROPERTIES NOTIFIED	X SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED	PROPERTY SUBJECT OF DEVELOPMENT
1 SUBMISSION RECEIVED OUT OF MAP RANGE

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

· Lack of car parking.

· Unacceptable residential density.

· Negative impact on streetscape and residential character.

· Impact on heritage item.

· Impact on traffic safety.

· Overshadowing and privacy impacts.

· Lack of space for children’s recreation and for clothes drying.

· Building height > 3.6m.

· Unacceptable number of bins for waste collection.

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 Boundary fence

It is considered to be a reasonable request that the applicant be required to construct the boundary fence at nil cost to the neighbouring property owner. A recommended condition of consent has been included in Attachment A.

5.2 Public Agencies

The development application was referred to NSW Transport (Rail Corp) in respect development in the vicinity of the rail corridor.

Rail Corp raised no objection to the proposal subject to a condition for compliance with noise mitigation measures.

6. THE PUBLIC INTEREST

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

CONCLUSION

Consent is sought for demolition of two existing dwelling houses and construction of an affordable housing development comprising eight townhouses.

The proposed affordable housing development complies with the development standards prescribed under the SEPP – Affordable Rental Housing in respect to floor space ratio, car parking, landscaping, deep soil zones, solar access and dwelling size. The proposed townhouses would provide accommodation for low income families and conditions are recommended to ensure the accommodation is managed for this purpose.

The proposed townhouses are designed for energy efficiency and achieve a cost effective quality design standard. The non-discretionary development standards to facilitate the provision of this form of housing result in a shortfall in parking which has implications for the standard of accommodation and internal site amenity. In this regard the provisions of the SEPP – Affordable Rental Housing prevail notwithstanding the concerns raised in public submissions.

The concerns raised in public submissions concerning privacy are considered to have been addressed by the provision of fixed screens and landscaping. It is considered the proposed development would not significantly detract from the residential character of the locality.

The proposed development is therefore recommended for approval subject to recommended conditions.

Rod Pickles

Manager - Assessment Team 2

Planning Division

Scott Phillips

Executive Manager

Planning Division

Attachments:

1.View	Locality Plan
2.View	Demolition Plan
3.View	Survey Plan
4.View	Site Analysis Plan
5.View	Floor Plans
6.View	Elevations
7.View	Perspective Front Elevation
8.View	Sections
9.View	Landscape Plan
10.View	Overland Flow Path

File Reference: DA/1021/2010

Document Number: D01502111

SCHEDULE 1

GENERAL CONDITIONS

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.

1. Approved Plans and Supporting Documentation

*Plan No.*	*Drawn by*	*Dated*
DA 00 - Calculations	GGF Architects	04/11/10
DA 01 – Site Analysis	GGF Architects	04/11/10
DA 02 - Demolition	GGF Architects	27/07/10
DA 03 – Gnd Floor Plan	GGF Architects	04/11/10
DA 04 – 1st Floor Plan	GGF Architects	04/11/10
DA 05 - Elevations	GGF Architects	04/11/10
DA 06 - Elevations	GGF Architects	04/11/10
DA 07 - Sections	GGF Architects	04/11/10
108.10/179 ‘A’	ISCAPE Landscape Architecture	November 2010

2. Removal of Existing Trees

This development consent only permits the removal of tree(s) numbered T1 –T7, T12, T14, T17 and T19 as identified on Drawing No. DA 02 prepared by GGF Architects dated 27/07/10. The removal of any other trees requires separate approval under Council’s Tree Preservation Order.

3. Amendment of Plans

The approved plans are to be amended as follows:

a. Screen fencing 1.2m high is to be erected at the frontage of Unit 7 and Unit 6 to provide screening of the car parking spaces at the frontage of the units.

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

4. Building Code of Australia

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

5. Contract of Insurance (Residential Building Work)

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

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

6. Notification of Home Building Act, 1989 Requirements

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

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

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

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

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

i. The name of the owner-builder.

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

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

7. Water/Electricity Utility Services

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

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

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

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

8. Noise – Rail Corridor

An acoustic assessment is to be submitted to Council prior to the issue of a construction certificate demonstrating how the proposed development will comply with the Department of Planning’s document titled “Development Near Rail Corridors and Busy Roads- Interim Guidelines.

9. Foundation Design

Foundations are to be designed by a Structural Engineer to extend below the level of the Council-controlled drainage system.

10. 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 27 cubic metres, and a maximum discharge (when full) of 40 litres per second.

b. Have a surcharge/inspection grate located directly above the outlet and accessible exterior of the dwellings.

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

d. Where above ground and the average depth is greater than 0.3 metres, a ‘pool type’ safety fence and warning signs to be installed.

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

11. Stormwater Drainage

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

a. Connected to the on-site detention system and then the existing Council piped drainage system, using a full depth 900 mm x 900 mm Council standard junction pit on-line, stepirons and grated pit cover.

b. The existing depression be constructed to contain the 1 in 100 year Average Recurrence Interval storm event as per overland flow design prepared by Acor Appleyard (reference GO100353).

c. Minimum floor levels are to be set at least 500mm above the 100 year design storm level as set out by Acor Appleyard.

d. Fencing in the area affected by the design overland flow shall be constructed as described by Acor Appleyard.

e. Pier and beam method construction adjacent to easements to the depth of the invert of proposed and existing pipes.

Note: A certificate from a chartered civil engineer together with a works as executed design plan must be submitted to the principal certifying authority to demonstrate the satisfaction of this condition.

12. Internal Driveway/Vehicular Areas

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

a. Design levels at the front boundary be obtained from Council.

b. The driveway be a rigid pavement.

c. The driveway grade must not exceed 25 percent and transitions for changes in grade must not exceed 8 percent per plan metre.

d. The driveway pavement be a minimum 3 metres wide, 0.15 metres thick reinforced concrete with F72 steel reinforcing fabric and a 0.15 metre sub-base.

e. The pavement have a kerb to one side and a one-way cross fall with a minimum gradient of 2 percent and a lintel and pit provided at the low points and on grade.

f. Retaining walls required to support the carriageway and the compaction of all fill batters to be in accordance with the requirements of a chartered structural engineer.

g. The provision of safety rails where there is a level difference more than 0.3 metres and a 1:4 batter can not be achieved.

h. Conduit for utility services including electricity, water, gas and telephone be provided.

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

13. Erection of Construction Sign

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

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

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

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

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

14. Erosion and Sediment Control

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

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

15. Dilapidation Report

A ‘Dilapidation Report’ is to be prepared by a chartered engineer detailing the condition of adjoining properties and assets in the public road and submitted to Hornsby Shire Council.

16. Toilet Facilities

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

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

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

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

17. Tree Protection Barriers

Tree protection fencing must be erected around trees numbered 20 to be retained at a 3 metre setback. The tree fencing must be constructed of 1.8 metre ‘cyclone chainmesh fence’ or star pickets spaced at 2 metre intervals, connected by a continuous high-visibility barrier/hazard mesh at a height of 1 metre.

REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION

18. Construction Work Hours

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

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

19. Demolition

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

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

20. Environmental Management

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

21. Council Property

22. Vehicular Crossing

Separate applications under the Local Government Act, 1993 and the Roads Act, 1993 must be submitted to Council for the installation of a new vehicular crossings and the removal of any redundant crossing. The vehicular crossings must be constructed in accordance with Council’s Civil Works Design, 2005 and the following requirements:

a. Any redundant crossings to be replaced with integral kerb and gutter.

b. The footway area to be restored by turfing.

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.

23. Works near Trees

All required tree protection measures are to be maintained in good condition for the duration of the construction period.

All works (including driveways and retaining walls) within 5 metres of any trees required to be retained (whether or not on the subject property, and pursuant to this consent or the Tree Preservation Order), must be carried out under the supervision of an ‘AQF Level 5 Arborist’ and a certificate submitted to the principal certifying authority detailing the method(s) used to preserve the tree(s).

Note: Except as provided above, the applicant is to ensure that no excavation, filling or stockpiling of building materials, parking of vehicles or plant, disposal of cement slurry, waste water or other contaminants is to occur within 4 metres of any tree to be retained.

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

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

24. Sydney Water – s73 Certificate

A s73 Certificate must be obtained from Sydney Water.

25. Damage to Council Assets

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

26. Creation of Easements

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

a. A drainage easement 3 metres wide located centrally over the Council pipeline within the burdened lot in favour of Council and in accordance with the terms set out in Memorandum B5341305V filed with the NSW Department of Lands.

b. A restriction over the pipeline and the flow path for a 100 year average recurrence interval storm. The "Restriction on the Use of Land" over the affected lots is to prohibit the alteration of the final floodway shape and the erection of any structures, including fencing, in the floodway without the written permission of Council. The terms of this restriction must be obtained from Council.

c. A "Restriction on the Use of Land" for any lot adjacent to the floodway, requiring the finished floor level of any habitable room to be not less than 500mm and the garage 300mm above the 100 year average recurrence interval storm level. The levels must be related to Australian Height Datum.

d. 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 lot in favour of Council in accordance with Council’s prescribed wording. The position of the on-site detention system is to be clearly indicated on the title.

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

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

27. Maintain Canopy Cover

To maintain canopy cover, 10 medium to large trees selected from Council’s booklet ‘Indigenous Plants for the Bushland Shire’ are to be planted on the subject site. The planning location shall not be within 4 metres of the foundation walls of a dwelling or in-ground pool. The pot size is to be a minimum 25 litres and the tree(s) must be maintained until they reach the height of 3 metres. Trees must be native to Hornsby Shire and reach a mature height greater than 10 metres.

28. Fulfilment of BASIX Commitments

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

29. Completion of Landscaping

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

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

30. Boundary Fencing

Fencing must be erected along all property boundaries behind the front building alignment to a height of 1.8 metres at nil cost to adjoining owners.

31. Consolidation of Allotments

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

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

32. s94 Infrastructure Contributions

The payment to Council of a contribution of $99,287.35* for 6 additional dwellings towards the cost of infrastructure identified in Council’s Development Contributions Plan 2007-2011.

Note: * The value of contribution is current as at 9 November 2010. The contribution will be adjusted from this date in accordance with the underlying consumer price index for subsequent financial quarters.

It is recommended that you contact Council to ascertain the indexed value of the contribution prior to payment.

33. Restriction as to User – Affordable Rental Housing

To inform current and future owners that the townhouse development on the site is for affordable rental housing, a Restriction as to User must be created under Section 88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919 identifying the following:

(a) The development is for affordable rental housing pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 for a period of 10 years from the date of the issue of the occupation certificate.

(b) The dwellings identified as Units Nos. 2, 3, 5 and 8 on the approved plans must be used for the purpose of affordable housing pursuant to Clause 6 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009.

(c) The dwellings identified as Units Nos. 2, 3, 5 and 8 on the approved plans must be managed by a registered community housing provider as defined in the Housing Act 2001.

Note: The wording of the Restriction as to User must be to Council’s satisfaction and Council must be nominated as the authority to release, vary or modify the Restriction.

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

34. Landscaping Maintenance

All of the approved landscaping for the development must be continually maintained to ensure screening for privacy and the presentation of the development.

- END OF CONDITIONS -

ADVISORY NOTES

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 Requirements

· The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 requires:

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

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

· Mandatory inspections of nominated stages of the construction inspected.

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

Long Service Levy

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

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

Tree Preservation Order

To ensure the maintenance and protection of the existing natural environment, it is an offence to ringbark, cut down, top, lop, remove, wilfully injure or destroy a tree outside 3 metres of the approved building envelope without the prior written consent from Council.

Note: A tree is defined as a single or multi-trunked wood perennial plant having a height of not less than three (3) metres, and which develops many branches, usually from a distance of not less than one (1) metre from the ground, but excluding any plant which, in its particular location, is a noxious plant declared as such pursuant to the Noxious Weeds Act 1993. This definition of ‘tree’ includes any and all types of Palm trees.

All distances are determined under British Standard BS 5837: 2005, “Trees in Relation to Construction – Recommendations”.

Fines may be imposed for non-compliance with Council’s Tree Preservation Order.

Dial Before You Dig

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

Asbestos

www.environment.nsw.gov.au

www.nsw.gov.au/fibro

www.adfa.org.au

www.workcover.nsw.gov.au

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

House Numbering

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

Planning Report No. PLN82/10

Date of Meeting: 1/12/2010

6 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - ERECTION OF A DWELLING HOUSE
2 DAWSON STREET, EPPING

Development Application No:	DA/1258/2010
Description of Proposal:	Demolition and erection of a dwelling-house
Property Description:	Lot 1 DP 28300, No. 2 Dawson Street, Epping
Applicant:	Mr P G Calf
Owner:	Mr P G Calf
Statutory Provisions:	Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan, 1994 Residential A (Low Density)
Estimated Value:	$450,000
Ward:	C

RECOMMENDATION

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. The application proposes the demolition of a dwelling-house and the erection of a dwelling-house and associated works.

2. The proposal meets the objectives of the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan, 1994 (HSLEP) and generally complies with Council’s Dwelling House Development Control Plan (DCP).

3. The application is referred to a Planning Meeting at the request of a Councillor.

4. Six submissions were received during the public exhibition period.

5. It is recommended that the application be approved.

THE SITE

The rectangular-shaped, corner site is located on the northern side of Dawson Street, Epping with a secondary side boundary adjacent to Midson Road and the rear boundary facing Plympton Road. The allotment has an area of 692.4m² with a 10% fall from south to north.

The site contains a post-war, one and two storey dwelling-house facing Dawson Street with an in-ground swimming pool in the rear yard adjacent to the rear (Plympton Road) boundary.

There are no significant trees located on the subject or the neighbouring property that would be affected by the development.

The surrounding residential development is characterised by an eclectic blend of one and two storey dwelling-houses, ranging from modest, post-war design to dwelling-houses of a contemporary appearance, all surrounded by well established trees and landscaped areas.

The site is not within a heritage conservation area or in the vicinity of a heritage-listed item and is not constrained by bushfire, landslip, flooding or threatened species.

THE PROPOSAL

The application proposes the demolition of the dwelling-house and the erection of a one and two storey, split level dwelling-house incorporating a double garage, rumpus room, laundry, and an area to accommodate a 5,000 litre water tank at the lower ground floor level.

The ground floor would incorporate a dining room, living room, kitchen, entry, three bedrooms, a bathroom and a studio laid out in a “U” shaped design to encircle an open plan internal deck under a shade sail.

The upper floor would include a bedroom, walk-in-robe, a study and a bathroom. An area has been set aside for a lift connecting all three levels and photovoltaic cells and solar hot water panels are proposed on the north-facing skillion roof above the first floor level rooms.

A free-standing garden shed with a studio above is proposed adjacent to the north-east corner of the deck facing Midson Road.

The development would be clad in a combination of rendered brickwork, fibre cement cladding with metal deck roofing.

The stormwater from the development would be stored in rainwater tanks with the overflow directed to the street drainage system.

Landscaping works, including retaining walls and boundary fencing are proposed along the eastern and western side boundaries.

The swimming pool in the rear yard would be retained with a shade structure to be erected above the western end of the pool adjacent to the side boundary adjoining No. 4 Dawson Street.

To establish and secure the private open space in the rear yard area adjacent to Plympton Road and Midson Road, a retaining wall is proposed along the northern boundary and sections of the western and eastern side boundaries, topped with a 1.5m high, slatted timber fence. Similar fencing, interspersed with bagged brick panels, is proposed to enclose the front yard area facing Dawson Street and Midson Road.

ASSESSMENT

1. STRATEGIC CONTEXT

1.1 Metropolitan Strategy – (Draft) North Subregional Strategy

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

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

· Housing stock to increase by 11,000 dwellings.

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

2. STATUTORY CONTROLS

2.1 Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan, 1994

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

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

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

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

The use is defined as a “dwelling-house” and is permissible within the Residential A (Low Density) zone pursuant to Clause 7 of the HSLEP. The development is consistent with the zone objectives as detailed in the assessment of the application outlined in this report.

Clause 15 of HSLEP prescribes that the maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of development within the Residential A zone is 0.4:1. The proposal achieves an FSR of 0.4:1 which complies with the development standard contained within Clause 15.

2.2 State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development)

The NSW Government, as part of its ongoing planning reforms released the NSW Housing Code on 27 February 2009.

This Housing Code outlines how residential developments including:

· detached one and two storey dwellings,

· home extensions and

· other ancillary development, such as swimming pools,

can proceed on lots of greater than 450m² in size as complying development with council or accredited certifier approval. Provided that the proposal accords within the development standards contained within the Code, the application must be approved.

The proposed development has been assessed having regard to the NSW Housing Code. The following table sets out the proposal’s compliance with the prescriptive measures of the Code:

NSW Housing Code
Control	Proposal	Requirement	Complies
Floor area	327m²	380m²	Yes
Site cover	33%	50%	Yes
Height	7.9m	8.5m	Yes
Number of storeys	2	2	Yes
Unbroken wall length	N/A	N/A	N/A
Building length	N/A	N/A	N/A
Cut	1.2m	1m	No
Fill	1.35m	1m	No
Setbacks - Front (south) - Rear (north) - Side (east) - Side (west)	10m 10m 1.95m 3m - 1.5m	9.5m 8.5m 1.925m 3m	Yes Yes Yes No
Private Open Space	205m²	25m²	Yes
Landscaping	65%	24%	Yes
Car parking spaces	2	1	Yes
Front boundary fencing	1.8m	1m	No

Whilst the subject allotment falls within land the subject of the SEPP, as noted in the above table, the proposal has minor departures from the Code such that the application does cannot be determined as complying development. However, the development standards under The Code have been taken into consideration in the assessment of the application.

However, with minor amendments to the design of the dwelling-house, the proposal would constitute complying development and a development application would not be required.

2.3 Dwelling House Development Control Plan

The proposed development has been assessed having regard to Council’s Dwelling House DCP. The following table sets out the proposal’s compliance with the prescriptive measures of the Plan:

Dwelling House Development Control Plan
Control	Proposal	Requirement	Compliance
Floor Space Ratio	0.4:1	0.4:1	Yes
Site cover	33%	40%	Yes
Dwelling Height	7.9m	9m	Yes
No. of Storeys	2	2	Yes
Length of Building	21m	24m	Yes
Unbroken Wall Length	14.5m	10m	No
Private Open Space	205m²	120m²	Yes
Landscaping	65%	45%	Yes
Car parking	2 spaces	2 spaces	Yes
Cut and Fill	1.35m	1m	Yes
Solar access to neighbouring properties	4 hrs	4 hrs	Yes
Setbacks: Front - (South) Side - (West) Side - (East) Rear - (North)	10m 1.95m 1.5m 10m	6m 1m 3m 3m	Yes Yes No Yes

As detailed in the above table, the proposed development does not comply with some prescriptive standards within Council’s Housing DCP. The matters of non-compliance are detailed below, as well as a brief discussion on compliance with relevant performance standards under the NSW Housing Code.

2.3.1 Scale

In assessing the environmental capacity of the land, Council’s assessment has had regard to Clause 15 of HSLEP that prescribes a maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of development within the Residential A zone of 0.4:1. The proposal achieves an FSR of 0.4:1 which complies with this development standard.

The development achieves a 33% site cover which also accords with the DCP 40% site coverage requirement.

It is noted that the NSW Housing Code, provides a maximum gross floor area of 380m²for complying development within the low density residential zones of the Shire. The proposal’s 327m² (including the open deck) would comply with the requirements of the Code.

The development would provide accommodation that would not detract from the scale and variety of dwelling-houses in the low density areas of the Shire and is considered acceptable.

2.3.2 Height

The proposal provides a maximum height of 7.9m which complies with the 9m prescriptive measure of the Height element under the DCP.

The development would also satisfy the requirements of the NSW Housing Code which permits dwelling-houses to a maximum height of 8.5m.

In assessing the merits of the application, it is concluded that the proposal would have minimal solar access, privacy and visual impacts on adjacent properties, meets the objectives of the Height element of the DCP and is considered acceptable.

2.3.3 Setbacks

The application proposes a 2.4m setback for the free-standing garden shed/studio to Midson Road and a variable 2.65m to 1.5m setback from the eastern wall of the dwelling-house. These setbacks do not comply with the 3m prescriptive measure of the Setbacks element under the DCP which seeks to provide a transition between a development and other adjoining developments and to establish or maintain an acceptable visual impact on the surrounding streetscape.

Given that the subject property is bounded by Dawson Street, Midson Road and Plympton Road, a secondary building line transition is not applicable in this instance. In assessing the merits of the application in terms of this reduced setback, it is considered that the setbacks of the development from the Midson Road boundary would have minimal visual impacts on the streetscape.

It is noted that the existing two storey dwelling-house on the subject allotment and the two storey dwelling-house at the nearby No. 1 Marinda Avenue are both sited within 3m of the secondary boundary fronting Midson Road and that neither development has a deleterious effect on the surrounding streetscape.

The siting of the development meets the objective of the Setbacks element and is considered acceptable.

2.3.4 Design

The contemporary design of the proposal addresses the environmental and topographical constraints of the site by way of a split level layout and a building height of 7.9m which would be consistent with other dwelling-houses in the area.

A balance between the horizontal and vertical elements, together with openings and variations of roof form and pitch in the eastern and western elevations in particular, would ensure that the development has an acceptable presentation when viewed from any of the street frontages and the adjacent premises, No. 4 Dawson Street.

In addition, the ‘U’ shaped layout of the dwelling-house which encircles the ground floor level deck maximises the northern orientation of the development to support passive solar design principles and maximise the energy efficiency performance of the dwelling-house.

In assessing the design of the proposal, the provisions of the NSW Housing Code have also been considered, as the Code will significantly influence the future appearance of dwelling-houses to be erected within the non heritage areas within Hornsby Shire.

Whilst the design and materials of the proposal would not be consistent with the design and materials of the surrounding development, it is considered that the proposal would be acceptable given it sets a positive precedent for future environmentally responsive development and with a few minor design changes, the dwelling house would be acceptable as complying development under the NSW Housing Code.

2.3.5 Cut and Fill

The application proposes an excavation to a maximum depth of 1.2m which does not comply with the 1m prescriptive measure of the Design element. The purpose of this control is to minimise amenity impacts as a consequence of excavating or filling of the land.

It is considered that given the 10% fall towards the northern side of the site, the 1.2m excavation is acceptable, as it has the effect of lowering the overall height of the dwelling-house and reducing its visual impact on the area.

To establish a level area of private open space it is also proposed to fill the rear yard area adjacent to the Plympton Road boundary up to 1.35m in height. This fill would be retained by a masonry retaining wall along the northern boundary and sections of the western and eastern side boundaries. This would maintain the private open space area at approximately the same level as the existing swimming pool on site, which is to be retained as part of the development.

The architectural plans submitted with the application indicate that the existing land along the eastern (rear) and northern boundaries is currently supported by a batter slope up to 1.5m above the level of the adjacent public footpath. The plans also propose a retaining wall above this sloped batter, topped by a 1.5m high timber slatted boundary fence.

To reduce the visual impact from the combined height of the proposal when viewed from Plympton Road and Midson Road, it is recommended that this batter slope be replaced with a retaining wall in keeping with the retaining wall proposed under this application.

To further reduce the visual impact, it is also recommended that the proposed timber slatted boundary fence be set back a minimum 700mm from the Midson Road and Plympton Road frontages for a distance of 6m from the north-eastern corner of the allotment so as to create a landscaping strip where screening plants could be established.

With these amendments, the proposed land form modifications and retaining walls are considered acceptable.

2.3.6 Privacy

The first floor of the development includes a study which does not comply with the prescriptive measures of the Privacy element of the DCP, which seeks to have living and entertaining areas located on the ground floor only.

In this instance, the window serving the study faces the rear yard only and would not allow a direct line of sight over the private open spaces of adjoining allotments. The remaining first floor level windows serve the bedroom, the walk-in-robe and the bathroom only. The windows located in the western wall serving the living and dining rooms are both highlight windows.

The proposal meets the objectives of the Privacy element and is considered acceptable.

2.3.7 Vehicle Access and Parking

The development provides for a double garage with sufficient space for two motor vehicles in compliance with the prescriptive measures and objectives of the Vehicle Access and Parking element of the DCP. Access to the garage would utilize the existing driveway crossing off Midson Road.

2.3.8 Fencing

The proposed front fence facing Dawson Street, comprising alternating masonry and timber panels 1.5m in height, does not meet the prescriptive measures of the Fencing element which states that “where the street has few or no fences, front fencing should be avoided to maintain an open streetscape appearance and character of the area.”

Front fences in Dawson Street and the surrounding area are predominantly low in height or non-existent.

To address this issue of non-compliance, a condition is recommended requiring the height of the front fence to be reduced to a maximum height of 1.2m.

With this amendment, the proposal meets the objectives of the Fencing element of the DCP and would address the concerns raised by the neighbouring property owners regarding the visual impact of the fence and the loss of sight lines when exiting their driveway.

The proposed (modified) fencing and associated retaining walls are consistent in terms of the height and design of secondary boundary fencing that are typically erected on corner allotments elsewhere in the residential areas of the Shire, would not detract from the streetscape and is considered acceptable.

3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

3.1 Natural Environment

There are four mature Lophostemon Confertus (Brush Box), a Cedrus Deodara, a Pittosphorum Undulatum, a Gordonia axillaris and several Camellia trees that are to be removed from the site.

The removal of these trees is considered acceptable as they are not indigenous species and are not significant.

The concept landscape plan includes plant species that would be appropriate to the development and the locality, including five Turpentine trees (Syncarpia Glomulfera) which are to be planted along the Midson Road nature strip.

3.2 Social and Economic Impacts

There are no anticipated negative social or economic impacts resulting from the proposed development.

4. SITE SUITABILITY

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

The site is not constrained by significant trees, threatened species, acid sulphate soils, soil contamination, watercourses, bushfire, flooding or landslip.

5. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

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

5.1 Community Consultation

The proposed development was placed on public exhibition and was notified to adjoining and nearby landowners between 11 October and 25 October, 2010 in accordance with Council’s Notification and Exhibition Development Control Plan. During this period, Council received five submissions in relation to the proposal. A further submission was received after the notification period.

NOTIFICATION PLAN
• PROPERTIES NOTIFIED	X SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED	PROPERTY SUBJECT OF DEVELOPMENT
Objections have also been received from the owners of No. 20 Dawson Street and No. 257 Midson Road, Epping. Both these properties are located outside the map area.

The submissions have objected to the proposal, generally on the grounds that the development would have unacceptable impacts in terms of scale, design, height, privacy, vehicle access, boundary fencing, use and the removal of trees.

The merits of the matters raised in community submissions have been addressed in the body of the report.

6. THE PUBLIC INTEREST

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

The application is considered to have satisfactorily addressed Council’s 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 two-storey, split-level dwelling house would be in the public interest.

CONCLUSION

The application proposes the erection of a two-storey, split-level dwelling house and associated works in a style that would set a positive precedent in terms of its innovative and environmentally sensitive design.

The proposal meets the relevant requirements of Council’s Dwelling House DCP and with some minor amendments the dwelling-house would be complying development under the NSW Housing Code.

Six submissions were received from neighbouring property owners objecting to the development on planning grounds. Whilst the grounds for objection are valid, it is considered that having regard to the merits of the case, they are not sufficient to warrant Council’s refusal of the application.

Having regard to the assessment of the proposed development and the circumstances of the case, it is recommended that the application be approved.

Simon Evans

Manager - Assessment Team 1

Planning Division

Scott Phillips

Executive Manager

Planning Division

Attachments:

1.View	Locality Plan
2.View	Site Plan
3.View	Demolition Plan
4.View	Floor Plans
5.View	Elevations & Sections
6.View	Shadow Plan
7.View	Sediment & Erosion Plan
8.View	Landscape Plans
9.View	Fencing Plan
10.View	Stormwater Plan

File Reference: DA/1258/2010

Document Number: D01518461

SCHEDULE 1

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

GENERAL CONDITIONS

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.

1. Approved Plans and Supporting Documentation

*Plan No.*	*Drawn by*	*Dated*
GA01(B), GA02(B), GA03(B), GA04(B), GA05(B), GA06(B), GA07(B), GA08(B), GA09(B), GA10(B)	Peter Calf	25/10/2010
L01(B) L02(A) L03(A)	Torin Calf	October 2010
2794 (HSC-01)	David Buckle & Associates	May 2010

2. Amendment of Plans

The development application plans must be amended as follows:

a. To maintain consistency with the low scale front fencing in the area, the front fence forward of the 7.6m Dawson Street building line must not be higher than 1.2m and the fencing along the western side boundary forward of the Dawson Street building line must taper down from 1.8m height at this point to a 1.2m maximum height of the front fence.

b. The proposed garbage enclosure within the front fence must be deleted from the plans as the doors serving the garbage enclosure open into the road reserve and the design would not be in keeping with the streetscape.

c. To reduce the visual impact from the combined height of the batter slope, retaining wall and timber slatted fence along Plympton Road and Midson Road:

(i) the batter slope must be deleted and replaced with a retaining wall in keeping with the retaining wall proposed under this application; and

(ii) the timber slatted boundary fence must be set back a minimum 700mm from the Midson Road and Plympton Road frontages for a distance of 6m from the north-eastern corner of the allotment so as to create a landscaping strip to allow for the establishment of suitable screening plants.

3. Removal of Existing Trees

This development consent only permits the removal of trees numbered T1-T7 as identified on Plan No. GA02(B) prepared by Peter Calf dated 25/10/2010. The removal of any other trees requires separate approval under Council’s Tree Preservation Order.

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

4. Building Code of Australia

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

5. Contract of Insurance (Residential Building Work)

6. Notification of Home Building Act, 1989 Requirements

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

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

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

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

i. The name of the owner-builder.

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

7. Sydney Water – Quick Check

The application must be submitted to a Sydney Water ‘Quick Check Agent’ or ‘Customer Centre’ for approval to determine whether the development will affect any Sydney Water infrastructure, and whether further requirements are to be met.

Note: Refer to www.sydneywater.com.au or telephone 13 20 92 for assistance.

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

8. Erection of Construction Sign

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

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

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

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

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

9. Toilet Facilities

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

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

10. Erosion and Sediment Control

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

REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION

11. Construction Work Hours

All work on site (including demolition and earth works) must only occur between 7am and 5pm Monday to Saturday. No work is to be undertaken on Sundays or public holidays.

12. Demolition

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

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

13. Council Property

14. Survey Report – Finished Floor Level

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

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

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

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

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

15. Fulfilment of BASIX Commitments

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

16. Stormwater Drainage

The stormwater drainage system for the development must be designed and constructed for an average recurrence interval of 20 years and be gravity drained and connected directly to Council’s street drainage system.

17. Internal Driveway/Vehicular Areas

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

a. The driveway must be a rigid pavement; and

b. The driveway grade must not exceed 25 percent and changes in grade must not exceed 8 percent.

18. Damage to Council Assets

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

19. Retaining Walls

All required retaining walls must be constructed as part of the development.

20. Planting of trees

a. To maintain canopy cover, five (5) Syncarpia glomulifera (Turpentine trees) are to be planted on Council's nature strip as indicated on the landscape plan numbered L01(B) prepared by Peter Calf dated August 2010.

b. The pot size is to be a minimum 25 litres.

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

21. Maintenance of Trees

c. The required five (5) Syncarpia glomulifera (Turpentine trees) to be planted on Council's nature strip must be maintained until they reach the height of 3 metres. In the event that the tree dies or is damaged it shall be replaced and maintained.

- END OF CONDITIONS -

ADVISORY NOTES

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 Requirements

· The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 requires:

· 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; and

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

Long Service Levy

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

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

Tree Preservation Order

To ensure the maintenance and protection of the existing natural environment, it is an offence to ringbark, cut down, top, lop, remove, wilfully injure or destroy a tree outside 3m of the approved building envelope without the prior written consent from Council.

All distances are determined under British Standard BS 5837: 2005, “Trees in Relation to Construction – Recommendations”.

Fines may be imposed for non-compliance with Council’s Tree Preservation Order.

Dial Before You Dig

Asbestos Warning

www.environment.nsw.gov.au

www.nsw.gov.au/fibro

www.adfa.org.au

www.workcover.nsw.gov.au

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

Planning Report No. PLN83/10

Date of Meeting: 1/12/2010

7 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - SUBDIVISION - TWO LOTS INTO FOUR
11A AND 15 MALTON ROAD BEECROFT

Development Application No:	DA/521/2010
Description of Proposal:	Torrens Title Subdivision of Two Allotments into Four Allotments and the Demolition of an Existing Dwelling and Garage
Property Description:	Lot 5 DP 4551 and Lot 6 DP 4551, Nos. 11A and 15 Malton Road Beecroft
Applicant:	PS Graham and Associates
Owner:	Mr Phillip Anthony Titterton Mrs Anne Titterton
Statutory Provisions:	Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 Residential AS (Low Density - Sensitive Lands) Zone
Estimated Value:	Not relevant
Ward:	C

RECOMMENDATION

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. The application proposes the Torrens title subdivision of two allotments into four allotments and the demolition of an existing dwelling.

2. The proposal has not received integrated development approval from the NSW Rural Fire Service as the proposal adjoins a bushland reserve, which is considered to be a significant and continuous fire hazard. As a consequence, Council is not able to grant development consent to the application.

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

5. It is recommended that the application be refused.

HISTORY OF THE SITE

There are no previous applications relevant to the proposal.

THE SITE

The site comprises two allotments with a combined area of 5438 sq. metres. The site is located on the northern side of Malton Road and experiences a variable fall to the rear, north boundary. There is an average fall of 7% for the southern half of the site and 33% for the northern half of the site.

A significant group of trees (Group A) is located at the front of 11A Malton Road which is a part of the Blue Gum Shale Forest, an endangered ecologically community. Another significant group of trees (Group B) comprising a densely populated Blackbutt Gully Forest (which is not an endangered ecological community) occupies the northern half of the site and continues to extend to the north and northwest. The rear of the site contains a natural watercourse which facilitates water flows from the upper catchment via a natural drainage gully and bushland to Byles Creek located less than 100 metres away.

The site has direct frontage to Malton Road. The current improvements on the site include two existing single storey brick dwelling houses with tiled roofs, which are sited on the two allotments. The gross floor areas of the existing dwellings are 150 square metres (No. 11A Malton Road) and 265 square metres (No. 15 Malton Road).

Residential properties exist to the south, east and south west of the site. A public bushland reserve is located to the north west of the site.

The site is located within the Beecroft/Cheltenham Heritage Conservation Area and is adjacent to heritage listed items to the east, west and south.

THE PROPOSAL

The proposal involves the Torrens title subdivision of two allotments into four allotments and the demolition of an existing dwelling and garage.

Details of each allotment are as follows:

· Proposed Lot 1

The area of proposed lot 1 is 830 square metres and has a gentle fall of 7% to the rear of the lot. A Blue Gum Shale Forest (Significant Group A), which is an endangered ecological community, is located on the street frontage. None of these trees are proposed to be removed.

An existing dwelling and detached garage occupies this site, which are proposed to be demolished. The lot has direct frontage to Malton Road. A future dwelling could be accessed via Malton Road or via a 4 metre wide right of way (ROW) which is proposed to be centrally located between proposed lots 1 and 4. This right of carriageway would be shared by proposed lots 1, 2 and 3. A building envelope of 200 square metres is proposed on the southern half of the lot with two parking spaces allocated on the south eastern corner of the dwelling.

· Proposed Lot 2

The area of proposed lot 2 is 1609 square metres and has a steep fall of 33% to the rear of the lot. This allotment is dominated by a densely populated Blackbutt Gully Forest (Significant Group B), which is not considered an endangered ecological community. A watercourse traverses the site at the rear of the allotment. Access is proposed via a ROW shared by lots 1, 2 and 3. A building envelope of 200 square metres is proposed on the southern half of the lot with two parking spaces allocated on the southern side of the building.

· Proposed Lot 3

The area of proposed lot 3 is 1597 square metres and has a steep fall of 33% to the rear of the lot. As with proposed lot 2, this allotment is dominated by a densely populated Blackbutt Gully Forest (Significant Group B). The watercourse also traverses the site at the rear of the allotment. Access is proposed via a right of way shared by lots 1, 2 and 3. A building envelope of 200 sq. metres is proposed on the southern half of the lot, with two parking spaces allocated on the south eastern corner of the building.

· Proposed Lot 4

The area of proposed lot 4 is 1082 square metres and has a gentle fall of 7% to the rear of the lot. No significant trees exist on this proposed lot. Direct access is provided to Malton Road from this lot. The lot accommodates an existing dwelling and a swimming pool which are proposed to be retained.

ASSESSMENT

1. STRATEGIC CONTEXT

1.1 Metropolitan Strategy – (Draft) North Subregional Strategy

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

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

· Housing stock to increase by 11,000 dwellings.

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

2. STATUTORY CONTROLS

2.1 Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994

The subject land is zoned Residential AS (Low Density – Sensitive Lands) under the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 (HSLEP). The objectives of the zone are:

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

(b) to promote a variety of housing types and other land uses compatible with a low density residential environment and sensitive to the land capability and established character of this environment.

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

The proposed development is defined as ‘demolition’ and ‘subdivision’ under the HSLEP and is permissible in the zone with Council’s consent. Notwithstanding, the proposed development fails to comply with Residential AS (Low Density – Sensitive Lands) Zone objective (c) as the proposal fails to demonstrate “environmental capacity” given the fire risk.

Clause 14 of the HSLEP prescribes that the minimum required of an allotment within the Residential AS zone is 600 square metres. The proposed subdivision complies with this requirement as proposed Lot 1 is 830 sq. metres, proposed lot 2 is 1609 sq. metres, proposed lot 3 is 1597 sq. metres and proposed Lot 4 is 1087 sq. metres.

Clause 15 of the HSLEP prescribes that the maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of development within the Residential AS (Low Density - Sensitive Lands) zone is 0.4:1. The proposed subdivision complies with this requirement as proposed Lot 4 (containing the existing dwelling to be retained) would have a FSR of 0.25:1.

Clause 18 of the HSLEP sets out heritage conservation provisions. The site is within the Beecroft /Cheltenham Heritage Conservation Area. The site adjoins heritage listed items and is in the vicinity of a number of additional heritage listed items. Adjoining and surrounding heritage listed items include: Kunaware & garden at No. 11 Malton Road, “Eureka” at No. 17 Malton Road, “Linwood” at No. 12 Malton Road and “Mindaribba” at No. 14-18 Malton Road. These sites are listed as items of Local Significance under the provisions of Schedule D (Heritage Items) of HSLEP. Other items of Local Significance listed within the vicinity of the site include “Loonycarn” at No. 27, “Notrella” at No. 31 and Nos. 2, 5, 28 Malton Road.

The application includes a heritage statement which indicates that the proposal would not have a detrimental impact to the Beecroft/Cheltenham Heritage Conservation Area and surrounding heritage listed items as the application would not result in any changes to the streetscape. The report notes that an existing Blue Gum Shale Forest (Significant group A) occupies the street frontage at proposed lot 1. It is suggested that any future dwelling on this site would be screened by these trees and would therefore have minimal impact on the streetscape.

It is considered that the proposed development would have an acceptable impact on the items of local heritage significance adjoining and nearby the subject site.

2.2 Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

The application has been assessed against the requirements of the Plan which includes planning principles applicable to the site within the upper part of the harbour catchment. The principles incorporate measures to protect water quality, minimise urban runoff, to conserve water and to ensure the catchment watercourses, wetland, riparian lands and remnant vegetation are protected.

Subject to the implementation of erosion and sediment control measures, a stormwater infiltration system, a riparian buffer zone and conditions pertaining to General Terms of Approval by the NSW Office of Water, the proposed subdivision would not adversely impact on the catchment or water quality.

2.3 Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995

The Beecroft area provides habitat for Gang Gang Cockatoos listed as an endangered population under Schedule 1 of the Threatened Species Conservation Act. The northern half of the site includes Blackbutt Gully Forest which is a potential habitat for the endangered population.

The application includes a Flora and Fauna Report prepared by ecologist Dr Stephen Ambrose, who carried out an assessment of the site pursuant to Clause 5A of the (EPA), 1979. The report determined the proposal would not be likely to have a significant effect on the life cycle of Gang Gang Cockatoos. An assessment of the environmental impact of the development is held at Section 3.1 of this report.

2.4 Residential Subdivision Development Control Plan

The proposed development has been assessed having regard to the relevant performance and prescriptive design standards within Council’s Residential Subdivision Development Control Plan. The following table sets out the proposal’s compliance with the prescriptive standards of the Plan:

Residential Subdivision Development Control Plan
Control	Proposal	Requirement	Compliance
Density
Site Area	5438m²	2400 m²	Yes
Minimum allotment size	Lot 1- 830m² Lot 2 - 1609m² Lot 3 - 1597m² Lot 4 - 1082m²	600m² 600m² 600m² 600m²	Yes Yes Yes Yes
Minimum allotment size with gradient	Lots 1 and 4 = 7% Lots 2 and 3 = 33%	600m² 725m²	Yes Yes

Existing Dwelling
Gross Floor Area	Lot 4 - 265m²	<432m²	Yes
Floor space ratio	0.25:1	0.4:1	Yes
Site cover	27%	40%	Yes
Private open space	450m²	120m²	Yes
Setbacks (Lot 4)
Front (Malton Street)	10m	7.6m	Yes
Side (eastern)	4m	1m	Yes
Side (western)	1.5m	1m	Yes
Rear (swimming pool)	2m	3m	No
Landscaping
Landscaped area	<45%	45%	Yes
Car Parking
No. of spaces	2 spaces	2 spaces	Yes
Driveway gradient	Complies with design template	Complies with design template	Yes
Accessway	4m	4m	Yes
Turning Area	Complies with design template	Complies with design template	Yes

As detailed in the above table, the proposed development generally complies with the prescriptive standards within Council’s Subdivision DCP. The matters of non-compliance are detailed below, as well as a brief discussion on compliance with relevant performance standards.

2.4.1 Density

The proposed lots comply with the minimum lot area requirement based on the topography of the land.

2.4.2 Allotment Layout and Design

Proposed lot 1 contains a significant group of trees (Group A) at the street frontage and tree numbered 16 located at the rear of the allotment. These trees have been assessed as worthy of retention. The proposed indicative building envelope is designed to retain these trees.

Proposed lot 2 has a steep fall of 33% to the rear. A watercourse traverses the site. The lot is adjacent to a Council bushland reserve on Garret Road (Lot 40 DP 596659) which has been identified by the NSW Rural Fire Service as containing vegetation that is a significant and continuous fire hazard. More than half of the allotment is populated with a significant group of trees (Group B). These trees are located in Blackbutt Gully Forest which is contiguous to the adjoining bushland reserve. Whilst the proposed allotment complies with the minimum allotment size, the application does not provide adequate information to make an informed assessment of the total unrestricted building development area. Restrictions such as setbacks from the significant group of trees (Group B) have not been identified in the application.

Proposed lot 3 also has a steep fall of 33% to the rear. The lot contains a significant group of trees (Group B) and part of the water course traverses the site. It is considered that a single storey dwelling house could be located generally within the proposed indicative building envelope in a manner that would retain the significant group of trees and comply with Council’s design criteria for private open space and residential amenity.

Proposed lot 4 satisfies the minimum required size to accommodate the existing dwelling house and swimming pool. There is a non-compliance with the rear setback of the swimming pool which is addressed in Section 2.4.3.

2.4.3 Setbacks

The existing swimming pool within proposed lot 4 is setback 2 metres from the rear property boundary which does not comply with the 3 metre requirement within the Residential Subdivision DCP. Notwithstanding, the indicative building envelope on the adjoining allotment to the north (proposed lot 3) proposes a 6 metre front setback from the right of carriageway, resulting in a separation distance of 13 metre from the existing swimming pool. This provides the opportunity for landscaping and ensures the privacy and amenity to future dwellings. The non-compliance is minor and is considered acceptable.

2.4.4 Bush Fire Hazard

This matter is addressed in Section 4.1 of this report.

2.4.5 Private Open Space

The existing dwelling on proposed lot 4 includes a north facing open space of 450 sq. metres which is well above the minimal requirement.

Proposed lot 1 includes a large area of north facing private open space located at the rear. The area is subject to restriction to retain Tree No. 16 which has been assessed as worthy of preservation. Given the relatively large lot area, design for private open space is considered to be a matter that could be satisfactorily addressed in an application for a future dwelling house.

Proposed lot 2 has a steep fall to the rear with an average of 33%. The application does not provide adequate information to make an informed assessment of the total unrestricted building development area, including the private open space area in relation to the large population of a significant group of trees (Group B) and the provision of adequate Asset Protection Zones from the adjoining significant and continuous fire hazard known as No. 8 Garrett Road. Notwithstanding, having regard to the size and orientation of the lot, it is considered that sufficient private open space would be able to be achieved on this lot.

Proposed lot 3 also has a steep fall with an average grade of 33%. As with proposed lot 2, the application does not provide adequate information of the total unrestricted building development area, including the private open space area. Notwithstanding, the allotment is approximately 22m from the fire hazard and is capable of being designed to achieve adequate Asset Protection Zones. The design of private open space is considered to be achievable and is a matter to be addressed in application for a future dwelling house.

2.4.6 Accessway Design

The proposed accessway and right of carriageway is 4m wide and is centrally located between proposed lots 1 and 4. The right of carriageway is proposed to benefit lots 1, 2 and 3. The design complies with accessway design criteria.

The proposed accessway is located on the southern half of the site, which in that area has a natural gradient of 7%. Adequate space is available for screening of the accessway from residents.

Subject to recommended conditions, the proposal would comply with the Accessway Design objective of the Residential Subdivision DCP.

2.4.7 Drainage Control

The site contains a natural watercourse which facilitates water flows from the upper catchment via a sandstone lined drainage gully and bushland to Byles Creek located less than 100m away. A stormwater infiltration tank and a riparian buffer zone are proposed to control the impacts of stormwater discharge flows into the watercourse. This is considered satisfactory, subject to recommended conditions.

2.5 Byles Creek Development Control Plan

The development’s compliance with the relevant requirements of the Byles Creek DCP is addressed in Section 3.1.2 of this report.

2.6 Heritage Development Control Plan

The development’s compliance with the relevant requirements of the Heritage DCP is addressed in section 2.1 of this report.

2.7 Car Parking Development Control Plan

Proposed lot 4 incorporates two existing parking spaces on the eastern side of the dwelling. Proposed lots 1, 2 and 3 all indicate the provision of two carparking spaces on the respective building envelopes, which comply with the parking requirements under Council’s Car Parking Development Control Plan.

2.8 Section 94 Contributions Plan

Council’s Section 94 Contributions Plan applies to the development as two additional allotments are proposed. This requirement could be addressed with a condition of consent should Council be in a position to approve the application.

3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

3.1 Natural Environment

3.1.1 Flora & Fauna

The applicant submitted a Flora and Fauna Assessment in support of the proposed subdivision which included a 7 part test of significance for the endangered population of Gang-Gang Cockatoos and other threatened species that may occur on the site. The report determined the proposal would not have a significant impact on the life cycle of Gang Gang Cockatoos.

Council’s assessment of the proposal included a detailed examination of the existing trees on site. Two groups of significant trees have been identified on site including a Blue Gum Shale Forest (Group A), an endangered ecological community which is located at the front of proposed lot 1 and a Blackbutt Gully Forest (Group B) located at the Garrett Road side of the property. Group B forms part of a contiguous vegetation that extends to the north and northwest of the site.

The proposed development would necessitate the removal of 26 trees from the site. None of these trees to be removed are identified to be ‘significant trees’ under Council’s Assessment Sheet 3 – Assessment of Significant Groups of Trees. Council officers have assessed two trees (numbered 16 and 17) as worthy of preservation and design of infrastructure should consider the retention of these trees. Tree number 16 is located at the rear of the private open space in proposed lot 1 and is not proposed to be removed. Tree number 17 is located on the north western corner of proposed lot 4 with the trunk abutting the western boundary and right of carriageway serving proposed lots 1, 2 and 3. Retention of the trees could be addressed with a condition of consent should Council be in a position to approve the application.

Despite the above, a large proportion of Blackbutt Gully Forest (Significant Group B) on proposed lot 2 would be required to be removed to achieve appropriate Asset Protection Zones from the public bushland reserve considered to be a ‘significant and continuous’ fire hazard. The removal of these trees would result in a significant environmental impact. The 7 part test submitted in support of the application does not envisage this outcome and therefore does not assess the associated impact. It is considered that the loss of this vegetation is not acceptable and this constitutes the major deficiency of the application.

3.1.2 Watercourse

The site contains a natural watercourse which facilitates water flows from the upper catchment via a sandstone lined drainage gully and bushland to Byles Creek located less than 100m away. Any development approved on this site would increase the stormwater discharge flows into the watercourse. The application proposes a stormwater infiltration tank and a riparian buffer zone to control the impacts of this excess runoff. This is considered satisfactory, subject to recommended conditions.

3.2 Built Environment

The proposed development retains the existing dwelling and vehicular crossing at No. 15 Malton Road Beecroft. The existing significant trees located along the front of proposed lot 1 would ensure minimal visual impacts associated with the new development. The impact of the future dwellings on the built environment would be considered to be a matter to be addressed in future applications.

3.3 Social Impacts

The proposal would not result in a detrimental social impact.

3.4 Economic Impacts

4. SITE SUITABILITY

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

4.1 Bushfire Risk

The land is identified as being subject to bushfire risk in that the site is within a bushfire prone area and adjoins a bushland reserve which has been identified by the NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) as a ‘significant and continuous’ fire hazard as it contains continuous remnant bushland within the site and north/north western adjoining properties.

Pursuant to Section 91 of the Act, the application requires the concurrence of the RFS. Authorisation is required under section 100B of the Rural Fires Act 1997 in respect of bush fire safety of subdivision of land that could lawfully be used for residential purposes. The application was referred to the RFS for comment and the following comments have been received:

“The Service is not in a position to properly assess the application submitted by the Council of the Shire of Hornsby on the basis of the information provided. The service does not agree with the assessment of the vegetation in the additional report by Australian Bushfire Protection Planners Pty Ltd dated 16 August 2010 reference no. B101331”.

The additional report by Australian Bushfire Protection Planners Pty Ltd claims that adjoining bushland reserve (Lot 40 DP 596659) is only a “low level fire hazard”.

In response, the RFS deemed that the application “does not successfully demonstrate how the proposed building footprints and appropriate asset protection zones required for ‘Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006’ for forest vegetation can be achieved within the proposed subdivision in relation to the hazard to the northwest”. This is particularly relevant to proposed lot 2 which is directly adjacent to the significant and continuous fire hazard known as Lot 40 DP 596659 as the allotment proposes an indicative building envelope that is setback only 3m from the fire hazard.

The proposal does not provide for separation between dwellings and potential bush fire fronts, and does not minimise the risk to life, property and the environment from bushfires. Consequently the application cannot be supported in its current form.

5. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

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

5.1 Community Consultation

The proposed development was placed on public exhibition and was notified to adjoining and nearby landowners between 19 May 2010 and 9 June 2010 in accordance with Council’s Notification and Exhibition Development Control Plan. During this period, Council received two submissions. The map below illustrates the location of the nearby landowner who made a submission who is in close proximity to the development site.

NOTIFICATION PLAN
• PROPERTIES NOTIFIED	X SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED	PROPERTY SUBJECT OF DEVELOPMENT
1 SUBMISSION RECEIVED OUT OF MAP RANGE

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

· Unacceptable loss of privacy resulting from the demolition of an existing western brick boundary wall which is ancillary to the dwelling house proposed to be demolished.

· Whether Council would enforce the building envelopes shown on subdivision plan.

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 Privacy

The proposal is for the demolition of an existing dwelling and detached garage on proposed lot 1 and the Torrens title subdivision of two allotments into four. In this regard, the application only indicates the subdivision layout and indicative building envelopes. Should Council be in a position to approve the application, a requirement of fencing to be erected along all existing property boundaries behind the front building alignment to a height of 1.8m could be addressed as a condition of consent. A boundary fence exceeding 1.8m high is not considered to be exempt development under Council’s Exempt and Complying Development DCP. In addition, the provisions of the Diving Fences Act, 1991 would apply.

5.1.2 Building Envelopes

Building envelopes on a plan of subdivision are indicative and would not form part of the development consent. Should Council be in a position to approve the application appropriate conditions would be recommended to ensure that the future location of dwellings on the proposed lots would located in such a manner to comply with identified building constraints including setbacks to boundaries, trees, watercourses and bushland.

5.2 Public Agencies

The development application is Integrated Development under the Act. Accordingly, the application was referred to the following Agencies for comment:

5.2.1 Rural Fire Service

The comments of the RFS are addressed in section 4.1 of this report. As the development application is Integrated Development under the Act, Council does not have the authority to approve the proposal without consent from the RFS.

5.2.2 NSW Office of Water

This application was referred to the NSW Office of Water as the site is within 40m of a ‘prescribed stream’. The NSW Office of Water raised no objection to the proposal, subject to adherence to General Terms of Approval.

6. THE PUBLIC INTEREST

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

The application is considered to have not satisfactorily addressed Council’s and all relevant agencies’ criteria and would provide a development outcome that, on balance, would result in a negative impact for the community and would not be in the public interest.

CONCLUSION

This application seeks consent for the Torrens title subdivision of two allotments into four and the demolition of a dwelling house and garage.

The site is relatively large, has a steep fall to the rear and includes two groups of significant trees identified as Blue Gum Shale Forest (Group A) at the street frontage and Blackbutt Gully Forest (Group B) on the northern half of the site. An unformed Council owned bushland reserve known as Lot 40 DP 596659, No. 8 Garrett Road has been identified by the RFS as a significant and continuous fire hazard. The RFS does not support the proposal as the application does not successfully demonstrate how the proposed building footprints and appropriate asset protection zones required for ‘Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006’ for forest vegetation can be achieved within the proposed subdivision in relation to the hazard to the northwest. As the RFS is a ‘concurrence’ authority, Council is not able to approve the development application in light of the RFS’s non-concurrence.

The application does not provide adequate information to make an informed assessment of the total unrestricted building development area, including private open space areas for proposed lot 2. In particular, the proximity to the fire hazard known as Lot 40 DP 596659 No. 8 Garrett Road” does not allow for the provision of Asset Protection Zones within the site and cannot therefore be supported.

The application is recommended for refusal.

Rod Pickles

Manager - Assessment Team 2

Planning Division

Paul David

Manager - Subdivision & Development Engineering Services

Planning Division

Scott Phillips

Executive Manager

Planning Division

Attachments:

1.View	Locality Plan
2.View	Subdivision Plan
3.View	Rural Fire Service Comments
4.View	Drainage Concept Plan
5.	Tree Locations Plan

File Reference: DA/521/2010

Document Number: D01520561

SCHEDULE 1

1. Pursuant to Section 79C(1)(a)(iii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the proposal does not comply with objective (c) of the Residential AS (Low Density-Sensitive Lands) zone of the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 in that it is not within the environmental capacity of the site.

2. Pursuant to Section 79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the proposed development would result in an unacceptable environmental impact due to the need to remove significant vegetation to provide an Asset Protection Zone.

3. Pursuant to Section 79C(1)(c) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, the proposal is unsatisfactory as the site is not suitable for proposed development due to bushfire hazard.

4. Pursuant to Section 79C(1)(e) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the proposal would set an undesirable precedent for similar inappropriate development and is therefore not in the public interest.

5. Pursuant to Section 91A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the development application is ‘Integrated Development’ and has not received the General Terms of Approval of the NSW Rural Fire Service for the issue of a Bushfire Safety Authority under Section 100B of the Rural Fires Act 1997.

- END OF REASONS FOR REFUSAL -

Planning Report No. PLN88/10

Date of Meeting: 1/12/2010

8 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - ERECTION OF A DWELLING-HOUSE
40A BEECROFT ROAD, BEECROFT

Development Application No:	DA/1141/2010
Description of Proposal:	Erection of a dwelling-house
Property Description:	Proposed Lot 101 in Lot 3 DP 407029, No. 40A Beecroft Road , Beecroft
Applicant:	Cosmopolitan Living
Owners:	Mr F and Mrs E M Merhi and Mr M Merhi and Ms G Merhi
Statutory Provisions:	Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan, 1994 Residential AS (Low Density-Sensitive Lands)
Estimated Value:	$400,000
Ward:	C

RECOMMENDATION

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. The application proposes the erection of a dwelling-house on a battle-axe allotment which is yet to be registered with the NSW Land and Property Management Authority.

2. The proposal meets the objectives of the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan, 1994 (HSLEP) and generally complies with Council’s Dwelling House Development Control Plan (DCP).

3. The application is being referred to Council for determination at a Councillor’s request.

4. One submission has been received during the public exhibition period.

5. It is recommended that the application be approved.

HISTORY OF THE SITE

Council, at its Planning Meeting on 20 February 2008, approved DA/516/2007 for a four lot subdivision of the subject property.

On 18 October 2010, a modification to the subdivision was approved under DA/516/2007/A, deleting condition No. 33 as it related to foundation design and altering the sizes of the four allotments.

THE SITE

The battle-axe allotment has an area of 1,871.2m² (including the area of the right-of-carriageway) and a 12% fall from the south-east to north-west towards a retaining wall which runs diagonally across the allotment. The area to the east of this retaining wall has been designated as a ‘Restricted Development Area’ for the conservation of native vegetation.

The site contains 41 trees consisting largely of Eucalyptus saligna (Sydney Blue Gum) and Eucalyptus pilularis (Blackbutt). The site is currently being rehabilitated in accordance with the conditions of Development Consent No. 516/2007 for the subdivision of the existing lot. These rehabilitation works include the removal of the dead trees, the trees accessed as being in poor health as well as the 52 species of exotic and noxious weeds that were spread across the site. A review of the site by Council officers in September 2010 established that following the primary weeding, a total of 1140 plants were planted into the remnant Blue Gum High Forest area together with an additional 100 translocated plants.

Vehicular access to the site is via a battle axe handle fronting Beecroft Road. The existing allotment also has legal access to Lloyd Wright Way. The surrounding residential development is characterised by an eclectic blend of one and two storey dwelling-houses, ranging from modest, post-war design to dwelling-houses of a more contemporary appearance, each surrounded by well established trees and landscaped gardens.

The property is located within the Beecroft/Cheltenham Heritage Conservation Area listed under the provisions of Schedule E (Heritage Conservation Areas) of the HSLEP 1994. The property is also located within the vicinity of No. 44 Beecroft Road, which is listed as a heritage item (garden) of local significance under the provisions of Schedule D (Heritage Items) of the HSLEP 1994.

THE PROPOSAL

The application proposes the erection of a two storey dwelling-house incorporating a double garage, front porch, terrace, entry, family/dining room, kitchen, games room, laundry, bathroom, and an adjoining patio area on the ground floor. Four bedrooms, an ensuite, a walk-in-robe, bathroom, gallery, “IT nook”, “MPR” (multi-purpose room) and 2 balconies would be located at the first floor level.

The building is to be finished in rendered brickwork with solar panels and photovoltaic cells resting on a tiled roof.

The dwelling-house would be set back 7.9m from the northern boundary, 16.3m from the southern side boundary, 3m from the rear (eastern) side boundary and 1.25m from the existing retaining wall and the ‘Restricted Development Area’.

The proposal does not require the removal of any trees or other significant vegetation.

ASSESSMENT

The development application has been assessed having regard to the ‘2005 City of Cities Metropolitan Strategy’, the ‘North Subregion (Draft) Subregional Strategy’ and the matters for consideration prescribed under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 (the Act). Subsequently, the following issues have been identified for further consideration.

1. STRATEGIC CONTEXT

1.1 Metropolitan Strategy – (Draft) North Subregional Strategy

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

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

· Housing stock to increase by 11,000 dwellings.

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

2. STATUTORY CONTROLS

2.1 Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994

The subject land is zoned Residential AS (Low Density-Sensitive Lands) under the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 (HSLEP). The objectives of the zone zone are:

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

(b) to promote a variety of housing types and other land uses compatible with a low density residential environment and sensitive to the land capability and established character of this environment.

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

The use is defined as a “dwelling-house” and is permissible within the zone pursuant to Clause 7 of the HSLEP. The development is consistent with the zone objectives as evidenced by the assessment of the application detailed in this report.

Clause 15 of HSLEP prescribes that the maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of development within the Residential AS (Low Density-Sensitive Lands) zone is 0.4:1. The proposal achieves an FSR of 0.19:1 which complies with the development standard contained within Clause 15.

Clause 18 of the HSLEP sets out heritage conservation provisions within Hornsby Shire. This issue is discussed in Section 2.3 of this report.

2.2 Dwelling House Development Control Plan

The proposed development has been assessed having regard to Council’s Dwelling House DCP. The following table sets out the proposal’s compliance with the prescriptive measures of the Plan:

Dwelling House Development Control Plan
Control	Proposal	Requirement	Compliance
Floor Space Ratio	0.19:1	0.4:1	Yes
Site cover	11%	40%	Yes
Dwelling Height	8m	9m	Yes
No. of Storeys	2	1	No
Length of Building	21m	24m	Yes
Unbroken Wall Length	11.4m	10m	No
Private Open Space	140m²	120m²	Yes
Landscaping	68%	45%	Yes
Car parking	2 spaces	2 spaces	Yes
Cut and Fill	1m	1m	Yes
Solar access to neighbouring properties	4 hrs	4 hrs	Yes
Setbacks: Front - (West) Side - (North) Side - (South) Rear - (East)	18m 7.9m 16.3m 3m	6m 1m 1m 3m	Yes Yes Yes Yes

As detailed in the above table, the proposed development generally complies with the prescriptive elements of Council’s Dwelling House DCP. The matters of non-compliance are addressed as follows:

2.2.1 Design

The contemporary style of the proposal is consistent with the evolving form of development in the locality in terms of height, scale, size and the materials that would be used. Being on a battle-axe handle allotment the dwelling would not have a ‘street’ presence. Therefore, streetscape impacts are not applicable.

The architectural form of the proposal, the placement of windows and variations in roof form would ensure that the dwelling-house avoids a monotonous or symmetrical appearance when viewed from adjoining properties.

The proposal meets the objectives of the Design element and is considered acceptable.

2.2.2 Privacy

The first floor of the dwelling-house includes an “MPR” (multi-purpose room) with an adjoining balcony together with a second balcony accessed from the “M bedroom”. This multi-purpose room and the balconies do not comply with the prescriptive measures of the Privacy element, which requires active use living rooms and areas to be located at ground floor level, to minimise overlooking of the recreational and living areas of neighbouring properties.

In this instance, the multi-purpose room and the balconies are all oriented towards the front, north-eastern corner of the site, facing the driveway turning area and the right-of-carriageway which serves the property. In addition, the siting of the dwelling-house 7.9m from the nearest (northern) side boundary ensures that there would be minimal impacts on the amenity of the private open space of the adjacent premises, No. 38A Beecroft Road.

The proposal meets the objectives of the Privacy element and is considered acceptable.

2.2.3 Height

The proposal to erect a two storey high dwelling-house on a battle-axe allotment does not comply with the prescriptive measures of the Height element which states that “dwelling-houses on battle axe allotments should not exceed single storey in height”. The purpose of this control is to ensure that buildings are designed and located so that they do not cause unacceptable amenity impacts on neighbouring properties.

In this instance, the 8m height of the proposal complies with the 9m prescriptive measure and its design and siting on the allotment ensures that the proposal would allow for reasonable solar access and privacy to the neighbour properties.

The proposal meets the objectives of the Height element and is considered acceptable.

2.3 Heritage Development Control Plan

Clause 18 of the HSLEP sets out heritage conservation provisions within Hornsby Shire. The property is located within the Beecroft/Cheltenham Heritage Conservation Area listed under the provisions of Schedule E (Heritage Conservation Areas) of the HSLEP 1994. The property is also located within the vicinity of property No. 44 Beecroft Road, Beecroft which is listed as a heritage item (garden) of local significance under the provisions of Schedule D (Heritage Items) of the HSLEP 1994.

The objective of the Heritage element of the Dwelling House DCP requires “the retention of heritage items and conservation of the heritage values in heritage conservation areas to provide continuity with the past”.

It is considered that the proposed development would not impact on the heritage values of the area or the Beecroft Road streetscape. The contemporary appearance of the building is consistent with similar structures that have been erected in the area and, as the development is located on a battle-axe allotment and is effectively screened by the dwelling-houses at No.s 40, 42 and 44 Beecroft Road, the proposal would not be visible from the street.

The proposal meets the objectives of the Heritage DCP and is considered acceptable.

3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

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

3.1 Natural Environment

3.1.1 Flora and Fauna Protection

A portion of the subject site forms part of the Blue Gum High Forest Critically Endangered Ecological Community listed under the Threatened Species Conservation Act, 1995 and the Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act, 1999.

As previously noted, the subject allotment was approved as part of a four lot subdivision of 40A Beecroft Road under DA/516/2007. During the assessment of the subdivision application, consideration was given to the flora and fauna assessment report which accompanied that application.

That report concluded that the subdivision could proceed subject to the area of the site containing examples of Blue Gum High Forest trees being preserved, the rehabilitation of the area in accordance with the accompanying landscape management plan and the creation of a positive covenant on the title of the land to protect this environmentally sensitive area in perpetuity.

It is noted that the area of Blue Gum High Forest on the subject site has recently been rehabilitated and that vegetation regeneration requirements have been satisfactorily complied with in accordance with the conditions of subdivision consent.

To ensure that the environmental qualities of this environmentally sensitive area are maintained, specific conditions are recommended in that consent.

At the time Council’s Heritage Committee raised no objections to the proposed subdivision on heritage grounds in relation to the trees on the site in particular. The Committee noted that the subdivided allotments would be of a sufficient size to accommodate suitable dwelling-houses, at the same time retaining the significant trees which contribute to character of the surrounding heritage conservation area.

As the proposed development does not require the removal of any vegetation and stands clear of the restricted zone, the proposal meets the objectives of the Flora and Fauna Protection element of Council’s DCP and is considered acceptable.

3.2 Built Environment

The proposed dwelling-house would be consistent with the form of development permitted in the locality.

3.3 Social and Economic Impacts

There are no identified adverse social or economic impacts from the proposed development.

4. SITE SUITABILITY

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

The site is appropriately zoned to accommodate the proposal and there are no natural or built hazards preventing the construction of the dwelling-house and associated works. The site is considered suitable for the development.

5. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

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

5.1 Community Consultation

The proposed development was placed on public exhibition and was notified to adjoining and nearby landowners between 20 September and 4 October, 2010 in accordance with Council’s Notification and Exhibition DCP. During this period, Council received one submission. The map below illustrates the location of the nearby landowner who made the submission.

NOTIFICATION PLAN

• PROPERTIES NOTIFIED

X SUBMISSIONS

RECEIVED

PROPERTY SUBJECT OF DEVELOPMENT

One submission was received raising concerns about the potential glare from the photovoltaic cells on the roof and the visual impact of the proposal.

It is anticipated that any glare nuisance would be minimal, given the approximate 25m setback of the photovoltaic panels from the dwelling-house at No. 46 Beecroft Road and the screening effect of trees on the site.

The concerns about the visual impact of the proposal have been addressed in Section 2.2.1 of this report under the heading “Design”.

6. THE PUBLIC INTEREST

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

CONCLUSION

The application proposes the erection of a two storey dwelling-house of contemporary design on a recently subdivided battle-axe allotment which is yet to be registered with the NSW Land and Property Management Authority.

The scale of the development meets the prescriptive measures of Council’s Dwelling House DCP and is in accordance with the objectives of the surrounding low density zone. The proposal would be consistent in terms of its design with similar structures that have recently been erected in the area and would have minimal impacts on adjacent properties in terms of privacy, solar access and views.

Given its location on a battle-axe allotment, the proposal would not have any detrimental impacts on the character of surrounding development or the heritage values of the Beecroft Road streetscape or the heritage-listed item at No. 44 Beecroft Road.

Having regard to the assessment of the proposed development, it is recommended that Council approves the application.

Scott Phillips

Executive Manager

Planning Division

Simon Evans

Manager - Assessment Team 1

Planning Division

Attachments:

1.View	Locality Plan
2.View	Site Plan
3.View	Floor Plans
4.View	Elevations and Sections
5.View	Shadow Plan

File Reference: DA/1141/2010

Document Number: D01522497

SCHEDULE 1

CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL

1. Deferred Commencement

Pursuant to Section 80(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, this consent does not operate until the following information is submitted to Council:

a. A registered plan of subdivision from the NSW Department of Lands creating the proposed lot must be submitted to Council.

Upon Council’s written satisfaction of the above information, the following conditions of development consent will apply:

GENERAL CONDITIONS

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.

2. Approved Plans and Supporting Documentation

Plan No.

Drawn by

Dated

9100265

(Sheets 020,021,022,023,030,040,050,060,070)

Cosmopolitan Living

04/08/2010

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

3. Building Code of Australia

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

4. Contract of Insurance (Residential Building Work)

5. Notification of Home Building Act, 1989 Requirements

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

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

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

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

i. The name of the owner-builder.

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

6. Sydney Water – Quick Check

Note: Refer to www.sydneywater.com.au or telephone 13 20 92 for assistance.

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

7. Erection of Construction Sign

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

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

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

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

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

8. Toilet Facilities

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

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

9. Tree Protection Barriers

To avoid injury or damage, trees numbered T11 - T15 must have trunks protected by 2m lengths of 75mm x 25mm hardwood timbers spaced at 80mm centres and secured with galvanised wire, not fixed or nailed to the tree in any way.

10. Erosion and Sediment Control

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

REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION

11. Construction Work Hours

All work on site (including demolition and earth works) must only occur between 7am and 5pm Monday to Saturday. No work is to be undertaken on Sundays or public holidays.

12. Works near Trees

All required tree protection measures are to be maintained in good condition for the duration of the construction period. All works (including driveways and retaining walls) within 6m of any trees required to be retained (whether or not on the subject property, and pursuant to this consent or the Tree Preservation Order), must be carried out under the supervision of an AQF level 5 arborist and a certificate submitted to the principal certifying authority detailing the method(s) used to preserve the trees.

13. Bushland Protection

To ensure the protection of bushland during construction, the applicant must ensure that:

a. No building materials or machinery are stored within areas of retained bushland subject to an existing Restricted Development Area (88b of the Conveyancing Act, 1919) occurring at the eastern portion of the site; and

b. All machinery is cleaned of soil and debris before entering the site to prevent the spread of weeds and fungal pathogens.

Note: Actions such as tree removal, understorey slashing or mowing, removal of dead trees within this vegetation would likely impact upon this endangered ecological community. Such action would qualify as illegally picking or disturbing the habitat and could render any person who carried out such action as liable for prosecution.

14. Council Property

15. 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.

16. Survey Report – Finished Floor Level

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

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

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

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

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

17. Fulfilment of BASIX Commitments

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

18. Stormwater Drainage

The stormwater drainage system for the development must be designed and constructed for an average recurrence interval of 20 years and be gravity drained and connected to an existing inter-allotment drainage system.

19. Internal Driveway/Vehicular Areas

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

a. The driveway be a rigid pavement; and

b. The driveway grade must not exceed 25 percent and changes in grade must not exceed 8 percent.

20. Damage to Council Assets

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

21. Installation of Air Conditioner

To protect the amenity of adjacent properties, the condenser unit for the air conditioner must be sited a minimum of 3m from the property boundary of any adjoining residential premises unless a certificate has been prepared by a suitably qualified person confirming that the unit has been tested for heating and cooling on the highest settings and that the noise levels generated do not exceed 5 dB(A) above background noise levels when tested at the property boundary between 8 pm and 10 pm.

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

22. Native Landscaping

All landscaping activities within the “Restricted Development Area” are to be undertaken in accordance with the approved Vegetation Management Plan (VMP) prepared by Wirrimbirra Environmental Consultants Pty Ltd (dated January 2010)

Note: The two year maintenance period of this approved VMP expires June 2012. The applicant is reminded that Section 3.7 ‘Maintenance, monitoring and evaluation’ of the approved plan states that all works and monitoring reporting are to be undertaken by a qualified and experienced bush regeneration company.

23. Control of Spread of Weeds or Lawn into Bushland

To ensure that exotic weeds and lawn do not become invasive in the bushland on the site, the applicant must prevent the spread of exotic grasses such as turf or weeds into the downslope bushland area of the property through the erection of a physical barrier along the edge of the existing turf area using materials such as timber, logs, rock, or concrete. This barrier is to be installed underground as well as above-ground to provide a root barrier and to act as a mown strip to delineate the mown area from the bushland area. The physical barrier must be inserted approximately 20cm below the soil with a minimum 8cm above the soil.

24. Landscaping - General

Landscaping is to be primarily composed of locally occurring native species and must be in accordance with the Landscape Concept Plan (dated October 2007 by Andrews Neil Pty Ltd) and in accordance with the covenant which applies to the land, viz:

a. All landscaping/vegetation management shall be in accordance with the approved Vegetation Management Plan;

b. High use open space areas shall be limited to land outside the ‘Restricted Development Area’;

c. Trees within the ‘Restricted Development Area’ must be inspected annually by a qualified arborist, and treated to maintain tree health to ensure the stand of trees will be preserved.

- END OF CONDITIONS -

ADVISORY NOTES

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 Requirements

· The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 requires:

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

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

· Mandatory inspections of nominated stages of the construction inspected.

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

Long Service Levy

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

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

Tree Preservation Order

To ensure the maintenance and protection of the existing natural environment, it is an offence to ringbark, cut down, top, lop, remove, wilfully injure or destroy a tree outside 3m of the approved building envelope without the prior written consent from Council.

All distances are determined under British Standard BS 5837: 2005, “Trees in Relation to Construction – Recommendations”.

Fines may be imposed for non-compliance with Council’s Tree Preservation Order.

Dial Before You Dig

Standard Report No. PLN92/10

Planning Division

Date of Meeting: 1/12/2010

9 DRAFT COMPREHENSIVE LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

Under recent NSW Government reforms, all NSW councils are required to prepare a new comprehensive Local Environment Plan (LEP) in accordance with the State Government’s standard LEP template (Standard Instrument).

The preparation of Council’s new Comprehensive LEP has principally been a process of transferring Council’s existing LEP, the Hornsby Shire Local Environment Plan 1994 (HSLEP), into the new LEP format. Additional planning studies have also been undertaken and have informed the new LEP to respond to regional strategies and the requirements for preparation of a Standard Instrument based LEP.

The draft LEP will control development and guide planning decisions made by Council. It also aims to ensure that new development is sustainable and compatible with the character of the Shire.

It is recommended that Council endorse the draft Comprehensive LEP and supporting information for consultation with relevant Government agencies and public exhibition.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to present the draft Hornsby Shire Comprehensive LEP for endorsement for consultation with relevant Government agencies and public exhibition.

BACKGROUND

In September 2005, the NSW Government introduced a range of reforms aimed at streamlining the planning system. One of the reforms was the release of the Standard Instrument. Every local council is required to prepare a new LEP consistent with the form and content of the Standard Instrument.

On 31 March 2006, the Standard Instrument (Local Environmental Plans) Order 2006 was gazetted. Councils were given between two and five years from the gazettal of the Order to prepare their new comprehensive LEPs. Hornsby Council was given five years to prepare its new comprehensive LEP as the HSLEP was seen as a relatively sound environmental planning instrument.

At its meeting on 7 February 2007, Council considered Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN20/07 seeking endorsement to prepare a comprehensive LEP for Hornsby Shire in accordance with the Standard Instrument. Council resolved to prepare a new LEP pursuant to Section 54 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment (EP&A) Act, 1979 and that it be prepared in three stages, namely the:

· waterways;

· rural and open space lands; and

· urban lands.

Council resolved to advise the Department of Planning (DOP) of its resolution to prepare a new LEP and seek “Written Authorisation to Exercise Delegation” to allow Council to exercise delegation under Sections 65 and 69 of the EP&A Act in progressing the draft LEP through the public exhibition and reporting stages of its making. Council also resolved to consult with relevant Government authorities and adjoining councils pursuant to Section 62 of the EP&A Act.

In June 2007, Council advised the DOP pursuant to Section 54 of the EP&A Act of its resolution to prepare a new Comprehensive LEP in accordance with the Standard Instrument. Council also sought advice from the DOP confirming that:

· the DOP agrees to the proposed staging of the preparation of the LEP;

· the planning studies and strategies undertaken, or to be undertaken, by Council and the DOP are adequate to provide direction for the preparation of the LEP without the need to prepare a Local Environmental Study (LES); and

· a “Written Authorisation to Exercise Delegation” will be issued in relation to the Section 65 and 69 stages in the plan making process.

In August 2007, the DOP advised (letter attached) that a LES is not required in respect of the LEP and the Director General’s delegated powers are not being extended to councils for preparing comprehensive LEPs. The DOP also advised that there were practical difficulties and legal uncertainties in preparing the new LEP in stages.

At its meeting on 5 September 2007, Council considered Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN220/07 presenting the advice from the DOP concerning the progression of Council’s Comprehensive LEP and to seek endorsement of a project plan. Council resolved to prepare the Comprehensive LEP as a single plan, rather than in stages and to adopt a project plan that sought to deliver the new LEP by March 2011.

In accordance with Council’s resolution, the project plan was forwarded to the DOP. Confirmation of the Department’s satisfaction with the work program and key milestones was also sought. The Department advised that it was generally satisfied with Council’s project plan but requested the inclusion of formal Section 62 consultation prior to the public exhibition of the Plan. The DOP advised that this will provide the opportunity for relevant Government agencies and adjoining councils to review the implications of the Plan having regard to all strategy work and the final planning provisions over which preliminary consultation has not been undertaken.

At its meeting on 5 December 2007, Council considered Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN220/07 presenting the advice from the DOP concerning Council’s work program. Council resolved to note the DOP’s general satisfaction with Council’s work program and undertake formal Section 62 consultation on the draft LEP prior to the public exhibition of the Plan.

The new LEP has been prepared generally in accordance with the work program. However, the preparation has been delayed by the ongoing revision of planning legislation (including the Standard Instrument) and change in the DOP’s priority for delivery of Council’s new LEP.

In August 2009, Council was advised by the DOP that it was focusing its resources to reprioritise the delivery of comprehensive LEPs from councils across NSW based on preparing the most outdated council environmental planning instruments in the first instance. The DOP established a priority list of 67 councils required to prepare their new LEPs by June 2011. Hornsby Council was not originally included on the list but was later (December 2009) included after Council made representations to the DOP that it had undertaken the necessary strategic planning work and capacity to deliver a new LEP by June 2011.

In early 2010, three Councillor Workshops were held to present the process, key issues and recommendations for the preparation of the new LEP. Councillors provided direction on key issues in the translation of the HSLEP into the Standard Instrument format. In summary, Councillors confirmed their general satisfaction with the translation of zones, and adoption of the minimum lot size, height of building and floor space ratio provisions as the principal development standards. Councillors also confirmed their satisfaction with inclusion of additional local provisions to recognise Council’s unique planning circumstances. It was agreed that the draft Comprehensive LEP should be presented to Council for endorsement for consultation with relevant Government agencies and public exhibition.

DISCUSSION

The preparation of Council’s new Comprehensive LEP has principally been a process of transferring the HSLEP into the new LEP format. The following discussion identifies the strategic and statutory context within which the new LEP has been prepared, presents the main provisions of the new LEP and identifies how key translation issues have been resolved.

1. Strategic Context

The planning provisions of the HSLEP have formed the basis of the draft Comprehensive LEP. These provisions have been supplemented by local planning studies prepared by Council its obligations under regional planning strategies.

Regional strategies considered in the preparation of the draft LEP include the Metropolitan Strategy - City of Cities: A Plan for Sydney’s Future, draft North Subregional Strategy and Northern Sydney Regional Organisation of Council’s (NSROC) Regional Planning Strategy. Local studies undertaken to inform the preparation of the draft LEP include the:

· Hornsby Tourism Provisions Planning Review 2003;

· Waterways Review 2005;

· Review of the draft Waterways LEP 2006;

· Rural Resource Lands Study 2006;

· Open Space Review 2006;

· River Settlements and Foreshores Review 2007;

· Heritage Review (Stage 4) 2008;

· Rural Lands Planning Provisions Review 2009;

· Hornsby and Ku-Ring-Gai Subregional Employment Study 2010;

· Dural Service Centre Study 2010;

· Native Vegetation Planning Review 2010; and

· Housing Strategy 2010.

2. Statutory Context

The preparation of the draft LEP is guided by the plan making requirements of the EP&A Act, the Standard Instrument, LEP Mapping Guidelines and Practice Notes, other environmental planning instruments and Ministerial Directions issued pursuant to Section 117 of the EP&A Act.

Plan Making Requirements

Section 33A of the EP&A Act requires that all new council LEPs be prepared in accordance with the Standard Instrument (Local Environmental Plans) Order 2006.

In February 2007, Council resolved to prepare a new principal LEP based on the Standard Instrument. Council subsequently advised the DOP pursuant to Section 54 of the EP&A Act of its resolution. Accordingly, pursuant to savings provisions in the EP&A Regulations 2000, Council’s Comprehensive LEP is being prepared under the former LEP Plan Making provisions of the EP&A Act and associated Regulations.

The next steps in preparation of the LEP include undertaking formal Section 62 consultation with relevant Government authorities and adjoining councils and making a submission to the DOP seeking certification under Section 65 of the EP&A Act to enable Council to exhibit the draft Plan.

Following the exhibition period, Council will be required to review the issues raised in submissions received in response to the exhibition before forwarding the draft Plan to the DOP requesting that the Minister make the Plan. This will be the subject of a further report to Council.

Standard Instrument

The Standard Instrument outlines how Council’s new LEP should be structured. It identifies mandatory land use zones, specifies permitted and prohibited land uses in the zones, and identifies compulsory and optional provisions. Council may add other provisions which are relevant to local planning issues. The Standard Instrument also contains a standard dictionary and requires maps to be prepared following specified mapping requirements.

LEP Map Guidelines and Practice Notes

The DOP has released LEP Mapping Guidelines “Standard Technical Requirements for LEP Maps (March 2009)” and Practice Notes for the preparation of Standard Instrument based LEPs. The LEP Mapping Guidelines specify the map templates, scale and grid, colours, lines, symbols, codes, map-naming protocols and electronic file creation requirements. The Practice Notes provide guidance on a range of maters including the use of the standard zones, zone objectives, definitions and clauses. The Practice Notes also provide guidance on dealing with key issues including height and floor space ratio, rezoning of special use zones and application of environmental protection zones.

Environmental Planning Instruments and Ministerial Directions

There are a number of State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs) and Regional Environmental Plans (REPs) that apply to development in Hornsby Shire. The EP&A Act requires that draft LEPs be prepared to be consistent with relevant SEPPs and REPs. Of note, a number of new SEPPs have been gazetted in recent years which have a significant influence on the drafting of the LEP. These include:

· SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009;

· SEPP (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008;

· SEPP (Infrastructure) 2007; and

· SEPP No. 62 - Sustainable Aquaculture.

Sydney Regional Environmental Plans (SREPs) of relevance in Hornsby Shire are:

· SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005;

· SREP No. 20 - Hawkesbury-Nepean River (No. 2 - 1997); and

· SREP No. 9 (Extractive Industries).

On 20 July 2007, a new set of directions issued by the Minister for Planning pursuant to Section 117 of the EP&A Act came into effect and apply to the preparation of all draft LEPs that obtain certification for public exhibition under Section 65 of the EP&A Act, on or after, 19 July 2007. In summary, the Directions provide that all draft LEPs need to be justified in terms of consistency with the Standard Instrument, various individual requirements of the directions and subregional strategies. Each direction also identifies how minor inconsistencies with requirements may be justified.

The DOP has advised councils that they will need to demonstrate, as part of their Section 64 submission, that their new LEPs are consistent with the Standard Instrument, LEP Mapping Guidelines and relevant practice notes, environmental planning instruments and Ministerial Directions. Attached is an assessment of the consistency of the draft LEP to same. The attachment will form part of a submission to be forwarded to the DOP seeking certification for the exhibition of the draft LEP. In summary, the draft Comprehensive LEP has been prepared to be consistent with the Standard Instrument, LEP Mapping Guidelines, and relevant Practice Notes, SEPPs, REPs and Section 117 Directions.

3. Draft Comprehensive LEP

The draft Comprehensive LEP (available for viewing on Council’s website www.hornsby.nsw.gov.au) comprises 6 parts, schedules, a dictionary and maps. The mandated provisions and notes in the draft Plan are identified in black text and are consistent in all new LEPs throughout the State. The local provisions are identified in red text and have been inserted to respond to local planning circumstances. The draft LEP is supported by a set of explanatory notes (available for viewing on Council’s website) that presents to the main provisions of the draft LEP and outlines the translation process.

Part 1 - Preliminary

This part comprises the name of the Plan, aims of the Plan, land to which the Plan applies, reference to dictionary definitions, legal status of the notes, relevant consent authority, reference to the maps adopted by the Plan, repeal of other local planning instruments, savings provisions relating to development applications, application of SEPPs and REPs, and the suspension of covenants, agreements and instruments that may restrict the carrying out of development permitted by the Plan.

Aims of the Plan

The most important provisions in this part of the Plan are the overall aims of the Plan. The aims have been drafted having regard to the HSLEP aims and objectives, aims of adopted Council studies prepared to inform the new LEP and aims of other gazetted Standard Instrument based LEPs. The aims of the Plan are based on the following 10 themes:

· Vision

· Method - Triple Bottom Line

· Residential

· Employment

· Rural

· Recreational

· Social/Cultural

· Environmental

· Heritage

· Hazards/Risks

Part 2 - Permitted or Prohibited Development

This part comprises a list of the land use zones used, reference to the land zoning map, the legal context of the zone objectives and land use tables, land use tables and provisions for unzoned land, additional permitted uses, subdivision, demolition, temporary use of land and earthworks.

The translation of the HSLEP and adopted local planning strategies into the Standard Instrument format has primarily involved determination of which of the mandated land use zones should be utilised, land over which these zones should apply, drafting of additional zone objectives, permitting additional land uses for the zones and permitting land uses by exception where the zones do not provide the latitude to recognise local planning strategies.

In summary, there are 34 HSLEP zones and 34 Standard Instrument zones but they do not simply translate. Each of the zones has mandated objectives and permitted/prohibited land uses. Accordingly, 26 Standard Instrument zones that best meet the intent of the existing HSLEP zones have been utilised. New additional zone objectives have been prepared based on a combination of mandated and existing zone objectives under the HSLEP. Land use tables have been prepared based on amalgamation of existing zones, and inclusion of mandated land uses and new Standard Instrument definitions that do not have an equivalent under the HSLEP. The translation of the HSLEP zones into the new LEP is outlined in more detail below.

Rural Land Use Zones

The DOP advised Council at the Section 54 stage of preparation of the new LEP that the Rural Lands Study (1995) and Rural Resource Lands Study (2006) should be reviewed to provide updated planning controls. Accordingly, Council engaged an independent planning consultant to review the Studies. The Rural Lands Planning Provisions Review (2009) informed the selection of zones and included a land audit to identify land with the highest agricultural potential and other land units including rural/residential development. The land audit identified that the rural areas north of Galston Village are the most suitable for agriculture and the rural areas south of Galston Village are generally rural-residential in nature. Three new rural zones (i.e. RU1 - Primary Production, RU2 - Rural Landscapes and RU4 - Rural Small Holdings) have been be used to accord with the findings of the land audit and existing two and ten hectare subdivision pattern. The table below identifies the translation of rural zones.

Hornsby Shire LEP 1994	Comprehensive LEP 2011
Rural AA (Large Holdings - Agricultural Landscapes)	RU1 - Primary Production
Rural AE (Large Holdings - Extraction)	RU1 - Primary Production
Rural AR (Large Holdings - Rural Landscapes)	RU1 - Primary Production
Rural BA (Small Holdings - Agricultural Landscapes)	RU2 - Rural Landscape (north of Galston Village) RU4 - Rural Small Holdings (south of Galston Village)
Rural BR (Small Holdings - Rural Landscapes)	RU2 - Rural Landscape (north of Galston Village) RU4 - Rural Small Holdings (south of Galston Village)

Residential Land Use Zones

The HSLEP has 9 residential zones to reflect local planning strategies. The Standard Instrument does not have equivalent zones. Of note, there are 6 variants of the low density residential zone in the HSLEP. However, there is only 1 low density residential zone in the Standard Instrument which is suitable for application in Hornsby Shire. Accordingly, zones with similar permitted land uses have been amalgamated and minimum lot size maps and additional permitted uses prepared to reflect differences. Three residential (i.e. R2 - Low Density Residential, R3 - Medium Density Residential, R4 - High Density Residential), 2 special purpose (SP2 - Infrastructure - Health Services Facility and SP3 - Tourist) and a rural village zone (i.e. RU5 - Village) have been used. The table below identifies the translation of residential zones.

Hornsby Shire LEP 1994	Comprehensive LEP 2011
Residential A (Low Density)	R2 - Low Density Residential
Residential AA (Low Density - Aquaculture)	R2 - Low Density Residential + Cl. 2.5 Additional permitted uses
Residential AM (Low Density - Medical Support)	SP2 - Infrastructure - Health Services Facility
Residential AR (Low Density - Rural Village)	R2 - Low Density Residential (Arcadia, Galston & Glenorie Villages) RU5 - Rural Village + Cl. 2.5 Additional permitted uses (Dural Village)
Residential AS (Low Density - Sensitive Lands)	R2 - Low Density Residential
Residential AT (Low Density - Tourist Village)	SP3 - Tourist
Residential B (Medium Density)	R3 - Medium Density Residential
Residential C (Medium/High Density)	R4 - High Density Residential
Residential D (High Density)	R4 - High Density Residential

The Housing Strategy Planning Proposal precincts recently adopted by Council have been included in the Land Zoning Map of the Comprehensive LEP. Should Council adopt the draft Townhouse Planning Proposal, the adopted precincts will be included in the zoning map for progression as part of the Comprehensive LEP parallel with the Planning Proposal.

Business Land Use Zones

The draft North Subregional Strategy requires Hornsby and Ku-Ring-Gai Councils to prepare zoning strategies to facilitate employment opportunities that will translate into 13,500 additional jobs by 2031. The Ku-ring-gai and Hornsby Subregional Employment Study (2010) was undertaken and identifies new zones to be applied and land uses to be included in Council’s existing business zoned areas. The Study provides broad guidance on the application of the new zones and recommends further analysis where numerous zones are recommended for a commercial centre. The Dural Service Centre Study 2010 was also undertaken to inform the zones and permitted land uses in the Dural Service Centre.

Currently, land use tables in the HSLEP are prohibition based where all permitted land uses are listed as being permitted with, or without, consent and those not listed become prohibited. The DOP requires that the land use tables for the business zones be prepared as permissibility rather than prohibition based to permit newly emerging undefined commercial land uses of merit without the need for a rezoning. Accordingly, the land use tables have been formatted to identify prohibited development. All other development would be permissible with consent.

Six business zones (B1 - Neighbourhood Centre, B2 - Local Centre, B3 - Commercial Core, B4 - Mixed Use, B5 - Business Development and B6 - Enterprise Corridor) and an industrial zone (IN2 - Light Industrial) are proposed to be used in the commercial centres. The table below identifies the translation of business zones.

Hornsby Shire LEP 1994 + K&HSES	Comprehensive LEP 2011
Business C (Neighbourhood)	B1 - Neighbourhood Centre
Business A (General)	B2 - Local Centre
Business F (Town Centre)	B3 - Commercial Core
Business G (Town Centre Support)	B4 - Mixed Use
Business B (Special)	B5 - Business Development
Business A (General) + Business B - (Special) + Business C (Neighbourhood) + (Business G - Town Centre Support) + Industrial B (Light)	B6 - Enterprise Corridor
Business D (Aquatic Service Centre)	B2 - Local Centre + Cl. 2.5 Additional permitted uses
Business E (Service Centre)	IN2 - Light Industrial + Cl. 2.5 Additional permitted uses + B2 - Local Centre

Note: K&HSES = Ku-Ring-Gai and Hornsby Subregional Study Recommendations

Council, along with Parramatta City Council and the DOP, is currently undertaking the Epping Town Centre Study. The aim of the Study is to explore the potential for the Epping Town Centre to accommodate increased residential and employment growth to fulfil its role as a Town Centre in the Metropolitan context and to maximise the benefits arising from State Government infrastructure investment. The Study will inform future planning controls and infrastructure requirements to accommodate this growth and aims to provide certainty for Epping residents and businesses on the future of Epping.

It is anticipated that the Study will be endorsed for public exhibition in March 2011 and the Study recommendations (including planning controls for inclusion in Council’s Comprehensive LEP) will be adopted in July 2011. When adopted by Council, any new land zoning and/or planning controls for the Epping Town Centre will be likely progressed as a Planning Proposal to amend the Comprehensive LEP.

Industrial Land Use Zones

The Ku-Ring-Gai and Hornsby Subregional Study (2010) identifies new zones to be applied and land uses to be included in Council’s existing industrial zoned areas. The DOP has identified that the land use tables for industrial zones must be prepared in a permissibility format for the same reason as required for the business zones. Two industrial zones (IN1 - General Industrial and IN2 Light Industrial) are proposed to be used. The zones are almost a direct translation from the Industrial A (General) and Industrial B (Light) zones under the HSLEP, with the exception of the Mt Kuring-Gai Industrial Estate, which is currently zoned Industrial B under the HSLEP and is proposed to be zoned IN1. The table below identifies the translation of industrial zones.

Hornsby Shire LEP 1994 + K&HSES	Comprehensive LEP 2011
Industrial A (General)	IN1 - General Industrial
Industrial B (Light)	IN2 - Light Industrial

Note: K&HSES = Ku-Ring-Gai and Hornsby Subregional Study Recommendations

Special Purpose Land Use Zones

Currently, the HSLEP includes Special Uses A (Community Purposes) and Special Uses B (Transport Corridor) zones. The Special Uses A zone applies to existing infrastructure uses such as hospitals, schools, telecommunication facilities, water reservoirs and electricity substations. The Special Uses B zone applies to regional roads and railway corridors.

The DOP has developed a new zoning approach for infrastructure sites (aligned with the Infrastructure SEPP) to promote the opportunity for a change of use without the need for rezoning the land. The zoning approach is more relevant in the case of other councils, where the practice is to restrict the use of special uses zoned sites to the existing use. However, Council’s Special Uses A zone permits a large number of uses to enable adaptation of existing use.

Notwithstanding, the zoning of 234 special uses sites has been determined having regard to 6 principles for zoning established by the DOP. Generally it is recommended that the sites be zoned the same as the adjacent land. However, 11 special uses sites are proposed to be zoned SP2 - Infrastructure and restricted to the existing use due to potential contamination. Additional contamination clearance processes are required to be undertaken in accordance with the Contaminated Lands SEPP before land may be rezoned to a zone that permits residential and other sensitive land uses. The table below identifies the translation of special uses zones.

Hornsby Shire LEP 1994

Comprehensive LEP 2011

Special Uses A (Community Purposes)

Generally in accordance with adjacent land

Special Uses B (Transport Corridor)

SP2 - Infrastructure - Roads

SP2 - Infrastructure - Railway

Recreation Land Use Zones

The HSLEP includes Open Space A (Public Recreation - Local), Open Space B (Public Recreation - District) and Open Space C (Private) zones. The Standard Instrument only provides Recreation RE1 - Public Recreation and RE2 - Private Recreation zones. The existing open space zones have been translated having regard to the public/private function. The table below identifies the translation of open space zones.

Hornsby Shire LEP 1994	Comprehensive LEP 2011
Open Space A (Public Recreation - Local)	RE1 - Public Recreation
Open Space B (Public Recreation - District)	RE1 - Public Recreation
Open Space C (Private Recreation)	RE2 - Private Recreation

The acquisition authority for open space lands in private ownership is identified on a separate Land Reservation Acquisition Map.

Environmental Protection Land Use Zones

There are 5 environmental protection zones and a National Parks and Nature Reserves zone under the HSLEP. However, there are only 4 Environmental Protection zones under the Standard Instrument. The Rural Lands Planning Provisions Review (2009) and Waterways Review (2006) provide recommendations concerning the translation of the zones into the Standard Instrument format.

The Waterways Review recommends the application of the E2 - Environmental Conservation zone to mangrove, saltmarsh and seagrass communities below the mean high water mark (MHWM) and that the zone be restrictive in terms of permissible land uses. The Rural Lands Planning Provisions Review also recommends application of the zone to the existing Environmental Protection A (Wetland) zones above the MHWM to protect mangrove, saltmarsh and other wetland vegetation communities. The extent of the Environmental Protection A zone has been reviewed having regard to the latest vegetation mapping (i.e. Smith and Smith 2008) to ensure that no viable agricultural land is unnecessarily restricted. A review of the application of the zone has also identified that no private landholding is wholly zoned for environmental protection purposes. The application of E2 - Environmental Conservation to Environmental Protection A (Wetland) zoned lands will therefore not extinguish development entitlements but rather delineate areas with limited development potential. The table below identifies the translation of environmental protection zones.

Hornsby Shire LEP 1994	Comprehensive LEP 2011
National Parks and Nature Reserves	E1 – National Parks and Nature Reserves
Environmental Protection A (Wetlands)	E2 - Environmental Conservation
Environmental Protection B (River Catchment)	E3 - Environmental Management
Environmental Protection C (Tourist)	E3 - Environmental Management + Cl. 2.5 Additional permitted uses
Environmental Protection D (Recreation)	E3 - Environmental Management + Cl. 2.5 Additional permitted uses
Environmental Protection E (River Settlement)	E4 - Environmental Living

Waterways Land Use Zones

The waterways are currently unzoned and the Waterways Review (2006) recommends the application of the W1 - Natural Waterways, W2 - Recreational Waterways zones, E1 - National Parks and Nature Reserves zones and E2 - Environmental Conservation zones to the waterways.

The W1 zone is the default zone and has been applied to the majority of the waterways. The W2 zone permits a number of tourism uses and has been applied to Brooklyn and Berowra Waters. The E1 zone has been applied to gazetted National Parks and the E2 zone has been applied to mangrove, saltmarsh and seagrass communities below the MWHM. In accordance with a recommendation of the Waterways Review, the extent of the E2 zones below MHWM has been reviewed against the latest aquatic vegetation communities mapping provided by NSW Fisheries. The table below identifies the translation of unzoned lands below MHWM.

Hornsby Shire LEP 1994

Comprehensive LEP 2011

Unzoned

E1 – National Parks and Nature Reserves

E2 – Environmental Conservation

W1 – Natural Waterways

W2 – Recreational Waterways

Additional Permitted Uses

There are currently 46 exceptions to permit or prohibit development in certain areas and circumstances under Clause 22 of the HSLEP. These exceptions were largely formulated to prevent properties benefiting from existing use rights and the consequential ability of proponents to seek consent for an alternate non-conforming land use. Existing use rights legislation has subsequently been changed to no longer permit a change of use to an alternate non-conforming land use.

The DOP requires that Council review its exceptions list to ensure that additional permitted land uses are only included where they cannot be included in a land use zone and there is a strategic need. Accordingly, the permissibility of the uses identified in the exceptions and whether the site benefits from existing use rights has been reviewed. Seventeen additional permitted uses are included in the new LEP to recognise the existing exceptions not covered by existing use rights and where the translation of zones does not adequately cover Council’s local planning strategies.

Part 3 - Exempt and Complying Development

The Standard Instrument contains mandatory exempt development, complying development and environmentally sensitive area provisions similar to those contained in the HSLEP. The Standard Instrument contains exempt and complying development schedules which enable Council to insert exempt and complying development forms similar to those contained in Council’s Exempt and Complying Development DCP.

The Exempt and Complying Development schedules include development contained in Council’s Exempt and Complying Development DCP not covered by the Standard Instrument, Exempt and Complying Development Codes SEPP, Infrastructure SEPP and Development Without Consent SEPP.

The Exempt Development schedule also contains development carried out by, or on behalf of, Council currently covered by savings provisions in the HSLEP (i.e. Clause 6) and outdoor dining to implement a Council resolution.

Part 4 - Principal Development Standards

The Standard Instrument provides 3 optional principal development standards (i.e. minimum lot size, FSR and building heights) that Council can include in its new LEP but cannot include in its new Comprehensive Development Control Plan (DCP). The development standards of minimum lot size and FSR are linked to zoning under the HSLEP. However, they can operate independently in Council’s new LEP as they are separately mapped. The LEP Mapping Guidelines specify the colours that must be used for the various standards.

Minimum Subdivision Lot Size

The minimum subdivision lot size provisions in the draft LEP and corresponding Lot Size Map have been prepared based on the existing HSLEP provisions.

The Standard Instrument provision does not address a number of local planning circumstances concerning minimum lot size provisions. Accordingly, a local clause has been included to establish the methodology for calculating lot sizes for properties with dual zonings. A local clause has also been included to exclude the access handle in calculating the area of a battle axe allotment.

The HSLEP permits subdivision with minimum lot sizes of 500sqm and 600sqm in the low density residential zones. The HSLEP also permits multi-unit housing at a density of 350sqm and 400sqm (without subdivision) in the low density residential zones. The multi-unit housing density standards were included in the HSLEP to obtain exemption from the State Government dual occupancy provisions (i.e. SREP 12 and SEPP 25). Council sought to remove the density standards when SREP 12 and SEPP 25 were repealed. However, the then Department of Urban Affairs and Planning required the standards to be retained to enable relative accommodation, investment rental properties and multi-unit housing proposals by the Department of Housing.

The Affordable Housing SEPP was gazetted in 2009 and now permits secondary dwellings (i.e. granny flats), in-fill affordable housing and residential development by the Land and Housing Corporation. Accordingly, the draft LEP prohibits “dual occupancies” and “multi-unit housing” in the R2 and SP3 zones and does not propose to transfer the multi-unit housing density standards from the HSLEP into the draft LEP.

The HSLEP includes exceptions to minimum allotment size requirements for a number of sites. Local provisions have been included in the draft LEP for sites in Dural (i.e. Pacific Hills Christian School), Hornsby (i.e. College Crescent housing precinct) and Waitara (i.e. Orara Street housing precinct) where development has not been completed.

The Standard Instrument includes a mandated rural subdivision clause that allows for the creation of a lot that is less than the minimum lot size requirement where it is for the purposes of primary production and no existing or new dwelling-house would be located on the created lot. The Rural Lands Planning Provisions Review recommends that Council’s Comprehensive DCP include a requirement for the submission of a farm sustainability report to justify such a subdivision on an agricultural basis.

Height of Buildings

The DOP advises that any controls for building height must be mapped in metres in the LEP and can be supplemented by storey limits in the DCP. Council’s DCPs identify building heights in either metres or storeys. A Height of Buildings Map has been prepared based on existing DCP provisions and, where there are no heights limits referenced in metres for zones promoting multi-unit housing, building heights recommended by an urban design consultant have been applied.

The maximum height of a 5 storey multi-storey residential development is identified as 17.5m in accordance with Council’s adopted Housing Strategy. The maximum height for other multi-storey residential development above 4 storeys has been extrapolated based on the 5 storey height standard. Separate urban design analysis determined an appropriate height for 2 and 3 storey townhouses (i.e. 9m and 10m, respectively) and 3 storey walk up flats (i.e. 12m). The height of commercial buildings throughout the Shire’s commercial centres is based on 4 metres per commercial storey.

Council’s Dwelling House DCP has 2 height controls. It currently permits a 2 storey building up to 9m in height. However, the DCP restricts the height of dwelling-houses on battleaxe lots to single storey. The dual controls cannot be incorporated on the Building Height Map as it is impractical to map every battleaxe lot and it would not recognise newly subdivided battleaxe lots. Accordingly, the 9m building height limit has been applied to all low density residential zoned land and Council’s Comprehensive DCP will include controls to manage impacts associated with dwellings on battleaxe lots.

Floor Space Ratio

The DOP requires that FSRs must be identified for commercial centres. The Rivers and Foreshores Review identifies that the application of a FSR is necessary to control the bulk and scale of riverside development. Accordingly, the FSRs for all business, industrial and environmental protection zoned lands under the HSLEP have been transferred onto the FSR Map.

The HSLEP includes FSR bonus provisions where a community benefit is provided. Special local provisions have been drafted to facilitate greater development than would be ordinarily permitted on specific sites in Epping, Dural, Hornsby, Carlingford, Beecroft, Pennant Hills, Normanhurst, Asquith, Mount Colah, Berowra and Berowra Heights where the required community benefit is provided.

The Housing Code permits dwelling houses as complying development in low, medium and high density residential zones. The Code contains different complying development controls (including floor space restrictions) to that applied by the HSLEP and Council’s DCPs. For example, the HSLEP has traditionally applied a 0.4:1 FSR in the low density residential zones. However, the Housing Code applies various maximum permitted floor spaces on the basis of the size of the lot. The application of existing FSRs on the basis of zoning would result in differing development standards and outcomes.

There are no FSRs for the new 5 and 10 storey housing forms in Council’s adopted Housing Strategy precincts. Rather, maximum building heights have been included in the HSLEP and building envelope controls have been included in the Housing Strategy DCP to manage bulk and scale. Consistent with this approach, the new LEP does not incorporate FSR controls for any residential zones. Instead a suite of controls to manage bulk and scale similar to those based on those in the Housing Code, including site coverage, building heights, setbacks, landscaped area and outdoor living area will be included in Council’s Comprehensive DCP.

The Standard Instrument mandates the method of calculating floor space ratio and site area which does not exclude the access handle. Accordingly, Council cannot retain the existing control in the HSLEP to exclude the areas of the access handle for the purpose of calculating FSR on battleaxe lots. However, the suite of building envelope controls included in Council’s Comprehensive DCP will ensure the bulk and scale of development is commensurate with the size of the development site.

Exception to Development Standards

The Standard Instrument mandates provisions that allow some flexibility in the application of development standards where the development standard is demonstrated to be unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case. SEPP No. 1 - Development Standards will be revoked upon gazettal of the Plan.

Part 5 - Miscellaneous Provisions

The Standard Instrument contains land acquisition, classification of public land, transitional land development, miscellaneous land use development controls, coastal zone, architectural roof feature, waterways, fire alarm, vegetation preservation, heritage conservation, bushfire hazard reduction and Crown development provisions. Provisions that have required modification and optional provisions included in the draft LEP are outlined below.

Relevant Acquisition Authority and Development on Reserved Land

The HSLEP contains Land Acquisition provisions that identify the relevant acquisition authority by zoning. The provisions establish that the:

· Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) is required to acquire Special Uses B zoned land for road widening purposes;

· Council is required to acquire Open Space A zoned land for inclusion in Council’s local open space network; and

· DOP is required to acquire Open Space B zoned and cross hatched land for inclusion in the regional open space network.

The Standard Instrument contains similar mandatory provisions that require the preparation of a Land Reservation and Acquisition map to specifically identify privately owned parcels to be acquired and the relevant acquisition authority. The Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991 now identifies when authorities are obliged to acquire land.

The Land Reservation and Acquisition map has been prepared in consultation with the RTA concerning its road widening plans and in accordance with the recommendations of Council’s Open Space Land Acquisition Review. Council will also be required to take into account any requests from the Office of Strategic Lands (formerly the Land Management Branch of the DOP) for changing the zoning and/or reservation of regional open space received during the Section 62 consultation stage of plan preparation. The Office of Strategic Lands has advised Council that it is currently undertaking a strategic review of its regional open space reservations.

The HSLEP includes a provision to control the scale of development on land intended to be acquired for a public purpose. A similar local clause has been included in the draft Plan.

Classification and Reclassification of Public Land

In response to Council’s Section 54 notice, the DOP suggested Council strategically review Council owned land and make any necessary changes to the classification of land reflected in the LEP. The new LEP does not seek to reclassify any Council owned land for operational purposes. Any recommendations from future strategic reviews of Council owned land would be progressed as a separate Planning Proposal.

Development Near Zone Boundaries

The HSLEP permits development that would otherwise be prohibited within 20m of any zone boundary under the transitional land development provisions. The Standard Instrument contains similar optional provisions and requires specification of the transition in metres. The existing 20m transition has been applied.

The new provisions do not apply to the RE1, E1, E2, E3, W1 and W2 zones under the Standard Instrument. The W2 zone has been applied to ensure land based development cannot be given consent over land below the MHWM as recommended by the Waterways Review.

The HSLEP does not exclude any of the other listed zones from benefiting from the transitional land provisions. Of note, the clause currently applies to the Environmental Protection B (River Catchment) zone to apply some flexibility in zone boundaries due to the technical limitations of mapping same. As the transitional land provisions will not apply to the E3 Environmental Management zone (which is based on the extent of the Environmental Protection B zone) the mapping of the zone has been refined having regard to the latest topographic data (i.e. accurate to 0.5m levels and a 5m grid) to ensure greater accuracy of zone boundaries.

Controls Relating to Miscellaneous Permissible Uses

A number of land use definitions in the dictionary of the HSLEP specify development controls. The Standard Instrument contains mandatory provisions that provide the opportunity for Council to nominate appropriate development controls separate from the definition for a number of land uses including the size of bed and breakfast accommodation, home businesses, home industries, industrial retail outlets, farm stay accommodation, kiosks, neighbourhood shops, roadside stalls and secondary dwellings. The development controls included in the provision are a translation of existing controls in the HSLEP or in the case of previously undefined land uses, based on analysis of the size of similar land uses and standards applied by other councils.

Development within the Coastal Zone

The Standard Instrument mandates the use of the Development within the Coastal Zone clause if the LEP applies to land in the coastal zone. The clause identifies best practice coastal management principles and matters for consideration that councils must consider in determining a development application. Hornsby Shire is not located in the Coastal Zone. Hornsby Shire is also not identified in the Schedule for which SEPP No. 71 applies. The Waterways Review 2006 notes that Hornsby Shire is not in the Coastal Zone and recommends that the clause not be included in draft LEP. Accordingly, the Clause has not been adopted.

Architectural Roof Features

Building heights are currently contained in Council’s DCPs and have been translated into the new Height of Buildings LEP map. The Standard Instrument contains an optional provision to permit variations to maximum building heights where of architectural merit. The optional provision has been included in the draft LEP.

Development Below Mean High Water Mark

The Standard Instrument mandates the use of the Development Below MHWM clause if the LEP applies to land which contains tidal waters. The clause requires development consent to carry out development below MHWM. It is understood that the provision was drafted to apply where councils did not zone waterways.

The Waterways Review 2006 recommends the zoning of the waterways and notes that the clause is therefore not applicable. The E1, E2, W1 and W2 zonings, which have been applied to waterways, identify development which is permitted with, and without, consent and development which is prohibited. Accordingly, the provision has not been included in the draft LEP. This approach is supported by the DOP’s draft Waterway Zone Practice Notes which requires all land below MHWM to be zoned.

Preservation of Trees or Vegetation

The HSLEP contains tree preservation provisions. The provisions are implemented by Council’s Tree Preservation Order (TPO). The Standard Instrument contains new optional vegetation management provisions. The provisions are required to be supplemented by a DCP which prescribes whether an approval or development consent is required for the pruning or removal of trees or other vegetation based on significance, species, size and location.

The Native Vegetation Planning Review was undertaken to evaluate options to best manage native vegetation under the Standard Instrument. The Review recommends inclusion of the optional vegetation management provisions as part of a broader regulatory regime. Accordingly, the vegetation management provisions have been included in the draft LEP and tree and vegetation management provisions will be included in Council’s Comprehensive DCP.

Heritage Conservation

The Standard Instrument contains similar mandatory heritage provisions to those contained in the HSLEP. However, the provisions differ in relation to requiring consent for interior changes to heritage listed buildings.

The Standard Instrument specifies that the heritage schedule only include items of State and local significance. Accordingly, items of State significance (not listed on the State Heritage Register) and regional significance under the HSLEP default to items of local significance in the draft LEP.

Heritage items, heritage conservation areas, archaeological sites and places of Aboriginal significance all have specific conservation provisions as delineated in the LEP. The classifications of heritage items are included in the Heritage Schedule rather than a Heritage Map as there are practical difficulties in identifying same. A Heritage Map has also been prepared to show the location and extent of heritage items and heritage conservation areas.

Part 6 - Local Provisions

The Standard Instrument contains an option for the inclusion of local provisions to implement local planning strategies. Local provisions for foreshore building lines, restriction on consent for particular sex services premises, acid sulfate soils, natural resource - biodiversity, flood planning areas, water sensitive urban design and designated development have been included in the new LEP.

Foreshore Building Line

The HSLEP contains foreshore building line provisions. The provisions seek to prohibit development between the foreshore building line (FBL) and the MHWM other than development which provides a land/water interface. FBLs currently apply to land at Wisemans Ferry, Brooklyn and Dangar Island.

The Rivers and Foreshores Controls Review recommends that new FBLs for river settlements be prepared for inclusion on the Foreshore Building Line map. New FBLs for the river settlements have been prepared based on existing policy, established setbacks and topographic constraints. The DOP has released a model FBL provision that has been included in the draft LEP.

Restriction on Sex Services Premises

The Standard Instrument defines sex services premises as a brothel but does not include home occupation (sex services). The HSLEP does not include a definition of sex services premises or a brothel. Accordingly, sex services premises by default became a business premises and were permitted with consent in the business zones.

The translation of business premises into the new Standard Instrument LEP format means that sex services premises are permitted with consent in all business zones, excluding the B1 Neighbourhood Centre zone. B1 zoned land in Hornsby Shire is surrounded by low density residential zoned land and other land uses likely to be regularly frequented by children.

The DOP has released a model provision based on the criteria included in the now repealed Disorderly Houses Act to restrict sex services to locations that do not adjoin places where children live or frequent. Other councils have included similar provisions in their new LEPs to provide greater control than afforded by zoning only. Accordingly, similar provisions have been included in the Comprehensive LEP to require a determining authority to consider, on a site by site basis, where sex service premises can be established.

Acid Sulfate Soils

The HSLEP includes Acid Sulfate Soils provisions and maps based on the then Department of Lands model provisions and guidelines for mapping. The provisions require consent and submission of a plan for major works to manage acid sulfate soil impacts.

The DOP has released a new set of model provisions. The model provisions differ to those contained in the HSLEP in relation to not requiring consent for ploughing associated with agriculture. Accordingly, amended model provisions have been included in the draft LEP to address the rural planning issues.

Natural Resource - Biodiversity

The HSLEP includes bushland protection provisions to require consent for minor activities such as clearing of vegetation and erection of a fence. The DOP has released a model Natural Resources - Biodiversity provision.

The Native Vegetation Planning Review was undertaken to manage native vegetation having regard to existing planning tools (including the bushland protection provisions of the HSLEP) and the planning tools available under the Standard Instrument. Of note, the Review identifies that the HSLEP requires consent for “land clearing” in the rural zones of the Shire and that such a use cannot be included in the rural land use tables of the draft LEP as the Standard Instrument does not include a similar definition. This could result in the potential for wholesale land clearing on rural zoned land as “land clearing” could be considered ancillary to extensive agriculture, which is permitted without consent.

The Review recommends the inclusion of the model provision as part of a broader regulatory regime for tree and vegetation management. The model provision establishes matters for consideration for development on lands with significant vegetation. A Natural Resources - Biodiversity Map has been prepared and identifies vegetation of National, State or regional significance. Tree and vegetation management provisions will be included in Council’s Comprehensive DCP to prescribe whether an approval or development consent is required for the pruning or removal of trees or other vegetation based on significance, species, size and location.

Flood Planning Areas

The HSLEP includes waterways provisions (in part) to establish controls for flood prone areas. Flood prone land along the Hawkesbury River in the Wisemans Ferry area is identified on the HSLEP zoning map. Accordingly, the model flood planning area provision has been included in the LEP and the flood prone land maps transferred into the new format.

The NSW Government Flood Policy establishes that flood prone land maps should be prepared in accordance with the NSW Government’s Floodplain Development Manual (April 2005). Flood prone land maps are currently being prepared by Council in accordance with the Manual to identify lands affected by overland flow in a 1 in 100 year ARI storm event in both urban areas and areas adjoining the Hawkesbury River. In October 2010, Council endorsed the Hornsby Overland Flow Study 2010 and Flood Planning Maps for public exhibition. When endorsed, the Maps will be progressed as a separate Planning Proposal to replace the flood mapping included in the draft LEP.

Water Sensitive Urban Design

Council’s Sustainable Water DCP currently contains principles for water sensitive urban design. The DOP has released a model provision for Stormwater Management that addresses employ a number of the same principles. Accordingly, a clause based on the model provision has been included in the draft LEP. The Clause aims to minimise the impacts of stormwater on adjoining properties, waterways, groundwater systems and native bushland, by requiring development to maximise the use of water permeable surfaces and incorporate on site stormwater retention.

Designated Development

The HSLEP includes a clause to declare that reclamation and dredging forms designated development and therefore, require the submission of an Environmental Impact Statement. A clause has been included in the draft LEP in accordance with the recommendations of the Waterways Review 2006 to declare that dredging involving over 1,000 cubic metres and/or undertaken within 40 metres of sensitive zones is designated development.

Schedules

Five schedules have been included to implement the additional permitted uses, exempt and complying development, classification and reclassification of public land provisions in the draft LEP.

Dictionary

There are a total of 283 general, land use and group terms listed under the Standard Instrument dictionary. There are a total of 127 definitions listed under the HSLEP dictionary. Council cannot add, delete or replace any of the terms listed under the Standard Instrument.

Maps

A total of 234 maps have been prepared to implement the draft LEP. They are the Land Application Map, Land Zoning Map, Additional Permitted Uses Map, Lot Size Map, Floor Space Ratio Map, Height of Buildings Map, Land Reservation Acquisition Map, Heritage Map, Acid Sulfate Soils Map, Flood Planning Map, Foreshore Building Line Map and Natural Resource - Biodiversity Map. All maps have been prepared in a consistent map grid at a scale of 1:20,000.

STATUTORY CONSIDERATIONS

Statutory considerations have previously been discussed under the heading of strategic and statutory context. In summary, the next steps in preparation of the LEP include undertaking formal Section 62 consultation with relevant Government authorities and adjoining councils and making a submission to the DOP seeking certification under Section 65 of the EP&A Act to enable Council to place the draft Plan on public exhibition. This report presents all information required under the EP&A Act to enable formal Section 62 consultation and for the Plan to be placed on public exhibition.

BUDGET

The preparation of Council’s new Comprehensive LEP has been prepared with resources allocated to the Town Planning Service Branch under the adopted Strategic Planning Program.

POLICY

The draft Comprehensive LEP will establish the framework for all future Council planning policy, including the Comprehensive DCP that is currently being prepared to supplement the LEP.

CONSULTATION

Internal and external consultation has been undertaken in the preparation of the draft LEP.

Internal Consultation

Consultation with relevant Council staff from the Planning, Environment and Works Divisions has been undertaken throughout the process of preparing the new LEP. Consultation has included workshops with key staff to assist in the preparation of a robust Plan.

In early 2010, three Councillor Workshops were held to present the process, key issues and recommendations for the preparation of the draft LEP. Councillors provided direction on key issues in the translation of the HSLEP into the Standard Instrument format. In summary, Councillors confirmed their general satisfaction with the translation of zones, adoption of the minimum lot size, height of building and floor space ratio provisions as the principal development standards and inclusion of additional local provisions to recognise Council’s unique planning circumstances.

External Consultation

A webpage was established on Council’s website to inform the community of Council’s obligation to prepare a Comprehensive LEP in accordance with the Standard Instrument and that the task will principally be a translation of the HSLEP. The webpage contains an overview of the project, answers to frequently asked questions and provides a link to the Standard Instrument and relevant Council reports. The webpage will be used as the main portal for future external consultation.

Section 62 of the EP&A Act requires councils to consult during the preparation of a LEP with adjoining councils and statutory authorities or bodies that Council believes that may be affected by the draft Plan. When Council advised the DOP of its resolution to prepare a new LEP, the DOP requested that Council undertake formal Section 62 consultation prior to the public exhibition of the Plan. The DOP advised that this will provide the opportunity for relevant Government agencies and adjoining councils to review the implications of the Plan having regard to all strategy work and the final planning provisions.

Council’s Section 62 consultation strategy forms an attachment to this report and is anticipated to be undertaken prior to public exhibition of the Plan. Notwithstanding, preliminary consultation was undertaken with 45 relevant statutory authorities and adjoining councils to assist in the preparation of the draft LEP. Responses were received from 33 of those bodies, many providing detailed comments which have been considered in the preparation of the draft Plan. A summary of the submissions received and Council’s response is attached.

Targeted consultation was undertaken with the RTA and Office of Strategic Lands concerning the reservation of land for acquisition for the purposes of road widening and regional open space. The Office of Strategic Lands has advised that it is currently undertaking a strategic review of the land required for regional open space purposes and will likely request changes during formal Section 62 consultation.

As part of its response to Council’s Section 54 notice, the DOP advised that Council should liaise closely with the Department throughout the preparation of the draft LEP to resolve any issues prior to certification of the Plan. Accordingly, a series of workshops with representatives of the DOP have been conducted throughout the preparation of the Plan. The Department also requires a mandatory pre-submission meeting prior to the formal Section 64 submission of Council’s LEP. This meeting was held in July 2010.

CONSULTATION STRATEGY

The Comprehensive LEP is being prepared under the old provisions of the EP&A Act for the making of plans. Accordingly, Council is responsible for identifying the consultation strategy for the draft Plan. Pursuant to Sections 34A and 62 of the EP&A Act, a letter will be sent to relevant State Government agencies and adjoining councils seeking comments on the draft Comprehensive LEP prior to public exhibition. Consistent with Council practice for exhibition of major studies and plans, the draft Comprehensive LEP is proposed to be exhibited for a minimum period of 60 days. A detailed consultation strategy is attached. In summary, notice of the public exhibition of the LEP would be by:

- inclusion of an advertisement in local newspapers at the start of, and during, the exhibition;

- advertising on the Council website for the duration of the exhibition period;

- notifying relevant State Government agencies and adjoining councils by letter at the start of the exhibition period;

- notifying relevant community interest and industry groups by letter at the start of the exhibition period;

- distribution of an information brochure and dissemination of exhibition material on the ‘Bang the Table’ website.

Written notice of, and material displayed during, the exhibition will be generally in accordance with the community consultation standards identified in the Department of Planning’s document “A guide to preparing local environmental plans” (2009). A report on submissions will be presented to Council for its consideration following the exhibition period.

To ensure the exhibition of the draft LEP in a timely manner, Council should delegate authority to the General Manager to endorse exhibition material, including information brochures for distribution to the community.

TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE SUMMARY

This Triple Bottom Line (TBL) Statement forms part of Council’s efforts towards “creating a living environment”. The statement addresses the strategic themes within Council’s Community Plan that cover social, environmental and economic factors and the corresponding sustainability questions contained in the TBL checklist.

· Working with our community: The draft Comprehensive LEP has been prepared in consultation with relevant public authorities. The preparation of the draft LEP will also involve extensive community consultation including placing advertisements in local newspapers and on the Council website, consultation with community and industry groups and display of exhibition material at Council buildings. Copies of the draft LEP and supporting information will also be available for purchase from Council or by downloading information from Council’s website. Therefore, the public exhibition material will be readily accessible, understandable and available to all sectors of the community.

· Conserving our natural environment: The draft LEP aims to protect and enhance the scenic and biodiversity values of environmentally sensitive lands, including bushland, river settlements, river catchments, wetlands and waterways. The draft LEP also aims to protect and enhance the heritage of the Shire, including places of historic, aesthetic, architectural, natural, cultural and Aboriginal significance.

· Contributing to community development through sustainable facilities and services: The draft LEP aims to provide a range of quality passive and active recreational areas and facilities that service the leisure needs of both the local and regional community. The draft LEP also aims to provide for the equitable distribution of community services and cultural opportunities to promote the wellbeing of the population of the Shire.

· Fulfilling our community’s vision in planning for the future of the Shire: The draft LEP has been informed by a number of strategic planning studies prepared in consultation with the community, including the Waterways Review 2006, Open Space Review 2006, River Settlements and Foreshores Review 2007, Rural Lands Planning Provisions Review 2009, Hornsby and Ku-Ring-Gai Subregional Employment Study 2010 and Housing Strategy 2010.

· Supporting our diverse economy: The draft LEP aims to provide business and industrial lands that service the needs of the community near housing, transport, services, and are consistent with, and reinforces, the role of centres within the sub-regional commercial centres hierarchy. The LEP has been informed by recommendations from the Hornsby and Ku-Ring-Gai Subregional Employment Study 2010.

· Maintaining sound corporate and financial management: The preparation of Council’s draft LEP has been prepared with resources allocated to the Town Planning Service Branch under the adopted Strategic Planning Program.

· Other Sustainability Considerations: The draft LEP aims to ensure development incorporates principles of sustainable development through the delivery of balanced social, economic and environmental outcomes.

CONCLUSION

The preparation of Council’s draft Comprehensive LEP has principally been a process of transferring Council’s existing LEP, the HSLEP, into the new LEP format. Additional planning studies have also been undertaken and have informed the new LEP to respond to regional strategies and the requirements for preparation of a Standard Instrument based LEP.

It is recommended that Council endorse the draft Comprehensive LEP and supporting information for consultation with relevant Government agencies and public exhibition.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT:

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

5. Following exhibition of the draft Comprehensive Local Environmental Plan, a report on submissions received in response to the public exhibition be presentation to Council for its consideration.

James Farrington

Manager - Town Planning Services

Planning Division

Scott Phillips

Executive Manager

Planning Division

Attachments:

1.View	Section 54 Advice Letter
2.View	Assessment of Consistency
3.View	Summary of Preliminary Consultation
4.View	Consultation Strategy

To view the draft Hornsby Shire Comprehensive Local Environmental Plan go to:

www.hornsby.nsw.gov.au

File Reference: F2007/00692-03

Document Number: D01534053

Standard Report No. PLN93/10

Planning Division

Date of Meeting: 1/12/2010

10 EPPING TOWN CENTRE STUDY - UPDATE REPORT

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In August 2010, Council resolved to engage JBA Urban Planning to undertake preparation of the Epping Town Centre Study. The consultants have undertaken and/or completed a number of tasks to progress the preparation of the Study in accordance with the Workplan including:

· data collection and collation;

· base mapping;

· documentation review;

· preparation of a Consultation Action Plan;

· establishment and consultation with Government Agencies and Stakeholder Reference groups;

· development of a base transport model (being finalised);

· development of short and long term growth scenario assumptions; and

· commencement of the Urban Design/Planning Analysis, Retail Analysis and Core Structure Plan stages.

The consultants will commence broad community consultation in December 2010, through the operation of community stalls within the Epping Town Centre. The stalls will provide the community with an opportunity to provide comment on, or hear more about, the Study.

Following calibration of the transport model and modelling of the growth scenarios, the results will be used to further inform work completed to date on the Opportunities and Constraints Analysis, the Retail/Commercial Core Review and the Residential Areas Review stages of the Study. The result of these stages will be presented to the Steering Committee at its next meeting scheduled for March 2010.

It is anticipated that the final Study will be reported to Council in April/May 2010.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to provide an update on the preparation of the Epping Town Centre Study.

BACKGROUND

At its meeting on 3 February 2010, Council considered Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN108/10, seeking endorsement of a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Hornsby and Parramatta City Councils and the Department of Planning (DOP) for funding to prepare the Epping Town Centre Study. Council resolved (in part) to endorse the draft MOU and Project Workplan.

The MOU was subsequently signed by Hornsby and Parramatta City Councils and the DOP. In accordance with the Project Workplan, tender documentation for consultant involvement in the Study was prepared in consultation with PCC and DOP. The tender was advertised as an open tender until 28 May 2010. In response to the advertisement, seventeen firms lodged conforming tenders.

At its meeting on 18 August 2010, Council considered Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN60/10, seeking endorsement of the recommendations of the Epping Town Centre Study Steering Committee to engage the preferred consultant, JBA Urban Planning to undertake the Study. In accordance with Council’s resolution and following endorsement by Parramatta City Council and the DOP, the JBA study team was engaged on 8 September 2010. In addition to JBA, the consultant team includes Halcrow (traffic), KJA (community consultation), Hughes Trueman (costs analysis) and Hill PDA (economic feasibility).

DISCUSSION

The following discussion indentifies the tasks undertaken under the Workplan to progress the Epping Town Centre Study up to Week 7 of the Study.

Study Inception and Establishment

The Study Inception and Establishment stage has been completed. Details of individual components of this stage are outlined below.

Inception meeting

Members of the consultant team met with the Epping Town Centre Study Working Party on 16 September 2010. The meeting was also attended by representatives of the traffic and transport sections of both Councils. The meeting confirmed:

· the roles of members of both the Study team and the Working Party;

· key meeting dates and delivery of tasks throughout the Study;

· study priorities for the Councils and the DOP, including expectations for short and long term scenario development;

· consultation with Government Agencies, data collection and modelling methodology; and

· stakeholder and community consultation.

Hornsby Council Study priorities where outlined as follows:

· traffic management will be a critical factor in determining potential for increased development opportunities with the Centre;

· consideration should be given to draft Heritage Conservation Areas (namely East Epping, Essex Street and Rosebank Avenue); and

· Epping should have a residential role, rather than a commercial role that would compete with Hornsby Town Centre.

Parramatta Council Study priorities where outlined as follows:

· the controls proposed as part of the recently exhibited Parramatta Local Environmental Plan should be reviewed, particularly in relation to traffic constraints; and

· consideration should be given to draft Heritage Conservation Areas.

Department of Planning Study priorities were outlined as follows:

· the Centre should be considered as a single entity;

· the core area should be reviewed to determine the maximum capacity; and

· opportunities for development outside the core should be considered where it is identified there is spare capacity not met within the core.

Consultation Action Plan

A Consultation Action Plan was prepared by the consultant team following consultation with the Working Party. The Plan outlines community consultation and engagement activities to complement the technical assessment and planning undertaken as part of the Study to ensure key stakeholders and members of the broader community have an opportunity to provide input into the planning process. Key community consultation activities include:

· establishment of, and consultation with, a Stakeholder Reference Group comprising property owners, developers, residents, Epping Chamber of Commerce, Epping Civic Trust; and

· broad community consultation through two street stalls providing members of the community with an opportunity to gain information about the Study and provide feedback to the Study team.

Further community consultation will also be undertaken by the Councils following completion of the Study during the exhibition period.

Data Collection and Collation

The consultant has completed the collection of data from the Councils and the DOP to inform various stages of the Study including the Transport Capacity Analysis, Opportunities and Constraints Analysis, Retail Core and Residential Review. The consultant advises that there has been a 2 -3 week delay in collection of transport and traffic data from the RTA. However, this is not expected to impact on the delivery of the final Study.

Base mapping

Base mapping for the Study has been completed using data collected from the three organisations. Base mapping has been used to commence the Transport Capacity Analysis, the Opportunities and Constraints Analysis, the Retail Core and the Residential Review stages of the Study.

Document Review

Hornsby and Parramatta Councils and the DOP have provided the consultant with access to relevant documents prepared in respect of the Study area, the Subregions and the Sydney Metropolitan area. A review of these documents has been completed.

Transport Capacity Analysis and Scoping

Transport analysis is discussed below in terms of the establishment of the Government Agencies Group, development of the transport model and short and long term growth scenarios.

Government Agencies Group

A Government Agencies Group has been established to facilitate consultation with key government transport agencies such as RTA, Railcorp, Sydney Buses and the Transport Construction Authority (previously the Transport Infrastructure Development Corporation). On 22 September, a meeting was held with the Government Agencies Group and was attended by representatives from the RTA and Transport NSW (TNSW), who represented the other government transport agencies. The meeting was attended by JBA and Halcrow, who have the project lead for the Transport Capacity Analysis, Scoping and modelling activities in the Study, as well representatives of the Councils and the DOP.

At the meeting, the Government Agencies Group:

· outlined the RTA expectations for traffic modelling where it will be relied upon to justify infrastructure spending;

· provided a commitment to the provision of transport data to the Study team; and

· confirmed the NSW Government’s commitment to infrastructure projects as documented in the NSW Metropolitan Transport Plan (2020).

The development of the short and long term growth scenarios was also discussed. TNSW recommended that the short term scenario timeframe for modelling be based on existing land use capacity within the Centre and include projects fully funded as part of the Metropolitan Transport Plan. This precludes the inclusion of the proposed Parramatta to Epping Rail Link, which is currently unfunded at either the Federal or State level.

TNSW also recommended that the long term scenario include the projects identified, but not due to be completed within the 10 year horizon of the Metropolitan Transport Plan. This would include completion of the Hills District Line (formerly North West Rail Link) to Rouse Hill from Epping. TNSW also recommended 2031 as an appropriate planning horizon for the long term scenario, to align with the Bureau of Transport Statistics horizon year.

Transport Model Establishment

As discussed previously, data collection issues have resulted in delays in establishing the base model. These issues have now been resolved. However, final data is still being collated by the RTA for completion of the base model. This may delay delivery of the draft Study. However, it is expected that the final Study will be completed in accordance with the Workplan.

Short and Long Term Growth Scenarios

The base model, as well as short and long term growth scenarios, was presented at a Steering Committee Meeting on 3 November 2010. The justification for the development of the assumptions was also discussed with the Committee. The short and long term growth assumptions are outlined below:

Short term growth scenario assumptions include:

· a timeframe of approximately 10 years (2011–2020) to align with Metropolitan Transport Plan;

· based on existing rail network/ capacity;

· does not include the Parramatta to Epping Rail Link or Hills District Line;

· includes new Strategic Bus Corridor servicing the Epping Town Centre;

· existing local road network with local improvements as informed by the Councils;

· completion of the M2 Motorway upgrade is undertaken;

· consideration is given to opportunities to reduce parking rates for new development;

· a mode split based on 35% of journey to work by non-car modes is applied;

· 5% of local and district trips are by bicycle;

· an increase of 4,000 dwellings within the identified 800m pedestrian shed*, with a total of 5,000 dwellings in the overall Study area;

· no anticipated demand to generate an increase in overall commercial floor space within the Town Centre core; and

· an increase of 3,000m2 of retail floor space in the Town Centre core including the potential for one additional supermarket.

* Pedestrian shed - the actual area encompassed by a walkable distance of 800m of Epping station by public footpath.

Long term growth scenario assumptions include:

· a timeframe determined by the opening of the Parramatta to Epping Rail link and/or Hills District Line North West Rail Link;

· completion of road network improvements in the short term;

· mode split of 40/50% journey to work by non car mode;

· an increase to a total of 8,000 dwellings within the Study Area, including a total of 7,000 dwellings within the identified 800m pedestrian shed* (8,000 being the mid-point between the 4,500 – 9,500 dwelling target for town centres under the Metropolitan Strategy);

· static or reduction in commercial floor space due to conversion of sites to mixed use; and

· an increase of 3,000m2 of retail floor space in the Town Centre core, being a total increase of 6,000m2 since the development of the base case scenario.

Stakeholder Reference Group Presentation

A meeting with the Stakeholder Reference Group, facilitated by KJA was held on 4 November 2010. The Stakeholder Reference Group is comprised of:

· representatives of the Parramatta Council Community Resident Panel;

· representatives of the Hornsby Shire Council Community Resident Panel;

· a representative from the Epping Chamber of Commerce;

· a representative from the Epping Business Property Group;

· a representative from the Epping Civic Trust; and

· a representative from the Boronia Park Committee.

The meeting included an outline of the purpose and objectives of the Study. The Group provided feedback on their observations of opportunities and constraints within Epping Town Centre, as well as its current and future role. A range of views were held by the Group in relation to the current functioning of the Centre and the future development of the Centre as follows:

· traffic would continue to be the major constraint impacting upon the functioning of the Centre, the source of which is outside the Centre;

· positive features of cosmopolitan living such as outdoor eating, an active streetscape and good local shops/office are dependant upon a sustainable local population;

· encouraging compactness in the Centre would promote pedestrian activity;

· creating linkages should encourage people to not only walk but to follow a path of integrated open space which connects the Centre and reduce reliance on cars for local trips;

· a diverse range of housing options would encourage a range of residents to the area, although some members felt there was sufficient housing variety already available within the locality;

· to reduce the demand on vehicles, increased housing density should be located within the immediate vicinity of the station, although others felt that it should be focused in nodes located outside the Centre core and supported by a micro transport system serving Epping Station;

· good higher density development should achieve increased residential floor space without increasing building footprints, allowing ground level space to be opened up and providing redevelopment opportunities for existing poor quality housing stock; and

· development should be on a “human scale” and ensure that existing open/green space is protected, particularly from overshadowing, by any new development.

A further presentation is scheduled with the Stakeholder Reference Group following completion of the Opportunities and Constraints Analysis, the Retail/Commercial Core Review and the Residential Area Review stages of the Study.

Opportunities and Constraints Analysis

The consultant team has completed data collection, base mapping and the document review. The Urban Planning/Design Analysis stage has commenced and work on the Retail Analysis has also been commenced by Hill PDA.

Next Steps

Broad community consultation will commence from 1 December 2010 with the operation of community stalls. The stalls will be held at Epping Station, Langston Place and Rawson Street, Epping. Details of the stall will be published in the Northern District Times. The stalls will provide members of the community with an opportunity to gain information about the Study and provide feedback to the Study team. Feedback forms will be made available at the stalls for community members to provide input. Feedback forms will also be made available at Epping Library during that week.

Following completion and calibration of the transport model, the growth scenarios will be modelled. The outcome of this modelling will be used to inform the Opportunities and Constraints Analysis and the Retail/Commercial Core and Residential Areas stages of the Study. The result of these stages will be presented to the Steering Committee at its next meeting, anticipated to be scheduled in March 2010. It is anticipated that the final Study will be reported to Council in April/May next year.

CONSULTATION

A Steering Committee comprising the Regional Director, DOP and Councillor and staff representation from Hornsby and Parramatta Councils has been established as an advisory committee to oversee the progression of the key tasks of the Study.

A Consultation Action Plan outlines community consultation and engagement activities to complement the technical assessment and planning undertaken as part of the Epping Town Centre Study to ensure key stakeholders and members of the broader community have an opportunity to provide input into the planning process.

Key community consultation activities include establishment of, and consultation with, a Stakeholder Reference Group and broad community consultation through two Community Street Stalls.

Further community consultation will also be undertaken by the Councils following completion of the Study.

TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE

Triple Bottom Line is a framework for improving Council decisions by ensuring accountability and transparency on social, environmental and economic factors. It does this by reporting upon Council’s strategic themes. As this report presents information but does not propose any actions which require a sustainability assessment, no Triple Bottom Line considerations apply.

CONCLUSION

JBA Urban Planning have commenced and/or undertaken a number of tasks to progress the preparation of the Epping Town Centre Study in accordance with the Study Workplan. These tasks include preparation of a consultation plan, establishment of Government Agency and Stakeholder Reference groups, base traffic modelling and development of short and long term growth scenarios.

Following completion and calibration of the transport model, the growth scenarios will be modelled. The outcome of the modelling will be used to inform the Opportunities and Constraints Analysis, the Retail/Commercial Core and Residential Areas stages of the Study. The result of these stages will be presented to the Steering Committee at it next meeting, anticipated to be scheduled in March 2010. It is anticipated that the final Study will be reported to Council in April/May next year.

It is recommended that Council receive and note the contents of this report.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council receive and note the contents of Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN93/10.

James Farrington

Manager - Town Planning Services

Planning Division

Scott Phillips

Executive Manager

Planning Division

Attachments:

There are no attachments for this report.

File Reference: F2010/00546

Document Number: D01535091

Standard Report No. PLN94/10

Planning Division

Date of Meeting: 1/12/2010

11 KANGAROO POINT - BROOKLYN DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN AMENDMENTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Kangaroo Point Planning Proposal has been prepared and forwarded to the Department of Planning (DOP) for gazettal to permit the construction of a commuter berthing facility at Kangaroo Point. The Planning Proposal does not limit the size or intensity of any future commuter berthing facility. Accordingly, when Council adopted the Planning Proposal, it also resolved to prepare amendments to the Brooklyn Development Control Plan (DCP) to limit the number of commuter berths and the size of boats.

In accordance with Council’s resolution, draft amendments to the Brooklyn DCP have been prepared to limit the size of any future commuter berthing facility at Kangaroo Point to a maximum of 25 boats of up to 6m in length and within the existing commercial wet lease area. It is recommended that Council endorse the draft DCP amendments for public exhibition.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to present draft amendments to the Brooklyn DCP to control the location, size and design of any future commuter berthing facility at Kangaroo Point, Brooklyn.

BACKGROUND

In November 2009, Council resolved that the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan (HSLEP) 1994 be amended to permit the construction of a commuter berthing facility at Kangaroo Point. In accordance with Council’s resolution, the Kangaroo Point Planning Proposal was presented to Council on 7 April 2010 for endorsement for public exhibition. The Planning Proposal was exhibited for community comment in July 2010.

At its meeting on 6 October 2010, Council considered Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN69/10 presenting a report on submissions received in response to the exhibition of the Kangaroo Point Planning Proposal. Council resolved that:

1. Council forward the attached Kangaroo Point Planning Proposal to the Minister for Planning for gazettal pursuant to Section 59 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

2. Council prepare amendments to the Kangaroo Point Community Masterplan in the Brooklyn Development Control Plan to aim to ensure that any future commuter berthing facility is limited to a maximum of 25 boats of up to 4.5m in length and within the existing wet lease area (Licence No. L201707).

3. Any future provision of commuter berthing and car parking at Kangaroo Point be funded by river residents (including the land value component) and the detailed financial arrangements concerning the acquisition, construction and occupation of a commuter berthing proposal at Kangaroo Point be the subject of further discussion and a report to Council.

4. Submitters be advised of Council’s resolution.

5. Council pursue negotiations with the owners of land within the vicinity of Dolphin Marina and land between Dolphin Marina and Kangaroo Point to either acquire land and/or obtain legal rights for public car parking and pedestrian access to facilitate additional car parking associated with future development at Kangaroo Point.

6. Council pursue grant funding to facilitate the above.

In accordance with part 1 of Council’s resolution, the Kangaroo Point Planning Proposal has been forwarded to the DOP for gazettal. This report presents draft DCP amendments to supplement the Planning Proposal in accordance with part 2 of Council’s resolution.

Council is pursuing negotiations with owners of land within the vicinity of Kangaroo Point to facilitate additional carparking opportunities in association with future development at Kangaroo Point and is pursuing grant funding to facilitate same.

DISCUSSION

The Kangaroo Point Planning Proposal does not limit the size or intensity of any future commuter berthing facility. Council resolved to limit the size of any future berthing facility by including appropriate controls in the Brooklyn DCP. This report presents draft amendments to the Brooklyn DCP to control the scale and intensity of any future commuter berthing facility.

Brooklyn Development Control Plan

The Brooklyn DCP applies to Kangaroo Point and came into force on 1 October 1996. The primary purpose of the DCP is to provide detailed provisions for the control of development within Brooklyn and Kangaroo Point, and to implement the findings of the Brooklyn and Environs Management Plan 1990.

Controls concerning the natural and visual qualities and facilities at Kangaroo Point are contained in the Recreation Settings and Kangaroo Point Community Masterplan elements. The Kangaroo Point Community Masterplan seeks to provide direction for the future community use of Kangaroo Point Reserve and determine its long term role and function as a community area, having regard to its intrinsic values, opportunities and constraints. In accordance with Council’s resolution on 6 October 2010, these elements have been revised to include controls limiting the size and impact of any commuter berthing facility to prevent detraction from the quality of the environment and amenity of the reserve.

Draft Development Control Plan Amendments

Draft DCP amendments have been prepared to limit the number of berths, size of boats and extent of any future commuter berthing facility as outlined below.

Number of Berths

The amendments propose to limit any future commuter berthing facility to 25 spaces to meet the current permanent demand of Hornsby Shire river residents. This figure was derived from a demand/supply analysis of commuter berthing in the lower Hawkesbury River considered by Council at its meeting on 16 March 2005 (Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN63/05). The report noted that there is a permanent demand for 25 river residents (based on full time occupancy of premises) and potential demand (based on dwelling entitlements) for up to 95 river residents of Hornsby Shire for commuter berthing.

Size of Boats

Council previously resolved that boats be restricted to 4.5m in length. The length of boats was determined having regard to the average length of boats in a survey undertaken in 2002 of boats used by Hornsby Shire river residents. However, it is proposed that the length of boats permissible be increased to 6m to permit all surveyed river resident boats access to the berthing facility to commute to, and from the mainland. The maximum length of 6m would prevent the use of the facility by pleasure craft.

Scale of the Facility

Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN69/10 notes that a commuter berthing facility should also be contained within the boundaries of the commercial licence (Licence No. L201707) issued by the Land and Property Management Authority (LPMA) to minimise the visual and environmental impact of boats utilising the facility. The draft DCP amendments require that any facility be contained within the existing licence area. The houseboat berths and associated offices of the “Luxury Afloat” marina would need to be reconfigured to be contained within the licence area.

A copy of the draft amendments to the Brooklyn DCP are attached to this report.

STATUTORY CONSIDERATIONS

If Council endorses the draft amendments to the Brooklyn DCP, the draft DCP amendments are required to be exhibited for a minimum period of 28 days for public comment. Following the exhibition, an assessment of submissions would be undertaken and a further report prepared detailing any recommended amendments to the draft DCP amendments. Following amendments, the draft DCP amendments can be finalised and adopted in accordance with Section 74 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The draft DCP amendments would come into effect on the date of publication of a notice in local newspapers following gazettal of the draft LEP.

CONSULTATION STRATEGY

The draft amendments to the Brooklyn DCP should be exhibited for a minimum period of 28 days. The exhibition of the draft DCP would include the following:

Advertisements in Local Newspapers

An advertisement would be placed in the newspapers listed below on two occasions during the exhibition period.

Hornsby Advocate

Bush Telegraph

The advertisement would identify the purpose of the draft DCP amendments and where the draft Plan can be viewed.

Advertisement on the Council Website

The draft DCP amendments would be exhibited on the Council website (www.hornsby.nsw.gov.au) under “On Exhibition – Town Planning”. Council’s libraries have access to the website.

Letter to Local Community Groups and Individuals who made a Submission on the Kangaroo Point Planning Proposal

Notification letters would be sent to local community groups and individuals, who made a submission on the Kangaroo Point Planning Proposal, advising of the exhibition of the draft DCP amendments and inviting submissions.

Displays at the Council Administration Building, Community Centre and Local Libraries

The draft DCP amendments would be displayed at the Council Administration Centre, 296 Pacific Highway, Hornsby and the following community centre and libraries:

Hornsby Library

Berowra Library

Brooklyn and District Community Health and Resource Centre

Referrals to Statutory Authorities

Notification letters and a copy of the draft DCP amendments would be sent to the following statutory authorities advising of the exhibition of the draft Plan and inviting submissions.

Roads and Traffic Authority

Land and Property Management Authority

Department of Primary Industries (Fisheries)

NSW Maritime Authority

Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Lands Council

NSW Rural Fire Service

Sydney Water Corporation

Hawkesbury Nepean Catchment Management Authority

Gosford City Council

Referrals to other Divisions/Branches

A copy of the draft DCP amendments would be forwarded to the following Divisions/Branches of Council for comment.

Environmental Sustainability and Health Team

Parks and Landscape Team

Waste Management Team

Water Catchments Team

Assets Branch

Traffic and Road Safety Branch

Administration Services Branch

Property Development Branch

Review of Consultation Strategy

Where submissions warrant, the consultation strategy may be reviewed to extend the exhibition period and/or the methods of consultation. This may occur where a submission provides reasonable justification for a request for an extension to the exhibition period or where Council is of the opinion an amendment to the consultation strategy would facilitate greater feedback on the draft DCP.

Following the exhibition period, a report on submissions would be presented to Council for its consideration.

TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE SUMMARY

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

A Triple Bottom Line summary was provided in respect of the Kangaroo Point Planning Proposal in Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN23/10 considered by Council on 7 April 2010 and remains relevant in relation to the inclusion of controls in the Kangaroo Point Community Masterplan to limit the size and intensity of any future commuter berthing facility.

CONCLUSION

The Kangaroo Point Planning Proposal has been prepared and forwarded to the DOP for gazettal to permit the construction of a commuter berthing facility at Kangaroo Point. The Planning Proposal does not limit the size or intensity of any future commuter berthing facility. Accordingly, when Council adopted the Planning Proposal, it also resolved to prepare amendments to the Brooklyn DCP to limit the number of commuter berths and the size of boats.

In accordance with Council’s resolution, draft amendments to the Brooklyn DCP to limit the size of any future commuter berthing facility at Kangaroo Point to a maximum of 25 boats of up to 6m in length and within the existing commercial wet lease area have been prepared for endorsement for public exhibition.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT:

3. Following the exhibition, a report on submissions be presented to Council.

James Farrington

Manager - Town Planning Services

Planning Division

Scott Phillips

Executive Manager

Planning Division

Attachments:

1.View

Draft Brooklyn DCP Amendment

File Reference: F2010/00285

Document Number: D01535929

Development Application No:	DA/746/2010
Description of Proposal:	Two lot subdivision and construction of an affordable housing development comprising 36 units.
Property Description:	Lot A DP 399538 (No. 8A) Northcote Road Hornsby
Applicant:	Northcote Trust
Owner:	Arara Properties Pty Ltd
Statutory Provisions:	Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 Residential A (Low Density)
Estimated Value:	$6.5 million
Ward:	A