Agenda of Planning Meeting

Planning Report No. PLN2/11

Date of Meeting: 6/04/2011

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

Development Application No:	DA/591/2010
Description of Proposal:	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

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.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

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

2. Council at its Planning Meeting on 1 December 2010, resolved to defer consideration of the development application to provide the applicant with an opportunity to address Council’s concerns. The application still does not include the consent of the adjoining owner for construction works to be undertaken on the driveway.

3. The proposal complies with the provisions of the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 and Council’s Residential Subdivision Development Control Plan.

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

5. It is recommended that the application be refused.

HISTORY OF THE APPLICATION

On 20 May 2010, DA/591/2010 was lodged for the demolition of the existing structures on the site and the subdivision of one lot into six lots. Council at its Planning Meeting on 1 December 2010 considered Executive Manager’s Report PLN/80/2010 regarding DA/591/2010 and resolved as follows:

“THAT consideration of 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 deferred until the 2 February 2011 Planning Meeting to provide the applicant the opportunity to address the deficiencies in the application as set out in Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN80/10.”

Subsequent to the Planning Meeting, Council officers held an on-site meeting with the applicant to discuss the outstanding matters. Following this meeting the applicant submitted a construction management plan, an on-site detention system plan and garbage truck access plan. The plans satisfactorily address Council’s concerns other than providing the owner’s consent for works on the adjoining land.

Council Officers also attempted to meet the adjoining property owner to discuss their on-going concerns. However, Council officers and the neighbouring property owner were unable to find mutually convenient time to meet and consequently a meeting did not take place.

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 has a width of 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.

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 5 metre wide accessway is 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 stormwater channel is proposed to be accommodated within Lots 1, 2 and 3. 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 ‘Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036’, the ‘North Subregion (Draft) Subregional Strategy’ and the matters for consideration prescribed under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the Act). Subsequently, the following issues have been identified for further consideration.

1. STRATEGIC CONTEXT

1.1 Metropolitan Strategy – (Draft) North Subregional Strategy

The Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036 is a broad framework to secure Sydney’s place in the global economy by promoting and managing growth. It outlines a vision for Sydney to 2036; the challenges faced, and the directions to follow to address these challenges and achieve the vision. The Draft North Subregional Strategy acts as a framework for Council in its preparation of the Comprehensive LEP by the end of 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 Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 - Owners Consent

Pursuant to Clause 49 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, a development application may be lodged by any person with the consent of the owner of the land to which the application relates.

The proposed development involves works on the common driveway servicing the site and the adjoining allotment at No. 61 Woodcourt Road. The proposed development would also require right-of-access over a section of the adjoining allotment at No. 61 Woodcourt Road.

The applicant has demonstrated that they have made a number of attempts to achieve a mutual agreement with the owner of the neighbouring property with regard to owner’s consent. The applicant’s town planning consultant has advised Council that the applicant has made written offers to the neighbour seeking to achieve owners consent. However, it is understood that no positive response has been received from the neighbouring owner.

The applicant has addressed all other planning concerns, previously raised by Council.

As the consent of the owner of the adjoining allotment has not been submitted with the development application, Council cannot support the proposal in its current form.

2.2 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 proposal complies with the zone objectives as detailed in subsequent sections of this report.

Clause 14 of the 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.

2.3 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.

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

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

2.4.1 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 has submitted a Soil and Water Management Plan and a Stormwater Management Plan to demonstrate that the development would not have any adverse impact on the water quality of the catchment.

Council’s assessment concludes that the development is satisfactory in respect of the requirements of SREP 20.

2.5 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

587 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

North-western side No Yes

South-eastern side

Lot 2

Front(South-west)

Rear

North-western side No Yes

South-eastern side

Lot 3

Front(South-west)

Rear

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

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:

2.5.1 Density

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

2.5.2 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.

2.5.3 Setbacks

The proposal includes concept building envelopes within each lot which demonstrates compliance with the DCP’s setback requirements.

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 for dwellings.

2.5.4 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 the future.

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

2.5.5 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.

2.5.6 Drainage Control and Urban Stream

An open Stormwater drainage channel traverses the north-eastern side of the property. The stormwater from Alan Road discharges into this drainage channel. The drainage system to the north of the site is known to cause flooding to several downstream properties.

The applicant proposes that the collected stormwater runoff be drained 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 system is considered to be sufficient to mitigate flooding to downstream properties as a result of the proposed development. Considering the flooding and drainage problems downstream of the subject site, it is considered that the development would require the construction of an on-site detention (OSD) system to minimise the impact of flooding on downstream properties. Should the application be approved, a condition of development consent would recommend that the OSD be constructed for a permitted maximum site discharge that will be equal to the pre-development 1 in 5 year storm event and provide storage for all storms up to and including the 1 in 100 year post development storm event. This condition would be similar to that recommended for a subdivision proposal, immediately upstream of the subject site at No. 11 Alan Road.

Council’s engineering assessment also concludes that the open drainage channel should be piped as part of any development on site and an overland flowpath be provided though the site. A Restriction-as-to-User would be required on the title of the property prohibiting the alteration of the overland flowpath and to ensure that a minimum floor level of 500mm above the 1 in 100 ARI flood level is applied to all dwellings that are adjacent to the drainage system.

To provide a compliant drainage system, the existing piped vehicular crossing that services both No. 61 Woodcourt Road and the subject property would be replaced with a box culvert in the future ensuring that this portion of the system is designed in accordance with Council Civil Works Specification. It would also minimise the impact of flooding during severe storm events.

Further, catch drains would also be required around the upstream perimeter of the site so that overland flows can be redirected around the site and then be discharged into the drainage system in a controlled manner.

Given the above, the development would comply with the “Drainage Control” element of the RSDCP subject to owner’s consent being provided by the neighbouring property with regard to the required drainage construction works required on that land.

2.5.7 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 not 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. Without that consent, it is considered that the subdivision could not proceed in an orderly and economic manner.

2.5.8 Waste Minimisation and Management

The applicant has submitted a construction management plan demonstrating how access would be maintained for both sites during construction works. The construction management plan is considered satisfactory subject to owner’s consent being provided from the neighbouring property regarding construction works and temporary access within the adjoining property.

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.

The proposal includes details of garbage truck turning areas within the site demonstrating that a garbage truck could ingress and egress the site is a forward direction. Council’s engineering assessment of the proposal with regard to truck turning areas concludes that the turning area would comply subject to minor alterations which can be recommended as conditions of development consent. However, it is noted that the proposal requires right-of-way over a section of the adjoining property at No. 61 Woodcourt Road, to achieve the required width of the driveway. Consent from the adjoining property owner has not been provided, granting the right-of-way.

2.6 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:

2.6.1 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.

2.7 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 2.5.7 of this report.

2.8 Sustainable Water Development Control Plan

The matter is discussed in Section 2.5.6 of this report. No further assessment is considered necessary under this DCP.

2.9 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 2.5.6 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 other relevant matters are discussed below.

3.2.1 Traffic

Access to the development site is via a right of way to Woodcourt Road which is a minor collector road within the Berowra Heights precinct. Collector roads typically have traffic volumes of between 2,000 and 15,000 vehicles per day (vpd). In 2004 Council undertook a traffic count adjacent to No 47 Woodcourt Road. The result determined that the average vpd for the road was 1790 which is well below the capacity of a collector road. Furthermore the RTA’s Guide to Traffic Generating Developments indicates that the environmental capacity of residential streets should not exceed 2000 vpd.

In accordance with the above, the proposed development would generate a maximum of forty-five additional daily traffic movements (at nine per additional dwelling house). This increase in vehicular movements would only be 2.5% and would not have any noticeable impact on the traffic movements within Woodcourt Road. It should also be noted that the total vpds would still be within the environmental capacity of the road network in this area. Council’s traffic assessment concludes that the additional traffic generation on the local road network would be satisfactory.

3.2.2 Vehicle sight distances

AS 2890.1 Off Street Car Parking provides details regarding the required sight distances for access driveways. In this regard it is noted that a minimum sight distance of 55 metres is required for roads that have a posted speed limit of between 55 and 64 km/h. The measured sight distances in both directions from the access driveway exceed 100 metres and it would comply with AS 2890.1. Notwithstanding, should the application be approved, minor regrading of the access handle at the intersection of Woodcourt Road would be necessary to ensure that vehicles are entering and leaving the access handle from a level surface.

3.2.3 Acoustics

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 a 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.

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 3 June 2010 and 24 June 2010 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

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 and the like. Section 193 and 194 of the Act also provides that Council may authorise a person to perform such functions.

Given that the drainage line 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 should Council decide to exercise its right under the Act.

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. However, given that this application is for subdivision only and that the drainage channel is proposed to be piped, a landscape plan would not be required.

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 demonstrated that the development could proceed in an orderly and economic manner consistent with Council’s planning requirements. The development would be in the public interest in so far as providing the opportunity to better utilise residential land for future housing. The development would meet State and Local planning strategies and the subdivision of the land is encouraged.

The applicant has demonstrated a reasonable approach to seeking consent of the adjoining property owner to obtain access rights over a minor portion o the right of carriageway in a manner that would not adversely impact upon the amenity of that site. However, as owner’s consent has not been forthcoming, Council is unable to approve the application despite the development being 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 or for garbage truck access. 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 includes details of garbage truck access to the site and details of the proposed on-site-detention system which have been assessed as satisfactory.

Council, at its planning meeting on 1 December 2010, resolved to defer the application to provide the applicant with an opportunity to address Council’s concerns and achieve an acceptable outcome on the site. The applicant has been able to address all of Council’s concerns regarding the application except for providing the owner’s consent from the neighbouring property for the required works on the adjoining property. Consequently, despite the development being in the public interest 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
4.View	Construction Management Plan
5.View	Garbage Truck Access Details

File Reference: DA/591/2010

Document Number: D01571481

SCHEDULE 1

1. 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 to ensure the orderly and efficient access to and egress from the development. The necessary written consent of the owner of the adjoining property at No. 61 Woodcourt Road (Lot 1 DP 502390) has not been obtained.

- END OF REASONS FOR REFUSAL -

Planning Report No. PLN24/11

Date of Meeting: 6/04/2011

2 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - ERECTION OF A DWELLING HOUSE & CONVERSION OF THE EXISTING DWELLING HOUSE TO A RURAL STRUCTURE
27 BAY ROAD, ARCADIA

Development Application No:	DA/1634/2010
Description of Proposal:	Erection of a dwelling-house and conversion of existing dwelling-house into a rural structure
Property Description:	Lot 2, DP 234025, No 27 Bay Road, Arcadia
Applicant:	Mr B Waller
Owners:	Mr Bernard Waller and Mrs Waller
Statutory Provisions:	Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan, 1994 - Rural AR (Large Holdings- Rural Landscapes) and Environmental Protection B (River Catchment)
Estimated Value:	$475,000
Ward:	A

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Development Application No. 1634/2010 for the erection of a dwelling-house and the conversion of the existing dwelling-house to a rural structure at Lot 2, DP 234025, No 27 Bay Road, Arcadia be approved subject to the conditions of consent detailed in Schedule 1 of this report.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. The application seeks development consent for the erection of a dwelling-house, a garage and a swimming pool and the conversion of the existing dwelling-house on the site for use as a “rural structure”.

2. The proposal generally complies with the requirements of the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan, 1994 (HSLEP) and Council’s Development Control Plans applicable to the development.

3. A Red Sticker has been placed against the application and accordingly it has been referred to Council for determination.

4. One public submission was received during the exhibition period.

5. It is recommended that the application be approved subject to conditions.

THE SITE

The site is 8.7 hectares in size and has a relatively long and narrow shape. The site is located on the northern side of Bay Road, Arcadia between Coolamon Close and Chilcott Road. The site contains a single storey dwelling-house and several small outbuildings located within a cleared portion adjacent to the Bay Road boundary.

The site slopes steeply to the rear, draining towards a natural watercourse which is an upper tributary of Banks Creek. The site is predominantly covered by natural bushland with a portion of the site in the vicinity of the front boundary identified as an Endangered Ecological Community (EEC). The site is located within a bushfire prone area.

The surrounding area is characterised by allotments of similar shape and size with dwelling-houses, rural structures, swimming pools and water tanks erected on the cleared portions of the properties in close proximity to the road.

THE PROPOSAL

The application proposes the erection of a contemporary styled, two storey dwelling-house incorporating a dining room, family room, laundry, three bedrooms, a kitchen, powder room, study, living room, and a pergola with an enclosed walkway accessing another bedroom with an adjacent walk-in-robe, ensuite and a verandah on the ground floor. Two bedrooms, a bathroom, a rumpus room and a study are proposed at first floor level. A double garage is proposed adjacent to the front of the dwelling-house and an inground pool would be installed behind the dwelling-house.

The new dwelling-house would be set back approximately 45 metres from the dwelling-house at No. 25 Arcadia Road and 35 metres from the dwelling-house at No. 29 Arcadia Road.

The application originally proposed the existing dwelling-house be retained for use as “extended family accommodation”. As this land use would be prohibited within the rural zone pursuant to Clause 7 of the HSLEP, the applicant has amended the application seeking consent for the conversion of the existing dwelling-house to a “rural structure”.

As this development would be sited within a cleared portion of the site, no trees would be removed.

ASSESSMENT

1. STRATEGIC CONTEXT

1.1 Metropolitan Strategy – (Draft) North Subregional Strategy

The Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036 is a broad framework to secure Sydney’s place in the global economy by promoting and managing growth. It outlines a vision for Sydney to 2036, the challenges faced, and the directions to follow to address these challenges and achieve the vision. The Draft North Subregional Strategy acts as a framework for Council in its preparation of the Comprehensive LEP by the end of 2011.

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

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

· Housing stock to increase by 11,000 dwellings.

The propose development would be consistent with the draft Strategy by contributing towards housing choice in the locality.

2. STATUTORY CONTROLS

2.1 Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan, 1994

The subject land is zoned Rural AR (Large Holdings- Rural Landscapes) and Environmental Protection B (River Catchment) under the HSLEP.

The objectives of the Rural AR zone are as follows:

(a) to restrain population growth and maintain the rural character of the area.

(b) to provide for a compatible range of land uses, including agriculture, which maintain the rural environment of the area and support the urban populace.

(c) to ensure that development is carried out in a manner that improves the environmental qualities, and is within the service capability of the area.

The objectives of the Environmental Protection B zone are as follows:

(a) to protect the natural environment of the sensitive area within the catchment of the Hawkesbury River.

(b) to protect the valleys, and escarpments within the catchment of the Hawkesbury River and accommodate land uses, including housing, that recognise environmental sensitivity of the area.

(c ) to protect the scenic quality of visually prominent areas and water quality within the catchment of the Hawkesbury River.

The proposed developments are defined as a “dwelling-house” and a “rural structure” under the HSLEP and both are permissible in the zone with Council’s consent.

A dwelling-house is defined as:

“a dwelling other than a rural worker’s dwelling or an attached dwelling, that is the only dwelling on the allotment”.

The conversion of the existing dwelling-house would be a permitted land use pursuant to the definition of a “rural structure” under the HSLEP. A “rural structure” is defined as:

“any shed, barn, outbuilding or the like associated with a dwelling and used by the permanent residents of the dwelling for storage, hobbies, home occupations and the like.”

The converted dwelling-house would be used only for the uses permitted under the HSLEP. The conversion of the existing dwelling-house to a “rural structure” would also be consistent with similar developments that Council has permitted in the rural zones, allowing older structures to be retained for the purposes as defined in the HSLEP.

Consistent with Council’s land use controls, a condition of consent is recommended requiring that the bathroom, laundry and kitchen facilities be removed from the existing dwelling-house so that it can be used as a “rural structure” only.

2.2 Rural Lands Development Control Plan

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

Rural Lands DCP
Control	Proposal	Requirement	Complies
Design
Character and Visual impacts	Maintains the Rural character of the area	Maintains the Rural character of the area	Yes
Setbacks
Front	23.2m	30m	No
Western Side	11.3m	15m	No
Eastern Side	20.5m	3m	Yes
Rear	> 50m	3m	Yes
Car Parking
No. of spaces	3 space(s)	2 space(s)	Yes

2.2.1 Design

Whilst the contemporary design of the proposal, incorporating Corten steel cladding and a low-pitched roof, is not in keeping with the traditional style of dwelling-houses within the area, the dwelling would have an acceptable impact on the surrounding rural zone. The development has been designed to maximise energy and resource efficiency and would set a positive precedent for future environmentally responsive development.

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

2.2.2 Setbacks

As Bay Road is classified as an “arterial road”, the proposed 25.4 metre and 23.2 metre front boundary setbacks for the dwelling-house and garage respectively do not comply with the 30 metre prescriptive measure.

This variation is considered to be acceptable in this instance, given that there are numerous structures and dwelling-houses on adjacent properties which are sited as close as 6 metres from the front boundary alignment.

Whilst the 11.3 metre western side boundary setback of the garage does not comply with the 15 metre prescriptive measure, this variation is also considered acceptable. The purpose of the side boundary setback requirement is to establish separation between structures so as to maintain the open rural character of the area. In this instance, there would be 45 metres of open space between the proposed garage and the nearest structure on the adjoining land.

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

3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

3.1 Natural Environment

No trees in the vicinity of the proposed dwelling-house, garage and swimming pool would be removed from the site.

A portion of the site, in the vicinity of the front boundary is classified as an Endangered Ecological Community (EEC). In assessing the impact of the driveway that would serve this development, Council officers have determined that proposed driveway (as amended) would have minimal impacts on this EEC and that a Seven Part Test for this aspect of the development is not required.

The development would also have a minimal impact on the watercourse that traverses the site, given the 95 metre setback from the development. All stormwater from the development would drain to an existing dam on the site.

3.2 Built Environment

The character of the area is an eclectic blend of housing styles surrounded by rural structures. The proposal would not impact on this character and would set a positive precedent for future environmentally responsive development.

The conversion of the existing dwelling-house for use as a rural structure would involve internal alterations to the building only. Its external appearance and therefore its visual impact on the surrounding area would remain unchanged.

3.3 Social Impacts and Economic Impacts

There would be no anticipated social or economic impacts should the proposed development be approved.

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

As the land is bushfire prone, the application was referred to the NSW Rural Fire Service for comment. The RFS does not object to the proposal, subject to appropriate conditions of consent being imposed.

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

4.2 Effluent Disposal

The development would be serviced by an on-site sewage management system which has been approved by Council on the 6 December, 2010 under application LA/256/10.

5. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

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

5.1 Community Consultation

The proposed development was placed on public exhibition and was notified to adjoining and nearby landowners between 5 January and 24 January, 2011 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 and who is in close proximity to the development site.

NOTIFICATION PLAN

• PROPERTIES NOTIFIED

X SUBMISSIONS

RECEIVED

PROPERTY SUBJECT OF DEVELOPMENT

The submission objected to the proposal on the grounds that the retention of the existing structure would not meet with the single dwelling requirement of the surrounding rural zone.

The merits of this submission have been addressed in Section 2.1 of this 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 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 two storey dwelling-house and the conversion of the existing dwelling into a rural structure would be in the public interest.

CONCLUSION

The application proposes the erection of a two storey dwelling-house, a garage and a swimming pool and the retention of the existing dwelling-house on the site to serve as “rural structure”.

The design and location of the new dwelling-house, garage and swimming pool generally complies with the relevant requirements of Council’s Rural Lands DCP and the objectives of the zone. It is considered that the development would have a positive impact upon the rural landscape and would set a desirable precedent in terms of its environmentally sensitive design.

The land owner would occupy the existing dwelling while the new dwelling is constructed. Upon completion, the internal layout of the existing dwelling will be modified to convert it for use as a “rural structure” in accordance with the objectives of the surrounding rural zone.

Having regard to the merits of the proposed development, it is recommended that the application be approved.

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
5.View	Sections

File Reference: DA/1634/2010

Document Number: D01603078

SCHEDULE 1

GENERAL CONDITIONS

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

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

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

1. Approved Plans and Supporting Documentation

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

*Plan No.*	*Drawn by*	*Dated*
0000-00- Pages 1-10	Nettletontribe	17 Dec., 2010
0000-002B Pages 1-1	Nettletontribe (Revised Driveway Position Drawing)	23 Feb., 2011

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. 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.

4. 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.

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 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. Toilet Facilities

Toilet facilities must be available or provided at the 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 temporary chemical closet approved under the Local Government Act, 1993; or

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

7. Erosion and Sediment Control

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

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

REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION

8. Ongoing Protection of the Endangered Ecological Community (EEC)

The EEC area of the site identified adjacent to the front boundary (shown clouded) on the Site Plan No. 0000_002 B must be fenced off with post and wire (or similar) fencing to prevent vehicular access.

9. 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.

10. 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.

11. 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.

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.

12. Bush Fire Protection - Asset Protection Zones

At the commencement of building works and in perpetuity, the property around the proposed dwelling-house must be managed as follows:

a. West to the boundary as an Inner Protection Area;

b. North for a minimum distance of 61 metres consisting of 30 metres as an Inner Protection Area and 31 metres as an Outer Protection Area;

c. East to the boundary as an Inner Protection Area; and

d. South to within 15m from the boundary as an Inner Protection Area.

Note: The requirements for an Inner Protection Area are outlined within Section 4.1.3 and Appendix 5 of “Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006” and the NSW Rural Fire Service’s document “Standards for asset protection zones”. “Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006” Chapter 3.3 section (b) states neither the RFS nor a Council has the power to impose an APZ on an adjoining landowner.

13. Water and Utilities

Water, electricity and gas must comply with the following requirements of Section 4.1.3 of “Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006”:

a. A hardened ground surface for truck access must be supplied up to and within 4 metres of the water source;

b. A 65mm metal Storz outlet with a gate or ball valve must be provided;

c. In recognition that no reticulated water supply exists, a 20,000 litre water supply must be provided for fire fighting purposes;

d. Above ground tanks are manufactured concrete or metal and raised tanks must have their stands protected. Plastic tanks must not be used;

e. Underground tanks must have an access hole of 200mm to allow tankers to refill direct from the tank. A hardened ground surface for truck access must be supplied within 4 metres of the access hole; and

f. A minimum 5hp of 3kw petrol or diesel powered pump must be made available to the water supply. A 19mm (internal diameter) fire hose and reel must be connected to the pump.

14. Design and Construction - North and East Elevations

New construction on the northern and eastern elevations must comply with Australian Standard AS3959-2009 “Construction of buildings in bush fire-prone areas” Section 9. Any material, element of construction or system when tested to the method described in Australian Standard AS1530.8.2 “Methods for fire tests on building materials, components and structures Part 8.2: Tests on elements of construction for buildings exposed to simulated bushfire attack- Large flaming sources” must comply with Clause 13.8 of that standard except that flaming of the specimen is nor permitted.

15. Design and Construction - South and West Elevations

New construction on the southern and western elevations must comply with Section 8 (BAL 40) Australian Standard AS3959-2009 ‘Construction of buildings in bush fire-prone areas’ and Section A3.7 Addendum Appendix 3 of ‘Planning for Bush Fire Protection’.

16. Fire Protection - Windows

Windows assemblies must comply with modified Section 9 of Australian Standard AS3959 or be completely protected by a non-combustible and non-perforated bushfire shutter that complies with Section 3.7 excluding (e) and (f) and the following additional requirements:

a. Window frames and hardware must be metal;

b. Glazing must be toughened glass, minimum 5mm thick;

c. The seals to stiles, head and sills or thresholds must be manufactured from materials having a flammability index no greater than 5; and

d. The openable portion of the window must be screened internally or externally with a mesh with a maximum aperture of 2mm, made from corrosion-resistant steel or bronze. The frame supporting the mesh must be metal.

17. Fire Protection - Doors

External doors, not including garage doors, must comply with modified Section 9 of Australian Standard AS3959 or they must be completely protected by a non-combustible and non- perforated bush fire shutter that complies with Section 3.7 excluding (e) and (f); and the following additional requirements:

a. Doors must be non combustible;

b. Externally fitted hardware that supports the panel in its function of opening and closing must be metal;

c. Where doors incorporate glazing, the glazing must be toughened glass minimum 6mm;

d. Seals to stiles, head and sills or thresholds must be manufactured from silicone;

e. Doorframes must be metal;

f. Doors must be tight fitting to the doorframe or an abutting door; and

g. Weather strips, draught excluders or draught seals must be maintained.

18. Fire Protection - Roofing

Roofing must be gutterless or guttering and valleys must be screened to prevent the build up of flammable material. Any materials used must have a Flammability Index of no greater than 5 when tested in accordance with Australian Standard AS1530.2-1993 “ Methods for Fire Tests on Building Materials, Components and Structures- Test for Flammability of Materials”.

Note: Timbers treated with an applied intumescent paint are no longer recognised by the Rural Fire Service as a fire retardant treated timber or a performance option to increase fire resistance.

19. Conversion of the existing dwelling-house into a rural structure

To ensure that the existing dwelling-house is not used as a separate domicile, it must be converted to a “rural structure” in accordance with the uses permitted under the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan, 1994 by removing all bathroom, laundry and kitchen facilities including all the associated fittings and fixtures from within the structure. Fittings and fixtures include: cupboards, sinks, benches, wall and floor tiling, cooking equipment, taps and bath and other plumbing.

20. Fulfilment of BASIX Commitments

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

21. Stormwater Drainage

The stormwater drainage system for the development must be designed and constructed for an average recurrence interval of 20 years.

22. 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 be located in accordance with the revised driveway position drawing prepared by Nettletontribe dated 23 February, 2011, reference Site Plan No. 0000_002 B.

23. Vehicular Crossing

A separate application under the Local Government Act, 1993 and the Roads Act, 1993 must be submitted to Council for the installation of the new vehicular crossing and the removal of any redundant crossing. The vehicular crossing must be constructed in accordance with Council’s Civil Works Design, 2005.

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.

24. 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.

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

25. Ongoing Protection of the Endangered Ecological Community (EEC)

The EEC area of the site identified adjacent to the front boundary (shown clouded) on the Site Plan No. 0000_002 B must remain undisturbed and be protected in perpetuity in accordance with the following requirements:

a. The EEC area must be kept free of noxious weeds using recognised bush regeneration methods in accordance with ‘Recovering bushland on the Cumberland Plain: Best practice guidelines for the management and restoration of bushland – Department of Conservation 2005’; and

b. Machinery and fertilizer must not be used in the EEC area for maintenance purposes.

26. Swimming Pool Requirements

The construction and operation of the swimming pool must comply with the provisions of the Swimming Pool Act 1992, the Swimming Pool Regulation, 1998, Australian Standards 1926.1-3 – Swimming Pool Safety and the following requirements:

a. All waste water from the pool’s filtration system must be treated by equipment that does not require backwashing;

b. The filtration motor and pump unit must be housed in a soundproofed structure. Sound from the equipment must not exceed 5(dBA) above ambient noise levels at any residential property boundary;

c. The swimming pool is to be located a minimum of 6 metres from any wastewater disposal area as outlined in the Environment & Health Protection Guidelines – Onsite Sewage Management for Single Households (1998); and

d. The applicant must participate in the ‘Static Water Supply Project’ initiative of the NSW Fire Brigades and make available the water in the swimming pool for use as a static water supply for fire fighting purposes by the NSW Fire Brigades or the NSW Rural Fire Service.

Note: On completion of the swimming pool, the applicant is to contact the local NSW Fire Brigade Station or NSW Rural Fire Service Station to arrange the installation of a static water supply identification plate.

27. Use of Rural Structure

The rural structure approved under this consent must not be used as a dwelling-house on any occasion.

- 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.

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

Long Service Levy

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

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

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

Tree Preservation Order

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

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

All distances are determined under Australian Standard AS4970-2009 “Protection of Trees on Development Sites”.

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 Warning

Should asbestos or asbestos products be encountered during demolition or construction works you are advised to seek advice and information 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. PLN31/11

Date of Meeting: 6/04/2011

3 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - TELECOMMUNICATIONS FACILITY
ARCADIA PARK, 127X ARCADIA ROAD, ARCADIA

Development Application No:	DA/1436/2010
Description of Proposal:	Erection of a telecommunications facility including a mobile phone tower and associated equipment shelter
Property Description:	Lot 761 DP 1121447, Arcadia Park, 127X Arcadia Road, Arcadia
Applicant:	Aurecon Group
Owner:	Hornsby Shire Council
Statutory Provisions:	Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 Open Space A (Public Recreation) Zone
Estimated Value:	$250,000
Ward:	A

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Development Application No. DA/1436/2010 for the erection of a telecommunications facility including a mobile phone tower and associated equipment and shelter at Lot 761 DP 1121447 No. 127X Arcadia Road Arcadia be approved in accordance with the recommendation of the independent town planning consultant’s report – Nexus Environmental Planning Pty Ltd and the conditions of consent held at Schedule 1 of this report.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. The application proposes the erection of a 30 metre high telecommunications tower, including associated antennas and equipment shelter.

2. The application involves land owned by Hornsby Shire Council. In accordance with Council’s adopted Policy, ‘PSA1 Proposed Council Developments’ and ‘Practice Note No. 7 Assessment Practice’ an independent assessment of the development application has been undertaken by Nexus Environmental Planning Pty Ltd.

3. The proposal complies with the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the Telecommunications Act 1997 and the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994.

4. One submission was received objecting the proposed development.

5. The report by Nexus Environmental Planning is attached to this report for Council’s consideration. The independent consultant’s report recommends approval of the application.

ASSESSMENT

In accordance with Council’s adopted Policy PS41 Proposed Council Developments and Practice Note No. 7 – Assessment Practice, the assessment of the development application has been referred to an independent town planning consultant. The report by Nexus Environmental Planning is held at Attachment 2 of this report.

CONCLUSION

The proposal seeks to erect a mobile phone tower within Arcadia Park.

Council has referred the application to an independent planning consultancy to carry out an assessment of the application. The assessment concludes that the application should be approved.

One submission was received in opposition to the proposed development during the public exhibition period.

It is recommended that Council approve the application in accordance with the recommendation in the report prepared by Nexus Environmental Planning Pty Ltd and the conditions of consent held at Schedule 1 of this report.

Rod Pickles

Manager - Assessment Team 2

Planning Division

Scott Phillips

Executive Manager

Planning Division

Attachments:

1.View	Locality Plan
2.View	Consultant's Report - Nexus Environmental Planning Pty Ltd
3.View	Location Plan
4.View	Elevations

File Reference: DA/1436/2010

Document Number: D01613384

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

Sheet 1- Issue 3

Site layout and access

Aurecon

7/02/2011

Sheet 3 – Issue 3

North –eastern elevation

Aurecon

7/02/2011

*Document No.*	*Prepared by*	*Dated*
Statement of Environmental Effects	Aurecon	November 2010
EME Report	Telstra	17/11/2010

2. Removal of Existing Trees

This development consent does not permit the removal of any trees on the site. The removal of any tree requires separate approval under Council’s Tree Preservation Order.

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.

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

4. 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.

5. Protection of Adjoining Areas

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

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

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

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

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

6. 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

7. 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.

8. Tree Protection Barriers

Tree protection fencing must be erected around trees numbered T4, T5 to be retained at a 6 metre setback.

Tree protection fencing must be erected around trees numbered T1, T3 to be retained at a 2 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

9. 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.

10. 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.

11. Works near Trees

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

Note: The applicant is to ensure that no excavation, including sub-surface trenching for stormwater or other services or the filling or stockpiling of building materials, parking of vehicles or plant, disposal of cement slurry, waste water or other contaminants is to occur within the Tree Protection Zone (as determined using the Australian Standard AS 4970-2009) of any tree to be retained.

12. Council Property

13. Landfill

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

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

14. Excavated Material

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

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. 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.

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

16. Noise – Plant and Machinery

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

17. Site Compliance Certificate

A Site Compliance Certificate issued by a NATA accredited service is to be submitted to Council for the site at Arcadia Park, 127X Arcadia Road, Arcadia confirming the operating EME levels, within one month of the commencement of the operation of the facility. The site is to be assessed and found to comply with the Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency (ARPANSA)’s Radiation Protection Standards and the RF Human Exposure Limits as specified by the Australian Communications and Media Authority (ACMA).

18. Telecommunications Facility

The telecommunications facility on the site must be operated in compliance with, but not limited to:

a) Australian Radiation Protection and Nuclear Safety Agency’s (ARPANSA) ‘Radiation Protection Standard for Maximum Exposure Levels to Radiofrequency Fields – 3kHz to 300 GHz’, (2002).

b) The Australian Communication Industry Forum Code (ACIF), Industry Code C564:2004, Deployment of Mobile Phone Network Infrastructure, (2002).

c) The Australian Communications Authority (ACA), Radiocommunications (Electromagnetic Radiation – Human Exposure) Standard, (2003).

- 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:

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

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

· Mandatory inspections of nominated stages of the construction inspected.

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

Tree Preservation Order

All distances are determined under Australian Standard AS4970-2009 ”Protection of Trees on Development Sites”.

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

Bushland Protection during Construction

The site contains Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest (STIF) which is listed as an ‘Endangered Ecological Community’ under the ‘Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995’. The Act prohibits the disturbance to threatened species, endangered populations and endangered ecological communities, or their habitat, without the approval of the ‘Department of Environment and Climate Change’ where such activities are not authorised by a development consent under the ‘Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979’.

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.

Covenants

The land upon which the subject building is to be constructed may be affected by restrictive covenants. Council issues this approval without enquiry as to whether any restrictive covenant affecting the land would be breached by the construction of the building, the subject of this consent. Applicants must rely on their own enquiries as to whether or not the building breaches any such covenant.

Dial Before You Dig

Planning Report No. PLN21/11

Date of Meeting: 6/04/2011

4 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - SECTION 96(2) - ERECTION OF AN 11 STOREY MIXED USE BUILDING - 135 - 137 PACIFIC HIGHWAY AND POUND ROAD RESERVE, HORNSBY

Development Application No:	DA/1586/2001/D
Description of Proposal:	Mixed use building comprising 104 residential units and one level of commercial and retail units - Section 96 (2) Application
Property Description:	Lot 1 DP 606694, Lot 2 DP 606694 Nos. 135 - 137 Pacific Highway and Pound Road Reserve, Hornsby
Applicant:	TF Investment Trust
Owners:	Fal Management Group Pty Ltd and Hornsby Shire Council (Pound Road)
Statutory Provisions:	Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 Residential D (High Density)
Estimated Value:	$22,000,000
Ward:	B

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Development Application No. DA/1586/2001/D to modify Development Consent No. 1586/2001 for the construction of a mixed use development comprising 104 residential units and one level of commercial and retail units at Lot 1 DP 606694, Lot 2 DP 606694 Nos. 135-137 Pacific Highway and Pound Road Reserve, Hornsby be approved subject to the conditions of consent in Schedule 1 of the independent town planning consultant’s report – ADW Johnson.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. The application proposes modifications to an existing development consent resulting in the construction of a mixed use development comprising 104 residential units and one level of commercial and retail units with basement car parking.

2. A portion of the site is owned by Council. In accordance with Council’s adopted Policy ‘PSA1 Proposed Council Developments’ and ‘Practice Note No. 7 Assessment Practice’ an independent assessment of the development application has been undertaken by ADW Johnson.

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

4. The report by ADW Johnson is attached to this report for Council’s consideration. The independent consultant’s report recommends approval of the application.

Rod Pickles

Manager - Assessment Team 2

Planning Division

Scott Phillips

Executive Manager

Planning Division

Attachments:

1.View	Locality Plan
2.View	Consultant's Report
3.View	Floor Plans
4.View	Elevations and Sections
5.View	Shadow Diagrams

File Reference: DA/1586/2001/D

Document Number: D01598126

SCHEDULE 1

Date of 1^st modification:	3 June 2009
Details of 1^st modification:	Mixed use building comprising 70 residential units and three levels of commercial units - Section 96(2) Application

Conditions Added:	103 to 125
Conditions Deleted:	1, 4, 10-14, 16, 18, 20, 36, 42-45, 53-60, 61-63, 69-71, 74-76 and 88-90.
Conditions Modified:	6, 17, 37, 64, 79, 80, 81, 91, 92, 93 and 99

Date of 2^nd modification:	3 March 2010
Details of 2^nd modification:	Section 96(1A) modification to amend condition Nos. 82, 91A, 91B, 82 and 102

Conditions Added:	126-130
Conditions Deleted:	101 and 102
Conditions Modified:	82, 91A, 91B and 114

Date of this modification:	6 April 2010
Details of this modification:	Mixed use building comprising 104 residential units and one level of commercial and retail units - Section 96 (2) Application The description of the development should read as follows: DEVELOPMENT: Erection of a building comprising 104 residential units, one ground level of commercial and retail tenancies and four levels of basement car parking.

Conditions Added:	131-147
Conditions Deleted:	91B
Conditions Modified:	6, 30, 91A, 125

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. Deleted

Sediment & Erosion Control

2. Temporary sedimentation and erosion controls shall be constructed prior to commencement of any work to eliminate the discharge of sediment from the site. The controls are to be designed and installed in accordance with the requirements of the NSW Department of Conservation and Land Management's "Urban Erosion and Sediment Control" manual, Hornsby Shire Council’s “Sustainable Water Best Practices” manual and shall:-

* be effectively maintained at all times during the course of construction and shall not be removed until the site has been stabilised or landscaped to the Principal Certifying Authority’s satisfaction.

* include adequate measures to remove clay from vehicles leaving the site so as to maintain public roads in a clean condition.

* ensure disturbed areas are rehabilitated with indigenous plant species, landscaped and treated by approved methods of erosion mitigation such as, mulching, and revegetation with native grasses or other suitable stabilising processes within fifteen days of the completion of works.

* No site works are to commence until the sediment control installation has been inspected and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority. At least 48 hours notice is to be given for the inspection of such works. A compliance certificate be submitted to Hornsby Shire Council with the notification for commencement of works.

Sydney Water

3. A Section 73 compliance certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994 must be obtained. Application must be made through an authorised Water Servicing Coordinator. Please refer to “Your Business” section of Sydney Water’s web site at www.sydneywater.com.au then the “e-developer” icon or telephone 13 20 92.

Following application, a “Notice of Requirements” will detail water and sewer extensions to be built and charges to be paid. Please make early contact with the Coordinator, since building of water/sewer extensions can be time consuming and may impact on other services and building, driveway or landscape design.

The Notice must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the Construction Certificate being issued.

The Section 73 Certificate must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to occupation of the development/release of the plan of subdivision.

4. Deleted

Use of Materials

5. If reflective glass is to be used externally in the construction of the building, the reflectivity index of the glass is to be not more than 20%.

6. The materials and colours to be used in the construction must be the same as those samples shown on plan prepared by Woodhead (Reference: DWG No. W4004 issue A) dated 15 November 2010.

Carparking

7. The commercial car parking spaces shall be signposted and made available at all times during business hours.

8. The residential visitor parking spaces shall be signposted and made available at all times.

9. Parking, loading and manoeuvring areas are to be used solely for such purposes.

10. Deleted

11. Deleted

12. Deleted

13. Deleted

14. Deleted

Energy Efficiency and Services

15. A NatHERS assessment shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority demonstrating that the building will achieve a minimum rating of 3.5 stars or greater.

16. Deleted

Access & Mobility

17. A minimum of 2 units within the development must be provided as adaptable units and shall comply with Australian Standard 1428 Parts 1 and 4 and the Building Code of Australia. Prior to occupation of the building, a compliance certificate certifying compliance with these requirements must be obtained and submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority.

18. Deleted

Lighting

19. All external lighting shall comply with Australian Standard 4282 – 1997 ‘Control of the obtrusive effects of outdoor lighting’.

20. Deleted

Notifying Council of Commencement of Works

21. It is a requirement of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act (Section 81A(2)(c)) that you notify Hornsby Council at least two (2) days prior to the intention to commence works.

Where works are to be undertaken in a public place, such notice must be accompanied by evidence of the contractor's Public Liability and Workers’ Compensation Insurances. The public risk policy shall be such an amount as determined by Council (not being less than $10,000,000.00) and shall cover the owner and the Council against any injury, loss or damage sustained by any person, firm or company.

Dust Control

22. Measures to prevent the emission of dust or other impurities into the surrounding environment are to be implemented during demolition/excavation/construction works.

Inspections – Engineering

23. All engineering work required by this consent must be inspected and compliance certificates shall be issued prior to occupancy or issue of the subdivision certificate, whichever occurs first, certifying that the works comply with development consent, construction certificate and Hornsby Shire Council Civil Works - Design and Construction Specification for the following nominated stages:

- Implementation of erosion control

- Implementation of traffic control

- Replacement of redundant gutter crossing

- At completion of on-site detention system

- Driveways and accessways

- Pavement marking

- Final inspection

Access Way/Driveway

24. A separate application under the Local Government Act 1993 and Roads Act 1993 shall be submitted to Council for approval for the following:

(a) The installation of a vehicular footway crossing servicing the development, and the removal of any redundant crossings.

(b) The undertaking of work within a public road (this includes Laneways, Public Pathways, Footways).

25. Any redundant gutter and/or footway crossing must be replaced with integral kerb and gutter. The footway area must be restored by turfing. Works are to be completed prior to occupancy.

26. The vehicular crossing shall be designed and constructed in accordance with Council’s Civil Works - Design and Construction Specification 1999.

27. The concrete vehicular crossing shall be a minimum of 150mm in depth and reinforced with F72 steel reinforcing fabric.

28. The vehicular crossing shall have a minimum width of 6.0m at the property boundary alignment. The crossings shall be located no closer than 6m to the tangent point of the kerb return in Government Rd in accordance with AS 2890.1.

29. Any damage caused to Council's assets in the vicinity of the subject site as a result of construction works associated with the approved development is to be repaired by the applicant/developer prior to occupation.

30. All car parking must be constructed and operated in accordance with Australian Standard AS/NZS 2890.1:2004 – Off-street car parking, and Australian Standard 2890.2 - 2002 – Off-street commercial vehicle facilities and the following requirement:

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

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

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

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

31. A Traffic Control Plan (TCP), prepared by a qualified work site traffic controller, is to be submitted with any construction certificate for any works within the road reserve, demonstrating compliance with the Road & Traffic Authority’s Traffic Control At Worksites Manual, 1998, and detailing:-

(a) Public notification of proposed works.

(b) Long term signage arrangement.

(d) Vehicle Movement Plans, where applicable.

(e) Traffic Management Plans.

(f) Pedestrian and cyclist access/safety.

Drainage

32. The drainage system is to be designed and constructed with an on-site-detention system. Stormwater drainage from the site shall be designed to satisfactorily drain rainfall intensities for an average recurrence interval of 20 years. The maximum permitted site discharge is to be equal to the 1 in 5 year ARI pre development storm event. Full engineering hydraulic calculations verifying the storage and discharge rates are to be submitted with the construction certificate plans. The system shall be designed by a chartered professional civil engineer to the following requirements:

(a) A surcharge/inspection grate is to be located directly above the outlet.

(b) Stormwater discharge from the detention system is to be controlled via a one metre length of pipe not less than 50mm diameter discharging into a larger diameter pipe capable of carrying the design flow to Council's gutter/stormwater pit.

(c) Where the on-site detention system is proposed under the vehicular driveway, the engineer is to certify that the detention tank is structurally capable of withstanding the maximum anticipated traffic loads.

(d) The on-site detention systems within private or common courtyard areas must be designed so they do not impact on the amenity of the development or the use of such areas.

A compliance certificate is to be submitted to Council which includes work-as-executed details of the on-site-detention system prepared by a chartered professional engineer/registered surveyor verifying that the required storage and discharge volumes have been constructed in accordance with the design requirements. The details are to show the invert levels of the on system as well as the pipe sizes and grades. Any variations to approved plans must be shown in red and supported by calculations.

33. A certificate from a chartered professional civil engineer/registered surveyor must be obtained prior to release of construction certificate verifying that the on-site detention system will function hydraulically in accordance with the approved design plans.

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

Works as Executed

35. A works-as-executed plan prepared by a chartered professional engineer or a registered surveyor must be lodged with Hornsby Shire Council when the engineering works are complete, prior to the release of the subdivision certificate.

36. Deleted

Building Code of Australia

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

Council Property

38. The land and adjoining areas are to be kept in a clean and tidy condition at all times. Litter and rubbish to be placed in containers and removed from the site. A waste storage container is to be provided at the commencement of the building work.

39. The cost of repairing any damage caused to Council's assets as a result of construction works associated with the approved development is to be met in full by the applicant/developer prior to the issue of a subdivision certificate.

Hours of Demolition Works

40. In order to maintain the amenity of adjoining properties, demolition works shall be restricted to between 7.00 am and 6.00 pm. No demolition works are to be undertaken on Saturdays, Sundays or Public Holidays. Plant, goods or materials shall not be delivered to the site outside the approved hours of site works unless written Council gives consent.

Demolition

41. All demolition work is to be carried out in accordance with the applicable provisions of Australian Standard 2601-2001 ‘The Demolition of Structures’.

Note: Applicants are reminded that WorkCover NSW requires all plant and equipment used in demolition work must comply with the relevant Australian Standards and manufacturer specifications.

42. Deleted

43. Deleted

44. Deleted

45. Deleted

Signs for Building And Demolition Sites

46. A sign must be erected in a prominent position on the premises, on which the erection or demolition of a building is being carried out, stating that unauthorised entry to the premises is prohibited and showing the name of the builder or other person in control of the premises and a telephone number at which the builder or other person may be contacted during and outside work hours.

The sign is to be removed when the erection or demolition of the building has been completed. This condition does not apply to building work carried out inside an existing building or building work carried out on premises, that is to be occupied continuously (both during and outside working hours) while the work is being carried out.

Hours of Construction

47. In order to maintain the amenity of adjoining properties, site works shall be restricted to between 7.00 am and 6.00 pm, Monday to Friday and 8.00 am to 1.00 pm Saturday. Site works may extend to 4.00 pm on Saturdays if inaudible on residential properties. No work shall be undertaken on Sundays or public holidays. Plant, goods or materials shall not be delivered to the site outside the approved hours of site works unless otherwise approved by Council.

Engineers certifications – Building

48. A qualified practising chartered Structural engineer shall inspect the slab steel reinforcement prior to the pouring of any concrete and supply the Principal Certifying Authority and copy to Hornsby Shire Council with a certification of structural adequacy.

Excavation & Backfilling

49. All excavations must be properly guarded and protected to prevent them from being dangerous to life or property.

50. Retaining walls or other approved methods necessary to prevent the movement of excavated or filled ground, shall be constructed together with associated stormwater drainage measures prior to occupation of the development or before where site conditions require.

Support for Neighbouring Properties

51. If an excavation extends below the level of the base of the footings of a building on an adjoining allotment of land, the person causing the excavation to be made must:

- preserve and protect the building from damage;

- if necessary, underpin and support the building in an approved manner; and

- at least 7 days before excavating, give notice of intention to do so to the adjoining owner and furnish particulars to the owner of the proposed work.

52. A Dilapidation Report is to be prepared by a chartered professional structural engineer at the applicant’s expense, detailing the structural condition of adjoining properties, including Council’s property, and their ability to withstand the proposed excavation. This report must include any measures required to be incorporated to ensure that no damage will occur during the course of works. The report shall be submitted to the principal certifying authority prior to any excavation works taking place. Such works shall take place in accordance with the recommendations of the report.

53. Deleted

54. Deleted

55. Deleted

56. Deleted

57. Deleted

58. Deleted.

59. Deleted

60. Deleted

61. Deleted

62. Deleted

63. Deleted

Fire Safety Statement - Annual

64. 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.

Survey Reports

65. To ensure that the building and any associated structures are correctly positioned on the site, a report prepared by a registered surveyor is to be submitted to the principal certifying authority at each level of construction of the building (prior to the pouring of concrete) indicating that the finished floor level is in accordance with the approved plans.

Cooling Towers

66. All cooling towers are to be designed and installed in accordance with Australian/New Zealand Standard AS/NZS 3666.1:1995 Air-Handling & Water Systems of Buildings – Microbial Control, Part 1: Design, Installation & Commissioning and a compliance certificate certifying same is to be submitted to Council with the occupation certificate.

Toilet Facilities

67. Closet accommodation is to be provided at the work site at all times at the rate of one closet for every 20 persons and be constructed in accordance with the requirements of sub clause 3.1 of the BCA, and be located wholly within the boundaries of the property.

Unit Numbering

68. Unit numbering can only be authorised by Hornsby Shire Council. Before proceeding to number each lot/occupancy in your development, approval must be sought from Council’s Planning Division.

69. Deleted

70. Deleted

71. Deleted.

Environmental Health & Protection

72. The site shall be sampled by a suitably qualified/experienced consultant in accordance with NSW Environment Protection Authority’s Guidelines for Consultants Reporting on Contaminated Sites. This will take the form of a Stage 2 – Detailed Site Investigation. Each soil sample shall be assessed to determine whether or not it is carrying impurities and contaminants including:

(a) Heavy metal (Arsenic, Cadmiun, Lead, Copper, Mercury and Zinc).

(b) Organochlorins and Organophosphates.

(d) Other recognised contaminants.

Sampling shall be carried out in accordance with NSW Environment Protection Authority’s Sampling Design Guidelines for Contaminated Sites. Upon sampling a contamination assessment of the site shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority.

If the findings of the assessment conclude that there is contamination present and that the levels exceed the provisions of the contaminant criteria within the NSW Environment Protection Authority’s Guidelines for NSW Site Auditor Scheme, a site Remedial Action Plan (RAP) shall be prepared. This RAP shall be prepared by a suitably qualified/experienced consultant in accordance with NSW Environment Protection Authority’s Guidelines for Consultants Reporting on Contaminated Sites and be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority.

Water Catchments

73. A permanent stormwater treatment device(s) shall be designed to service the total site during the post development phase. The device shall screen and capture gross stormwater pollutants that will be generated during the post development phase.

Accordingly, engineering cross sectional plans and maintenance/management details shall be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority with the Soil and Water Management Plan, or the stormwater engineering plans.

The design criteria for the device shall include the following:

(a) Performance capture criteria in excess of 90% of gross stormwater pollutants (e.g. litter, floatable, organic debris, coarse/fine sediments, suspended solids, oils and road grit) during a 3-6 month/year ARI storm event.

(b) Stormwater pollutants captured shall not be resuspended.

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

(e) Be fully installed and cleaned at the completion of the development.

(f) The device shall be non-accessible to the general public and aesthetically non-intrusive.

Traffic

74. Deleted

75. Deleted

76. Deleted

77. Minimum sight lines for pedestrian safety at driveway exit shall be in accordance with AS 2890.1-1993.

Waste Management

78. The site is to be serviced by Council or its authorised Contractor. (Domestic Waste Only).

79A. The Commercial waste can be serviced by any authorised collection contractor, including Council.

79B. All commercial tenants must keep written evidence on site of a valid contract with a licensed waste contractor(s) for the regular collection and disposal of the waste and recyclables that are generated on site.

80. An easement entitling the Council, its servants and agents and persons authorised by it to enter upon the property and to operate equipment for the purpose of waste and recycling collection services. This easement must be granted in favour of Council prior to the occupation of the development and prior to registration of any plan of subdivision or strata subdivision of the land.

Note: An 88(b) instrument is an acceptable form of easement subject to the area affected by the easement not requiring renewal upon sale or transfer at any time.

81. The bin rooms, garbage chute and related devices must be designed and constructed in accordance with the provisions of Hornsby Shire Council’s Waste Minimisation and Management Development Control Plan.

Landscape Architect

82. The Landscape Plan shall be prepared in accordance with the requirements of the High Density Multi-Unit Housing Development Control Plan and the Hornsby Shire Council Landscape Code for Development and Building Approval. The Applicant shall address all requirements of the code in the submission of a plan to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the release of any Construction Certificate for any works other than excavations, test holes and piling works. The plan shall include the following: -

General design and plan information

- The scope of proposed construction works.

- Basic design levels for paving, pathways and soft landscape areas.

Soft landscape

- Proposed finishes are to be clearly indicated, e.g. paving, lawn, garden beds, water, and gravel;

- Character or intent of the landscape design proposal, e.g. plant colour, spatial relationships, sizes;

- List of intended plant species with botanical and common names, mature heights and spacing, divided into three tiers - trees, shrubs, groundcovers and ferns;

- Screening of adjoining properties with tree and shrub plantings

- Numbers of plants and pot sizes,

- Adequate proportion of native tree and shrub species

- Suitable and appropriate species combinations and

- Planting densities.

Hard landscape

- Basic design levels on paving, pathways and soft landscaping;

- Type and heights of any walling;

- All existing information: buildings - and structures and fences, underground services, boundary lines;

- Outline of adjoining buildings in close proximity.

Pacific Highway streetscape

83. Council requires street tree plantings, on the kerbside of Eucalyptus maculata in minimum 75 Litre pot sizes.

84. Street tree/specimen tree planting shall be undertaken according to Council’s Urban Tree Planting specification and shall include the following requirements:

- proved soil backfill mix around the tree rootball;

- Structural soils to create an adequate lateral growing volume below the pavement; and

- Root control barriers.

85. Tree grates shall not be used for any trees in paved areas due to asset management and risk management issues and shall be substituted with proprietary tree surrounds such as Terrabond^TM or equivalent. The tree surrounds shall comprise an approved resin bonded aggregate with feature granite setts to Council selection and in accordance with Council’s Tree Surrounds specification.

86. The existing street verge paving shall be removed and replaced with unit paving to match the adjoining development. The specification of the unit paving shall be Claypave ‘Monarch Tan’ 230x110x60mm laid in herringbone with headercourse to kerbing and banding at nominated spacings to match the adjoining paving layout and laid in accordance with Council’s Unit Paving specification.

87. The paving works adjacent to the top of the proposed and existing pram ramps shall include a double row of 300x300mm tactile indicator pavers with 30% luminance contrast to unit paver colour in accordance with AS 1428.

88. Deleted

89. Deleted

90. Deleted

Contributions / Fees

91A. The payment to Council of a contribution of $1,139,409.55 for 104 dwellings towards the cost of infrastructure identified in Council’s Development Contributions Plan 2007-2011.

The contribution must be paid prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate for the dwellings.

Note: * The value of contribution is current as at 2 March 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.

91B. Deleted

Dedication of Pound Road

92. Prior to the release of the occupation certificate, that stratum part of the land known as Lot 1 DP1077943 comprising the former Pound Road excluding the stratum required for the basement car parking must be landscaped in accordance with the requirements of conditions Nos. 4 and 88-90 and be identified as public open space and the land must be dedicated to Council, at no cost to Council

Roads and Traffic Authority

93. No stopping restrictions shall be installed across both Pacific Highway and Government Road.

94. All deliveries to/from the site are not to be undertaken directly from the Pacific Highway frontage.

95. Suitable provision shall be made to retard stormwater run-off from the site onto the Pacific Highway.

96. All off-street parking, ramp grades and manoeuvring areas to Council’s satisfaction. Design of car parking area to conform to AS2890.1-1993 and AS2890.2-1989.

97. The commercial spaces clearly segregated and signposted away from the residential spaces.

98. The proposed disabled spaces should be located in close proximity to the elevators/lifts.

99. Noise protection must be provided in accordance with the Department of Planning’s Developments Near Rail Corridors and Busy Roads Interim Guideline. The cost of any attenuation measures must be provided at no cost to the Roads and Traffic Authority.

100. All works/regulatory signposting associated with the development will be at no cost to the Roads and Traffic Authority.

State Rail

101. Deleted

102. Deleted

103. 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.

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

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

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

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

105. The floor to ceiling height must be no less than 4.5 metres in all areas used to manoeuvre, park and load heavy rigid vehicles, including loading bays/ service areas.

106. The manoeuvring path for heavy rigid vehicles must be clear of all structures.

107. To confirm compliance with the Waste Management Plans lodged with this Development Application, prior to issue of the subdivision certificate/occupation certificate, the applicant must submit to Council documentary evidence (i.e. tipping dockets/receipts from recycling depots, transfer stations and landfills) and provide a summary report of actual destinations and quantities of waste generated by the works carried out under this development consent. This summary report is to be based on and be in the format of the Waste Management Plan Section One – Demolition Stage and/or Section Three – Construction Stage. If less than 60% waste was reused or recycled, then the summary report must include the reasons why the 60% target was not achieved.

108. A site caretaker must be employed and be responsible for moving bins where and when required, washing bins and maintaining storage areas, managing the communal composting area, arranging the prompt removal of dumped rubbish, and ensuring all residents and commercial tenants are informed of the waste management system.

109. Each bin room must be designed to comply with the Building Code of Australia with particular regard to fire prevention provisions.

110. Each dwelling must be provided with an indoor waste/recycling cupboard for the interim storage of a minimum one day’s garbage and recycling generation.

111. Space must be provided for a communal compost container; the siting of which will have regard for potential amenity impacts.

112. Site security measures implemented on the property, including electronic gates, must not prevent access to the bin room/collection point by waste removal services.

113. The residential component and non-residential component of the development must have separate and self-contained waste management systems, including separate waste/recycling storage rooms. Commercial tenants must be prevented (via signage and other means) from using the residential waste/recycling bins and vice versa.

114. Submission to Hornsby Shire Council for approval the Pound Road landscape pedestrian plaza development plans, prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate for any works other than excavations, test holes and piling works. The plans shall demonstrate the scope of construction works, consistent with the requirements of the following conditions. Design requirements shall include:

(a) The park must be developed with clear open sight lines through the space from Government Road. Areas of shrub planting must not be included in the central areas. The majority of the area must be grassed.

(b) A central paved space must be provided which relates to the proposed commercial use of 1 Pound Road and the entry to the existing building at 4-10 Pound Road.

(c) Paths linking through the site must follow the main pedestrian movement corridors, in particular the diagonal movement across the plaza. Emergency exit points of adjacent building must be incorporated into the plan.

(d) Screen shrub planting to a height of 3-4 metres must be provided in front of any blank building walls.

115. The applicant must develop the landscape pedestrian plaza on Pound Road including paving, lighting, retaining walls, planting and furnishings to meet the following requirements:

Paving works to area

(a) All existing concrete and bitumen pavements must be demolished and removed from the site.

(b) Paving must be constructed to a standard equal to paving in public areas managed by Council and must include a clay brick paving surface finish, laid on sand and a concrete base course over a compacted subgrade.

(d) The concrete base course to paved areas must consist of a minimum 100mm thick 25 Mpa reinforced concrete with SL72 centrally placed;

(e) A central paved area must be provided for temporary tables should an appropriate tenant be established in the adjoining commercial leasing. Paved areas must be of minimum dimensions 15 x 15 metres.

(f) All new brick paving must be Claypave Regency Tan 230mm x 115mm x 50mm pavers supplied by Claypave Pty Ltd, Chum St Dinmore Queensland, phone 07 3282 1444 or approved equivalent.

Retaining walls and steps

(g) Retaining walls that may be utilised to define garden bed areas must have a maximum height of 900mm above the adjacent finished surface level and must be constructed from reinforced concrete blockwork with a coloured masonry finish and / or bagged and painted finish with an approved capping securely fixed to the wall.

(h) It is preferred that turf areas are set at a level nominal 150mm above adjacent paving level with finished block work.

Furniture Works and Lighting

(i) Landscape development works must include the construction of:

1. Four (4) new park benches;

2. 3.5 metre height pedestrian scale light poles with luminaires to meet the requirements of the relevant Australian Standards for pedestrian lighting.

(j) New park benches must be Bench Seat 12 Aluminium (1800mm x 1200mm x 450mm high) supplied by Botton and Gardiner Urban Furniture, 37/34-36 Ralph Street, Alexandria NSW, phone 02 9667 8100. Park benches must be installed in a paved area, extending a minimum of 200mm beyond the edges of the bench in all directions.

Landscaping

(k) Landscaping of all areas must be planted with shrubs, groundcovers or native grasses and provided with a minimum 400mm depth of topsoil and 100mm depth of mulch. Topsoil must be suitable for the successful development of native shrubs and meet the requirements of AS4419 or approved equivalent.

(l) Landscaping of areas where tree planting is proposed must include a minimum topsoil depth of 1.0 metre, and topsoil volume of 4.0 cubic metres. The top 400mm of this topsoil must meet the requirements of AS4419 or approved equivalent.

(m) All turf areas must be constructed with a minimum 150mm depth of topsoil that meets the requirements of AS4419 or approved equivalent. Turf shall be Buffalo ‘shade master’ or approved equivalent.

(n) Tree planting to the plaza areas must include mature palms with a minimum height of 5 metres. Butia Palm or approved equivalent is to be provided.

(o) Screen planting to eastern edge of plaza must be installed in a minimum pot size of 25 litres and be Syzigium species.

116. Following completion of construction, the landscape softworks must be maintained by the applicant for a minimum of 12 months to ensure the establishment and successful growth of plant material to meet the intent of the landscape design. Maintenance must include but not be limited to watering, weeding, replacement of plant material and promoting the growth of all plants through standard industry practices.

117. A defects liability period of 12 months shall apply to all hard landscape construction works.

118. Prior to the issuing of the Final Occupancy Certificate, the completed works must be inspected and certified by a Registered Landscape Architect as being completed in accordance with the requirements of the Development Consent.

119. The swept path of the longest vehicle (including garbage trucks) entering and exiting the subject site, as well as manoeuvrability through the site, must be in accordance with AUSTROADS. In this regard, a plan must be submitted to Hornsby Shire Council for approval, which shows that the proposed development complies with this requirement.

120. The developer must submit detailed design drawings and geotechnical reports relating to the excavation of the site and support structures to the Roads and Traffic Authority for assessment (prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate). The developer must meet full cost of the assessment by the Roads and Traffic Authority. This report must address the following key issues:

(a) The impact of excavation/rock anchors on the stability of the Pacific Highway and detailing how the carriageway would be monitored for settlement.

(b) The impact of the excavation on the structural stability of the Pacific Highway.

(c) Any other issues that may need to be addressed to the satisfaction of the Roads and Traffic Authority. (Contact Geotechnical Engineer Stanley Yuen on 8837 0246 or Graham Yip 8837 0245 for details).

121. The post development stormwater discharge from the site into the Roads and Traffic Authority drainage system must not exceed the pre development discharge. Detailed design plans and hydraulic calculations of any changes to the stormwater drainage system must be submitted to the Roads and Traffic Authority for approval, prior to the commencement of any works.

Details shall be forwarded to:

The Sydney Asset Management

PO Box 973

Parramatta CBD NSW 2124

A plan checking fee may be payable and a performance bond may be required before the Roads and Traffic Authority’s approval is issued. With regard to the civil works requirements, please contact the Roads and Traffic Authority’s Project External Works on ph: 8849 2114 or fax: 8849 2766.

122. Any proposed landscaping, fencing or signage must not impede the desired sight lines of all road users including pedestrians and cyclists.

123. All vehicles must be able to enter and exit the site in a forward direction.

124. All construction vehicles must be accommodated on site.

125. Approved Plans and Supporting Documentation

*Plan No.*	*Issue*	*Drawn by*	*Dated*
W2000 – Ground Floor Plan & Site Plan	B	Woodhead	10.01.2011
W2001 – Level 1 Floor Plan	A	Woodhead	15.11.2010
W2002 – Level 2-8 Floor Plan	A	Woodhead	15.11.2010
W2009 – Level 9 Floor Plan	A	Woodhead	15.11.2010
W2010 – Floor Plan	A	Woodhead	15.11.2010
W2011 – Plant Level Floor Plan	A	Woodhead	15.11.2010
W2012 – Roof Plan	A	Woodhead	15.11.2010
W2015 – Basement 1 Floor Plan	B	Woodhead	10.01.2011
W2016 – Basement 2 Floor Plan	A	Woodhead	15.11.2010
W2017 – Basement 3 Floor Plan	A	Woodhead	15.11.2010
W208 Basement 4 – Floor Plan	A	Woodhead	15.11.2010
W4001 – Elevations	A	Woodhead	15.11.2010
W4002 – Elevations	B	Woodhead	10.01.2011
W4003 – Elevations	A	Woodhead	15.11.2010
W4010 – Sections	A	Woodhead	15.11.2010
W4011 – Sections	A	Woodhead	15.11.2010

*Supporting Documents*	*Issue*	*Prepared by*	*Dated*
Statement of Environmental Effects	-	Wayne Siwak Urban Planning Consultant	November 2010
W4004 – Finishes	A	Woodhead	15.11.2010
W6000 – 3D Perspectives	A	Woodhead	15.11.2010
Architectural Design Statement	-	Woodhead	-
Building Code of Australia Report	-	McKenzie Group Consulting (NSW) Pty Ltd	November 2010
Traffic Report (Reference 08151)	-	Transport and Traffic Planning Associates	November 2010
Access Review	-	Morris-Goding Accessibility Consulting	16 November 2010
Building Services Statement (Project No. S10562)	-	Floth Sustainable Building Consultants	16 November 2010
Civil Notes & Drawing Schedule (Drawing No. C0 )	A	Demlakian Engineers Pty Ltd	November 2010
Sediment & Erosion Control Plan (Drawing No. C1)	A	Demlakian Engineers Pty Ltd	November 2010
Sediment & Erosion Control Details (Drawing No. C2)	A	Demlakian Engineers Pty Ltd	November 2010
Stormwater Notes & Drawing Schedule (Drawing No. SW0)	A	Demlakian Engineers Pty Ltd	November 2010
Basement 4 Stormwater Drainage Plan (Drawing No. SW1)	A	Demlakian Engineers Pty Ltd	November 2010
Typical Basement Stormwater Drainage Plan (Drawing No. SW2)	A	Demlakian Engineers Pty Ltd	November 2010
Basement 1 Stormwater Drainage Plan (Drawing No. SW3)	-	Demlakian Engineers Pty Ltd	November 2010
Stormwater Details (Drawing No. SW4	A	Demlakian Engineers Pty Ltd	November 2010

Railcorp

126. Prior to the issuing of a Construction Certificate, the Applicant must provide a Geotechnical Engineering report to RailCorp. The report must demonstrate that the development has no negative impact on the rail corridor or the integrity of the infrastructure through its loading and ground deformation and must contain structural design detail/analysis for review by RailCorp.

127. An acoustic assessment must be submitted to Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate for any works other than excavations and test holes demonstrating how the proposed development will comply with the Department of Planning’s Road and Rail Guidelines. A Construction Certificate must not be issued until the measures recommended in the Acoustic Report have been incorporated into the design.

128. Prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate for any works other than excavations and test holes, the Applicant is to procure a report on the Electrolysis Risk to the development from stray currents, and the measures that will be taken to control that risk. The Applicant is advised to consult an Electolysis expert. A Construction Certificate for any works other than excavations and test holes must not be issued until the measures recommended in the Electrolysis report have been incorporated into the design.

129. The Applicant is required to submit to RailCorp for its endorsement a plan showing all carnage and other aerial operations for the development prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate for any works other than excavations and test holes. The Applicant is advised that no loads are to be carried over RailCorp’s land.

130. Where a condition of consent requires RailCorp’s endorsement the Principal Certifying Authority shall not issue a Construction Certificate or Occupancy Certificate, as a case may be, until written confirmation has been received from RailCorp that the particular condition has been complied with.

Traffic

131. A security gate is to be provided to separate residential parking from residential visitor, retail and commercial parking.

132. Space number 28 on level B3 is a small car space and is not considered adequate for residential parking. A replacement space is to be provided for residential parking.

133. All vehicles shall enter and exit the site in forward direction, 12.5m removalist vehicle excepted.

134. Vertical clearance for MRV access is to be 4.5m in accordance with AS 2890.2-2002.

135. All deliveries shall be made within the site, under no circumstances are delivery vehicles to be loaded or unloaded upon the public road.

136. Parking spaces are not to be used as storage bays.

137. Formulate a car park management plan that prevents long term parking by motorists not using the development.

138. Prior to occupation, car parking spaces are to be allocated to each unit in accordance with Hornsby Shire Council’s Car Parking DCP and a corresponding compliance certificate obtained.

Waste Management

139. 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 (as amended) is required to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority in accordance with the Waste Minimisation and Management Development Control Plan.

140. The floor to ceiling height must be no less than 4.5 metres in all areas used to manoeuvre, park and load waste and recycling collection vehicles, including loading bays/ service areas.

141. During Construction, appropriate work practices shall be employed to implement the Waste Management Plan Section One – Demolition Stage and Section Three – Construction Stage as applicable.

142. Prior to issue of an Occupation Certificate a report(s) must be prepared by a registered surveyor and submitted to the principal certifying authority prior to the issue of the Subdivision/Occupation Certificate, certifying that:

(a) The finished road/access way (including vehicle turning area and site entry/exit) complies with Australian Standard AS2890.2-2002 Parking Facilities Part 2: Off-street Commercial Vehicle Facilities for heavy rigid vehicles with minimum design vehicle dimensions of 10.5 metres overall length, width of 2.5 metres, turning radius of 11.25 metres, and 4.5 metre clearance height; and

(b) The finished gradient(s), dimensions and geometry of the road/access way (including vehicle turning area) are in accordance with the approved plans.

143. To confirm compliance with the Waste Management Plans lodged with this Development Application, prior to issue of an Occupation Certificate, a report(s) must be prepared by an appropriately qualified person and submitted to the principal certifying authority prior to the issue of the Subdivision/Occupation Certificate, certifying that:

(a) Either

(i) The Waste Management Plan Section One – Demolition Stage and Section Three – Construction Stage were implemented and at least 60 % waste generated was reused or recycled; or

(ii) If the 60% diversion from landfill was not achieved in the Demolition Stage and/or Construction Stage, the Report is to include the reasons why this occurred and certify that appropriate work practices were employed in the demolition and construction stages to implement the Waste Management Plan.

(b) The Report(s) is based on documentary evidence (i.e. tipping dockets/receipts from recycling depots, transfer stations and landfills, audits of procedures etc) which have been attached to the Report.

144. Prior to issue of an Occupation Certificate, each dwelling must be provided with an indoor waste/recycling cupboard for the interim storage of a minimum one day’s garbage and recycling generation.

145. Prior to issue of an Occupation Certificate, each kitchen/lunchroom of the commercial/retail areas must be provided with an indoor waste/recycling cupboard for the interim storage of a minimum one day’s garbage and recycling generation.

146. Prior to issue of an Occupation Certificate, space must be provided for a communal compost container; the siting of which will have regard for potential amenity impacts.

147. Prior to issue of an Occupation Certificate, a recycling bin must be provided on each residential level next to the garbage chute.

- END OF CONDITIONS –

ADVISORY NOTES

Advertising Signage – Separate DA Required

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

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Requirements

· The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 requires:

· 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 issued before occupying any building or commencing the use of the land.

Transfer of Pound Road

This consent does not commit the Council in any manner whatsoever, as owner of the land, to any agreement (other than which currently applies for the future transfer or use of the land. Any variation to the existing contracts/options will require further negotiation with the Property Branch of Council’s Works Division and will be subject to a formal resolution of Council in accordance with Section 377 of the Local Government Act 1993.

Planning Report No. PLN28/11

Date of Meeting: 6/04/2011

5 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - ERECTION OF A MCDONALDS RESTAURANT
361- 365 PENNANT HILLS ROAD, PENNANT HILLS

Development Application No:	DA/1427/2010
Description of Proposal:	Demolition of existing structures and erection of a new McDonald’s restaurant with basement car parking and drive-thru facility, associated landscape works and erection of twenty-three signs.
Property Description:	Lots 35, 34 and 33 DP 262566, Nos. 361-365 Pennant Hills Road, Pennant Hills
Applicant:	McDonalds Australia Limited
Owner:	McDonalds Australia Limited The Shell Company of Australia Ltd
Statutory Provisions:	Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 Business B (Special) zone
Estimated Value:	$3,000,000
Ward:	C

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Development Application No. 1427/2010 for the demolition of existing structures and the erection of a new McDonalds restaurant with basement car parking and drive-thru facility, associated landscape works and erection of twenty-three signs at Lots 35, 34 and 33 DP 262566, Nos. 361-365 Pennant Hills Road, Pennant Hills be refused for the reasons detailed in Schedule 1 of this report.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. The application proposes the demolition of existing structures and the erection of a new McDonald’s restaurant with basement car parking and drive-thru facility, associated landscape works and erection of twenty-three signs.

2. The proposal complies with the requirements of the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 and the relevant Development Control Plans, with the exception of signage which exceeds the maximum total number of signs for a site and also the maximum total signage area permitted on the site.

3. The development would result in detrimental traffic impacts upon the locality.

4. Council has received 113 submissions in respect of the application.

5. It is recommended that the application be refused on traffic and parking grounds.

HISTORY OF THE SITE

Two of the lots that form part of the development site are currently used for commercial purposes (Pergola Land and Doors Plus), whilst the third lot is vacant and forms part of the Shell Service Station holdings.

The site was historically subject to road widening along the Pennant Hills frontage which has subsequently been acquired by the RTA and the road widening works undertaken.

THE SITE

The site comprises three allotments, Lots 35, 34 and 33 in DP 262566 and is known as Nos. 361-365 Pennant Hills Road, Pennant Hills. The site is located on the south eastern intersection of Pennant Hills Road and George Street.

The site has a 49.845 metre splayed corner frontage to Pennant Hills Road and a 35.495 metre secondary frontage to George Street. The site has a 39.95 metre south-western boundary and 56.965 metre rear southern boundary. The total site area is approximately 2011.1 square metres.

The site slopes gradually towards the north-west with a fall of approximately 3.2 metres. There is an existing vehicular crossing from Pennant Hills Road to the Doors Plus commercial showroom. Vehicular access to the Pergola Land showroom is via a driveway from George Street.

Surrounding development comprises predominantly commercial development to the north-east and industrial development along the northern side of Pennant Hills Road. The streetscape along George Street consists predominantly of residential development to the south-east and east of the site.

Adjacent to the site on the northern corner of George Street and Pennant Hills Road is an existing KFC restaurant with a drive-thru facility and a car parking area.

To the rear of the site the land is zoned and developed for residential purposes along George Street, Harold Avenue and surrounding residential streets.

The six lanes of Pennant Hills Road and concrete median provide separation to the Pennant Hills commercial and industrial area which comprises land zoned Business A (General) and Industrial B (Light) under the HSLEP.

THE PROPOSAL

The proposal is to demolish the existing commercial showroom buildings and other improvements on the site and construct a McDonald’s restaurant with car parking area and loading bay at ground floor level and a lower level basement drive-thru facility with additional basement car parking as well as stair and lift access to the restaurant.

The proposed McDonald’s restaurant building would have a gross floor area (GFA) of 405.51 square metres. Vehicular access is proposed from George Street with off street car parking for 38 vehicles (including 4 disabled spaces).

It is also proposed to erect twenty-three signs as part of the development and undertake associated landscaping works including an acoustic fence along the eastern boundary.

The proposed hours of operation are 24 hours, 7 days a week and the applicant has advised that at any given time there would be approximately 15 to 25 staff on site.

ASSESSMENT

1. STRATEGIC CONTEXT

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

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

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

· Housing stock to increase by 11,000 dwellings.

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

2. STATUTORY CONTROLS

2.1 Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994

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

(a) to encourage economic growth and employment opportunities.

(b) to accommodate a broad range of commercial and service related business within the area.

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

The proposed development is defined as ‘demolition’, ‘restaurant’ and ‘advertising’ 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 Business B (Special) zone is 0.5:1. The proposed development complies with this requirement.

Clause 18 of the HSLEP sets out heritage conservation provisions within the Hornsby area. The property is in close proximity to property No. 4 Harold Avenue, Pennant Hills which is listed as a heritage item (“House”) of local significance under the provisions of Schedule D (Heritage Items) of the HSLEP.

A detailed Heritage Impact Statement (HIS) accompanies the application. The HIS includes recommendations to assist in mitigating any potential impacts on the adjoining heritage item. The recommendations include construction of a new acoustic-rated wall and screen planting along the common boundary. Council’s Heritage assessment of the application concluded that the proposal would not adversely affect the setting or heritage significance of the heritage item subject to the implementation of the recommended measures contained in the HIS including the provision of an acoustic-rated wall and screen planting and no substantial objections were raised to the proposal on heritage grounds.

2.2 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 - Contaminated Land

Clause 7 of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 - Remediation of Land requires Council to consider whether land is contaminated prior to granting consent to the carrying out of any development on that land.

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

The applicant submitted an Environmental Investigation Report (Phases 1 & 2) prepared by Environmental Strategies Pty Ltd for the proposed development which concluded that the site is suitable for the proposed commercial use. Council’s environmental review of the submitted information assessed the development as satisfactory with regard to SEPP 55.

2.3 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 - Advertising and Signage

This Policy aims to improve the amenity of urban and natural settings by managing the impact of outdoor advertising. In accordance with Part 3, Clause 9, the proposed signage is defined as a ‘business identification sign’ and the provisions of Part 3 of the Policy do not apply.

Approximately half of the proposed signs are located within the basement level of the proposed development and are not visible from the street. Furthermore, over half of the signage proposed is for directional purposes only. The signage 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 satisfies the assessment criteria in Schedule 1 of the SEPP and is considered to be acceptable in terms of its impact.

2.4 State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

The application was referred to the RTA pursuant to Clause 104 of the Infrastructure SEPP as Schedule 3 applies to ‘drive-in take away food outlets’. In considering the application, the RTA requested that Council satisfy itself of certain matters prior to granting development consent. In the event that Council was satisfied as to the merits of the application, the RTA recommended the imposition of conditions of consent. This matter is discussed in more detail in section 5.2.1 of this report.

2.5 Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

The site is located within the catchment of Sydney Harbour. As such the land is subject to the SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005. The aim of the Plan is to ensure that the catchment, foreshores, waterways and islands of Sydney Harbour are recognised, protected, enhanced and maintained.

The Plan addresses matters related to biodiversity, ecology and environment protection; public access to, and use of, foreshores and waterways; maintenance of a working harbour; interrelationship of waterway and foreshore uses; foreshore and waterways scenic quality; maintenance, protection and enhancement of views and boat storage facilities

It is considered that the proposed development is not inconsistent with the aims and objectives of the Plan subject to the imposition of appropriate conditions of consent.

2.6 Business Lands Development Control Plan and Pennant Hills Commercial Centre 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) and the Pennant Hills Commercial Centre Development Control Plan (Pennant Hills DCP). The following table sets out the proposal’s compliance with the prescriptive standards of the Plan:

Business Lands Development Control Plan and Pennant Hills Commercial Centre Development Control Plan
Control	Proposal	Requirement	Compliance
FSR	0.2:1	0.5:1	Yes
Height	7.42m (eqv. 2 storey)	2 storey	Yes
Car parking	38 spaces	38 spaces	Yes
Signage - Total area - Total pole signs - Total wall signs - Total advert panels - Total directional signage - TOTAL SIGNAGE	22.59m² 3 signs 6 signs 6 signs 8 signs 23 signs	21.3m² 1 sign N/A N/A N/A 3 signs	No No N/A N/A N/A No
Setbacks - Pennant Hills Road - George Street - Side (southwest) - Side (southeast)	0-1.5m 0m 18m 17.7m	5m 0m 0m 0m	No Yes Yes Yes

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

2.6.1 Setbacks

Other than the front setback to Pennant Hills Road, the proposed development complies with the setback prescriptive measures of the DCPs. The front setback of the proposed McDonald’s restaurant is consistent with adjoining commercial buildings located along Pennant Hills Road and the existing commercial buildings located upon the site.

The development has been sited as far as possible to the north-west of the residential properties located along the south eastern boundary to reduce potential amenity impacts to these neighbouring residential properties.

Notwithstanding the non-compliance with the front setback provision, the proposed development is considered to satisfy the element objective of the DCP.

2.6.2 Signage

The proposal includes the erection of twenty-three signs on the site, which exceeds the requirement of a maximum total of three signs per site. The proposed development also exceeds the maximum total signage area permitted on the site.

Notwithstanding the above, approximately half of the proposed signs are located within the basement level of the proposed development and are not visible from the street and the remaining signage at street level is consistent with the existing KFC site signage located on the opposite corner of Pennant Hills Road and George Street and the signage on surrounding development within the Pennant Hills Commercial precinct. Furthermore, a number of the signs are for either directional purposes (including a height bar for the drive-thru) or are to display menu items within the drive-thru lane and would not be visible from either the Pennant Hills Road or George Street frontages.

Notwithstanding, the non-compliance with the signage provision, the proposed development is considered to satisfy the element objective of the DCP.

2.6.3 Acoustics

Submissions received have raised concerns that the additional traffic, pedestrian activity and associated noise to be generated around the proposed development would further exacerbate the loss in residential amenity for adjoining property owners 24 hours a day 7 days a week.

The application included a Noise Assessment report, prepared by Atkins Acoustics and Associates Pty Ltd. The report concluded that:

· The trading hours considered in the assessment are 24 hours, 7 days;

· The findings of the assessment have shown that noise emanating from the site mechanical plant can be controlled through selection and installation to achieve the assessment noise goals.

· With respect to outdoor dining activities, the assessment has shown noise emissions are predicted to satisfy the noise goals; and

· In regard to transient site activities, the assessment has shown that predicted noise levels satisfy the night-time disturbance goals.

Council’s assessment of the noise report raised no concerns to the proposal on acoustic grounds subject to the implementation of the report’s recommendations.

Whilst the DCP states that the hours of operation of commercial activities should be between 7am to 6pm Monday to Wednesday and Friday, 7am to 9pm Thursday and 8am to 4pm Saturday with no work to be undertaken on Sunday or Public Holidays, if Council were minded to grant approval to the development the 24 hour operation of the site could be implemented on a trial basis to further assess whether the recommended acoustic measures address the potential amenity impacts of the development.

2.6.4 Solar Access

The proposed development allows for over two hours of sunshine to the private open space for adjacent residential dwellings along Harold Avenue between 9am and 3pm on 22 June. Additionally, the proposal allows for all north facing windows to living areas of adjacent residential dwellings along Harold Avenue to receive three hours of sunshine between 9am and 3pm on 22 June. Finally, the development allows footpaths to receive sunlight between 12pm and 2pm on June 22.

The proposal meets the prescriptive measures of the DCP and it is considered that the shadow cast by the proposed development on the adjoining residential development is not such as to warrant refusal of the application.

2.6.5 Crime Prevention

The applicant provided the following information with regard to crime prevention measures for the proposed development:

“The design of the proposed McDonald’s restaurant and drive-thru optimises safety and security, both internal to the development and from the public domain. Safety and security has been considered with incorporation into the design of Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles of surveillance, access, territorial reinforcement and space management.

The proposed McDonald’s restaurant and drive-thru development will provide commercial activity on a 7 day, 24 hour basis, thereby promoting casual surveillance and security of this area.

The proposed terrace area, site landscaping and car park areas maintain clear sight lines and will be appropriately lit. The proposed hours of operation (i.e. 24 hours per day, 7 days a week) and active use of the site will further improve the safety aspects of the McDonald’s restaurant and drive-thru proposal and the surrounding area along this section of Pennant Hills Road and nearby streets.”

A number of submissions raised concern with regard to the potential threat to the safety, security and amenity of surrounding and nearby residents, and the general public, arising from people loitering and congregating outside the proposed restaurant especially at late night opening hours.

The development has been designed to incorporate a number of features based primarily on crime prevention through design including increased lighting, CCTV coverage, high quality locking devices, barriers, door hardware, security awareness programs for staff and defined signage. If Council were minded to grant approval to the proposal, it is recommended that a condition of consent be imposed which requires a management plan to be prepared detailing measures to prevent and manage the specific problem of people loitering and congregating outside the proposed restaurant during late night opening hours and engaging in unruly and anti-social behaviour to the detriment of the amenity, safety and security of adjoining and surrounding local residents and the general public.

2.7 Car Parking Development Control Plan

In accordance with Council’s Car Parking DCP, the parking requirement for take-away restaurants with drive-through facilities is the greater of, one space per two seats (internal), or 1 space per three seats (internal and external). The proposed development has a combined total of 114 internal and external seats, which results in a requirement for 38 parking spaces. The development proposes a total of 38 parking spaces which complies with the requirements of the DCP.

Notwithstanding the above, the compliance with the numerical controls, Council’s engineering assessment raised concerns with regards to traffic and parking impacts of the development and this matter is addressed in section 3.2 of this report.

2.8 Outdoor Advertising Development Control Plan

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

Outdoor Advertising Development Control Plan

Control

Proposal

Requirement

Compliance

Total Signage Area

22.59m²

21.3m²

Building Signage

Sign 1 (Wall Sign - McDonald’s)

- Area

- Height above ground to base

1.74m²

2.6m

4m²

>2.6m

Yes

Sign 2 (Wall Sign - small M)

- Area

- Height above ground to base

0.72m²

2.6m

4m²

>2.6m

Yes

Sign 3 (Wall Sign - large M x 2)

- Area

- Height above ground to base

3.52m²

4m²

>2.6m

Yes

Sign 4 (Wall Sign - McCafe)

- Area

- Height above ground to base

1.82m²

4m²

>2.6m

Yes

Sign 5 (Wall Sign - McCafe small)

- Area

- Height above ground to base

0.67m²

4.5m

4m²

>2.6m

Yes

Freestanding Site Signage

Sign 7 (rotating menu board) x 6

- Area

- Height

- Height above ground to base

1.19m²

2.2m

400mm

4.5m²

>2.6m

Yes

Sign 8 (Pole Sign x 3)

- Area

- Height

- Height above ground to base

1.61m²

2.3m

nil

4.5m²

>2.6m

Yes

Directional Signage

Sign 6 (Height Clearance Gantry)

- Area

- Height above ground to base

0.4m²

2.2m

4m²

>2.6m

Yes

Sign 9 (Car Park Signage x 4)

- Area

- Height above ground to base

0.27-0.36m²

1.5m-2.3m

4m²

>2.6m

Yes

Sign 10 (Hanging Sign - Order Here) x2

- Area

- Height above ground to base

0.105m²

Not specified

4m²

>2.6m

Yes

Sign 11 (Wall Sign - Pay Here)

- Area

- Height above ground to base

0.14m²

Not specified

4m²

>2.6m

Yes

Sign 13 (Wall Sign - Confined Spaces)

- Area

- Height above ground to base

0.135m²

Not specified

4m²

>2.6m

Yes

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

2.8.1 Total Signage Area

The proposed development exceeds the maximum total signage area permitted on the site. Notwithstanding, the signage is consistent with the existing KFC site signage and the signage located on surrounding commercial development fronting Pennant Hills Road. Furthermore, a number of the signs are for either directional purposes (including a height bar for the drive-thru) or are to display menu items within the drive-thru lane and are located within the basement level of the development and therefore would not be visible from either the Pennant Hills Road or George Street frontages.

2.8.2 Pole Sign

The proposed pole signs fronting George Street and the rotating menu boards located in the basement drive-thru area do not comply with the height above ground to base requirement of the DCP. The design and location of the pole signs and rotating menu boards is such that pedestrians and vehicles are unable to walk and or drive under the pole sign, accordingly the non-compliance with the requirement that the sign shall not be less than 2.6m above the ground would not impact on the safety of pedestrians and vehicles on the site.

2.8.3 Directional Signage

The directional signage is to be located within the drive thru lanes such that pedestrians are unable to walk under and would be positioned so as not to impede the passage of vehicles. Accordingly the non-compliance with the requirement that the sign shall not be less than 2.6m above the ground would not impact on the safety of pedestrians and vehicles on the site.

2.8.4 General Comments

The proposed signage for the site whilst inconsistent with the controls for total site signage is consistent with existing signage currently on the site and is in keeping with commercial development in the locality.

2.9 Access and Mobility Development Control Plan

The primary purpose of this DCP is to assist proponents and Council in ensuring the requirements for equality of access in the Anti Discrimination Act 1977 are satisfied when building work is proposed.

The proposed development has been designed for accessible street access paths from Pennant Hills Road and accessible car parking at both the basement and ground level car park areas. A lift provides access from the basement car park level to the restaurant. Furthermore, the applicant has advised that the plans and documentation would be audited by an Accessibility Consultant at the construction certificate stage.

Accordingly, the proposed development is consistent with the objectives of the Access and Mobility Development Control Plan.

2.10 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 applicant has submitted a waste management plan in accordance with the requirements of the DCP. Subject to recommended conditions of consent relating to disposal of waste being implemented, the proposed development is consistent with the objectives of the Plan.

2.11 Sustainable Waters Development Control Plan

The DCP aims to achieve the implementation of sustainable water practices into the management of development in the Hornsby Shire.

The relevant issues in this DCP are discussed in section 2.5 under the heading Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005.

2.12 Section 94 Development Contributions Plan 2007 - 2011

Section 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 enables Council to levy development contributions towards the cost of community facilities, public works, open space and recreational facilities.

The proposed re-development of the site for use as a McDonald’s restaurant would not result in a net increase in the commercial floor area of existing development on the site. Therefore, no s94 contribution is payable as the proposed development would not result in the intensification of the use of the site.

3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

3.1 Natural Environment

The site comprises a number of exotic, native planted trees and locally indigenous specimens. The application has been supported by an Arboricultural Impact Assessment Report & Tree Protection Specification (Rev A), prepared by Integrated Vegetation Management, dated 27 October 2010

The proposed development would necessitate the removal of eight trees from the site. None of the trees to be removed are identified as ‘significant trees’ under Council’s assessment.

In addition to the above, it is possible that trees numbered 9, 11 and 12 which are located on the neighbouring properties to the rear would be removed or adversely affected by the proposed development. There is an existing masonry wall located along the boundary between the development site and the properties containing trees numbered 9, 11 and 12. Council’s assessment concluded that it is unclear as to the depth of the footings of this wall which may restrict the growth of roots in the direction of the proposed development. To determine the full impacts that the proposed development would have on the trees the location and distribution of the roots would have to be determined and inspected by an AQF5 Arborist.

Notwithstanding, Councils assessment concluded that it is reasonable to permit the removal and replacement of trees numbered 9, 11 and 12 subject to consent being obtained from the owners of the properties that the trees are located on.

3.2 Built Environment

3.2.1 Visual impact

The proposed development is two storeys and replaces an existing commercial development (Pergola land and Doors Plus) on the site. Landscape planting around the perimeter of the site in conjunction with the articulation of the building façade would lessen the visual impact of the development from the Pennant Hills Road and George Street frontages.

3.2.2 Traffic Volume and Distribution

The proposed restaurant would be located on the national road network and for that reason, the development cannot be considered as a typical suburban McDonald’s outlet. The restaurant would be the only McDonald’s outlet encountered by south bound traffic between Wyong and Winton along the National Highway network (F3, Pennant Hills Road, M2, M7, F5). Therefore, visitation patterns would be influenced by State and National holiday periods and the types of vehicles that would visit the restaurant would not be typical of a suburban McDonald’s restaurant.

In addition, the proposed development would be in the vicinity of one of the Shire’s major sporting complexes. Consequently, it is considered that the proposed development is not reflective of the other nominated restaurants used to justify the traffic volume and distribution outlined in the applicant’s submitted traffic report.

Council’s engineering assessment of the traffic impacts of the development concludes that the applicant has not provided adequate vehicle circulation within the site nor fully considered traffic generation of the site. Furthermore, the applicant has not fully considered the operation of George Street, in particular its use by local residents, nor has the applicant had regard to the redistribution of local traffic when users of Pennant Hills Park access the site.

Additional information received from applicant states that recent surveys undertaken at Belmont, Cremorne and Campbelltown have found peak hour traffic generations of some 180 to 200 vehicles per hour two-way.

It is not stated whether the restaurants surveyed are within close proximity to a major sporting complex like Pennant Hills Park. The proximity of the Park is likely to result in an undefined number of visits to McDonald’s before and after sporting events. This additional traffic does not appear to have been taken into account when assessing traffic volumes to/from the restaurant.

The predicted traffic volumes by the applicant have been mainly attributed to southbound entry and exit from Pennant Hills Road. While the volumes nominated would include visits from the local community, the distribution of resident traffic does not appear to take this into account.

The Saturday traffic counts were undertaken when netball and soccer were being played at Pennant Hills Park. However the redistribution of Park related traffic via George Street which would occur when McDonald’s is operating appears not to have been taken into account.

3.2.3 Vehicle Access

Vehicle access to the site was considered in the assessment of the application and is addressed below:

· Left turn from Pennant Hills Road into George Street.

Sight distance to turning vehicles on Pennant Hills Road is considered inadequate due to the bend in the road. However, sight distance for vehicles travelling in the kerb side lane to vehicles turning left at George Street has been estimated at 155 metres which is adequate and meets the standard for 70 km/h.

Whilst there is adequate stopping sight distance to a stopped vehicle, if there are queues forming in George Street as vehicles wait to enter McDonalds, then Pennant Hills Road would be reduced from three to two lanes, with a resultant likely increase in rear enders or side swipe crashes. This problem is not due to sight distance but the fact that the kerbside lane is blocked causing erratic driver behaviour.

· Emergency access to/from “The Peninsular”

There are over five hundred residences in ‘The Peninsular’* catchment having access to and from Pennant Hills Road via The Crescent and George Street. If the closure of the Pennant Hills Road median restricts George Street to a left in, left out access, only one entry from the south and one exit to the north would remain.

*(Note: The Peninsular is the informal name of the residential catchment on the Eastern side of Pennant Hills Road accessed via George Street and The Crescent.)

If the residential area and Pennant Hills Park are required to be evacuated in a bush fire emergency, the entry and exit points need to be maintained for emergency vehicle entry and civilian evacuation. The provision of a median to limit George Street to left in and left is a matter for the RTA who would need to consult with emergency service agencies and local residents and businesses.

· Vehicles using local streets to access McDonald’s.

It is anticipated that a number of local residents would use the McDonald’s restaurant, and those vehicles approaching from the south and north during peak periods would access the site via residential streets. The right turn into George Street from Pennant Hills Road is a safety concern at peak times.

The right turn out of George Street onto Pennant Hills Road is seldom used, as evidenced by the lack of debris at the intersection in George Street. Therefore it is probable that vehicles wishing to proceed to the north from the site would use local streets to turn onto Pennant Hills Road via The Crescent.

· Operation of KFC and Car dealership driveways opposite McDonald’s driveway.

Residents have reported that when turning left from Pennant Hills Road into George Street they often have to stop suddenly due to delays as vehicles enter and depart the KFC and the car dealership sites. Residents are concerned that with the McDonald’s driveway being located opposite these driveways, any further delays could result in a dangerous situation with vehicles queuing back onto Pennant Hills Road. The SIDRA analysis has averaged vehicle movements over an hour which is unlikely to reflect the above scenario when a platoon of vehicles arrives from Pennant Hills Park at end of each game approximately every hour on a Saturday.

3.2.4 Service Vehicles

Concern is raised that with the proposed restaurant operating 24/7, deliveries and garbage collection would occur at night time. Delivery vehicles have to manoeuvre over allocated car parking spaces and therefore delivery could not occur during busy trading times.

In the event that the application is approved, it is considered that deliveries should be limited to 7am to 9pm Monday to Friday and 7am to 6pm Saturday, with no deliveries on Sunday or public holidays to preserve residential amenity.

3.2.5 Parking Provision

Although car parking has been provided in accordance with surveys of selected McDonald’s restaurants, there is concern that there is no overflow parking available generally on the surrounding residential streets. During week days these spaces are used by local businesses and commuters, to the extent that parking restrictions have had to be installed on Harold Street.

Internal circulation within the car park has not been addressed to Council officers satisfaction. If the upper level is full, large cars and 4 wheel drives have to make a three-point turn to exit this level and enter the lower level. At 11.5 metres the U turn diameter is close to the theoretical 11.0 metre diameter of many large passenger vehicles and would be difficult for many drivers to achieve.

Cars with boats or caravans would need to be prohibited from entering either car park. There is a height restriction on the lower level which prevents these vehicles entering the drive through facility or to park on site. On the upper level these vehicles would not be able to turn around. In addition to cars and trailers, the 2.2 metre vertical clearance for vehicles to the drive through and underground car park would preclude most 4WD vehicles with roof racks from entering the site.

Observation of car and trailer parking at Thornleigh McDonald’s shows that these vehicles generally use three to four car parking spaces. On the limited number of observations made, there was always at least one car and trailer present, with one combination observed entering, circulating, and departing as sufficient adjoining spaces were unavailable.

No provision has been made for staff parking. If staff parking is included in the 38 parking spaces provided, the location staff car parking areas should be detailed. If staff parking is not included in the 38 parking spaces it is assumed that staff would park on residential streets. Car parking on residential streets is not acceptable for the 24/7 operation of the restaurant. Although it may be argued that many employees do not drive due to their age, the McDonald restaurant in Waitara provides ten staff car parking spaces to address Council’s enforcement of car parking time limits at that site.

3.2.6 Pedestrian Access

Concerns have been raised regarding young pedestrians from the rail station and bus interchange, and hotel patrons, crossing Pennant Hills Road at George Street instead of using the pedestrian facilities at Railway Street.

Due to increased turning movement into and out of George Street at Pennant Hills Road as a result of this development, concerns have also been raised about pedestrian safety crossing George Street at Pennant Hills Road.

However, it is noted that dedicated pedestrian access is available directly from Pennant Hills Road and is considered satisfactory.

3.2.7 Traffic Signals

To provide safe access to the site, it is considered that traffic signals are required at the intersection of George Street and Pennant Hills Road. The provision of traffic signals at this intersection is subject to approval by the RTA.

Submissions in relation to traffic and parking impacts are addressed in section 5.1 of this report and further comment from the RTA is provided in section 5.2.1 of this report.

3.3 Social Impacts

The proposal would have a positive social impact on the locality through the provision of causal employment and part-time employment opportunities for local young people.

3.4 Economic Impacts

The proposal would not have a detrimental 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”.

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

However, for the reasons detailed in section 3.2 of this report, it is considered that the applicant has failed to demonstrate that the site is suitable for the development having regard to traffic congestion and the generation of traffic to 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 23 November 2010 and 16 December 2010 in accordance with Council’s Notification and Exhibition Development Control Plan. During this period, Council received 38 submissions. A further 75 submissions were received after the notification period had ended (as at the date of the finalisation of this report). The map below illustrates the location of those nearby landowners who made a submission (within the reporting period) that are in close proximity to the development site.

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

113 submissions objected to the development, generally on the following grounds:

· Traffic volume and distribution.

· Vehicle Access.

· Service vehicles.

· Parking provision.

· Pedestrian access.

· The removal of trees.

· Amenity impacts, including an increase of rubbish/litter on surrounding streets.

· Social and Economic Impacts.

· Unacceptable overshadowing of adjoining properties.

· Acoustic impacts and 24 hour operation.

· Close proximity to existing McDonald’s at Thornleigh.

· Impact of nearby heritage items.

· Increase in vermin in the area.

· Loss of property values.

· Increase in crime in the area and general safety and security issues.

· Odours.

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 TSA submission on behalf of KFC

In addition to resident submissions, a submission opposing the proposed McDonald’s Restaurant was made by KFC, supported by a report prepared by Thompson Stanbury Associates (TSA). The TSA rep ort addressed various issues as summarised below.

· Traffic generation:

Ø TSA notes that the RTA recommends a sensitivity test be undertaken for developments having a generation of 230 vehicles per hour. This test was not carried out.

Ø TSA carried out a traffic generation survey at Thornleigh McDonald’s on Wednesday 19 January 2011 between 4pm and 7pm in which it surveyed drive through and groups of people walking between vehicles and the restaurant. A peak traffic generation of 280 vehicle trips per hour was found. Council officers note that the TSA submission estimated the peak traffic generation of the Thornleigh restaurant which exceeded the CBHK assumptions.

Ø Traffic generation is “some 55% greater than addressed within” the DA and “20% higher” than RTA sensitivity test.

Ø Delays at the access driveway are likely to result in traffic queues back onto Pennant Hills Road using the TSA surveyed volumes.

Ø Travel time for emergency vehicles is likely to increase.

· Internal Circulation

Ø Internal circulation between car park levels is not possible and requires re-entering George Street.

· Site Servicing

Ø Service vehicle turn paths encroach on parking spaces, resulting in servicing having to be carried out outside peak trading periods.

Ø Possibility of service vehicles using local streets.

· Pedestrians

Ø No independent pedestrian access from George Street is available (T&RS comment –direct pedestrian access is available from Pennant Hills Road).

5.1.2 Littering and potential rodent problem

Submissions received raise concern that the development would result in public littering and a potential rodent problem. The proposal would be required to manage waste disposal and litter control in accordance with Council’s waste management policy. Furthermore, littering and pest control is an operational matter that could be dealt with through appropriate Council regulatory and compliance measures when the need arises.

5.1.3 Loss of property values

Submissions received raised concern that property values would be affected by the establishment of a McDonald’s restaurant on the site.

The loss or otherwise of property values due to a development proposal is not a matter for consideration in the assessment of a development application.

5.1.4 Odours

Submissions raised concerns with the potential for odours to emanate from the site.

The application has been assessed utilising the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997, and Council’s public health assessment raised no concerns with the proposal on this ground.

5.2 Public Agencies

The development application was referred to the following Agencies for comment:

5.2.1 Roads and Traffic Authority

The application was referred to the RTA pursuant to the provisions of Clause 104 and Schedule 3 of SEPP (Infrastructure).

The RTA has informed Council that it is currently reviewing the closure of the central median in Pennant Hills Road, thus preventing right turn movements into or out of George Street. To mitigate access issues into this area, improvements to the intersection of Pennant Hills Road and The Crescent would need to be implemented. No indication is given as to what the improvements might be.

It is noted that any changes to the intersection of George Street and Pennant Hills Road is the responsibility of the RTA and no details of any proposal are available at this stage. Until the RTA can provide traffic modelling showing the consequences of any proposed changes, George Street should remain open to all traffic movements at its intersection with Pennant Hills Road to allow adequate access to the precinct due to the current problems at the alternative access point, The Crescent. The right turn movement from Pennant Hills Road north bound into The Crescent is prone to queue back into the through traffic lane on Pennant Hills Road during weekday AM peak periods and more so on Saturdays when there are sporting events at Pennant Hills Park.

With regard to the proposed development, the RTA requires the applicant to dedicate as road reserve, a minimum 3.5m footway for the full frontage of the property. Upon clarifying the RTA’s advice, it is noted that the RTA is referring to that 3.5 metre wide strip along Pennant Hills Road on the original Deposited Plan known as Lots 62, 63 and 64. The illustration below highlights the land referred to by the RTA.

As this land has already been dedicated as road reserve, no further action is required in respect of the RTA’s requirement.

The RTA provided the following advisory comments to Council for consideration in its determination of the DA:

1. Council will need to be satisfied that vehicles accessing this development will not create queues out onto Pennant Hills Road. It is noted that queues are already evident on Pennant Hills Road and the sight distance is compromised by the alignment of the road.

Having assessed the results of the TSA traffic surveys the Council’s officers are not satisfied that traffic accessing the proposed development, KFC and car yard would not queue back onto Pennant Hills Road.

2. The location of the driveway may impact on the adjacent businesses. Vehicles queuing to turn right into this development will block vehicles wishing to exit the adjacent businesses.

Council’s officers concur with this comment and considers that this would result in an unacceptable outcome.

3. To mitigate some of this impact ‘NO STOPPING’ parking restrictions could be installed on both sides of George Street from Pennant Hills Road to Harold Street. These restrictions would need to be approved by the local traffic committee prior to installation.

In the event that Council approves the development application, Council’s officers concur with this recommendation.

4. Council will need to be satisfied that this development will not have an adverse impact on the local road network

Council’s officers are not satisfied that this development would not have an adverse impact on the local road network for the reasons detailed in this report.

a. There is no internal link between the upper and lower car parks. If there are insufficient parking spaces, this will force vehicles to exit the property and use the local road network to turn around to re-enter the property.

Council’s officers concur with this statement for movement between upper to lower deck only. It is physically possible for 85 percentile vehicles to circulate from the lower to upper deck.

The electronic signage may be of some benefit in assisting visitors locating vacant parking however it may also cause some visitors to hesitate in the critical areas of George Street or the entry driveway as they try and determine which route to take, particularly if the numbers are changing when vehicles are preceding the entering vehicle.

b. Vehicles that enter the lower car park and do not find parking cannot access the drive through facility without exiting the site, (painted pavement arrows force vehicles to turn left and exit the site).

The revised car park circulation plans submitted (Plan Nos. A001 (Rev C) and A002 (Rev C), dated 14 March 2011) show right turn arrows allowing movement from lower to upper deck and upper deck to lower deck. The turning paths do not confirm that a 99 percentile vehicle can perform the u-turn from the upper to lower ramp at this critical location.

c. No long parking spaces have been provided to cater for cars towing trailers or boats, which would be expected as this is the first McDonald’s restaurant for vehicles heading south from the F3.

Council’s officers concur with this comment.

5. The delivery vehicle is required to encroach on some parking spaces to access the loading dock, therefore, deliveries will need to occur outside peak business periods to reduce this conflict and the likelihood of a manoeuvring vehicle causing queues.

In the event that Council approves the development application, Council’s officers concur with this recommendation.

6. Detailed design plans and hydraulic calculations of any changes to the stormwater drainage system are to be submitted to the RTA for approval, prior to the commencement of any works.

In the event that Council approves the development application, Council’s officers concur with this recommendation.

7. Any redundant driveways shall be removed and replaced with kerb and gutter to match existing.

In the event that Council approves the development application, Council’s officers concur with this recommendation.

8. A Construction Traffic Management Plan detailing construction vehicle routes, number of trucks, hours of operation, access arrangements and traffic control should be submitted to council prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

In the event that Council approves the development application, Council’s officers concur with this recommendation.

9. If not already in place, full time ‘No Stopping’ parking restrictions are to be implemented along the full Pennant Hills Road frontage of the development site. This restriction should be implemented prior to the commencement of any demolition works relating to the proposed development. Prior to the installation of the parking restrictions the applicant is to contact the RTA’s Traffic Management Services on Ph: (02) 8849 2294 for a works instruction.

In the event that Council approves the development application, Council’s officers concur with this recommendation.

10. Council should ensure that post development storm water discharge from the subject site into the RTA drainage system does not exceed the pre-development discharge.

In the event that Council approves the development application, Council’s officers concur with this recommendation.

11. The developer shall be responsible for all public utility adjustment/relocation works necessitated by the above work and as required by the various public utility authorities and/or their agents.

In the event that Council approves the development application, Council’s officers concur with this recommendation.

12. Car parking provision is to be to Council’s satisfaction.

For the reasons detailed in this report, Council’s officers are not satisfied with the car parking provision.

13. The layout of the proposed car parking areas associated with the subject development (including, driveways, grades, turn paths, sight distance requirements, aisle widths, aisle lengths, and parking bay dimensions) should be in accordance with AS 2890.1 – 2004 and AS 2890.2 – 2002 for heavy vehicle usage.

In the event that Council approves the development application, Council’s officers concur with this recommendation.

14. All vehicles are to enter and leave the site in a forward direction.

In the event that Council approves the development application, Council’s officers concur with this recommendation.

15. The proposed turning areas are to be kept clear of any obstacles, including parked cars, at all times.

In the event that Council approves the development application, Council’s officers concur with this recommendation.

16. All vehicles are to be wholly contained on site before being required to stop.

In the event that Council approves the development application, Council’s officers concur with this recommendation.

17. Any proposed landscaping and/or fencing must not restrict sight distance to pedestrians and cyclists travelling along the footpath of George Street.

In the event that Council approves the development application, Council’s officers concur with this recommendation.

5.2.2 NSW Police

The application was referred to the NSW Police in accordance with the requirements of the RTA ‘Guide to traffic generating development’. At the time of writing this report, no response has been received from the Police.

6. THE PUBLIC INTEREST

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

In Double Bay Marina Pty Ltd v Woollahra Council [2009] NSWLEC 1001, the Commissioner suggested a relatively new planning principal: discerning the public interest in development applications. The Commissioner noted that consideration of the public interest ought to be broken into three steps:

1. Defining the public whose interest is being invoked.

2. Defining the benefit towards which a proposal claims to make a contribution (or from which it is claimed to detract).

3. Making explicit the weight given to the public interest relative to other considerations.

It could be argued that there is a public benefit for the establishment of the development by way of providing customers the convenience of a McDonald’s outlet on the southbound side when travelling on the National Highway network and providing jobs for young people in the local community. In addition, the development could improve competition, as there is an existing fast food outlet on the adjacent corner.

Submissions raised concerns that the proposed development could result in a proliferation of rubbish and vermin in the surrounding streets, noise and odour impacts which would be to the public detriment. However, there is no indication that the proposed development would result in these impacts.

However, as previously stated the proposed development would have detrimental traffic and parking impacts which have not been addressed as part of the application. In this regard, the public dis-benefit of the development is grounds for the refusal of the application.

The proposed development would provide private benefit to owners/shareholders in the company.

Similar to the public dis-benefit of the development, it could be argued that there is an indirect private dis-benefit of the development by way of immediate neighbours experiencing increased traffic in local residential streets and parking and access impacts directly affecting their property as a result of the proposal.

Having regard to the above, the application is not considered to have satisfactorily addressed Council’s and the relevant agencies’ 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 refusal of the proposed development would be in the public interest.

CONCLUSION

The application proposes the demolition of existing structures and erection of a new McDonald’s restaurant with basement car parking and drive-thru facility, associated landscape works and erection of twenty-three signs.

The proposed development is consistent with the objectives of the Business B (Special) zone and generally complies with the control elements of the Business Lands Development Control Plan, the Pennant Hills Commercial Centre Development Control Plan, the Car Parking Development Control Plan and the Outdoor Advertising Development Control Plan.

However it is considered that the site is not suitable for the development having regard to the likely traffic generated by the development, the constraints on the local road network and the lack of availability of overflow on and off-street car parking.

Council received 38 submissions during the public notification period, with a further 75 submissions received prior to the preparation of this report and having regard to the circumstances of the case, refusal of the 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 Plans
3.View	Floor Plans, Elevations and Sections
4.View	Signage Plans
5.View	Landscape Plans
6.View	Shadow Diagrams

File Reference: DA/1427/2010

Document Number: D01608033

SCHEDULE 1

1. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(b), it is considered that the development fails to demonstrate that it:

a. Would not result in unacceptable queuing of vehicles on Pennant Hills Road seeking to enter the site.

b. Would not result in unacceptable traffic generation on George Street within the vicinity of Pennant Hills Road having regard to the number of vehicles entering and exiting George Street.

c. Would not result in unacceptable impacts on the amenity of the residential neighbourhood as a result of larger vehicles and vehicles with trailers being required to park on the street in order to visit the site.

d. Would not result in unacceptable impacts on the amenity of the residential neighbourhood as a result of staff being required to park cars on the street at night and on weekends.

e. Provides efficient internal circulation of vehicles.

f. Would not result in a conflict between on-site car parking spaces and manoeuvring areas for delivery vehicles.

2. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(c), it is considered that the site is not suitable for the development having regard to the likely traffic generated by the development, the constraints on the local road network and the lack of availability of overflow on-street car parking.

3. Pursuant to the provisions of Section 79C(1)(d), it is considered that the development fails to overcome the concerns raised by the Roads and Traffic Authority in respect of the impact of the development on the national highway network and the relevant concerns made by, or on behalf of neighbouring businesses and the community in respect of the impact of the development on the local road network.

- END OF REASONS FOR REFUSAL -

Planning Report No. PLN35/11

Date of Meeting: 6/04/2011

6 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - SUBDIVISION OF TWO LOTS INTO FOUR
39 AND 41 BEECROFT ROAD BEECROFT

Development Application No:	DA/1298/2010
Description of Proposal:	Subdivision of two lots into four.
Property Description:	Lot 12 DP 20759 and Lot 13 DP 20759, Nos. 39 and 41 Beecroft Road, Beecroft
Applicant:	P S Graham & Associates
Owner:	Estate Late Mrs S Porter and Mr V Odhavj and Mrs S Odhavj
Statutory Provisions:	Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 Residential AS (Low Density – Sensitive Lands) Zone
Estimated Value:	Nil
Ward:	C

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Development Application No. 1298/2010 for the subdivision of two lots into four at Lot 12 DP 20759 and Lot 13 DP 20759, Nos. 39 and 41 Beecroft Road Beecroft be refused for the reasons detailed in Schedule 1 of this report.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. The application proposes the subdivision of two lots into four.

2. The proposal complies with the provisions of the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994. The proposal does not comply with the Residential Subdivision Development Control Plan requirements for lot size, private open space, accessway design and drainage control.

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

4. It is recommended that the application be refused.

THE SITE

The site comprises two existing allotments each with a dwelling house having frontage to the eastern side of Beecroft Road, which is a four lane RTA classified road.

The site has an area of 3,064m² with a diagonal frontage of 41.65m, northern boundary 81.54m, southern boundary 70.765m and rear boundary 40.23m. The site has an average fall of 14% to the rear boundary. A number of locally indigenous trees are located at the rear of the site which form part of an area identified as Blue Gum High Forest.

The two existing dwelling houses are single storey with lower ground floor areas including garaging at the rear. The houses are post-war construction in brick and tile.

The site is located within the Beecroft-Cheltenham Heritage Conservation Area. There are no items of heritage in the vicinity of the site other than a house and garden at No. 45 Beecroft Road on the corner with Albert Road.

The surrounding area is characterised by single and two storey dwelling houses on relatively large lots containing large indigenous trees. The site adjoins the rear of properties with frontage to Wongala Crescent which is a ‘No Through Road’ at a small watercourse and deep gully 90m north east of the site. The area within the road reserve and gully includes Blue Gum High Forest. The small watercourse flows through a culvert under the rail corridor and forms a tributary of Byles Creek.

The Main Northern Rail Corridor is located 85m east of the site. Beecroft Railway Station and shops are located 650m south of the site.

THE PROPOSAL

The proposal is for the subdivision of two lots into four with the existing dwelling houses being retained on the proposed two front lots. A central accessway is proposed to the two rear lots.

Proposed Lot 1 has an area of 848m² (excl. ROC) with dimensions 22.205m frontage, 48.88m northern boundary, 43.15m southern boundary and 20.115m rear boundary. The lot includes the existing dwelling house No. 39 Beecroft Road. The lot has an average fall of 8% to the rear boundary.

Proposed Lot 2 has an area of 756m² (excl. ROC) with dimensions 19.45m frontage, 43.15m northern boundary, 42.085m southern boundary and 20.31m rear boundary. The lot includes the existing dwelling house No. 41 Beecroft Road. The lot has an average fall of 7% to the rear boundary.

Proposed Lot 3 has an area of 601m² (excl. ROC) with dimensions 20.115m western boundary, 32.66m northern boundary, 32.71m southern boundary and 18.375m rear boundary. A 1m wide stormwater drainage easement is proposed along the northern and southern boundary. The lot has an average fall of 22% to the rear boundary. Tree No. 22A on adjoining land is identified as significant.

Proposed Lot 4 has an area of 601m² (excl. ROC) with dimensions 20.31m western boundary, 32.71m northern boundary, 28.68m southern boundary and 21.855m rear boundary. A 1m wide drainage easement is proposed along the northern boundary. The lot has an average fall of 27% to the rear boundary. The lot includes significant trees Nos. 15 and 16.

The proposed central accessway provides vehicular access to existing lower ground floor garages located at the rear of the two existing dwellings. The accessway includes a common turning area.

The proposal requires the creation of a drainage easement over the adjoining property for connection to an existing stormwater drainage line which flows to the small watercourse north east of the site.

ASSESSMENT

1. STRATEGIC CONTEXT

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

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

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

· Housing stock to increase by 11,000 dwellings.

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

The proposed development would be consistent with the Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036.

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 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 ‘subdivision’ under the HSLEP and is permissible in the zone with Council’s consent.

Clause 14 of the HSLEP prescribes that a minimum lot area of 600m² applies for subdivision within the zone. The proposed lots comply with this requirement.

Clause 15 of the HSLEP prescribes that the maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of development within the zone is 0.4:1. The existing dwellings on the proposed lots comply with this requirement.

Clause 18 of the HSLEP sets out heritage conservation provisions within the Hornsby area. The applicant submitted a Heritage Impact Assessment concerning the proposed subdivision within the Beecroft Cheltenham Heritage Conservation Area. This matter is further addressed in subsequent sections of this report.

2.2 State Environmental Planning Policy – Sydney REP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

The application has been assessed against the requirements of the Sydney REP which includes planning principles applicable to the site within the upper part of the catchment. The principles incorporate measures to protect water quality, to minimise urban runoff, conserve water and to ensure the catchment watercourses, wetlands, riparian lands and remnant vegetation are protected.

The proposed subdivision would not adversely impact on downstream water quality subject to appropriate conditions for stormwater detention.

2.3 Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995

The site includes trees identified and mapped as Blue Gum High Forest a critically endangered ecological community under Schedule 1A of the Act.

Council officers assessment, which included an inspection of the site concluded that the proposal is unlikely to have a significant impact on the endangered ecological community.

This matter is further addressed in 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 (Residential Subdivision DCP). 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
Lot Size	Lot 1 – 958m² Lot 2 – 856m² Lot 3 – 628m² Lot 4 – 622m²	600m² 600m² 672m² 702m²	Yes Yes No No
Floor Space ratio	Lot 1 – 0.23:1 Lot 2 – 0.27:1	0.4:1	Yes
Car parking	Lot 1 – 2 spaces Lot 2 – 2 spaces	2 spaces	Yes
Private Open Space	Lot 1 - 350m² Lot 2 – 270m² Lot 3 – 186m² Lot 4 – 215m²	120m²	Yes
Rear Setback	Lot 1 – 7.8m Lot 2 - 3m	3m	Yes

As detailed in the above table, the proposed development does not comply with a number of prescriptive standards within Council’s Residential 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

Proposed lots 3 & 4 have an average gradient of 22% and 27% respectively and the DCP identifies that additional area is required for the proposed lots to achieve compliance with the density prescriptive measures.

The proposed indicative building envelopes are lower in elevation to the level of the proposed accessway turning head. Vehicle access at grade would not be possible to the proposed parking spaces. The location of the proposed indicative building envelopes is therefore uncertain in respect to impacts on significant trees, provision of a 200m² buildable area, vehicle access and parking, as proposed lots 3 & 4 may be of insufficient size to accommodate future development in compliance with Council’s development controls.

It is considered the proposed lots do not comply with the density element objective:

To promote a low density residential environment and provide for lots of sufficient size to satisfy user requirements.

2.4.2 Solar Access

The proposed vacant lots would not be disadvantaged by existing buildings in respect to solar access.

2.4.3 Private Open Space

The proposed private open space areas meet the prescriptive numeric area requirement, however, are considered unsatisfactory in respect to performance criteria.

The proposal is for private open space areas at the frontage of the existing dwelling houses which present formally in the streetscape. No details have been submitted to demonstrate the open space areas are readily accessible from the dwelling living areas and have acceptable privacy in relation to the street frontage and the proposed accessway. The existing dwelling on proposed lot 2 would have insufficient rear setback for provision of private open space at the rear of the dwelling. The existing rear balconies do not have sufficient area to provide for outdoor activities in accordance with the performance criteria.

The proposed indicative building envelopes on proposed lots 3 and 4 would allow sufficient areas for private open space at the rear, however, the proposed driveway turning head is elevated in relation to the building envelopes and allows virtually no transition in grade for vehicle access. The proposed location of the building envelopes is therefore uncertain for the siting of future dwelling houses and the provision of private open space.

It is considered the proposed subdivision does not meet the Residential Subdivision DCP private open space performance criteria, i.e.:

Part of the private open space should be capable of enabling an extension of the function of existing and future dwelling houses for relaxation, dining, entertainment, recreation and children’s play, and be directly accessible from the dwelling house.

2.4.4 Landscaping

The proposed subdivision as submitted would not adversely impact on significant trees located along the rear boundary of the site. Refer also to comments in Section 3.1.

2.4.5 Land Sensitivity

The rear area of the site includes a number of locally indigenous trees and is identified under Council’s mapping as Blue Gum High Forest, a critically endangered ecological community under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995.

The proposal would not impact upon the critically endangered ecological community. Refer also to comments in Section 3.1.

2.4.6 Drainage Control

The proposed subdivision requires the granting of a stormwater drainage easement by downstream property owners for access to an existing stormwater drainage easement. The downstream owners are objecting to the proposed subdivision.

The application as submitted included the adjoining owner’s agreement to terms for the granting of an easement. The adjoining owner has subsequently objected to the proposal and withdrawn owner’s consent for the easement. The applicant’s solicitor has advised the agreement is legally binding.

The existing easement provides connection to Council’s stormwater drainage system at the watercourse north east of the site. The easement is over No. 37A Beecroft Road and No. 77, No. 79 and No. 81 Wongala Crescent. Details of the hydraulic capacity of the existing drainage line have not been submitted to Council. The consent of the owners of Nos. 77, 79 and 81 Wongala Crescent also has not been obtained for the proposed easement connection. The required details were requested by Council letter dated 25 November 2010.

Consequently, Council officers have not been able to determine the adequacy of the existing drainage line for the proposed subdivision, the potential impacts should upgrading of the existing drainage line be required and the impacts on downstream properties and the existing watercourse.

The proposed subdivision is therefore uncertain in respect to the drainage control element objective of the Residential Subdivision DCP, i.e.:

To control the flow of water into the natural drainage system and mitigate impacts from stormwater runoff.

2.4.7 Accessway Design

The proposed accessway is 6m wide for a length of 6m at the frontage and complies with Council’s and the Roads and Traffic Authority’s (RTA) design specification for sites fronting a busy road. The two existing vehicle crossings would be replaced with a single crossing and reinstated with kerb and gutter.

The proposed accessway between the two existing dwellings is satisfactory in respect to amenity of the two existing dwellings, provision for visitor car parking and design to avoid lengthy straight sections.

The two existing dwelling houses include lower ground floor garages located at the rear of the respective dwellings. Details of height clearance and turning area provisions, in compliance with AS 2890.1, have not been submitted to Council.

The proposed vehicular turning area within proposed Lots 2, 3 and 4 is elevated in relation to the proposed indicative building envelopes and car parking spaces on Lot 3 and Lot 4. Details of the gradient for vehicle access to the indicative building envelopes has not been submitted to Council. The proposed subdivision is uncertain in respect to future vehicular access, car parking provision and buildable area for Lot 3 and Lot 4 due to the difference in levels.

The proposed subdivision does not meet the accessway design element objective of the Residential Subdivision DCP, i.e.:

To ensure vehicular access to all lots within the subdivision is simple, safe, direct and creates a pleasant environment.

2.5 Dwelling House Development Control Plan

The Plan is applicable to the two existing dwellings on the proposed lots at the frontage of the site.

The proposal would result in non-compliance with the Plan in respect to private open space and vehicle access which are subject to the same consideration pursuant to the Residential Subdivision DCP. Refer to discussion in Section 2.4.3 and Section 2.4.7.

2.6 Byles Creek Development Control Plan

The site is located within the catchment of Byles Creek.

The Plan is to protect the amenity, water quality and scenic quality of Byles Creek. The proposed development is inconsistent with the element objectives of the Plan in respect to drainage control. Refer also to comments in Section 2.4.7.

2.7 Heritage Development Control Plan

The site is located within the Beecroft-Cheltenham Heritage Conservation Area. There are no items of heritage significance located in the vicinity of the site other than a house and garden at No. 45 Beecroft Road.

The proposed subdivision retains the two existing dwelling houses and avoids duplication of driveways in the streetscape. The significant indigenous trees on the site contribute to the significance of the heritage conservation area are proposed for retention. Replacement tree planting is recommended to maintain the tree canopy. Refer also to comments in Section 3.1.

The proposal is therefore acceptable in respect to the significance of the Beecroft-Cheltenham Heritage Conservation Area.

3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

3.1 Natural Environment

The existing trees at the rear of the site are located within Council’s mapped area of Blue Gum High Forest, a critically endangered ecological community. The proposed development seeks to retain the existing trees identified as Blue Gum High Forest species and would be unlikely to have a significantly impact on the ecological community.

The proposal would necessitate the removal of 17 trees from the site. None of the trees to be removed are identified as significant and mainly involve exotic species. The application has been supported by an arborist report which identified Trees Nos. 15 & 16 as significant trees and subject to a recommended setback of 8 metres. The proposed indicative building envelope on Lot 4 is partially within the recommended setback of Tree No. 15.

Council’s assessment of the proposal included a detailed examination of the existing trees on site. The assessment recommended tree protection measures for Trees Nos. 14, 15, 16 and No. 22A (on adjoining land) and the planting of 8 replacement trees to maintain the tree canopy.

The location of the proposed indicative building envelope on Lot 4 is uncertain in respect to future access, car parking provision and buildable area. The potential impact on significant Tree No. 15 is unable to be determined.

3.2 Built Environment

The proposed development would maintain the existing streetscape.

3.3 Social Impacts

The proposal would not result in 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”.

The proposed subdivision would be unlikely to have a significant effect on Blue Gum High Forest on 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 20 October and 17 November 2010 in accordance with Council’s Notification and Exhibition Development Control Plan. During this period, Council received seven 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

Seven submissions objected to the development, generally on the following grounds:

· Insufficient capacity of existing stormwater drainage line;

· Owner’s consent for stormwater drainage easement withdrawn;

· Loss of trees and visual amenity;

· Privacy and overshadowing;

· Non-compliance with open space requirement;

· Erosion of watercourse from increased flows;

· Traffic safety on Beecroft Road;

· Heritage impact from tree loss.

The merits of the matters raised in community submissions have been addressed in the body of the report.

5.2 Public Agencies

The development application was referred to the RTA for comment in respect to the proposed works within Beecroft Road.

The RTA granted concurrence to the proposal pursuant to Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993 subject to conditions and Council approval of the proposed development.

6. THE PUBLIC INTEREST

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

The application fails to address Council’s criteria for residential subdivision within the Residential AS (Low Density – Sensitive Lands) Zone and would not be in the public interest.

CONCLUSION

The proposal is for subdivision of two lots into four with the existing dwelling houses being retained.

The proposed lots at the rear of the existing dwellings are insufficient in area to accommodate low density residential development in compliance with Council’s development controls. Access to the proposed indicative building envelopes and car parking spaces would not be possible due to the gradient difference with the proposed accessway turning area. Impacts of future residential development on significant trees and the amenity of neighbouring residents is therefore uncertain.

The proposal does not demonstrate that the private open space areas at the frontage are readily accessible from the dwelling’s living areas and have acceptable privacy in relation to the street frontage and the proposed accessway. There is insufficient rear setback for provision of private open space at the rear of the dwelling on proposed Lot 2. The existing dwelling’s rear balconies do not have sufficient area.

The proposal relies on downstream owner’s consent for access to an existing stormwater drainage easement. The downstream owners are objecting to the proposal. Council officers have been unable to determine the adequacy of the existing drainage line for the proposed subdivision, the potential impacts should upgrading of the existing drainage line be required and the impacts on downstream properties and the existing watercourse.

The proposal does not comply with the Residential Subdivision DCP requirements in respect to density, private open space, accessway design and drainage control.

It is recommended that Council refuse the 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	Tree Plan

File Reference: DA/1298/2010

Document Number: D01627432

SCHEDULE 1

1. The proposal is unsatisfactory in respect to Section 79C(1)(a)(iii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as the proposal does not comply with the Residential Subdivision Development Control Plan as follows:

1.1 The proposal does not comply with the allotment density prescriptive measure for a larger lot size on steeply sloping sites.

1.2 The proposal does not comply with the private open space performance criteria.

1.3 The proposal does not meet the drainage control element objective.

1.4 The proposal does not meet the accessway design element objective.

2. The proposal is unsatisfactory in respect to Section 79(1)(e) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as the proposal is not in the public interest.

- END OF REASONS FOR REFUSAL -

Standard Report No. PLN34/11

Planning Division

Date of Meeting: 6/04/2011

8 BROOKLYN DCP AMENDMENTS - KANGAROO POINT - AFTER EXHIBITION

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

In October 2010, the Kangaroo Point Planning Proposal was forwarded to the Department of Planning (DOP) for gazettal to permit the construction of a commuter berthing facility at Kangaroo Point, Pacific Highway, Brooklyn. In December 2010, Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan (HSLEP) 1994 (Amendment No. 100) was gazetted.

The Planning Proposal does not limit the size or intensity of any future commuter berthing facility. Accordingly, Council 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, the amendments were presented to Council on 1 December 2010 for endorsement for public exhibition.

The draft amendments were exhibited for community comment in January and February 2011. Five submissions were received in response to the exhibition. Key issues raised in submissions include the use of public parking to service commuter berthing, environmental impacts associated with establishing a commuter berthing facility at Kangaroo Point, and restrictions to the licence (wet lease) area and boat size.

Many of the issues raised in submissions were previously considered by Council in resolving to progress the associated Kangaroo Point Planning Proposal. Accordingly, it is recommended that Council adopt the amendments to the Brooklyn DCP subject to minor amendments detailed in this report.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to review submissions received in response to the exhibition of amendments to the Brooklyn DCP.

BACKGROUND

On 17 December 2010, the Kangaroo Point Planning Proposal was gazetted permitting 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.

Draft amendments were prepared and presented to Council at its meeting on 1 December 2010 in Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN94/10. Council endorsed draft amendments to the Brooklyn DCP for public exhibition that 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. The draft amendments to the Brooklyn DCP were exhibited for public comment from 27 January to 25 February 2011.

DISCUSSION

This report discusses submissions received in response to the public exhibition of draft amendments to the Brooklyn DCP.

Exhibition and review of submissions

The draft amendments to the Brooklyn DCP were exhibited from 27 January to 25 February 2011. The amendments were exhibited for 30 days in accordance with the consultation strategy contained in Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN94/10.

Advertisements were placed in the Hornsby Advocate on two occasions and in the Bush Telegraph on one occasion. The amendments to the Brooklyn DCP and supporting documentation were also displayed at Council’s Administration Centre, the Brooklyn and District Community Health and Resource Centre, the Hornsby and Berowra branch libraries and on the Council website.

In accordance with the adopted consultation strategy, seven branches of Council, nine public authorities, and 98 local community groups and individuals who made a submission on the Kangaroo Point Planning Proposal were provided with a copy of the draft DCP amendments and invited to comment.

A total of five submissions have been received. The submissions comprise individually written letters and emails from one public authority (Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA)), three individuals and one community group (Friends of Kangaroo Point). Comments were also received from Council’s Water Catchments Team.

Key issues raised in submissions include the use of public parking to service commuter berthing, environmental impacts associated with establishing a commuter berthing facility at Kangaroo Point, and restrictions to the licence (wet lease) area and boat size. These issues are addressed below.

Car parking

The Friends of Kangaroo Point raise concern that a commuter berthing facility at Kangaroo Point may result in a loss of parkland for car parking. The submission requests that the DCP state that the park cannot be used for commuter car parking, or for any other use in connection with any future marina development. Furthermore, all parking in the designated parking area should be limited to two hours. The Friends of Kangaroo Point support the proposal to secure additional land between Kangaroo Point and the Dolphin boatshed to ease the parking problems at Kangaroo Point.

The Friends of Kangaroo Point also request that the Kangaroo Point Community Masterplan be altered to prohibit buses from parking on the upper level of the park. It is argued that the buses are likely associated with commercial cruise operations and not the primary use of the park.

The Friends of Kangaroo Point request that the launching of boats at Kangaroo Point be discontinued as the storage of boat trailers at Kangaroo Point occupies excessive space and intrudes into the designated park area. Furthermore, alternative facilities exist at Parsley Bay, Deerubbin Park and the Dolphin Boatshed. A submitter believes that the Masterplan Steering Committee rejected a public boat launching ramp at Kangaroo Point because of the limited space for vehicular movement and trailer parking.

Comment: The impact of commuter berthing at Kangaroo Point on the limited parking available has been addressed in a number of reports to Council including Executive Manager’s Reports Nos. PLN132/99, PLN307/02, PLN305/03, PLN108/04 and PLN63/05.

Any proposal for a commuter berthing facility would require lodgement of a development application. The commuter berthing proposal would require a statement of environmental effects including an analysis of environmental, traffic and parking impacts. As part of the assessment of a development application, parking restrictions at Kangaroo Point could be considered by Council’s Traffic and Parking Committee.

The Kangaroo Point Community Masterplan identifies the provision of three coach parking spaces on the upper level. During the masterplanning process, it was recognised that it would be preferable to locate coach parking associated with commercial ferries off site rather than at Kangaroo Point. Options for the provision of coach parking were investigated. The Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA) was approached to seek approval for the parking of coaches on the shoulder of the Pacific Highway, but no agreement was reached. Distant parking arrangements were identified as being not commercially viable for tourism operators. Accordingly, three coach parking spaces are provided on-site.

The Kangaroo Point Community Masterplan identifies the provision for a boat ramp. The Kangaroo Point Community Masterplan Report adopted by Council in 2005 identifies a heavy reliance on Kangaroo Point for access to the water by river residents, commercial operators and the general public. The Report notes that this function is part of the heritage significance of Kangaroo Point. Godden Mackay Logan, in its heritage review of Kangaroo Point, notes that “the reclaimed land spit and boat ramp have historical values in their shape, layout and some of their fabric. Land at the water edge should be conserved.” Accordingly, the Masterplan Report recommends retention of the boat ramp and public vehicular access as principles of the Masterplan.

Recommendation: It is recommended that no amendment be made to the draft DCP in response to submissions commenting on car parking, coach parking and public access to the water.

Environmental impacts

Council’s Water Catchments Team supports the amendments to the Brooklyn DCP but raises concern that seagrass beds may be affected by marina activities. The Team provides aerial images as evidence that current boating activities have had a detrimental impact on seagrass beds. To ensure there is a community benefit, the Team recommends that users of any berthing facility contribute towards seagrass protection activities with the proceeds from the commercial lease of the facility allocated for seagrass protection activities.

Comment: The Brooklyn DCP amendments limit the size of any commuter berthing facility to within the licence (wet lease) area issued by the Land and Property Management Authority (LPMA). There are currently no seagrass areas within the wet lease area occupied by Luxury Afloat. However, seagrasses are located directly south of the commercial licence in Seagrass Bay Reserve.

Seagrass Bay Reserve is reserved for environmental conservation purposes and does not permit the extension of the marina. Should a proposal be submitted to extend the marina into Seagrass Bay Reserve, the LPMA would either have to seek a revocation of the reserve status from the Minister for Lands or require Council to acquire part of Seagrass Bay Reserve. Council would be consulted regarding any change to the wet lease area and its impact on the environmental values of Seagrass Bay Reserve.

The impact of a commuter berthing facility on the seagrass communities would also be the subject of consideration with the lodgement of a development application. Environmental risk may be addressed at the development application stage with conditions of consent to implement adequate channel and seagrass marking, buffer areas and signage.

At its meeting on 6 October 2010, Council also resolved (in part) that:

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.

5. Council pursue grant funding to facilitate the above.

Funding arrangements for seagrass protection activities should be considered as part of the investigation of financial arrangements of any commuter berthing facility.

Recommendation: It is recommended that arrangements for seagrass protection activities be considered at the development application stage and as part of the investigation of financial arrangements for any commuter berthing facility.

Licence area

A submission notes that discussions have occurred with the LPMA regarding the issuing of a new wet lease at Kangaroo Point, Brooklyn. Council has not been consulted regarding any new lease. However, to ensure the Brooklyn DCP remains accurate when a new licence is issued, the submission requests that the boundaries of the commuter berthing facility be more flexible.

Comment: The Brooklyn DCP amendments state that the existing houseboat berths and associated offices of the “Luxury Afloat” marina should be reconfigured with a commuter berthing facility to be contained within the boundaries of the commercial licence (Licence No. L201707). The DCP refers to the existing licence to provide certainty of the surveyed boundary of the area in which a future berthing facility should be located. The purpose of the control is to protect seagrasses, maintain boat channels and retain views to and from the water. To ensure the Brooklyn DCP remains current should a new licence be issued, the licence numbers in the Kangaroo Point Community Masterplan should be removed and wording in the DCP amended. However, wording should be included to reinforce the objective of the control to minimise impacts on seagrasses, boat channels and the visual environment.

Recommendation: It is recommended that the licence numbers in the Masterplan be removed and the wording in the DCP amended as follows:

To protect seagrass, maintain boat channels and retain views to and from the water, any commuter berthing facility should be:

1. limited to a maximum of 25 boats of up to 6m in length; and

2. within the area shown on the Masterplan or an approved licence area.

Boat size

A submitter supports the 6 metre boat length limit for any future commuter berthing facility as boats larger than 4.5 metres are safer and more appropriate for use in the vicinity of Kangaroo Point. However, concern is raised that specifying a size limit presents a risk of litigation if the boat size is determined to have been a factor in a commuter boat accident. It is recommended that to avoid this risk, the DCP should not specify a boat size and NSW Maritime should instead assess this aspect of a development application.

The submitter also recommends that the DCP specify that the commuter berthing facility only be used by ‘commuter’ boats. It is suggested that a ‘commuter’ boat be defined in the DCP as a boat that is authorised to carry no more than 6 passengers in terms of NSW Maritime regulation.

The submitter notes that liability incurred by commuter boat owners using the facility is not covered by the public liability insurance required by licensees. Accordingly, it is suggested that all vessels authorised to use the commuter berthing facility be required to have third party insurance.

Comment: At its meeting on 6 October 2010, Council 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, at its meeting on 1 December 2010, Council considered Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN94/10 which presented the draft DCP amendments for exhibition and 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 larger pleasure craft. The intention of this restriction is three fold. It minimises the adverse environmental impact associated with potential scouring of the river bed/aquatic vegetation by a boat with a deep draft, visual impacts when viewed to and from the waterway associated with larger boats and the potential reduction in availability of berthing spaces for genuine use by river residents for commuter berthing in preference to mainland residents mooring large pleasure craft (thereby accommodating a desire rather than an identified need).

Any proposal for a commuter berthing facility would require the lodgement of a development application. As requested by NSW Maritime in its submission to Council on the Kangaroo Point Planning Proposal, any development application for waterside structures, such as marinas, would be referred to NSW Maritime for navigation comment.

The purpose of a development control plan is to contain guidelines, more detailed controls for development, and provide explanations of the relevant controls in the HSLEP. It is ultimately the responsibility of boat owners to ensure they are covered by insurance and observe boating rules and regulations to ensure safe navigation.

Recommendation: It is recommended that no amendment be made to the 6m maximum boat length in the draft DCP in response to the submission commenting on boat size.

A copy of the draft amendments to the Brooklyn DCP are attached to this report.

CONSULTATION

On 6 December 2010, Council resolved to exhibit draft amendments to the Brooklyn DCP. The draft amendments were exhibited for community comment in January and February 2011. Five submissions have been received and are addressed in this report.

STATUTORY CONSIDERATIONS

On 17 December 2010, HSLEP 1994 (Amendment No. 100) was gazetted to permit the construction of a commuter berthing facility at Kangaroo Point, Pacific Highway, Brooklyn.

In accordance with Clause 21 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, should Council adopt the draft amendments to the Brooklyn DCP, the amendments would come into effect on the date of publication of a notice in local newspapers.

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 by 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. The summary 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

In December 2010, HSLEP 1994 (Amendment No. 100) was gazetted permitting the construction of a commuter berthing facility at Kangaroo Point, Pacific Highway, Brooklyn. The LEP amendment does not limit the size or intensity of any future commuter berthing facility.

The amendments to the Brooklyn DCP provide controls to limit the size of any future facility and were exhibited for community comment in January and February 2011. Five submissions were received in response to the exhibition. Key issues raised in submissions include the use of public parking to service commuter berthing, environmental impacts associated with establishing a commuter berthing facility at Kangaroo Point, and restrictions to the licence (wet lease) area and boat size.

Many of the issues raised have previously been evaluated by Council in considering the future use and management of Kangaroo Point or will be addressed in the assessment of a development application. The only amendment required to the draft amendments is to remove the licence numbers on the Kangaroo Point Community Masterplan and associated provisions in the Brooklyn DCP. Accordingly, it is recommended that Council adopt the amendments to the Brooklyn DCP attached to Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN34/11.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT:

1. Council approve the draft amendments to the Brooklyn Development Control Plan attached to Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN34/11 to limit the size of any future commuter berthing facility at Kangaroo Point.

2. Submitters be advised of Council’s resolution.

James Farrington

Manager - Town Planning Services

Planning Division

Scott Phillips

Executive Manager

Planning Division

Attachments:

1.View

Draft Brooklyn DCP Amendment - After Exhibition

File Reference: F2010/00285

Document Number: D01625764

Standard Report No. PLN36/11

Planning Division

Date of Meeting: 6/04/2011

9 HORNSBY TOWN CENTRE WEST PRECINCT PLANNING CONTROLS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

This report discusses the existing controls and vision for the Hornsby Town Centre and specifically, for a particular area within the Town Centre known as the West Precinct or “Hornsby Westside”. The report also presents opportunities and constraints to future development within the West Precinct and discusses the following options for a review of planning controls:

- Increase residential and employment development opportunities;

- Increase employment development opportunities; or

- Retain the current controls.

The advantages and disadvantages of each option are outlined in the report. Should Council resolve to undertake a review, the first step in the process would require a resolution to prepare a planning proposal. This would enable Council to obtain preliminary advice from the Department of Planning by means of a Gateway Determination prior to undertaking the necessary supporting studies.

The Hornsby Town Centre has been the subject of considerable study and analysis by Council and consultants. The studies undertaken address many of the issues relevant to the progression of a planning proposal for the West Precinct. Given the work conducted to date, the most cost effective and timely method of progressing any review would be for the work to be done in-house with the assistance of urban design, traffic and economic feasibility consultants. Should Council resolve to progress a study and planning proposal, Council would need to allocate $100,000 in the Budget for 2011/2012.

This report recommends that Council determine a position concerning a review of planning controls for the West Precinct based on one of the options presented.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to:

1. outline the current and proposed planning controls for the Hornsby West Precinct under the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan (HSLEP) 1994 and the draft Comprehensive LEP; and

2. present options for progressing a review of the controls.

BACKGROUND

At its meeting on 2 February 2011, Council considered Notice of Motion No. NOM2/11 requesting a report concerning the Hornsby West Precinct and resolved that:

A report be presented to an upcoming Planning Meeting outlining the proposed planning controls under the Comprehensive LEP for the area commonly known as ‘Hornsby Westside’.

The report should include options for alternative planning controls that may facilitate a range of viable built forms including commercial, retail and residential development consistent with the draft North Subregional Strategy. The report should also include a preliminary analysis of any constraints to future development, including (but not limited to) urban design, heritage controls, traffic constraints and car parking demand.

This report provides the above information in accordance with Council’s resolution.

DISCUSSION

This report discusses the existing controls and vision for Hornsby Town Centre and specifically, for the West Precinct. The report also presents opportunities and constraints to future development within the Precinct and options for a review of planning controls.

Hornsby Town Centre Current Vision

The current vision for the Hornsby Town Centre is contained within the Hornsby Town Centre Development Control Plan (HTC DCP). The DCP divides the Town Centre into three distinct precincts, namely the North, East and West Precincts. The West Precinct, commonly known as Hornsby Westside, is the subject of this report. A map of the West Precinct is attached.

The current vision for the West Precinct is embodied in the Strategy element of the HTC DCP and in the masterplan for the Town Centre. The DCP identifies that development should preserve and enhance the ‘Old Town Centre’ character on the western side of the railway line to provide an alternate experience and urban form to the commercial/retail core on the eastern side. Development within the Precinct should increase the range of retail shops, food outlets and employment opportunities within the Town Centre to support the commercial/retail core and service the working and residential populations.

West Precinct Planning Strategy

The existing planning strategy for the West Precinct is discussed below in terms of urban design, traffic, car parking and heritage.

Urban Design

The urban design strategy for the West Precinct is to promote building design that is consistent with the ‘Old Town Centre’ character and amenity of the Precinct, to promote development which contributes to the establishment of an entertainment and restaurant district of the Upper North Shore, and to encourage pedestrian comfort and amenity through the design of buildings.

The HTC DCP requires the design of new buildings to reinforce the existing traditional shopping centre character of the Precinct which includes two storey parapeted buildings. Footpath widening along the southern side of Coronation Street should allow for outdoor dining at cafes and restaurants to encourage more active use of the public domain.

Traffic and Car parking

The traffic and car parking strategy for the West Precinct is to limit the number of access points to the Pacific Highway and to provide parking in a public car park where vehicular access to development sites is limited.

The Parking and Access element within the HTC DCP requires vehicular access to the Pacific Highway and Coronation Street to be avoided. The DCP allows a monetary contribution per parking space to be paid for sites unable to provide all required parking on site. Additional parking to meet future demand is to be provided through the construction of decked parking above the existing Council car parks in William and Dural Streets and the Hornsby RSL Club and Community car park.

Heritage

Served by the main entrance to the railway station and at the point where the Highway crosses the railway line, the West Precinct began to develop at the end of the 19th Century and continued as the primary commercial centre of Hornsby until the 1970s. The area therefore contains the oldest commercial buildings in Hornsby, as well as representing development that has occurred over the 20th century.

The current heritage strategy is to provide for continuity with the past by retaining and enhancing heritage items within the Hornsby Town Centre. Development within, or adjacent to, heritage items are required to demonstrate the means proposed to conserve and respect such items. The majority of the West Precinct is located within the Hornsby West Side Heritage Conservation Area. Development is required to be designed in keeping with the heritage characteristics of the area including front setbacks, materials and colours, scale, roof form, facades, and heritage themes.

Current Controls

The current controls applying to the area are outlined in the HSLEP 1994 and the HTC DCP as follows:

Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994

The West Precinct is zoned Business F (Town Centre) under the HSLEP 1994. The objectives of the zone are to:

(a) encourage economic growth and employment opportunities;

(b) accommodate the retail, commercial, housing and social needs of the local and regional community; and

(c) encourage development that improves the health, vitality, cultural environment and social environment within the Hornsby Town Centre.

Land uses permissible in the zone include bulky goods retail premises, business premises, car parks, child care centres, convenience stores, dwellings, entertainment facilities, hotels, medical centres, motels, multi-unit housing, office premises, recreation facilities, registered clubs, restaurants, service stations, and shops.

The HSLEP specifies a maximum floor space ratio for the Business F zone of 2:1. However, the HSLEP also includes bonus provisions for land within the Hornsby Town Centre. Land within the West Precinct is permitted to have a floor space ratio of up to 3:1 if the floor area that results in a floor space ratio in excess of 2:1 is used exclusively for the purpose of employment generating development.

Hornsby Town Centre DCP

The HTC DCP contains general controls for the Hornsby Town Centre, along with specific controls for the West Precinct. The DCP controls include an overall maximum height limit of 16m (approximately 4-5 storeys), with a height limit at the street and adjacent to residential development of 8m (approx 2 storeys). Zero setbacks are permitted from the roadway, with 5m setbacks required adjacent to residential development. Other controls specific to the West Precinct include building design, landscaping and parking elements.

Proposed Controls

The Comprehensive Local Environmental Plan (CLEP) has been drafted and is awaiting authorisation from the Department of Planning (DOP) for exhibition. The preparation of the CLEP has principally been a process of transferring Council’s existing HSLEP 1994 into the new Local Environmental Plan template format set out by the State Government.

The CLEP proposes to rezone the West Precinct to Zone B4 Mixed Use. The objectives of the zone are to:

- Provide a mixture of compatible land uses;

- Integrate suitable business, office, residential, retail and other development in accessible locations so as to maximise public transport patronage and encourage walking and cycling; and

- Encourage development that supports the town centre in serving the needs of the local and wider community.

The land use table for the B4 Mixed Use zone is similar to the existing Business F (Town Centre) zone. However, bulky goods premises, dwellings and other residential accommodation (excluding residential flat buildings as part of mixed use developments) would be prohibited.

The CLEP retains the same floor space ratio for the West Precinct of 2:1, with the bonus of up to 3:1 if the floor area that results in a floor space ratio in excess of 2:1 is used exclusively for the purpose of employment generating development. The CLEP also translates the existing 16m height control currently contained within the HTC DCP, which would permit development of 4-5 storeys in height.

Planning Context

There are a number of State and Subregional planning strategies which set a framework for change and growth into the future, as discussed below.

Metropolitan Strategy

The State Government’s Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036 updates the Metropolitan Strategy and integrates it with the Metropolitan Transport Plan to provide a framework for the sustainable growth of Sydney over the next 25 years. The Plan proposes the growth and renewal of centres and identifies a hierarchy of centres including Major Centres and Specialised Centres, and includes future directions to inform their planning.

Hornsby Town Centre is identified in the Metropolitan Plan as a Major Centre and future directions outlined in the Plan include:

- Provide for increased employment in retail and office uses;

- Provide for residential development within walking catchment of the Centre;

- Investigate opportunities for better pedestrian links between eastern and western sides of the Centre;

- Revitalise the traditional Centre to the west of the station; and

- Investigate development opportunities to the west of the station.

The Metropolitan Plan updates the housing and employment capacity targets for each subregion, requiring 29,000 new dwellings and 15,000 new jobs to be provided within the North Subregion (Hornsby and Ku-ring-gai Local Government Areas). This is an increase of 8,000 dwellings and 1,500 jobs from the Metropolitan Strategy.

Subregional Strategy

The draft North Subregional Strategy was released in 2007. It is anticipated that Subregional Strategies will be reviewed and finalised based on the new Metropolitan Plan and will break down the dwelling and employment targets for each Council area. Currently, the draft Strategy identifies that Hornsby Council must provide 11,000 new dwellings and 9,000 new jobs (including 3,000 within the Hornsby Town Centre) by 2031. These targets are expected to increase when the North Subregional Strategy is finalised.

Ku-ring-gai and Hornsby Subregional Employment Study

The Ku-ring-gai and Hornsby Subregional Employment Study reviews employment lands within the North Subregion and provides strategic direction for the future role and function of those lands. The Study confirms the hierarchy of centres outlined in the Metropolitan Strategy and the draft North Subregional Strategy, provides recommendations on the future function of employment lands and the application of zones from the State Government’s Standard Instrument Template for Council’s CLEP.

The Study finds that there is adequate floor space within the Hornsby Town Centre to meet future demand without the need to rezone additional business land. However, there is a need to increase the amount of office floor space. A key recommendation is to reinforce the role of the Hornsby Town Centre as the major town centre in the Subregion by preserving a commercial core and identifying adjacent business development areas to facilitate future growth in the Centre.

Opportunities and Constraints to Development within the West Precinct

The Hornsby Town Centre has a number of strengths including its location at a transport node, proximity to a workforce on the Central Coast, proximity to the Sydney CBD and other centres, development opportunities including Council owned sites, and cultural attributes. However, the Town Centre, including the West Precinct, is unlikely to attract significant employment generating development in the short to medium term. Constraints include the promotion of the global arc by the State Government which provides employment opportunities that compete with the role and function of the Hornsby Town Centre. Based on the findings of the Subregional Employment Study, any vision for the Town Centre should incorporate a 20-30 year horizon to ensure employment lands are preserved for the future.

Council’s Housing Strategy identifies that, subject to the making of the current Planning Proposal awaiting gazettal by the DOP, Council will be required to prepare planning controls to facilitate a further 3,900 dwellings under the next stage of the Housing Strategy. This long term target is likely to increase with the allocation of an additional 8,000 dwellings to be provided by 2036 within the North Subregion under the revised Metropolitan Plan. There may be opportunity to promote future development within the West Precinct in the form of both commercial and residential development, to assist meet Council’s dwelling target while also reinforcing the role of the Hornsby Town Centre as the major town centre with adequate employment opportunities.

Other opportunities and constraints to development within the West Precinct include:

Property Ownership Patterns

Property ownership within the West Precinct is fragmented, although there are approximately seven groups of up to four parcels in the same ownership. Council is also a major land owner within the Precinct, with nine properties in Council ownership. Buildings within the business area are located on small sites, are mostly two storeys in height and form a traditional streetscape. The average parcel size is approximately 350sqm, and the average street frontage is approximately 8m. However, the building stock in the area has suffered from a lack of investment over time which presents a timely opportunity for redevelopment.

Economic Feasibility – Property Nos. 1 - 11 Coronation Street

In 2010, Council commissioned a consultant study to review the current planning controls and investigate the feasibility of development in relation to specific Council owned land within the West Precinct, being property Nos. 1-11 Coronation Street, Hornsby. The study concludes that heritage constraints and car parking requirements rather than height controls are the major factors impacting on the economic feasibility of development. The study also comments that as the scale of development increases, higher risk may be perceived in presales, selling periods and finance risk, all counteracting increased profits and land value and potentially reducing feasibility.

Council Properties

There are nine properties within the West Precinct owned by Council. These include the car parks in Dural Street and William Street and the child care centre in Dural Street, along with the properties discussed above in Coronation Street and adjoining property Nos. 1 – 5 Jersey Street, Hornsby.

Constraints to Council properties are discussed above in terms of heritage and car parking requirements. Existing staff car parking within the Coronation Street properties is also a factor in future development considerations. Council is also reviewing the efficiency of the Dural Street car park and the costs/benefits of relocating the car parking in a more efficient configuration elsewhere within the Town Centre. A significant constraint to development on Council’s car park sites is the identified demand for these sites as locations for additional parking for properties unable to provide parking on-site as part of their redevelopment.

Urban Design

As discussed above, the current urban design strategy for the West Precinct is to reinforce the existing traditional shopping centre character. Urban design controls have been drafted on the basis of retaining the ‘Old Town Centre’ character of the area and establishing an entertainment and restaurant district. Although heights of existing buildings are predominantly two storeys, the existing planning controls allow development to a height of 4-5 storeys which is promoted as an appropriate built form in the context of the existing vision and urban design strategy. Any consideration of increased heights as part of future development should reassess the desired urban design outcomes and the impacts of heights in excess of 5 storeys.

Car parking

Car parking rates are contained within the HTC DCP. Current requirements include the provision of 1 space per 22.7sqm of gross leasable floor area (GLFA) for shops, and 1 space per 40sqm of GLFA for commercial development. As discussed above, the DCP allows a monetary contribution per parking space (currently $22,000) to be paid for development unable to provide all required parking on site. Feasibility and planning studies prepared for Council owned sites within the West Precinct indicate that the current car parking rates are a constraint to development and may be considered onerous when compared to precincts near railway stations in other local government areas. There is opportunity for consideration of whether car parking requirements can be reduced due to proximity of sites to the railway station.

Council is currently preparing a Car Parking Study for the Hornsby Town Centre. The findings of the Study should inform revised parking rates to encourage future development within the West Precinct.

Traffic

The West Precinct is bisected by the Pacific Highway, which has historically been a State Road under the care and control of the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA). In 2005, a modification to the road hierarchy was implemented leading to a swap in the care and control of the Pacific Highway and George Street, Hornsby. The classification of the Pacific Highway between George Street and Bridge Road was changed to Local Road and the classification of George Street between the Pacific Highway and Bridge Road was changed from Regional Road to State Road.

The reclassification of George Street as the State Arterial Route through Hornsby presents an opportunity to increase development within the West Precinct while also reinforcing the pedestrian network and formalising pedestrian links to connect public spaces and retail/commercial activities. In considering additional development within the West Precinct, traffic modelling would be required to assess the impacts of increased traffic generation and any traffic improvements which may be required.

Council is currently utilising the services of Cardno to undertaking traffic modelling works through and around the Hornsby Town Centre associated with the proposed filling of Hornsby Quarry. There may be opportunity to extend the scope of traffic modelling to including a review of the traffic management and parking issues associated with increased development opportunities within the West Precinct.

Heritage

The majority of the West Precinct is located within the Hornsby West Side Heritage Conservation Area. There are also seventeen heritage items located within the Precinct, including the War Memorial, Hornsby Cinema and a number of shops.

In summary, the development of the West Precinct is currently constrained by heritage issues and fragmented ownership and is guided by a vision to preserve and enhance the ‘Old Town Centre’ character and increase employment opportunities to support the commercial core. The emphasis on increasing employment opportunities represents a long term strategy to reserve land for future demand for employment generating land uses. However, the revised employment and residential targets contained within the Metropolitan Plan may present an opportunity to promote future development within the West Precinct in the form of both commercial and residential development to assist meet Council’s new targets.

OPTIONS FOR A REVIEW OF PLANNING CONTROLS

Council has the following options for consideration regarding a review of planning controls for the West Precinct.

Option 1: Increase residential and employment development opportunities

The Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036 identifies increased housing and employment capacity targets for the North Subregion. These revised targets represent an increase of 8,000 dwellings and 1,500 jobs from the Metropolitan Strategy. Accordingly, this option would involve a review of planning controls to contribute to the achievement of the revised housing and employment targets.

Council’s existing controls for the West Precinct currently allow development up to a height of approximately 5 storeys. Although it is premature to pre-empt the findings of any review of planning controls, it should be noted that Council has received a number of enquiries and submissions from land owners within the Precinct suggesting that heights of up to 12 storeys should be facilitated to encourage amalgamation and promote economically feasible development. A significant increase in height limits would likely be required to fund necessary improvements to the public domain and to provide a substantial contribution to the achievement of Council’s dwelling and employment obligations under the Metropolitan Plan.

Under this option, a comprehensive planning study would need to be progressed to inform a planning proposal including an evaluation of the proposal, the likely strategic and land use implications and demonstrating the community benefits arising from the proposal. The Hornsby Town Centre has been the subject of considerable study and analysis in the past. This work would provide a significant foundation for any planning study. Accordingly, urban design, traffic and economic feasibility would be the main issues for further analysis in progressing the study.

The advantages and disadvantages of this option are outlined below.

Advantages

- Retention of the character of existing residential areas within the Shire by providing housing opportunities within the Hornsby Town Centre.

- Promotion of redevelopment of undercapitalised sites.

- Maintains commercial core on the eastern side of the Town Centre and provides additional employment opportunities within the West Precinct.

- Provide funding through developer contributions towards improvements to the public domain including streetscape works and traffic control measures.

Disadvantages

- Potential loss of heritage qualities including heritage items and streetscapes. (However, it is acknowledged that, subject to further urban design analysis, there may be potential to retain some items and/or heritage facades.)

- Possible reduction in increased office based development in the West Precinct.

- Hornsby’s place as a Major Centre in the planning hierarchy may not be as strong if substantial residential development takes place in favour of office development.

Should Council be of a mind to support this option, an appropriate resolution would be as follows:

1. Council endorse progression of a planning proposal for the Hornsby West Precinct to provide revised planning controls that facilitate development to contribute to the achievement of the revised housing and employment targets identified under the Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036.

2. Pursuant to Section 56(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Council forward the planning proposal to the Minister for Planning seeking “gateway determination” to progress the preparation of the planning proposal.

3. Should the Minister for Planning support the progression of the planning proposal, Council consider the allocation of $100,000 in the 2011/2012 Budget to the Town Planning Services Branch Annual Operating Plan for consultants to assist prepare the necessary studies to support the proposal.

4. A planning consultant be engaged to provide urban design input into a review of the West Precinct.

5. A traffic consultant be engaged to undertake traffic modelling of the traffic management and parking issues associated with increased development opportunities within the West Precinct.

6. An economic development consultant be engaged to undertake feasibility analysis associated with increased development opportunities within the West Precinct.

Option 2: Increase employment development opportunities

As indicated in option 1 above, the Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036 has increased the employment target for the North Subregion by 1,500 jobs from the Metropolitan Strategy. Accordingly, this option would involve a review of planning controls to contribute to the achievement of the revised employment targets.

This option would build on the findings of the Ku-ring-gai and Hornsby Subregional Employment Study that incentives should be provided for office activity and that properties in public ownership may provide opportunity for additional commercial office floor space. Although the allocation of the additional 1,500 jobs has not yet been identified in the North Subregional Strategy, the potential allocation of the total job target to the Hornsby Town Centre would equate to demand for an additional 45,000 square metres of floor space (based on 30 square metres/job as recommended by the Employment Densities Research, SGS Economics and Planning for Council, 2008).

It should be noted that Council has received representations from land owners within the Precinct that stand alone commercial development within the Town Centre is not viable. Previous consultant reports on the Town Centre comment that past experience has indicated that the regional demand for major office floor space has been capable of being satisfied in other centres throughout the broader North Shore. This trend is unlikely to change in the foreseeable future. Accordingly, this option would be a long-term strategy aimed at ensuring the limited opportunities for development within the Town Centre are reserved for employment generating land uses. This option acknowledges that to ensure that the Hornsby Town Centre fulfils a Major Centre role as a place to work in addition to a place to shop and live, appropriate controls should be prepared to promote employment opportunities within the Centre.

Under this option, a comprehensive planning study would need to be progressed to inform a planning proposal including an evaluation of the proposal, the likely strategic and land use implications and demonstrating the community benefits arising from the proposal. As indicated in option 1 above, the Hornsby Town Centre has been the subject of considerable study and analysis in the past. This work would provide a significant foundation for any planning study. Accordingly, urban design, traffic and economic feasibility would be the main issues for further analysis in progressing the study.

The advantages and disadvantages of this option area outlined below.

Advantages

- Increases the commercial core to provide additional employment opportunities to facilitate the Town Centre fulfilling its Major Centre role as a place to work in addition to a place to shop and live.

- Provide funding through developer contributions towards improvements to the public domain including streetscape works and traffic control measures.

Disadvantages

- Lack of development in the short/medium term as demand for office floor space is currently being met by other centres on the North Shore.

- Potential loss of heritage qualities including heritage items and streetscapes. However, it is acknowledged that, subject to further urban design analysis, there may be potential to retain some items and/or heritage facades.

Should Council be of a mind to support this option, an appropriate resolution would be as follows:

1. Council endorse progression of a planning proposal for the Hornsby West Precinct to provide revised planning controls that facilitate development to contribute to the achievement of the revised employment targets identified under the Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2036.

4. A planning consultant be engaged to provide urban design input into a review of the West Precinct.

5. A traffic consultant be engaged to undertake traffic modelling of the traffic management and parking issues associated with increased development opportunities within the West Precinct.

6. An economic development consultant be engaged to undertake feasibility analysis associated with increased development opportunities within the West Precinct.

Option 3: Retain the Current Controls

This option would involve retaining the existing controls for the West Precinct as contained in the HSLEP 1994 and Hornsby Town Centre DCP. The exiting controls would be translated into the CLEP and Comprehensive DCP.

The advantages and disadvantages of this option area outlined below.

Advantages

- Retains employment opportunities to facilitate the Town Centre fulfilling its Major Centre role as a place to work in addition to a place to shop and live.

- Conserves heritage qualities including heritage items and streetscapes providing an alternative experience and urban form to the commercial/retail core within the East and North Precincts.

- Ensures car parking is provided either on-site or in public car parks to meet the demand of employees, residents and visitors.

Disadvantages

- Lack of development in the short/medium term as demand for office floor space is currently being met by other centres on the north shore.

- Lack of developer contributions in the short/medium term towards improvements to the public domain including streetscape works, traffic control measures and provision of additional car parking.

Should Council be of a mind to support this option, an appropriate resolution would be as follows:

Council not undertake a review of planning controls for the Hornsby West Precinct as the current controls provide an appropriate planning strategy to:

1. Retain employment opportunities to facilitate the Town Centre fulfil its Major Centre role as a place to work in addition to a place to shop and live.

2. Conserve heritage qualities including heritage items and streetscapes providing an alternative experience and urban form to the commercial/retail core within the East and North Precincts.

3. Ensure car parking is provided either on-site or in public car parks to meet the demand of employees, residents and visitors.

It is recommended that Council determine a position concerning a review of planning controls for the Hornsby Town Centre West Precinct based on the options outlined above.

STATUTORY CONSIDERATIONS

As indicated in the discussion of options above, should Council resolve to undertake a review, the first step in the process would require a resolution to prepare a planning proposal to prepare revised planning controls for the West Precinct. This would enable Council to obtain preliminary advice from the DOP by means of a Gateway Determination prior to undertaking the necessary supporting studies. The planning proposal should outline the community consultation and scope of studies to be undertaken to justify the proposal including, at a minimum, the following:

1. Strategic Justification in the Subregional and Metropolitan Context: Identification of the net community benefit arising from the review.

2. Transport Capacity Analysis and Scoping: Traffic modelling and car parking analysis.

3. Opportunities and Constraints Analysis: Including land ownership, heritage, urban design, building type and condition, economic feasibility, services and utilities, visual environment, public domain and open space.

4. Urban Structure Plan: Identification of appropriate building footprints, envelopes and zonings.

5. Community Consultation: Implementation of a community consultation process, including consultation with relevant public authorities and key stakeholders.

6. Implementation Plan: Preparation of draft planning controls and contributions plan.

The Minister for Planning determines whether a planning proposal is to proceed. The “gateway” acts as a checkpoint to ensure that the proposal is justified before further studies are done and resources allocated. The Minister determines requirements for further technical studies and investigations, consultation required to be undertaken, whether a public hearing is required and the timeframes for the various stages in the plan making process. If necessary, the planning proposal is amended to meet the requirements of the gateway determination.

FINANCIAL IMPLICATIONS

The following discussion outlines the financial implications associated with the progression of options 1 or 2.

The Hornsby Town Centre has been the subject of considerable study and analysis by Council and consultants concerning opportunities and constraints for development and land management. The studies undertaken to date address many of the issues relevant to the progression of a planning proposal for the West Precinct. Specifically, such studies include:

- Hornsby Town Centre Car Parking Study currently being prepared by Council’s Traffic and Road Safety Branch;

- Traffic Modelling for the Hornsby Quarry Landfill Proposal currently being prepared by consultants for Council; and

- Coronation Street Economic Feasibility Study.

Given the work conducted to date, the most cost effective and timely method of progressing any review would be for the work to be done in-house with the assistance of urban design consultant, traffic consultant and economic feasibility consultants that are currently, or have recently, provided consultancy services to Council relevant to the Hornsby Town Centre.

It is anticipated that the cost of consultant input into any review would be as follows:

Urban design analysis	Approximately $60,000
Traffic modelling	Approximately $30,000
Economic feasibility analysis	Approximately $10,000
Total	$100,000

Accordingly, should Council resolve to progress a study and planning proposal, Council would need to allocate $100,000 in the Budget for 2011/2012.

TRIPLE BOTTOM LINE SUMMARY

CONCLUSION

This report discusses the current controls for the Hornsby West Precinct, the opportunities and constraints to future development within the area, and outlines the advantages and disadvantages of options for a review of planning controls. It is recommended that Council determine a position concerning a review of planning controls for the West Precinct based on one of the options presented.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council determine a position concerning a review of planning controls for the Hornsby Town Centre West Precinct based on the options outlined in Executive Manager’s Report No. PLN36/11.

James Farrington

Manager - Town Planning Services

Planning Division

Scott Phillips

Executive Manager

Planning Division

Attachments:

1.View

Map of West Precinct

File Reference: F2011/00441

Document Number: D01632481