Agenda of General Meeting

Date Lodged	Councillor/Designated Person (Position)	Reason for Lodgement
22 May 2013	Caretaker/Cleaner - Wisemans Ferry	New designated person
19 June 2013	Qualified Educator (Certified Supervisor)	New designated person
19 June 2013	Program Director (Certified Supervisor)	New designated person

Group Manager’s Report No. PL54/13

Planning Division

Date of Meeting: 17/07/2013

7 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - SUBDIVISION OF ONE ALLOTMENT INTO TWO LOTS - 116 CARDINAL AVENUE, WEST PENNANT HILLS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

DA No:	DA/283/2013 (Lodged 26 March 2013)
Description:	Torrens title subdivision of an existing strata titled property comprising two detached dwellings.
Property:	Lots 1 and 2 SP 40121, No. 116 Cardinal Avenue, West Pennant Hills
Applicant:	Mr Danny Kian Hong Tay
Owner:	Owners Corporation – SP 40121
Estimated Value:	N/A
Ward:	C

· The application proposes the Torrens title subdivision of an existing strata titled multi-unit housing development comprising two detached dwellings.

· The proposal does not comply with the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 with regard to Clause 14 (Density). The applicant has made a submission pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 (Development Standards) to vary the minimum 500m²lot size development standard. The submission is considered well founded and is supported.

· No public submissions have been received in respect of the application.

· It is recommended that the application be approved.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council assume the concurrence of the Director-General of the Department of Planning and Infrastructure pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 and approve Development Application No. DA/283/2013 for subdivision of one allotment into two lots at SP 40121, No. 116 Cardinal Avenue, West Pennant Hills subject to the conditions of consent detailed in Schedule 1 of Group Manager’s Report No. PL54/13.

BACKGROUND

On 16 January 1991, DA/469/90 was approved for erection of a second dwelling on the subject site under Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 12 – Dual Occupancy (SREP 12) and strata subdivision.

On 1 January 1992, Amendment No. 2 to State Environmental Planning Policy No 25-Residential Allotment Sizes and Dual Occupancy Subdivision (SEPP 25) was gazetted, permitting the subdivision of new and existing dual occupancy developments.

In July 1994, the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 (HSLEP) was gazetted, permitting multi-unit housing at a rate of one dwelling per 350m² of land area within the Residential A (Low Density) zone. In accordance with Clause 4(2) of the HSLEP, SEPP 25 and SREP 12 no longer applied to Hornsby Shire.

On 15 December 1995, Amendment No. 8 to the HSLEP was gazetted which aimed to preclude subdivision of multi-unit housing developments unless in accordance with the minimum 500m²allotment size prescribed by the Residential A (Low Density) zone.

Although it was possible for the existing dual occupancy development on the site to be subdivided under Torrens title until 1995, the owners of the property did not seek approval for Torrens title subdivision until the lodgement of the current application.

SITE

The 1001m² site is located on the western side of Cardinal Avenue with frontage to both Cardinal Avenue and Dean Street. The site experiences an average fall of 7% to the western, side boundary of the site.

The site contains two single storey brick veneer dwellings approved under SREP 12 in 1991. The land is divided into two strata allotments.

Lot 1 has an area of 651m²and has a 15.260m frontage to Cardinal Avenue. The dwelling on Lot 1 comprises three bedrooms and has a gross floor area of 168m². Vehicular access to Lot 1 is from Dean Street and parking for two vehicles is provided within a carport at the rear of the dwelling.

Lot 2 has an area of 350m² and has frontage to Dean Street. The dwelling on Lot 2 comprises three bedrooms and has a gross floor area of 146m². Vehicular access to the site is from Dean Street and parking for two vehicles is provided within a double garage.

The site is not located in bushfire prone land, is not a heritage listed item, and is not in a heritage conservation area or in the vicinity of a heritage listed item.

THE PROPOSAL

The application proposes the Torrens title subdivision of an existing strata titled property comprising two detached dwellings.

The proposed lots would be 651m² and 350m², known as Lots 1 and 2 respectively. The proposed Torrens title subdivision is consistent with the land allocation for Lots 1 and 2 on Strata Plan 41021. No alterations to the existing dwellings or any other physical works are proposed as part of this application.

ASSESSMENT

The development application has been assessed having regard to the ‘Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2031, the ‘North Subregion (Draft) Subregional Strategy’ and the matters for consideration prescribed under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the Act). The following issues have been identified for further consideration.

1. STRATEGIC CONTEXT

1.1 Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2031 and (Draft) North Subregional Strategy

The (Draft) Metropolitan Strategy for Sydney 2031 is a broad framework to provide for Sydney’s growth to help plan for housing, employment, transport, infrastructure, the environment and open space. It outlines a vision for Sydney to 2031; the challenges faced, and the directions to follow to address these challenges and achieve the vision.

The North Subregion comprises Hornsby, Ku-ring-gai, Manly, Warringah and Pittwater Local Government Areas. The Draft North Subregional Strategy acts as a framework for Council in its preparation of the Comprehensive LEP by the end of 2013.

Within the North Subregion, the Draft Metropolitan Strategy proposes:

· Population growth of 81,000 from the current 2011 baseline of 529,000;

· Housing growth of 37,000 from the current 2011 baseline of 204,000; and

· Employment growth of 39,000 from the current 2011 baseline of 186,000.

The proposed development would alter the type of subdivision of an existing residential development. Accordingly, the proposal is not inconsistent with the draft Strategy.

2. STATUTORY CONTROLS

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

2.1 Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994

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

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

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

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

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

2.1.1 Clause 14 – Density

Clause 14 of the HSLEP prescribes the minimum allotment size within the Residential A (Low Density) zone is 500m². The proposed subdivision would result in allotment sizes that do not comply with the above requirements. Proposed Lot 1 would have an area of 651m² which complies the minimum lot size requirement, whilst proposed Lot 2 would have an area of 350m²resulting in a 30% variation to the minimum lot size requirement.

The application is supported by a submission pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 to vary the minimum 500m²allotment size development standard and is discussed in Section 2.3 of this report.

2.1.2 Clause 15 – Floor Space Ratio

Clause 15 of the HSLEP prescribes the maximum permissible floor space ratio (FSR) for development within the Residential A (Low Density) zone is 0.4:1. The proposal would result in an FSR of 0.27:1 and 0.36:1 for Lot 1 and Lot 2 respectively. The proposal therefore complies with the maximum FSR requirements of the zone.

2.1.3 Clause 18 – Heritage

Clause 18 of the HSLEP sets out heritage conservation provisions for Hornsby Shire. The site does not include a heritage item and is not located in a Heritage Conservation Area. Therefore, no further assessment in this regard is necessary.

2.2 Draft Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan

The draft Hornsby Local Environmental Plan (DHLEP) was endorsed by Council at its meeting on 19 December 2012 to be forwarded to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure to be made. In accordance with Council’s resolution, the draft Plan has been submitted to the Department for finalisation. The relevant provisions of the DHLEP that apply to the site are outlined below.

2.2.1 Zoning

Under the DHLEP, the subject land would be zoned R2 (Low Density Residential). A “subdivision” is a permissible use with consent under Clause 2.6 of the DHLEP.

2.2.2 Minimum Lot Size

Clause 4.1 of the DHLEP states that the size of any lot resulting from a subdivision of land is not to be less than the minimum size shown on the Lot Size Map. The minimum lot size for the subject site within the R2 zone is 500m². The proposal does not comply with this provision.

2.3 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards

The application has been assessed against the requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 - Development Standards (SEPP 1). This Policy provides flexibility in the application of development standards in circumstances where strict compliance with those standards would be unreasonable or unnecessary or tend to hinder the attainment of the objectives of the Act.

The Land and Environment Court has expressed the view that there are five Principles on which an objection may be well founded and the approval of the objection may be consistent with the aims of the Policy as follows:

1. The objectives of the standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard;

2. The underlying objective or purpose of the standard is not relevant to the development and therefore compliance is unnecessary;

3. The underlying object or purpose would be defeated or thwarted if compliance was required and therefore compliance is unreasonable;

4. The development standard has been virtually abandoned or destroyed by the Council’s own actions in granting consents departing from the standard and hence compliance with the standard is unnecessary and unreasonable;

5. The zoning of the particular land is unreasonable or inappropriate so that a development standard appropriate for that zoning is also unreasonable and unnecessary, as it applies to the land and compliance with the standard would be unreasonable and unnecessary. That is, the particular parcel of land should not have been included in the particular zone.

The applicant has provided the following SEPP 1 objection with respect to the non-compliance with Clause 14 of the HSLEP:

1. The subdivision pattern is identical to that created under the Strata plan and merely seeks to provide separate titles for each dwelling;

2. A Torrens subdivision is practical and in keeping with the manner in which the development was designed;

3. Should the applicant have applied under SEPP 25 - Residential Allotment Sizes (Amendment No. 2-Dual Occupancy Subdivision) (prior to amendment 2 dated 11 October 1991) Torrens subdivision would have been permissible;

4. No environmental or planning implications would arise should the application be approved; and

5. The proposal does not provide any changes to the approved built form, and therefore, the proposal does not have any impact on the existing streetscape or the amenity of the adjoining properties.

6. In addition to the above, no precedent would be set with regards to Unit 2/116 Cardinal Avenue being 350spm. See a similar development at property 32 Hyacinth Street, Asquith with 5 lots ranging between 326spm to 378spm was granted approval for Torrens title by Hornsby Shire Council.

The matters listed above have been taken into consideration in assessing the merits of the SEPP 1 objection. The objective of Clause 14 (Density) of the HSLEP is ‘to provide for the development of land that is within the lands environmental capacity and zone objectives’. Approval of the application for Torrens title subdivision would not alter the intensity or scale of the existing development on the site. As no works are proposed as part of the application, the proposal would not have an environmental impact on the locality.

The development complies with the maximum floor space ratio development standard for the zone and Council's previous consent for the dwellings demonstrates Council’s acknowledgement that the overall density of the development is within the lands environmental capacity. The conversion from strata to Torrens title would not alter the impacts of the existing development on the surrounding low density residential environment or the objectives of the zone. In this regard, the objectives of the density standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the numerical controls within the standard.

Strict compliance with the development standard would be unreasonable or unnecessary and would tend to hinder the attainment of the objects specified in section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Act. These relevant objectives of the Act are:

"(a) to encourage:

(i) the proper- management, development and conservation of natural and artificial resources, including agricultural land, natural areas, forests, minerals, water, cities, towns and villages for the purpose of promoting the social and economic welfare of the community and a better environment,

(ii) the promotion and co-ordination of the orderly and economic use and development of land,"

The proposed Torrens title subdivision is consistent with the first objective given the two dwellings presently exist on the property and no further development is proposed. The proposal accords with the second objective as the proposal would allow the existing dwellings to be on separate titles, thereby adding economic value and versatility to existing housing stock. In this regard, it is considered that a requirement for the development standard to be upheld by preventing Torrens title subdivision of the site would be unreasonable and unnecessary and would hinder the objectives of the Act.

Based on this assessment, it is considered that the applicant’s SEPP 1 submission is well founded and is supported.

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

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

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

The site history and site inspection indicate a history of residential development and it is not likely that the site has experienced any significant contamination. Accordingly, further assessment under SEPP 55 is not required.

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

The site is located within the catchment of the Hawkesbury Nepean River. Part 2 of this Plan contains general planning considerations and strategies requiring Council to consider the impacts of development on water quality, aquaculture, recreation and tourism. Subject to the implementation of sediment and erosion control measures and stormwater management to protect water quality, the proposal would comply with the requirements of the Policy.

2.6 Clause 74BA Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 – Purpose and Status of Development Control Plans

On 1 March 2013, the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 was amended so that a DCP provision will have no effect if it has the practical effect of “preventing or unreasonably restricting development” that is otherwise permitted and complies with the development standards set out in relevant Local Environmental Plans and State Environmental Planning Policies. The principal purpose of a development control plan is to provide guidance on the aims of any environmental planning instrument that applies to the development; facilitating development that is permissible under any such instrument; and achieving the objectives of land zones under any such instrument.

The provisions of a development control plan made for that purpose are not statutory requirements.

2.7 Residential Subdivision Development Control Plan

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

Residential Subdivision DCP

Control

Proposal

Requirement

Complies

Allotment size

Lot 1

Lot 2

651m²

350m²

500m²

Yes

Existing Dwelling (Lot 1)

Floor space ratio

Site cover

Private open space

0.27:1

37.4%

160m²

0.4:1

40%

120m²

Yes

Setbacks

Front (west)

Secondary frontage (south)

Side (north)

Rear (east)

10m

3.6m

1.4m

Yes

Landscaped area

45.4%

45%

Yes

Existing Dwelling (Lot 2)

Floor space ratio

Site cover

Private open space

0.36:1

40%

68m²

0.4:1

40%

100m²

Yes

Setbacks

Front (south)

Side (west)

Side (east)

Rear (north)

3.66m

1.4m

Yes

Landscaped area

59.1%

45%

Yes

As detailed in the above table, the proposed development does not comply with a number of prescriptive requirements 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 requirements. The non-compliance with the allotment sizes has been discussed in Section 2.5.

2.7.1 Setbacks

As the buildings currently exist on the site, there would be no change to the existing boundary setbacks. The proposed common boundary would be adjacent to the eastern elevation of the garage on Lot 1 resulting in a nil setback in this section of the site. An easement in favour of Lot 1 for overhang would be established over Lot 2.

2.7.2 Private Open Space

The Residential Subdivision DCP prescribes that for a 128m² dwelling, 100m² of private open space with a minimum dimension of 5m should be provided.

The subdivision does not involve any change to the open space areas. Lot 2 provides 68m² of private open space to the dwelling and in this circumstance, is considered acceptable.

2.7.3 Car Parking

The proposal would have no impact on transport, traffic, access and parking within the site. Lot 1 provides 2 car spaces, Lot 2 provides 1 car space. The proposed allotments would have individual driveways providing access to the properties. +

2.8 Section 94 Contributions

The original application for the erection of a second dwelling under SREP 12 did not require Section 94 contributions as part of the approval.

No new dwellings are proposed as part of the current subdivision application and Section 94 Contributions would not be applicable.

3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

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

3.1 Natural Environment

The proposal does not include any physical works and therefore, would not result in an adverse environmental impact.

3.2 Built Environment

The proposed Torrens title subdivision would not alter the approved built form of the development. The density and scale of the development is within the environmental capacity of the site and is acceptable with respect to the built environment.

3.3 Social and Economic Impacts

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

4. SITE SUITABILITY

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

The site is not identified as flood prone land, subject to bushfire risk, or affected by heritage controls. No physical work is proposed as part of this application.

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 8 April 2013 and 2 May 2013 in accordance with Council’s Notification and Exhibition Development Control Plan. During this period, Council received no submissions. The map below illustrates the location of those nearby landowners in close proximity to the development site.

NOTIFICATION PLAN

• PROPERTIES NOTIFIED

X SUBMISSIONS

RECEIVED

PROPERTY SUBJECT OF DEVELOPMENT

6. THE PUBLIC INTEREST

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

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

The application is considered to have addressed Council’s criteria under the Low Density Multi-Unit Housing Development Control Plan and the Residential Subdivision Development Control Plan and therefore, the development would be in the public interest.

CONCLUSION

The application proposes the Torrens title subdivision of an existing strata title property comprising two detached dwellings.

The application does not comply the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 is respect to Clause 14 ‘Density’. The applicant submitted a State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 objection to vary the minimum allotment size development standard. The objection is considered well founded with regard to the existing development and the principles established by the Land and Environment Court.

There were no submissions received in response to notification of the proposed development.

Having regard to the circumstances of the case and consideration of the SEPP 1 objection, approval of the application is recommended.

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

Rod Pickles

Manager - Development Assessment

Planning Division

James Farrington

Group Manager

Planning Division

Attachments:

1.View	Locality Plan
2.View	Subdivision Plan

File Reference: DA/283/2013

Document Number: D02178502

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.

Plan Title

Drawn by

Dated

12284/002

Sheet 1 of 1 Revision A

Plan showing proposed subdivision

A.E.

26 February 2013

Document Title	Drawn by	Dated
Statement of Environmental Effects	A.E.	24 March 2013
Objection under SEPP No. 1	Not named	March 2013

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A SUBDIVISION CERTIFICATE

Note: For the purpose of this consent, a reference to ‘occupation certificate’ shall not be taken to mean an ‘interim occupation certificate’ unless otherwise stated.

2. Sydney Water – s73 Certificate

An s73 Certificate must be obtained from Sydney Water.

3. Stormwater Drainage – Dwellings

The stormwater drainage systems from the proposed lots are to be connected to Council’s street gutter independently.

4. Creation of Easements

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

· An easement for an eave overhang over proposed lot 2 in favour of lot 1.

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

- 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 can be made to Council’s Customer Services Branch on 9847 6760.

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

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

· Mandatory inspections of nominated stages of the construction inspected.

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

Subdivision Certificate Requirements

A subdivision certificate application is required to be lodged with Council containing the following information:

· A surveyor’s certificate certifying that all structures within the subject land comply with the development consent in regard to the setbacks from the new boundaries.

· A surveyor’s certificate certifying that all services, drainage lines or access are located wholly within the property boundaries. Where services encroach over the new boundaries, easements are to be created.

· Certification that the requirements of relevant utility authorities have been met.

Note: Council will not issue a subdivision certificate until all conditions of the development consent have been completed.

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.

Fees and Charges – Subdivision

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

House Numbering

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

Group Manager’s Report No. PL55/13

Planning Division

Date of Meeting: 17/07/2013

8 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - DWELLING-HOUSE - 69 PARKLANDS ROAD, MOUNT COLAH

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

DA No:	DA/358/2013 (Lodged 11 April 2013)
Description:	Erection of a two storey dwelling-house
Property:	Lot 58, DP 207557, 69 Parklands Road, Mount Colah
Applicant:	Mr Andrew James Veldon
Owner:	Mr and Mrs Veldon
Estimated Value:	$350,000
Ward:	A

· The application proposes the demolition of an existing dwelling and erection of a new two storey dwelling-house.

· The proposal does not comply with the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 with regard to Clause 15 (Floor Space Ratio). The applicant has made a submission pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 (Development Standards) to vary the development standard. The submission is considered well founded and is supported.

· No public submissions have been received in respect of the application.

· It is recommended that the application be approved.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council assume the concurrence of the Director-General of the Department of Planning and Infrastructure pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 and approve Development Application No. DA/358/2013 for the demolition of an existing dwelling and erection of a 2 storey dwelling-house at Lot 58 DP 207557, No. 69 Parklands Road, Mount Colah subject to the conditions of consent detailed in Schedule 1 of Group Manager’s Report No. PL55/13.

BACKGROUND

There is no history of the site relevant to this application.

SITE

The site has an area of 567.2m² and is located on the western side of Parklands Road, Mount Colah. The site contains a single storey, weatherboard and tile-roofed dwelling-house with an attached carport and two garden sheds located adjacent to the western, rear boundary.

The site experiences a fall of 3% to the eastern, front boundary.

The site is located within a bushfire prone area.

The site is not a heritage listed item and is not in a heritage conservation area or in the vicinity of a heritage listed item.

The site is not burdened by any easements or restrictions.

THE PROPOSAL

The application proposes the demolition of an existing dwelling-house and the erection of a 2 storey dwelling-house.

The ground floor would include a double garage, study, theatre, dining room, living room, kitchen, laundry, guest room with an ensuite, toilet and deck with access from the laundry and living rooms.

The first floor would include a master bedroom with an ensuite and walk-in-wardrobe, 3 bedrooms, a sitting room and a bathroom.

The proposal would result in the removal of 1 tree from the site.

ASSESSMENT

The development application has been assessed having regard to the ‘Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2031’, the ‘North Subregion (Draft) Subregional Strategy’ and the matters for consideration prescribed under Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (the Act). The following issues have been identified for further consideration.

1. STRATEGIC CONTEXT

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

The North Subregion comprises Hornsby, Kuring-gai, Manly, Warringah and Pittwater Local Government Areas. The Draft North Subregional Strategy acts as a framework for Council in its preparation of the Comprehensive LEP by the end of 2013.

Within the North Subregion, the Draft Metropolitan Strategy proposes:

· Population growth of 81,000 from the current 2011 baseline of 529,000

· Housing growth of 37,000 from the current 2011 baseline of 204,000

· Employment growth of 39,000 from the current 2011 baseline of 186,000

The proposed development would be consistent with the Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2031 by providing renewed housing stock within the Shire.

2. STATUTORY CONTROLS

2.1 Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994

The subject land is zoned Residential A (Low Density) under the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 (HSLEP). The objectives of the Residential A 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 a ‘dwelling-house’ under the HSLEP and is permissible in the zone with Council’s consent.

Clause 15 of the HSLEP prescribes that the maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of development within the Residential A zone is 0.4:1. The proposed FSR of the dwelling-house is 0.45:1.

The applicant has submitted a State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 (SEPP 1) objection to the development standard. Refer to Section 2.4 for consideration of the applicant’s objection to the standard.

2.2 Draft Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan

The Draft Hornsby Local Environmental Plan (DHLEP) was endorsed by Council at its meeting on 19 December 2012 to be forwarded to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure to be made. In accordance with Council’s resolution, the draft Plan has been submitted to the Department for finalisation. The relevant provisions of the DHLEP that apply to the site are outlined below.

2.2.1 Zoning

Under the DHLEP, the subject land would be zoned R2 (Low Density Residential). A “dwelling house” would be a permissible use in the zone under the DHLEP.

2.2.2 Height of Building

Clause 4.3 of the DHLEP states that the height of a building on any land is not to exceed the maximum height shown for the land on the Height of Buildings Map. The maximum permissible height for the subject site within the R2 zone is 8.5 metres. The proposal complies with this provision.

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

2.4 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 - Development Standards

The proposed dwelling-house has a gross floor area of 257m2 resulting in a floor space ratio (FSR) of 0.45:1. The FSR exceeds the applicable 0.4:1 FSR development standard under the HSLEP 1994.To address the variation to the 0.4:1 development standard, the applicant has made a submission pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards (SEPP1).

The application has been assessed against the requirements of SEPP1. This Policy provides flexibility in the application of development standards in circumstances where strict compliance with those standards would, in any particular case, be unreasonable or unnecessary or tend to hinder the attainment of the objectives specified in section 5(a) (i) and (ii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act which states:

‘The objectives of this Act are:

(a) to encourage:

(i) the proper management, development and conservation of natural and artificial resources, including agricultural land, natural areas, forests, minerals, water, cities, towns and villages for the purpose of promoting the social and economic welfare of the community and a better environment,

(ii) the promotion and co-ordination of the orderly and economic use and development of land,’

Where development could, but for any development standard, be carried out under the Act (either with or without the necessity for consent under the Act being obtained therefore) the person intending to carry out that development may make a development application in respect of that development, supported by a written objection that compliance with that development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case, and specifying the grounds of that objection.

The Land and Environment Court has expressed the view that there are 5 different ways in which an objection may be well founded and that approval of the objection may be consistent with the aims of the policy:

1. The objectives of the standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard;

2. The underlying objective or purpose of the standard is not relevant to the development and therefore compliance is unnecessary;

3. The underlying object or purpose would be defeated or thwarted if compliance was required and therefore compliance is unreasonable;

4. The development standard has been virtually abandoned or destroyed by the Council's own actions in granting consents departing from the standard and hence compliance with the standard is unnecessary and unreasonable;

5. The zoning of the particular land is unreasonable or inappropriate so that a development standard appropriate for that zoning is also unreasonable and unnecessary as it applies to the land and compliance with the standard would be unreasonable or unnecessary. That is, the particular parcel of land should not have been included in the particular zone.

In regard to whether the objection may be well founded, the applicant contends that:

1. In accordance with the Hornsby Council Local Environment Plan 1994 Clause 15, the current floor space ratio is 0.4:1. The proposed floor space ratio is 0.45:1 would result in a minor variation to the maximum that is permitted by Council of 12%.

2. It is to be considered that strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary as the proposed development meets the objective of the development standard despite the non compliance with the numerical value. The scale of the proposed development provides for the housing needs in today’s market whilst still providing adequate landscaping and open space.

3. There is no perceived impact on the streetscape and adjoining properties by the proposed development and it will compliment and blend with the character of the area whilst adhering to the objectives of the zone and the environment.

4. The proposed development complies with all other controls within the current Development Control Plan.

5. Hornsby Council is currently in the process of having a new Local Environment Plan 2012 and Development Control Plan 2012 gazetted within the 2013 calendar year. Under these revised planning instruments, the proposed development would be in compliance with the floor area standard of 330m2 with a lot size between 450m2 to 599m2. Given that this is the direction council is taking, consideration should be given to this proposed development.

6. The proposed development complies with the objectives set out in section 5 (a) (i) and (ii). The proposed development will be constructed on an existing allotment which is considered orderly and economic use of the land and proposed development which will not affect the social and economic welfare and environment of the area.

7. The objective of the development standard is to be a measure to ensure the dwelling does not have an unreasonable impact on the adjoining properties and streetscape with regards to overshadowing, privacy and visual bulk.

8. The proposed dwelling complies with all controls within the DCP with the exemption of FSR. Consideration has been given to overshadowing and visual bulk to ensure that there are no unreasonable impacts on adjoining properties. The second storey of the proposed dwelling comprises predominantly bedrooms and bathrooms which are considered low trafficable areas.

The matters listed above have been taken into consideration in assessing the merits of the SEPP 1 objection.

The proposal takes into consideration the environmental and size constraints of the site. The additional floor space would not adversely impact on the environmental and amenity aspects of the site and the underlying objectives of the zone. The dwelling-house would provide accommodation that would not detract from the scale and variety of dwelling-houses in the low density areas of the Shire as the proposal is considered to meet the zone objectives outlined in the HSLEP.

In addition to the above, the proposal has been considered in regard to the provisions of the NSW Housing Code, which provides that the maximum gross floor area for complying development within the low density residential zones of the Shire as being:

· 330m², if the lot has an area of at least 450m² but less than 600m²;

· 380m², if the lot has an area of at least 600m² but less than 900m²; and

· 430m², if the lot has an area of at least 900m².

Accordingly, if applicable, the development would satisfy the maximum floor area development standard under the NSW Housing Code.

In this instance, the proposed front setback of the dwelling-house would exclude it from being assessed under the Code which requires the setback to be the average of the neighbouring dwelling-houses. The average of the front setbacks of the adjoining dwelling-houses is approximately 8.5 metres. However, given that the recently introduced NSW Housing Code is now enacted in many parts of the Shire, it is anticipated that more developments would be approved under this Code, which will change the characteristics of dwelling-houses. Consequently, whilst Council has previously applied a maximum FSR of 0.4:1 for dwelling-houses in the low density residential zones within the Shire under the HSLEP, the introduction of the NSW Housing Code is changing the effect of this standard.

The SEPP1 objection is considered well founded and acceptable in this instance.

2.5 Clause 74BA Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 - Purpose and Status of Development Control Plans

The principal purpose of a development control plan is to provide guidance on the aims of any environmental planning instrument that applies to the development; facilitating development that is permissible under any such instrument; and achieving the objectives of land zones under any such instrument. The provisions of a development control plan made for that purpose are not statutory requirements.

2.6 Dwelling-House Development Control Plan

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

Dwelling House Development Control Plan
Control	Proposal	Requirement	Complies
Floor space ratio	0.45:1	0.4:1	No
Site cover	39%	40%	Yes
Setbacks Front (east) Side (north) Side (south) Rear (west)	5.8 2.6m 1m 8.1m	6m 1m 1m 3 m	No Yes Yes Yes
Height	Two-storey	Max. two storey	Yes
Unbroken Wall length	13.35m	10m	No
Building length	18.04m	24m	Yes
Cut and fill	0m	1m	Yes
Private Open Space	151.9m²	120m²	Yes
Landscaped area	52.2%	45%	Yes

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

2.6.1 Floor Space Ratio

The objective of the Scale element is to encourage “development of a scale compatible with the low density residential environment”.

The proposed dwelling-house exceeds the maximum Floor Space Ratio allowable within the Residential A zone by 12.5%. The application was accompanied by a SEPP 1 objection and is supported.

The proposal meets the objective of the Scale element and is considered acceptable.

2.6.2 Setbacks

The objective of the Setbacks is to encourage “setbacks that complement the streetscape, provide for landscaping and protect the privacy of and sunlight to neighbouring properties”.

The garage wall of the dwelling-house would have a minor encroachment of 200mm into the front setback. The portion of the garage that is encroaching is minor and would not affect the character of the streetscape or the privacy of, or sunlight to, neighbouring properties.

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

2.6.3 Design

The objective of the Design element is to encourage “building design that is consistent with and enhances the character and amenity of the local area, has regard for environmental characteristics and energy efficiency”.

The proposed 13.35m unbroken wall length of the northern elevation does not comply with the prescriptive measures of the Design element which requires that walls not exceed 10m without a physical “break”. A balance between solid walls and openings and variations of roof form has been incorporated into the elevation to avoid a monotonous or symmetrical design.

Accordingly, the proposal would have negligible adverse visual or amenity impacts on adjoining properties, meets the objectives of the Design element and is considered acceptable.

3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

3.1 Natural Environment

The proposed development would necessitate the removal of one tree from the site. The tree is not considered significant or worthy of retention.

3.2 Built Environment

The proposal involves the demolition of the existing dwelling-house on the site. The proposed dwelling-house would be positioned closer to the front boundary than surrounding properties. The proposal would not cause a detrimental impact to the streetscape of Parklands Road.

3.3 Social and Economic Impacts

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

4. SITE SUITABILITY

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

4.1 Bushfire Risk

The land is identified as being subject to bushfire risk. However, the proposed location of the dwelling-house would be outside the 100 metre bushfire buffer zone. As a result, no conditions requiring fire sensitive construction methods are recommended.

5. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

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

5.1 Community Consultation

The proposed development was placed on public exhibition and was notified to adjoining and nearby landowners between 17 April 2013 and 1 May 2013 in accordance with Council’s Notification and Exhibition Development Control Plan. During this period, Council received no submissions. The map below illustrates the location of those nearby landowners that are in close proximity to the development site and were notified of the application.

NOTIFICATION PLAN

• PROPERTIES NOTIFIED

X SUBMISSIONS

RECEIVED

PROPERTY SUBJECT OF DEVELOPMENT

6. THE PUBLIC INTEREST

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

The application is considered to have addressed Council’s criteria under the Dwelling House DCP and therefore, the development would be in the public interest.

CONCLUSION

The application proposes the demolition of an existing dwelling-house and the erection of a 2 storey dwelling-house.

The application does not comply with the Hornsby Shire Council Local Environmental Plan 1994 in respect to Clause 15 ‘Floor Space Ratio’. The applicant has submitted a State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 objection to vary the floor space ratio development standard. The objection is considered well founded with regard to the existing development and the principles established by the Land and Environment Court.

There were no submissions received in response to notification of the proposed development.

Having regard to the circumstances of the case and consideration of the SEPP 1 objection, approval of the application is recommended.

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

Rod Pickles

Manager - Development Assessment

Planning Division

James Farrington

Group Manager

Planning Division

Attachments:

1.View	Locality Map
2.View	DA Plans
3.View	Floor Plans
4.View	Site Plan
5.View	Elevations
6.View	Shadow Diagram

File Reference: DA/358/2013

Document Number: D02178503

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.

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

Plan No.	Plan Title	Drawn by	Dated
Project No 12029 Drawing No. WD03 Revision C	Site Plan	DTH	05/04/2013
Project No 12029 Drawing No. WD05, WD06 Revision C	Floor Plans	DTH	05/04/2013
Project No 12029 Drawing No. WD17, WD18. WD19. WD20 Revision C	Section A Section B Section C Section D	DTH	05/04/2013
Project No 12029 Drawing No. WD21, WD 22 Revision C	Elevations 1 and 2 of 2	DTH	05/04/2013
Project No 12029 Drawing No. WD24 Revision C	Shadow Diagrams	DTH	05/04/2013

Document Title

Prepared by

Dated

Waste Management Plan

TRIM No. D02158575

A. J. Veldon

10/04/2013

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 relevant 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; and

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 and;

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.

5. Sydney Water – Quick Check

This application must be submitted to a Sydney Water ‘Quick Check Agent’ or ‘Customer Centre’ for approval to determine whether the development would affect any Sydney Water infrastructure, and whether further requirements are to be met.

Note: Refer to www.sydneywater.com.au or telephone 13 20 92 for assistance.

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

6. 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.

7. 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.

8. 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

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. Demolition

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

a) Demolition material must 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 2005; and

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.

11. 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 must be kept in a clean, tidy and safe condition at all times.

Note: This consent does not give right of access to the site via Council’s park or reserve. Should such access be required, separate written approval is to be obtained from Council.

12. 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.

13. Survey Report – Finished Floor Level

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

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

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

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

Note: For the purpose of this consent, a reference to ‘occupation certificate’ shall not be taken to mean an ‘interim occupation certificate’ unless otherwise stated:

14. Fulfilment of BASIX Commitments

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

15. Stormwater Drainage – Dwellings

The stormwater drainage system for the development must be designed and constructed for an average recurrence interval of 20 years, be gravity and connected to an existing Council piped drainage system.

16. Internal Driveway/Vehicular Areas

The driveway and parking areas on site must be designed in accordance with Australian Standards 2890.1, 2890.2, and 3727.

17. 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 a new vehicular crossing and the removal of the 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.

18. Damage to Council Assets

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

19. Installation of Air Conditioner

To protect the amenity of adjacent properties, the condenser unit for the air conditioner must be sited a minimum of 3 metres from the property boundary of any adjoining residential premises unless a certificate has been prepared by a suitably qualified person confirming that the unit has been tested for heating and cooling on the highest settings and that the noise levels generated do not exceed 5 dB(A) above background noise levels when tested at the property boundary between 8 pm and 10 pm.

- 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 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; and

· 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 a s a single or multi-trunked wood perennial plant having a height of not less than three (3) metres, and which develops many branches, usually form 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

Asbestos Warning

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

www.environment.nsw.gov.au

www.nsw.gov.au/fibro

www.adfa.org.au

www.workcover.nsw.gov.au

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

Group Manager’s Report No. PL58/13

Planning Division

Date of Meeting: 17/07/2013

9 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - TWO FIVE STOREY RESIDENTIAL FLAT BUILDINGS - 5-15 BELAIR CLOSE, HORNSBY

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

DA No:	DA/4/2013 (Lodged 3 January 2013)
Description:	Construction of two, five storey residential flat buildings comprising 64 units and strata subdivision
Property:	Lot 3 DP 204624, Lot 4 DP 204624, Lot 5 DP 204624, Lot 1 DP 525010, Lot 7 DP 204624, Nos. 5-15 Belair Close, Hornsby
Applicant:	CBD Core Pty Ltd
Owner:	Mr Y C Deng and Ms H Wang, Mrs E Leyden, Mr R A Hodgins, Mrs M F Mercuri and Miss E A Mercuri, Mr R A Heaton and Mrs D C Heaton
Estimated Value:	$9,280,000
Ward:	A

· The application proposes the demolition of existing structures and construction of two, five storey residential flat buildings comprising 64 units and strata subdivision.

· The application complies with Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 and with State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 – Design Quality Residential Flat Development. The proposal generally complies with the Housing Strategy Development Control Plan, subject to recommended conditions, other than the maximum five storey height limit, front setback and dwelling mix. The non-compliance are considered acceptable.

· A total of 75 submissions have been received in respect of the application.

· It is recommended that the application be approved.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Development Application No. DA/4/2013 for construction of two, five storey residential flat buildings, basement car park and strata subdivision at Lot 3 DP 204624, Lot 4 DP 204624, Lot 5 DP 204624, Lot 1 DP 525010, Lot 7 DP 204624, Nos. 5-15 Belair Close, Hornsby be approved subject to the conditions of consent detailed in Schedule 1 of Group Manager’s Report No. PL58/13.

BACKGROUND

Belair Close was previously zoned Residential A (Low Density) and formed a low density precinct bordered by residential flat development comprising mainly three storey buildings within a Residential C (Medium/High Density) Zone area. Belair Close was rezoned Residential C (Medium/High Density) for residential flat building to a height of 17.5m (five storey) as part of Council’s Housing Strategy on 2 September 2011.

SITE

The site has an area of 4,038m² and has a frontage of approximately 78m to the southern side of Belair Close. The site has a north easterly aspect and an average gradient of 13% to the street frontage. The site is irregular in shape to the head of the cul-de-sac which forms the higher part of the street.

The site includes five existing dwelling houses on irregular shaped lots fronting Belair Close and a number of trees and shrubs.

The southern and western boundaries of the site adjoin medium to high density residential developments comprising townhouses and three storey residential flat buildings with basement car parks. Opposite the site, the existing dwelling houses fronting the northern side of Belair Close adjoin an unformed road reserve (Water Street) at the rear which includes remnant trees and stormwater drainage and pollution control infrastructure.

The site is located 750m north east of Hornsby Railway Station and is within 260m of a regular bus service connection to the station.

THE PROPOSAL

The proposal is for the demolition of existing dwellings and construction of two, five storey residential flat buildings comprising 64 units, basement car park and strata title subdivision.

Building A comprises 32 units including 3 x 1 bedroom, 28 x 2 bedroom and 1 x 3 bedroom units. The units include 4 adaptable units. The building has driveway access to the basement car park. The building includes a central lift.

Building B comprises 32 units including 2 x 1 bedroom, 22 x 2 bedroom and 7 x 3 bedroom units, and 1 x 4 bedroom - dual key unit. The units include 14 adaptable units. The building has driveway access to the basement car park. The building includes a central lift.

The two proposed five storey buildings are stepped to the topography of the site. The proposed buildings are of concrete construction, with facebrick, glazed and painted masonry finishes and metal deck roofing.

The proposed single level basement car park is designed to form upper and lower car parking areas with a series of connecting ramps and two driveway entries. The basement car park includes 81 car parking spaces including 13 visitor car parking spaces and 9 disabled car parking spaces. The basement includes resident storage facilities, bicycle storage and waste management facilities.

The proposal includes a landscaping concept plan. The landscaping of communal open space areas includes retaining walls for level lawns areas and perimeter gardens.

ASSESSMENT

1. STRATEGIC CONTEXT

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

Within the North Subregion, the Draft Metropolitan Strategy proposes:

· Population growth of 81,000 from the current 2011 baseline of 529,000

· Housing growth of 37,000 from the current 2011 baseline of 204,000

· Employment growth of 39,000 from the current 2011 baseline of 186,000

The proposed development would be consistent with the Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2031 by providing an additional 59 dwellings and would contribute to housing choice in the locality.

2. STATUTORY CONTROLS

2.1 Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994

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

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

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

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

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

Clause 15A of the HSLEP prescribes a maximum building height of 17.5m for development on the subject site. The proposed development complies with this requirement.

Clause 18 of the HSLEP sets out heritage conservation provisions for Hornsby Shire. The site is not identified as a heritage item and is not in the vicinity of an item or within a heritage conservation area.

2.2 Draft Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan

The draft Hornsby Local Environmental Plan (DHLEP) was endorsed by Council at its meeting on 19 December 2012 to be forwarded to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure to be made. In accordance with Council’s resolution, the draft Plan has been submitted to the Department for finalisation.

2.2.1 Zoning

The site would be zoned R4 (High Density Residential) zone pursuant to the Land Use Table of the draft HLEP. The proposed development is defined as a ‘residential flat building’ and would be a permissible use in the zone with Council’s consent.

The land adjoining the Belair Close Precinct would also be zoned R4 (High Density Residential).

2.2.2 Height of Building

Clause 4.3 of the draft HLEP provides that the height of a building on any land is not to exceed the maximum height shown for the land on the Height of Buildings Map. The maximum permissible height for the subject site is 17.5 metres. The proposal complies with this provision.

The land adjoining the Belair Close, Hornsby Precinct would have a maximum height of 12m.

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 site has been used for residential purposes and is unlikely to be contaminated. No further assessment is considered necessary in this regard.

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

The Policy provides for design principles to improve the design quality of residential flat development and for consistency in planning controls across the State.

The applicant has submitted a design verification statement prepared by a qualified designer stating how the proposed development achieves the design principles of SEPP 65. The design principles of SEPP 65 and the submitted design verification statement are addressed below.

2.4.1 Principle 1 - Context

Design Principle 1 is as follows:

Good design responds and contributes to its context. Context can be defined as the key natural and built features of an area.

Responding to context involves identifying the desirable elements of a location’s current character or, in the case of precincts undergoing a transition, the desired future character as stated in planning and design policies. New buildings will thereby contribute to the quality and identity of the area.

The context of the site is defined by the Desired Future Character Statement of the Housing Strategy Development Control Plan (Housing Strategy DCP). The desired future character of the precinct is that of a high density residential precinct incorporating five storey developments in a landscaped setting. The applicant states the proposal is a contemporary interpretation of the Housing Strategy DCP taking into consideration modern aesthetics and amenity standards.

The submitted statement is supported in respect to this Principle.

2.4.2 Principle 2 - Scale

Design Principle 2 is as follows:

Good design provides an appropriate scale in terms of the bulk and height that suits the scale of the street and the surrounding buildings.

Establishing an appropriate scale requires a considered response to the scale of existing development. In precincts undergoing a transition, proposed bulk and height needs to achieve the scale identified for the desired future character of the area.

The precinct is undergoing transition. The scale of the future built environment is commensurate with Council’s planning controls which promote five storey residential flat buildings with a maximum height of 17.5 metres. The elevations achieve an appropriate aesthetic outcome and composition and create the appearance of separate pavilions. The scale of the proposed development is appropriate for the site and in accordance with the planning controls and desired future character of the precinct.

2.4.3 Principle 3 – Built Form

Design Principle 3 is as follows:

Good design achieves an appropriate built form for a site and the building’s purpose, in terms of building alignments, proportions, building type and the manipulation of building elements.

Appropriate built form defines the public domain, contributes to the character of streetscape and parks, including their views and vistas, and provides internal amenity and outlook.

The Housing Strategy DCP includes planning controls for height, setbacks, building footprints and articulation which prescribe the future built form of the precinct. The proposed building is appropriately modulated and articulated to reduce bulk and scale and express residential character. The proposed development presents a distinct architectural design which would set an appropriate precedent for development within the precinct and is considered acceptable in terms of built form.

The submitted statement is supported in respect to this Principle.

2.4.4 Principle 4 – Density

Design Principle 4 is as follows:

Good design has a density appropriate for a site and its context, in terms of floor space yields (or number of units or residents).

Appropriate densities are sustainable and consistent with the existing density in an area or in precincts undergoing a transition, are consistent with the stated desired future density. Sustainable densities respond to the regional context, availability of infrastructure, public transport, community facilities and environmental quality.

The site density is regulated by the statutory height control of 17.5m and the Housing Strategy DCP. The proposal is within the DCP prescriptive measures as addressed in Section 2.10 of this report.

2.4.5 Principle 5 – Resource, Energy and Water Efficiency

Design Principle 5 is as follows:

Good design makes efficient use of natural resources, energy and water throughout its full life cycle, including construction.

Sustainability is integral to the design process. Aspects include demolition of existing structures, recycling of materials, selection of appropriate and sustainable materials, adaptability and reuse of buildings, layouts and built form, passive solar design principles, efficient appliances and mechanical services, soil zones for vegetation and reuse of water.

The applicant has submitted BASIX Certificate No. 462119M-02 for the proposed 64 dwellings. In achieving the required BASIX targets for sustainable water use, thermal comfort and energy efficiency, the proposed development achieves the design criteria. The building design achieves an efficient use of natural resources, includes sustainable materials and passive solar design principles.

The submitted statement is supported in respect to this Principle.

2.4.6 Principle 6 – Landscape

Design Principle 6 is as follows:

Good design recognises that together landscape and buildings operate as an integral and sustainable system, resulting in greater aesthetic quality and amenity for both occupants and the adjoining public domain.

Landscape design builds on the existing site’s natural and cultural features in responsible and creative ways. It enhances the development’s natural environmental performance by co-ordinating water and soil management, solar access, micro-climate, tree canopy and habitat values. It contributes to the positive image and contextual fit of development through respect for streetscape and neighbourhood character, or desired future character.

Landscape design should optimise useability, privacy and social opportunity, equitable access and respect for neighbour’s amenity, and provide for practical establishment and long term management.

The application includes a landscape concept plan providing landscaping along the street frontage, side and rear boundaries. The planting would provide an appropriate landscape setting for the development. In this regard, the proposed development is in accordance with the Landscaping principle of SEPP 65 and the Housing strategy DCP objective for buildings within landscaped settings.

2.4.7 Principle 7 – Amenity

Design Principle 7 is as follows:

Good design provides amenity through the physical, spatial and environmental quality of a development.

Optimising amenity requires appropriate room dimensions and shapes, access to sunlight, natural ventilation, visual and acoustic privacy, storage, indoor and outdoor space, efficient layouts and service areas, outlook and ease of access for all age groups and degrees of mobility.

The amenity design principle is prescribed by the Residential Flat Design Code (refer to discussion in Section 2.5). The proposed development is in accordance with the requirements of the Residential Flat Design Code in respect to solar access, visual and acoustic privacy, apartment layouts, private open spaces and natural ventilation.

2.4.8 Principle 8 – Safety and Security

Design Principle 8 is as follows:

Good design optimises safety and security, both internal to the development and for the public domain.

This is achieved by maximising overlooking of public and communal spaces while maintaining internal privacy, avoiding dark and non-visible areas, maximising activity on streets, providing clear, safe access points, providing quality public spaces that cater for desired recreational uses, providing lighting appropriate to the location and desired activities, and clear definition between public and private spaces.

The applicant’s statement includes the following comment:

Proposed orientation of buildings, floor layouts and provision of balconies provide natural passive surveillance of public domain and common open space. Appropriate security arrangements are incorporated at pedestrian entry lobby and access to common open spaces. All pedestrian areas are designed to provide clear sight lines and minimise potential for “hiding” places for attacks. Storage cages will be of chain wire partitioning to allow visual sight lines.

The proposed development is considered satisfactory in respect to Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design principles (CPTED). The applicant’s statement is supported in respect to this Principle. Refer also to comments in Section 2.5.4.

2.4.9 Principle 9 – Social Dimensions and Housing Affordability

Design Principle 9 is as follows:

Good design responds to the social context and needs of the local community in terms of lifestyles, affordability, and access to social facilities.

New development should optimise the provision of housing to suit the social mix and needs in the neighbourhood or, in the case of precincts undergoing transition, provide for the desired future community.

New development should address housing affordability by optimising the provision of economic housing choices and providing a mix of housing types to cater for different budgets and housing needs.

The Housing Strategy DCP includes prescriptive measures for housing choice and for adaptable housing to provide for aging in place. The proposal provides a housing mix and adaptable housing and is supported in respect to this Principle.

2.4.10 Principle 10 – Aesthetics

Design Principle 10 is as follows:

Quality aesthetics require the appropriate composition of building elements, textures, materials and colours and reflect the use, internal design and structure of the development. Aesthetics should respond to the environment and context, particularly to desirable elements of the existing streetscape or, in precincts undergoing transition, contribute to the desired future character of the area.

The applicant’s statement includes the following comment:

An appropriate composition of building elements, material textures and colours has been utilised to reflect the building’s residential use character. The external appearance of the building reflects the “base, middle and top” typology encouraged by the SEPP 65 guidelines. The articulation of the building facades, the design’s massing composition seek to find balance with its surroundings. Selected materials also compliment required and desired materials as set out in the DCP.

The proposed building composition, colours, textures and materials would contribute to the quality of the residential environment of the ‘Belair Close, Hornsby precinct’. The applicant’s statement is supported in respect to this Principle.

2.5 SEPP 65 – Residential Flat Design Code

SEPP 65 also requires consideration of the Residential Flat Design Code, NSW Planning Department 2002. The Code includes development controls and best practice benchmarks for achieving the design principles of the SEPP 65. The following table sets out the proposal’s compliance with the Code:

Residential Flat Design Code
Control	Proposal	Requirement	Compliance
Deep Soil Zone	30%	25%	Yes
Communal Open Space	25%	25-30%	Yes
Gnd Level Private Open Space	18m²+ Min Dimension 2m	25m² Min Dimension 4m²	No No
Minimum Dwelling Size	1 br – 59.5m² 2 br – 80.0m² 3 br – 95.2m²	1 br – 50m² 2 br – 70m² 3 br – 95m²	Yes Yes Yes
Maximum Kitchen Distance	8m	8m	Yes
Minimum Balcony Depth	2.0m	2.0m	Yes
Dual Aspect & Cross Ventilation	64%	60%	Yes
Adaptable Housing	31%	10%	Yes

As detailed in the above table, the proposed development complies with the prescriptive measures within the Residential Flat Design Code other than the ground floor open space areas. Below is a brief discussion regarding the relevant development controls and best practice guidelines.

2.5.1 Apartment Layout and Mix

The two proposed buildings are designed in response to the topography and shape of the site. The proposal includes a range of apartment sizes and layouts appropriate to the configuration of the buildings.

Building A includes Units 1 to 32 and Building B, Units 33 to 64. The units range in size from 59.5m² to 64.9m² (1 bedroom units), 80m² to 94.4m² (2 bedroom units) and 95.2m² to 102.8m² (3 bedroom units). Unit 63 is a dual key unit which incorporates a studio unit. Of the 34 x 2 bedroom units, 13 units also include media/study areas. The proposed layouts are functional, well appointed spaces. The depth and width of the units ensures adequate natural light and ventilation. The majority of kitchen spaces either include a window, or are located within 8m of a window.

The proposal includes a range of smaller units providing for housing choice.

It is considered the proposed units meet the best practice requirements of the Code.

2.5.2 Ground Floor Apartments

The Code encourages separate entries for ground floor apartments and private gardens areas at ground level.

The proposed ground floor unit open space areas include courtyards and balconies contained within the building envelope. The unit open space areas are considered appropriate for the respective ground floor units in respect to dwelling size, aspect, unit configuration and amenity. The non-compliance with the best practice 25m² open space area and 4m dimension is considered acceptable as the larger area would be lost to private use and not contribute to landscaping with regard to the Housing Strategy Development Control Plan key principle for five storey residential flat buildings in garden settings.

Eight of ground floor apartments are adaptable dwellings and benefit from convenient access to common outdoor open space areas.

It is considered the design of the proposed ground units is satisfactory in meeting the requirements of Code.

2.5.3 Internal Circulation

Each floor includes a large open foyer/corridor that includes the lift and forms part of the articulation of the building to form separate pavilions. The lifts are within ready access of the respective units. The lift corridors meet the Code’s requirements for the number units accessed (less than 8) and design for amenity.

The proposed internal circulation spaces would contribute to the communal space of the building and promote a resident community.

It is considered the proposed internal circulation spaces achieve the best practice requirements of the Code.

2.5.4 Safety and Visual Privacy

The proposed development is designed to enable casual surveillance of public access to the development and communal open space areas without compromising resident privacy.

Appropriate conditions for building and unit security and graffiti management, are recommended for the safety and security of residents of the proposed development.

2.5.5 Acoustic Privacy

The applicant has submitted an acoustic consultant’s report which includes recommendations for noise mitigation measures, including glazing thickness and acoustic seals, for the building to comply with Council’s Code of Practice for Sound Insulation of Residential Buildings. The recommendations have regard to the existing acoustic environment which is relatively quiet, the interface with the surrounding residential environment and the transition to a higher density environment.

The proposed floor plan layout ensures effective grouping and separation of noise generating kitchen, bathroom and laundry areas from the quieter bedroom areas of the units.

To minimise noise impacts on residential amenity during construction of the development, a condition is recommended for compliance with the Interim Construction Noise Guidelines 2009 – NSW Department of Environment and Climate Change.

Subject to recommended conditions for noise mitigation, the proposed development meets the Code’s best practice requirements for acoustic privacy.

2.5.6 Storage

The proposed units include built-in robes and linen cupboard storage. The basement includes caged storage areas for all 64 units. The proposal would comply with the Codes best practice storage areas requirements.

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

The application has been assessed against the requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004. The proposal includes a BASIX Certificate for the proposed units and is considered to be satisfactory.

2.7 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 32 - Urban Consolidation (Redevelopment of Urban Land) (SEPP 32)

The application has been assessed against the requirements of SEPP 32, which requires Council to implement the aims and objectives of this Policy to the fullest extent practicable when considering development applications relating to redevelopment of urban land. The application complies with the objectives of the Policy as it would promote social and economic welfare of the locality and would result in the orderly and economic use of under utilised land within the Shire.

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

Subject to the implementation of sediment and erosion control measures and stormwater management to protect water quality, the proposal would comply with the requirements of the Policy.

2.9 Clause 74BA Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 - Purpose and Status of Development Control Plans

2.10 Housing Strategy Development Control Plan

The proposed development has been assessed having regard to the desired outcomes and prescriptive measures within Council’s Housing Strategy Development Control Plan (Housing Strategy DCP). The following table sets out the proposal’s compliance with the prescriptive measures of the Plan:

Housing Strategy Development Control Plan
Control	Proposal	Requirement	Compliance
Site Width	84.5m	Min – 30m	Yes
Height	Part 6 storeys – 17.5m	5 storeys – 17.5m	No
Lowest Residential Floor Above Ground	N/A	Max - 1.50m	N/A
Maximum Floorplate Dimension	35m	35m	Yes
Building Indentation	4m	4m	Yes
Building A Front Setback (Regular)	10.6m 8m < 1/3^rd building Balc. 6m	10m 8m < 1/3^rd building Balc. 7m	Yes Yes No
Building B Front Setback (Bulb Curve)	7m-13.5m 7m<2/3^rd building Balc. 3m	10m 8m<1/3^rd building Balc. 7m	No No No
N Side Setback	6+m Balc. 4m	6m Balc. 4m	Yes Yes
W Side Setback	6m Balc. 4m	6m Balc. 4m	Yes Yes
E Side Setback	6+m Balc. 4m	6m Balc. 4m	Yes Yes
Rear Setback	10+m Balc. 7.2m	10m Balc 7m	Yes Yes
Top Storey Setback From Ground Floor	3+m	3m	Yes
Underground Parking Setback	Front - > 3m W Side - 4m E Side – 4m Rear – 10m	7m 4m 4m 7m	No Yes Yes Yes
Basement Ramp Setback	2m	2m	Yes
Separation Building A & Building B	12m	6m	Yes
Car Parking	68 resident spaces 13 visitor spaces	65 resident spaces 13 visitor spaces	Yes Yes
Landscaping	Front – 3m-10m W Side – 4m E Side – 4m Rear – 10m	7m 4m 4m 7m	No Yes Yes Yes
Private Open Space Min Width 2.5m	1 br units - > 25m² 2 br units - > 12m² 3 br units - > 24m²	10m² 12m² 16m²	Yes Yes Yes
Communal Open Space	25%	25%	Yes
Sunlight Access	87.5%	70%	Yes
Housing Choice	1 br units – 8% 2 br units - 78% 3 br units – 14%	10% 10% 10%	No Yes Yes
Adaptable Units	31%	30%	Yes

As detailed in the above table, the proposed development does not comply with a number of prescriptive measures within Council’s Housing Strategy DCP. These non-compliances are largely a result of the irregular shape of the site being located at the head of a cul-de-sac. The matters of non-compliance are detailed below, as well as a brief discussion regarding the desired outcomes and the prescriptive measures.

2.10.1 Desired Future Character

The proposed building is in accordance with required key principles for the future character of the Belair Close, Hornsby Precinct for well articulated five storey residential flat buildings in garden settings with basement car parking.

Refer also to comments in Section 2.4.

2.10.2 Design Quality – SEPP 65

The proposed development accords with the design principles of SEPP 65 as discussed in Sections 2.4 and 2.5 of this report.

2.10.3 Site Requirements

The site is a consolidated site and is in accordance with the site requirements of the Housing Strategy DCP.

A submission raises concern that the adjoining site at No. 3 Belair Close would become an isolated site. The adjoining site however, would potentially include No. 1 Belair Close which in combination with No. 3 Belair Close would be of sufficient dimension and area to accommodate development in accordance with the Housing Strategy DCP.

2.10.4 Height

The site topography is relatively steep with variation in levels and an average gradient of 13%. The proposed development involves a substantial amount of excavation to a maximum depth of 7m to provide for the floorplates and the stepping of the buildings on the site. The stepping of the development includes four distinct changes in levels.

The roof height of the proposed buildings is generally consistent with the height of the existing adjoining residential developments as detailed in the following table.

Building Roof Height	Height RL
Proposed Building A	169.5m
Proposed Building B	175.1m
Townhouses - 41 Sherbrook Rd	160.7m to 166.8m
Residential flat building – 23-27 Linda St	168.4m to 174.6m
Residential flat building – 8-10 Bellbrook Ave	172.7m
Residential flat building – 12-14 Bellbrook Ave	169.6m

Proposed Building A and Building B are stepped on the site and include a lower ground floor section and a six storey height element where the fifth floor overlaps the step in level. The overlap includes minimal floor space and does not substantially contribute to the overall height of the development. Building A occupies the lower level and Building B the upper level of the site. The stepping of the development on the site and the split level of the two buildings is considered an appropriate design response to the topography of the site. In this regard, the proposed non-compliant sixth floor element of the two buildings is considered acceptable.

The height of the two proposed buildings is in accordance with the Housing Strategy DCP maximum 17.5m building height. The proposed basement car park would project 2m above ground level at the eastern elevation of Building A where the building overlaps the step in level. The projection would not contribute to the height of the building in relation to the adjoining land or the streetscape due to the cut required for the siting of the building on the steeply sloping site. The non-compliance with the maximum basement level 1m above ground height limit is therefore considered acceptable.

Accordingly, the proposed development is considered satisfactory in respect to five storey built form.

2.10.5 Setbacks

The site is irregular in shape in relation to the site frontage to the head of the cul-de-sac. The site adjoins development within the Residential C (Medium/High Density) Zone that provides for three storey development (12m height limit).

The proposed front setback of Building A conforms to the regular frontage with a 10m setback and encroachment to 8m for 1/3^rd of the building width. The balconies of Building A encroach to 6m in non-compliance with the permitted encroachment to 7m. The encroachment is considered appropriate with regard to the transition to the irregular street frontage and proposed Building B.

Proposed Building B encroaches on the 10m front setback to the extent of the head of the cul-de-sac. The 10m encroachment is for 2/3rds of the building frontage to the cul-de-sac including balconies. The balcony encroachment is to 3m and the building encroachment to 7m. The proposed encroachment to the cul-de-sac is integrated with the stepping and separation of the two buildings and is considered a satisfactory response to the irregular street frontage. The resulting scale, built form and presentation of the development to Belair Close would establish an appropriate pattern for future development on the opposite side of the cul-de-sac.

The proposed setback to the northern side boundary and the adjoining dwelling house within the Belair Close, Hornsby Precinct complies with the prescriptive measures of the Housing Strategy DCP and allows adequate separation for future development of the adjoining site.

The proposed setback to the western side boundary and the adjoining three storey residential flat building complies with the Housing Strategy DCP prescriptive measures. The proposed setback provides a 13.096m to 16.043m separation between buildings which is adequate for privacy and amenity in accordance with the DCP.

The proposed setback of Building A to the southern rear boundary and the adjoining townhouse development complies with the Housing Strategy DCP prescriptive measures. The setback provides a 15m to 17m separation which is adequate for privacy and amenity in accordance with the DCP.

The proposed setback of Building B to the southern rear boundary and the adjoining three storey residential flat building complies with the Housing Strategy DCP prescriptive measures. The setback provides a 12.5m to 15m separation between buildings which is adequate for privacy and amenity in accordance with the DCP.

The proposed setback to the eastern side boundary and the adjoining dwelling house within the Belair Close, Hornsby Precinct complies with the prescriptive measures of the Housing Strategy DCP and allows adequate separation for future development of the adjoining site.

2.10.6 Landscaping

The submitted landscaping plan provides suitable landscaped areas for the presentation of the building in the streetscape, active and passive open space areas and screen planting. A number of existing trees are retained.

A condition is recommended for the landscape plan to be amended to provide for the stepped retaining wall at the southern elevation of Building B to complement the common open space area. Conditions are also recommended for a wider landscaping planter between Building A and Building B and for alternate locally indigenous plant species.

The non-compliance of the landscaped frontage dimension with the Housing Strategy DCP prescriptive measure is considered acceptable with regard to the cul-de-sac frontage.

Subject to recommended conditions, the proposed landscaping complies with the landscaping prescriptive measures.

2.10.7 Floorplates and Separations

The floorplates of Building A and Building B comply with the prescriptive measures for 4m x 4m indentations for floorplates exceeding 25m dimension and for the maximum floorplate dimension of 35m.

The proposed 12m separation between the two buildings provides for appropriate landscaping and complies with the prescriptive measure.

2.10.8 Articulation

Proposed Building A occupies the lower part of the site and the regular street frontage. The building is stepped to the site and is well articulated with the façade treatment, size and placement of windows, protruding balconies, vertical panels and stepped levels of the building, minimising the bulk and scale of the building.

Proposed Building B occupies the upper part of the site is designed with regard to the irregular shaped street frontage and includes the same architectural treatment as Building A.

The two proposed buildings comply with the Housing Strategy DCP articulation prescriptive measures and meet the key principles for built form for development within the ‘Belair Close, Hornsby Precinct.

2.10.9 Open Space

The proposed unit open space areas comply with the prescriptive area requirements, include a range of space layouts with access off living areas and would provide for a range of outdoor activities.

The communal open space areas comply with the prescriptive area requirements and would provide for larger gatherings and family groups.

The proposed basement includes provision for bike storage comprising 13 resident bike racks and 7 visitor bike racks in accordance with the prescriptive measures.

It is considered the proposed open space provision would provide for a range of outdoor activities and encourage active living.

2.10.10 Privacy

The two proposed buildings adjoin existing residential flat buildings and a townhouse development at the southern and western elevations which currently overlook the site. A separation of more than 12m is proposed between the existing and proposed buildings in compliance with the privacy prescriptive measure of the Housing Strategy DCP.

The adjoining residential flat building at the southern elevation of Building B includes north facing balconies. The opposing balconies of proposed Building B are generally off bedroom accommodation limiting balcony use at the southern elevation and impacts on adjoining residents.

The proposed balconies are in painted masonry or coloured glass ‘Surfmist’ which would provide privacy for residents. The proposed units fronting the head of the cul-de-sac include recessed balconies and screens to provide privacy in proximity to the street frontage.

It is considered the proposed development meets the desired outcome of the Housing Strategy DCP to provide reasonable privacy for the proposed development and adjacent properties.

2.10.11 Sunlight and Ventilation

The existing residential developments adjoining the rear southern boundary of the site include north facing windows, balconies and private open space areas with full sun access. The proposed development would result in partial overshadowing of the adjoining open space areas at the March/September Equinox. The overshadowing would extend to the ground floors on June 22. The applicant has submitted a solar access analysis demonstrating all the adjoining dwellings would receive three hours of sunlight to north facing windows on 22 June. The proposed overshadowing would be in compliance with the provisions of the Medium/High Density Multi-Unit Housing Development Control Plan which applies to development of the adjoining sites. In this regard, the proposed overshadowing would be consistent with the medium/high density character of the area and is considered acceptable.

The proposed development would overshadow the eastern elevation of the existing residential flat building adjoining the western boundary in early morning on 22 June. The adjoining development would receive more than three hours of sunlight at the eastern elevation between 9:00am and 3:00pm.

Of the proposed dwellings, 87.5% would receive a minimum of two hours of sunlight to living room windows and private open space areas between 9am and 3pm, 22 June in accordance with the Housing Strategy DCP requirement for 70% of dwellings. The percentage of dwellings in compliance would reduce to an estimated 75% following future development of the site adjoining the eastern boundary.

The proposed active common open space areas at the southern elevation of the development would be substantially overshadowed on June 22 and would not comply with the Housing Strategy DCP requirement for two hours of sunlight during mid-winter. The overshadowing is considered acceptable with regard to the aspect of the site and the proposed unit layout for all adaptable units to receive a minimum of two hours of sunlight to living room windows and private open space June 22.

2.10.12 Housing Choice

The proposed buildings includes a mix of dwellings including; one bedroom, one bedroom + study, two bedroom, two bedroom + study, three bedroom and a three bedroom + studio/bedroom dwelling.

Of the proposed dwellings 8% are one bedroom, 78% two bedroom and 14% three bedroom + dwellings. The adaptable dwellings include 31% of dwellings. The proposed mix is in non-compliance with the Housing Strategy DCP requirement for at least 10% of each unit type and for 30% adaptable units.

The proposed housing mix is considered acceptable on merit with regard to the range of unit types proposed including units with separate studies.

2.10.13 Vehicle Access and Parking

The proposed vehicle access is via two 6.4m wide driveways for basement access to Building A and to Building B. The basement is shared between the two buildings and includes 81 car parking spaces comprising 68 resident spaces and 13 visitor spaces including disabled car parking. A minimum of 13 visitor and 65 residential parking spaces is required for the development.

The proposal includes bicycle parking and resident storage facilities in accordance with the Housing Strategy DCP prescriptive measures.

2.11 Waste Minimisation and Management Development Control Plan (WMMDCP)

The site will require 6 x 660 litre garbage bins serviced twice weekly plus 14 x 240 litre recycling bins serviced weekly. Each residential level has a waste facility – this is a garbage chute plus a recycling bin with the exception of the lower ground level, where three units are on the same level as Block A chute/bin room and will access it directly (each of these units are all less than 10 metres from the bin room).

The bin collection area is located next to the driveway for Building B. A service lift is used to bring the bins up from the basement. A small rigid waste collection vehicle would be able to reverse to the bin collection point and forward out. This is acceptable.

There are two areas allocated for storage of bulky items awaiting removal – within the Building A bin room and next to the bin hoist for Building B. Although these areas are not ideal, as Building A area has limited truck access for removal of items and items placed in the Building B area will hinder access to the bin hoist. However these areas can be functionally managed by the site caretaker.

A condition is recommended for the submitted Waste Management Plans for the demolition and construction stages to be revised for the estimated waste quantities prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

The proposed waste management system complies with the requirements of the WMMDCP subject to recommended conditions.

3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

3.1 Natural Environment

The proposed development would necessitate the removal of 20 trees from the site. None of the trees to be removed are considered significant trees. The application has been supported by an arborist report that assesses existing trees Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 6 as worthy of retention and recommends protection of the trees during construction of the proposed development.

The submitted landscape plan includes locally indigenous tree species including 20 Angophhora floribunda (Rough-barked Apple) trees. A condition is recommended for replacement with 20 Angophora costata (Sydney Red Gum) trees which are similarly indigenous and have a better landscape quality.

Subject to recommended conditions the proposed development would support locally indigenous trees and the natural environment.

3.2 Built Environment

3.2.1 Residential Character

The site is within a precinct undergoing transition to higher density housing. The proposed scale, built form and presentation of the development would establish an appropriate precedent for development within the precent. The proposed development is in accordance with the key principles of the Belair Close, Hornsby Precinct of the Housing Strategy DCP.

3.2.2 Traffic Generation

The applicant submitted a Traffic and Parking Statement for the proposed development which determined a traffic generation of 11 vehicle trips in the peak hours with regard to the proximity to Hornsby Town Centre and the Railway Interchange.

The increase in traffic generation is relatively minor and would not detract from the level of service of Belair Close or the surrounding road network.

3.2.3 Excavation

The geology of the site comprises sandstone formation which provides a stable foundation. The proposal involves excavation work to a depth of 7m. A condition is recommended for the foundation system and footings design to be certified by a structural engineer.

A condition is also recommended for a dilapidation report to be prepared for adjoining properties.

3.3 Social Impacts

The proposed development will increase the availability of housing in the locality including the provision of adaptable housing and be of positive social impact.

3.4 Economic Impacts

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

4. SITE SUITABILITY

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

The subject site has not been identified as bushfire prone or flood prone land. The site is considered to be capable of accommodating the proposed development. The scale of the proposed development is consistent with the capability of the site and is considered acceptable.

5. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

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

5.1 Community Consultation

The proposed development was placed on public exhibition and was notified to adjoining and nearby landowners between 24 January and 14 February 2013 in accordance with Council’s Notification and Exhibition Development Control Plan. During this period, Council received 56 submissions. Amended plans were similarly notified between 15 May and 29 May 2013. During this period 17 submissions were received. The map below illustrates the location of those nearby landowners who made a submission.

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

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

· Unacceptable traffic on local streets;

· Unacceptable overshadowing of adjoining properties;

· Development that is excessive in bulk and scale;

· Loss of residential character;

· Loss of trees;

· Loss of privacy and views;

· Design contrary to SEPP 65 Principles;

· Adverse visual impact;

· Median strip in Sherbrook Road;

· Isolated site;

· Increase in vandalism;

· Lack of recreation space;

· Excessive excavation; and

· Unacceptable construction noise.

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 Loss of Views

The proposed development would result in loss of existing views over the site from the rear of adjoining medium/high density developments. The views are localised to the surrounding area and are not extensive.

It is considered view loss would have been anticipated with the rezoning of the Belair Close Precinct for residential flat building to a height of 17.5m. The views from the rear of adjoining developments as a result of the proposal would be consistent with the medium/high density residential area.

5.1.2 Lack of Recreation Space

The increase in residential density would be lacking recreation space.

There are a number of recreation facilities in the vicinity of the site including Holman Park children’s playground corner Sherbrook Road and Northcote Road and James Park sports field 480m east of the site on Palmerston Road. Furthermore, a condition of consent is recommended requiring a Section 94 Contribution towards the cost of providing additional facilities to assist meet the demand of future residents. Such facilities include open space and recreational facilities.

5.1.3 Median Strip In Sherbrook Road

Council’s traffic assessment concludes that a median strip is not required in Sherbrook Road for the proposed development but may be subject to future consideration in completion of redevelopment within the Belair Close Precinct.

5.2 Public Agencies

The development application was not referred to any Public Agencies for comment.

6. THE PUBLIC INTEREST

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

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

CONCLUSION

The proposal is for the demolition of existing dwellings and construction of two, five storey residential flat buildings comprising 64 units, basement car park and strata title subdivision.

The proposed development is considered satisfactory in respect to achieving the Housing Strategy DCP desired future character of the Belair Close Housing Precinct together with the outcomes for design quality, site requirements, height, setbacks, landscaping, floorplates and separations, articulation, open space, privacy, sunlight and ventilation, housing choice and vehicle access and parking. The non-compliance with the prescriptive measures for five storey building height, front setback and housing mix are considered acceptable on merit.

The proposed development is in accordance with the SEPP 65 design principles and the best practice benchmarks of the Residential Flat Design Code. The scale, built form and presentation of the development to Belair Close would establish an appropriate pattern for future development within the Precinct.

The notification of the application received considerable public interest. The proposal has been amended to address concerns regarding solar access and is considered generally acceptable in respect to neighbourhood amenity and Council’s planning controls for a medium to high density residential environment.

The application is recommended for approval.

Rod Pickles

Manager - Development Assessment

Planning Division

James Farrington

Group Manager

Planning Division

Attachments:

1.View	Locality Map
2.View	Site Analysis Plan
3.View	Floor Plans - Part 1
4.View	Floor Plans - Part 2
5.View	Elevations
6.View	Landscape Plan
7.View	Shadow Plans
8.View	Survey Plan
9.View	Photomontage

File Reference: DA/4/2013

Document Number: D02187266

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.	Plan Title	Drawn by	Dated
8164 DA-D 00	Cover Page Basix Schedule	Zhinar Architects	Oct 2012
8164 DA-D 03	Overall Lower Ground Floor Plan	Zhinar Architects	Oct 2012
8164 DA-D 04	Overall Site Plan – Ground Floor	Zhinar Architects	Oct 2012
8164 DA-D 05.1	First Floor Plan	Zhinar Architects	Oct 2012
8164 DA-D 05.2	Second Floor Plan	Zhinar Architects	Oct 2012
8164 DA-D 05.3	Third Floor Plan	Zhinar Architects	Oct 2012
8164 DA-D 05.4	Fourth Floor Plan	Zhinar Architects	Oct 2012
8164 DA-D 05.5	Fifth Floor Plan	Zhinar Architects	Oct 2012
8164 DA-D 06	Basement – 1 Plan	Zhinar Architects	Oct 2012
8164 DA-D 07	Lower Ground Floor Plan	Zhinar Architects	Oct 2012
8164 DA-D 08	Ground Floor Plan	Zhinar Architects	Oct 2012
8164 DA-D 09	Block A+B First Floor	Zhinar Architects	Oct 2012
8164 DA-D 10	Block A+B Second Floor	Zhinar Architects	Oct 2012
8164 DA-D 11	Block A+B Third Floor	Zhinar Architects	Oct 2012
8164 DA-D 12	Block A Fourth Floor	Zhinar Architects	Oct 2012
8164 DA-D 13	Block B Fifth Floor + Roof Plan A	Zhinar Architects	Oct 2012
8164 DA-D 14	Roof Plan	Zhinar Architects	Oct 2012
8164 DA-D 15	Elevations + Basement Sections	Zhinar Architects	Oct 2012
8164 DA-D 16	Site Section A + B, Street Elevation	Zhinar Architects	Oct 2012
8164 Rev A	Colour Schedule & Materials Legend	Zhinar Architects	Undated
12203DA 1 B	Landscape Concept Plan	Vision Dynamics	29.4.13

Document Title	Prepared by	Dated
DA Acoustic Report	Acoustic Logic	19/12/2012
Access Compliance Assessment	Certified Building Specialists	18 December 2012
Arboricultural Impact Assessment	Redgum Arboriculture & Horticulture Consultants	29 November 2012
BASIX Certificate No. 462119M_02	Designview	29 April 2013

2. Amendment of Plans

The approved plans are to be amended as follows:

a) The approved plans are to be amended to address Condition No. 36 concerning landscaping.

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

3. Building Code of Australia

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

4. Contract of Insurance (Residential Building Work)

5. Water/Electricity Utility Services

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

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

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

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

6. Adaptable Units

a) The details of the adaptable units Nos. 1, 2, 4, 5, 7, 11, 12, 25, 26, 33, 36, 40, 41, 43, 47, 48, 50, 53, 54, and 57 must be provided with the Construction Certificate Plans.

b) Six of the adaptable units must be in compliance with AS1428.1 – Design for Access and Mobility.

7. Dilapidation Report

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

8. Acoustic Measures

The development must be carried out in accordance with the recommendations contained within the acoustic report submitted with the development application, titled DA Acoustic Report, prepared by Acoustic Logic and dated 19/12/2012.

9. Stormwater Drainage

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

a) Connected via galvanised rectangular hollow sections, 125mm x 75mm x 3mm thick, to Council’s kerb line in Belair Close.

b) Roofed and upstream paved areas shall be connected to the proposed on-site detention system.

10. On Site Stormwater Detention

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

a) Have a capacity of not less than 63 cubic metres, and a maximum discharge (when full) of 60 litres per second;

b) Have a 900mm x 900mm square access grate located directly above the on-site detention tank outlet.

c) An additional tank overflow system designed to convey all high level flows from the tank to the Council-controlled drainage system in Belair Close.

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

11. Excavation

The structural plans for basement and above ground areas must be prepared by a Chartered Structural Engineer and submitted with the Construction Certificate Application.

12. Road Works

All road works approved under this consent must be designed and constructed in accordance with Council’s Civil Works Design and Construction Specification, 2005 and the following requirements: -

a) Council’s standard 80 mm thick concrete footpath to be constructed within the road verge across the frontage of the properties and connecting with Council’s existing concrete footpath in Sherbrook Road. The remaining footpath verge area shall be turfed.

b) The existing kerb and gutter shall be removed and Council’s standard 150mm integral kerb and gutter and pavement shall be constructed in line with the adjoining properties, together with footpath formation, necessary drainage and sealing of road pavement between the existing pavement and lip of the gutter.

c) The existing road pavement to be saw cut a minimum of 1000 mm from the existing edge of the bitumen and reconstructed.

d) Pursuant to Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993, An application shall be made to Council for a Construction Certificate and Compliance Inspections for all works in the local road prior to the commencement of the works. The Applicant shall pay Council’s fees on lodgement for both these requirements.

e) The submission to Hornsby Shire Council of a compaction certificate from a geotechnical engineer for all fill within road reserves, and all road sub-grade and road pavement materials.

13. Internal Driveway/Vehicular Areas

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

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

b) The driveway be a rigid pavement.

c) Driveway grades for the design waste vehicle must not exceed 15.4% and transitions for changes of grade must not exceed requirements of AS2890.2. Provision shall be made for turning and manoeuvring of the waste services vehicle and standing area permanently marked out and restrictive signage provided.

d) Driveway structure, retaining walls and required to support the carriageway as required and the protection of all drops as per the requirements of a chartered Structural Engineer.

e) Planting of the driveway area to enhance the visual amenity of the driveway.

14. 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 a new vehicular crossing and the removal of all redundant crossings. The vehicular crossing must be constructed in accordance with Council’s Civil Works Design, 2005 and the following requirements: -

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

b) The footway area to be restored by turfing.

c) Adjustment of all regulatory signage and all services and street furniture made necessary by the proposed works.

15. Construction Management Plan

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

16. Waste Management Details

The following waste management requirements must be complied with:

a) A revised Waste Management Plan Section One – Demolition Stage and Section Three – Construction Stage, covering the scope of this project and including the following details, is required to be submitted to Council:

i) An estimate of the types and volumes of waste and recyclables to be generated;

ii) A site plan showing sorting and storage areas for demolition and construction waste and the vehicle access to these areas;

iii) How excavation, demolition and construction waste materials will be reused or recycled and where residual wastes will be disposed;

iv) The total percentage (by weight) of demolition and construction waste that will be reused or recycled.

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

17. 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.

18. 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.

19. Protection of Adjoining Areas

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

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

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

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.

20. Toilet Facilities

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

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

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

REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION

21. Construction Work Hours

All work on site (including demolition and earth works) must only occur between 7am and 5pm Monday to Saturday, in accordance with Interim Construction Noise Guidelines 2009 – NSW Department of Environment and Climate Change.

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

22. Demolition

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

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

d) All demolition and construction vehicles must be contained wholly within the site as a work zone permit will not be approved for Belair Close.

23. Waste Management

Waste management during the demolition and construction phase of the development must be undertaken in accordance with the approved Waste Management Plan. Additionally written records of the following items must be maintained during the removal of any waste from the site and such information submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority within fourteen days of the date of completion of the works:

a) The identity of the person removing the waste.

b) The waste carrier vehicle registration.

c) Date and time of waste collection.

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

e) Details of the site to which the waste is to be taken.

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

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

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

24. 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.

25. Works Near Trees

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

All works (including driveways and retaining walls) within 4 metres of any trees required to be retained (whether or not on the subject property, and pursuant to this consent or the Tree Preservation Order), must be carried out under the supervision of an ‘AQF Level 5 Arborist’ and a certificate submitted to the principal certifying authority detailing the method(s) used to preserve the tree(s).

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

26. Street Sweeping

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

27. Landfill

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

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

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

28. Excavated Material

All excavated material removed from the site must be classified in accordance with the Department of Environment, Climate Change and Water NSW Waste Classification Guidelines prior to disposal to an approved waste management facility and reported to the principal certifying authority.

29. Survey Report – Finished Floor Level

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

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

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

30. Council Property

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

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

Note: For the purpose of this consent, a reference to ‘occupation certificate’ shall not be taken to mean an ‘interim occupation certificate’ unless otherwise stated.

31. Fulfilment of BASIX Commitments

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

32. Sydney Water – s73 Certificate

An s73 Certificate must be obtained from Sydney Water.

33. Damage to Council Assets

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

34. Creation of Easements

The following matter(s) must be nominated on the plan of subdivision under s88 of the Conveyancing Act 1919:

a) Consolidation of the subject lots,

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

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

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

35. Garbage Collection Easement

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

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

36. Waste Management

The following waste management requirements must be complied with:

a) The bin storage room(s) at the lower ground level must include water or a hose for cleaning, graded floors with drainage to sewer, a robust door, sealed and impervious surface, adequate lighting and ventilation. The bin rooms at each residential level must include sealed and impervious surface, adequate lighting and ventilation.

b) A report must be prepared by an appropriately qualified person, certifying the following:

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

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

ii. That at least 60% of the waste generated during the demolition and construction phase of the development was reused or recycled.

Note: If the 60% diversion from landfill cannot be achieved in the Construction Stage, the Report is to include the reasons why this occurred and certify that appropriate work practices were employed to implement the approved Waste Management Plan. The Report must be based on documentary evidence such as tipping dockets/receipts from recycling depots, transfer stations and landfills, audits of procedures etc. which are to be attached to the report.

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

c) Each unit must be provided with an indoor waste/recycling cupboard for the interim storage of a minimum one day’s waste generation with separate containers for general waste and recyclable materials.

d) Space must be provided for either individual compost containers for each unit or a communal compost container;

Note: The location of the compost containers should have regard for potential amenity impacts.

e) The bin carting routes must be devoid of any steps.

Note: Ramps between different levels are acceptable

37. Additional Landscaping

a) Terraced retaining walls maximum height of 1.5m and a minimum 1m wide, creating landscape planter areas, are to be provided to the south western corner of the site. These planter areas are to included an additional 25 x Trachelospermum jasminoides (Chinese start jasmine) groundcover plants.

b) The landscape planter area along the eastern edge of the central paved pathway between the buildings is to be increased in width by 0.5m. An Additional five (5) x Howea forsterania (Kentia palms) are to be located in this planter area.

c) 20 x Angophora floribunda tree species are to be replaced with Angophora costata (Sydney Red Gum)

d) Planting to the front verge must include Three Angophora costata (Sydney Red Gum). Trees shall be installed at minimum 45 litre pot size.

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

38. Completion of Landscaping

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

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

39. Retaining Walls

All required retaining walls must be constructed as part of the development.

40. External Lighting

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

41. Safety and Security

a) Fire exist doors to the development must be fitted with single cylinder locksets (Australia and New Zealand Standard – Lock Sets) to restrict unauthorized access to the development.

b) Ground floor windows must be fitted with window locks that can be locked with a key.

c) A graffiti management plan must be incorporated into the maintenance plan for the development for graffiti to be removed within a forty-eight hour period.

d) The basement car park entries must be secured by security gates/roller shutters and controlled by secure access located at the top of the driveway.

42. Unit Numbering

The allocation of unit numbering must be authorised by Council prior to the numbering of each unit in the development.

43. Works as Executed Plan

44. Section 94 Infrastructure Contributions

The payment to Council of a contribution of $716,319.45 for 64 dwellings towards the cost of infrastructure identified in Council’s Development Contributions Plan 2007-2011.

Note: The value of contribution is current as at 20 June 2013 and includes a credit for the 5 existing allotments. The contribution will be adjusted from this date in accordance with the underlying consumer price index for subsequent financial quarters.

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

OPERATIONAL CONDITIONS

45. Noise

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

46. Disabled Parking

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

47. Fire Safety Statement - Annual

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

48. Landscape Establishment

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

49. Waste Storage Area and Waste Management

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

a) A site caretaker must be employed and be responsible for moving bins where and when necessary, washing bins and maintaining waste storage areas, ensuring the chute system and related devices are maintained in effective and efficient working order, managing the communal composting area, managing the bulky item storage area, arranging the prompt removal of dumped rubbish, and ensuring all residents are informed of the use of the waste management system.

50. Car Parking and Deliveries

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

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

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

c) 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.

e) All bicycle parking spaces are to be provided in accordance with AS 2890.3-1993 Bicycle parking facilities

f) Visitors are to have access to the parking area at all times. Visitors are to be able to access the basement car park by an audio/visual intercom system located at the top of the ramped driveways.

- END OF CONDITIONS -

ADVISORY NOTES

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 Requirements

The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 requires:

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

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

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

· Mandatory inspections of nominated stages of the construction inspected.

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

Long Service Levy

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

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

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

Tree Preservation Order

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.

Disability Discrimination Act

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

Dial Before You Dig

Telecommunications Act 1997 (Commonwealth)

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

Asbestos Warning

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

www.environment.nsw.gov.au

www.nsw.gov.au/fibro

www.adfa.org.au

www.workcover.nsw.gov.au

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

House Numbering

Group Manager’s Report No. PL52/13

Planning Division

Date of Meeting: 17/07/2013

10 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - SECTION 96(2) - BOUNDARY FENCE - 37 FERNDALE ROAD, NORMANHURST

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

DA No:	DA/123/2013/A (Lodged 10 April 2013)
Description:	Section 96(2) application to amend the consent for the erection of a boundary fence
Property:	Lot 23, DP 206093, No. 37 Ferndale Road, Normanhurst
Applicant:	Mrs Janet Margaret Wright
Owner:	Mrs Janet Margaret Wright
Estimated Value:	$2,600
Ward:	B

· The Section 96 application proposes to amend the consent for the erection of a boundary fence by increasing the height of the fence.

· The proposal complies with the relevant provisions within the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 and Dwelling Housing Development Control Plan.

· A Red Sticker has been placed on the application requiring that the application be determined at a Council meeting.

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

· It is recommended that the application be approved.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT pursuant to Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Development Application No. DA/123/2013/A for modification to the consent for the erection of a boundary fence at Lot 23, DP 206093, No. 37 Ferndale Road, Normanhurst be amended as detailed in Schedule 1 of Group Manager’s Report No. PL52/13.

BACKGROUND

In September 2012, a complaint was received by Council concerning the erection of a boundary fence on the subject site without approval. A Council compliance officer inspected the site on 25 September 2012 and found that one panel of fencing had been erected. Subsequent to the inspection, the portion of fencing was removed and an application (DA/123/2013) was lodged with Council for the erection of a boundary fence.

On 14 March 2013, Development Application No. 123/2013 was approved for the erection of a Colour-bond boundary fence to a height of 1.6 metres along the rear and side boundaries of the property.

In response to a complaint, a site inspection on 25 March 2013 by Council’s compliance officer revealed that the fence has not been constructed in accordance with the development consent. The boundary fence has been erected to a height of 1.8 metres. Subsequently, the applicant lodged a Section 96 modification for the approval of the fence at the constructed height of1.8 metres.

The Section 96(2) modification is the subject of this report.

SITE

The site has an area of 784.1m² and is located on the eastern side of Ferndale Road, Normanhurst with the northern and eastern boundaries having street frontage to Nicholas Crescent. The site has an average fall of 12% from the western, front boundary to the eastern, rear boundary and contains a single storey dwelling-house with attached carport.

The site is identified as being located on bushfire prone land.

Surrounding development comprises single and two storey detached dwellings. The adjoining corner lot (No. 33 Ferndale Road) has a rear yard enclosed with a 1.8m high lapped and capped timber fence.

PROPOSAL

The proposal involves a Section 96 application to amend the consent for the erection of a boundary fence along the rear and side boundaries of the allotment as follows:

· increase the overall height of the fence from 1.6 metres to 1.8 metres; and

· remove the requirement for 0.2 metre lattice on top of the fence.

ASSESSMENT

1. STRATEGIC CONTEXT

1.1 Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2031 and (Draft) North Subregional Strategy

1. Within the North Subregion, the Draft Metropolitan Strategy proposes:

· Population growth of 81,000 from the current 2011 baseline of 529,000

· Housing growth of 37,000 from the current 2011 baseline of 204,000

· Employment growth of 39,000 from the current 2011 baseline of 186,000

The proposed development involves a Section 96 Modification for a boundary fence adjustment on residential land. Accordingly, the proposal is not inconsistent with the draft Strategy.

2. STATUTORY CONTROLS

2.1 Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

Pursuant to Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Council may consider an application to amend development consent provided that, inter alia:

“a) it is satisfied that the development to which the consent as modified relates is substantially the same development, and

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

c) it has notified the application in accordance with the regulations, and

d) it has considered any submissions made concerning the proposed modification within the period prescribed by the regulations.”

In respect to part (a) of Section 96(2), the proposal involves modifications to an approved boundary fence and is of minimal environmental impact. The proposal would result in a development that is substantially the same development as was previously approved. In respect to part (b), the original proposal was not subject to concurrence of another authority. With respect to (c) and (d), the application was notified in accordance with Council’s Notification and Exhibition Development Control Plan and two submissions were received. The matters raised in submissions are addressed in Section 5 of this report.

The application is acceptable in respect to Section 96(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.

2.2 Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994

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

The objectives of the Residential A (Low Density) zone are:

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

b) to promote a variety of housing types and other land uses compatible with a 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 ‘ancillary’ to a ‘dwelling-house’ under the HSLEP and is permissible in the zone with Council’s consent.

2.3 Draft Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan

Under the DHLEP, the subject land would be zoned R2 Low Density Residential and “Dwelling-house” would be permissible within the zone with Council’s consent.

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

The Plan regulates impacts of future land uses on the River through implementation of planning policies and strategies for total catchment management, environmentally sensitive areas, water quality, water quantity, cultural heritage, flora and fauna, riverine scenic quality, agriculture/aquaculture and fishing, rural residential development, urban development, recreation and tourism. The proposed Section 96 modification would not adversely impact on the River or its catchment.

2.5 Clause 74BA Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 - Purpose and Status of Development Control Plans

2.6 Dwelling House Development Control Plan

Dwelling House Development Control Plan
Control	Proposal	Requirement	Compliance
Fence height	1.8 m	1.8 m	Yes

The proposed Section 96 modification complies with the prescriptive requirements within Council’s Dwelling House DCP. The compliance with the requirement of the DCP is discussed in more detail below.

2.6.1 Fencing

The height of the fence is consistent with the prescriptive measure of the Fencing element in the Dwelling-House DCP, which states that ‘Courtyard or private open space areas may be required to be enclosed by a 1.8m high fence to maximise privacy’.

The subject site has three street frontages with no enclosure of the private open space on the subject site from any of the three sides. The fence provides the residents with privacy and security to the rear yard. Furthermore, the height of the fence is consistent with the height of the boundary fence at the rear of the property on the opposite corner of Ferndale Road and Nicholas Crescent (No. 33 Ferndale Road).

The proposed fence does not comply with the prescriptive measure of the Fencing element in the DCP which states that “sheet metal, colour bond, wire mesh, or tubular fences should be avoided”. Given that the site is located in a bushfire prone zone, the colour-bond metal fence proposed by the applicant is acceptable.

In response to concerns raised in a submission that the fence has not been erected within the property boundaries, Council’s surveyors carried out a survey of the location of the fence in relation to the property boundary. The survey confirms that the fence erected along the rear of the property is located 0.85 metres inside the eastern property boundary and the fence along the side of the property is located on the northern property boundary. However, the north eastern corner of the fence is erected outside of the property boundary. Condition No.2 is recommended requiring the corner section of the fence be splayed and be erected on the property boundary.

To minimise impacts on the streetscape, a condition is also recommended requiring screen planting along the rear of the property boundary. This screen planting would reduce the visual impact of the fence.

3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

3.1 Natural Environment

The proposed Section 96 involves a proposal to increase the height of the fence from 1.6 metres to 1.8 metres. The modification would not require the removal of any additional vegetation. A condition of consent is recommended requiring screen planting to minimise the visual impact of the fence.

3.2 Built Environment

The height of the fence would be consistent with fencing on the opposite corner allotment at property No.33 Ferndale Road.

3.3 Social Impacts

The proposal includes a minor increase in the height of the approved fence (20cm). The proposal would maintain the residential character of the locality.

3.4 Economic Impacts

The proposal would not have an impact on the local economy.

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/risk associated with the site with respect to flooding, landslip and subsidence that would preclude approval of the proposed development. However, the land is identified as being subject to bushfire risk.

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 16 April 2013 and 30 April 2013 in accordance with Council’s Notification and Exhibition Development Control Plan. During this period, Council received two submissions. The map below illustrates the location of those nearby landowners who made a submission.

NOTIFICATION PLAN

• PROPERTIES NOTIFIED

X SUBMISSIONS

RECEIVED

PROPERTY SUBJECT OF DEVELOPMENT

Two submissions object to the development, generally on the following grounds:

· Unacceptable location of the fence in relation to the property boundary;

· Unacceptable height and appearance of the fence;

· Development without screen planting;

· Development without the lattice top;

· Traffic safety concerns.

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 Location of the Fence

Two submissions request that the boundary fence be erected within the subject property and setback from the boundary. The majority of the fence is within the property boundary, approximately 0.85 metres from the rear boundary. However, the north eastern corner of the fence is erected outside of the property boundary. Condition No.2 is recommended requiring the corner section of the fence to be splayed and be erected on the property boundary. Furthermore, adequate area is available within the property boundary for screen planting. Condition No. 16 is recommended requiring screen planting.

5.1.2 Lattice Top

Two submissions have been received in regards to the fence being erected without a lattice top. DA/123/2013 proposed a 0.2 metre lattice on the top of the 1.4 metre boundary fence. However, this Section 96 application amends the approved plan to remove the 0.2 metre lattice top and proposes 1.8 metre high colour-bond metal sheet panels only. Given the proposed increase in fence height, the proposal to remove the lattice top is considered acceptable.

5.1.3 Traffic Safety Concern

A submission raises traffic safety concerns that the fence obscures sight lines. There is existing vegetation screening which provides a similar obstruction of sight lines in Nicholas Crescent. Nicholas Crescent is a cul-de-sac which serves a limited number of dwellings and as a consequence, traffic movements would be minimal and at low speeds. Subject to the fence being constructed on the property boundary, the fence is considered acceptable.

6. THE PUBLIC INTEREST

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

CONCLUSION

Consent is sought for a Section 96 modification to amend the consent for the erection of a boundary fence.

The proposed amendment is minor in nature and is considered to be satisfactory in maintaining the residential character of the locality, and with regards to the provisions of the relevant environmental planning instruments applicable to the residential site and the Dwelling-house DCP.

The Section 96 modification application is recommended for approval.

Rod Pickles

Manager - Development Assessment

Planning Division

James Farrington

Group Manager

Planning Division

Attachments:

1.View	Locality Plan
2.View	Site Plan

File Reference: DA/123/2013/A

Document Number: D02175777

SCHEDULE 1

Date of this modification:	27 June 2013
Details of this modification:	Section 96 (2) modification to amend the consent for the erection of a boundary fence.
Conditions Added:	Nil
Conditions Deleted:	Nil
Conditions Modified:	1, 2 & 16

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

*Plan No.*	*Drawn by*	*Dated*
Page 3 of 3	Unnamed	Undated

2. Amendment of Plans

The approved plans are to be amended with the north eastern section of the proposed fence to be splayed and located on the property boundary.

3. Removal of Existing Trees

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

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

4. Building Code of Australia

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

5. 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:

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

a) The name and licence number of the principal contractor.

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

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

a) The name of the owner-builder.

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

6. Sydney Water – Quick Check

The application must be submitted to a Sydney Water ‘Quick Check Agent’ or ‘Customer Centre’ for approval to determine whether the development will affect any Sydney Water infrastructure, and whether further requirements are to be met.

Note: Refer to www.sydneywater.com.au or telephone 13 20 92 for assistance.

7. Design and Construction - Bushfire Attack Category

New construction must comply with the current Australian Standard AS3959 ‘Construction of buildings in bush fire-prone areas’ section 6 (BAL 19) and section A3.7 Addendum Appendix 3 of Planning for Bushfire Protection.

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

8. Erection of Construction Sign

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

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

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

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

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

9. Toilet Facilities

10. 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

11. Construction Work Hours

All work on site (including demolition and earth works) must only occur between 7am and 5pm Monday to Saturday. No work is to be undertaken on Sundays or public holidays.

12. Council Property

Note: This consent does not give right of access to the site via Council’s park or reserve. Should such access be required, separate written approval is to be obtained from Council.

13. Disturbance of Existing Site

14. Works Near Trees

All excavation works within 4 metres of any trees required to be retained (whether or not on the subject property, and pursuant to this consent or the Tree Preservation Order), must be hand dug to ensure the health and longevity of these trees. Tree roots between 10mm and 40mm diameter, revealed during excavation and located outside the trees Structural Root Zone (AS 4970-2009), must be cut cleanly by a sharp hand saw. The severance of tree roots greater than 40mm in diameter is strictly forbidden.

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE

Note: For the purpose of this consent, a reference to ‘occupation certificate’ shall not be taken to mean an ‘interim occupation certificate’ unless otherwise stated:

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.

16. Screen Planting

To minimise the visual impact of the fence, vegetation screen planting, such as Melaleuca Bracteata and Black Tea Tree is to be planted on the rear of the property boundary (minimum of 2 metres apart) along the eastern elevation of the boundary fence.

- 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 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; and

· 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.

Dial Before You Dig

Group Manager’s Report No. PL62/13

Planning Division

Date of Meeting: 17/07/2013

11 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - ALTERATIONS AND ADDITIONS - 11 JAMES HENTY DRIVE, DURAL

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

DA No:	DA/404/2013 (lodged 24 April 2013)
Description:	Alterations and additions to a dwelling-house
Property:	Lot 19, DP 806180, No. 11 James Henty Drive, Dural
Applicants:	Mr G J Evans and Mrs S J Evans
Owners:	Mr G J Evans and Mrs S J Evans
Estimated Value:	$336,025
Ward:	B

· The application proposes the alterations and additions to a dwelling-house.

· The proposal does not comply with the Dwelling-House Development Control Plan with regard to site cover or landscaped area.

· No public submissions have been received in respect of the application.

· It is recommended that the application be refused.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Development Application No. DA/404/2013 for alterations and additions to a dwelling-house at Lot 19, DP 806180, No. 11 James Henty Drive, Dural be refused, for the reasons detailed in Schedule 1 of Group Manager’s Report No. PL62/13.

BACKGROUND

On 2 September 1992, consent was granted to BA/1390/1992 for the erection of a dwelling-house on the subject site.

On 29 April 1993, consent was granted to BA/622/1993 for the erection of an in-ground swimming pool.

SITE

The 823.6m² site is located on the southern side of James Henty Drive, Dural and contains a two storey dwelling-house of brick and tile construction with an attached triple car garage at the front. An in-ground swimming pool and retaining walls are located in the rear yard.

The site experiences a 4 metre fall from the rear, southern boundary to the front, northern boundary.

The site is identified as being located within a bushfire prone area and adjoins Dural Nature Reserve to the front of the property.

The site is not located in a heritage conservation area and is not in the vicinity of a heritage listed item.

The surrounding residential development is characterised by two storey dwelling-houses within double garages of similar age and appearance, surrounded by well established trees and landscaped areas.

THE PROPOSAL

The application proposes alterations and additions to the two storey dwelling-house involving the demolition of a bay window to access a new pavilion in front of the kitchen within the rear, southern facade. A games room, study and bathroom are also proposed, two retaining walls and stairs would be demolished and replacement retaining walls and stairs erected.

Works have commenced in the rear yard comprising the demolition of two retaining walls and stairs and the construction of new retaining wall and stairs.

No trees would be removed or impacted by the development.

ASSESSMENT

1. STRATEGIC CONTEXT

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

· Population growth of 81,000 from the current 2011 baseline of 529,000;

· Housing growth of 37,000 from the current 2011 baseline of 204,000; and

· Employment growth of 39,000 from the current 2011 baseline of 186,000.

The proposed development would be consistent with the Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2031.

2. STATUTORY CONTROLS

2.1 Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994

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

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

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

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

The proposed development is defined as a ‘dwelling-house’ under the HSLEP and is permissible in the zone with Council’s consent.

2.2 Draft Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan

The draft Hornsby Local Environmental Plan (DHLEP) was endorsed by Council at its meeting on 19 December 2012. In accordance with Council’s resolution, the draft Plan has been submitted to the Department of Planning for finalisation. The relevant provisions of the DHLEP that apply to the site are outlined below.

2.2.1 Zoning

Under the DHLEP, the subject land would be zoned R2 (Low Density Residential). A “dwelling house” would be a permissible use in the zone under the DHLEP.

2.2.2 Height of Building

2.3 Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

The application has been assessed against the requirements of Sydney Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005. This Policy provides controls to protect the catchment, foreshores, waterways and islands of the Sydney Harbour Catchment, including its water quality. The Policy addresses matters related to water quality, significant vegetation habitats, extraction, environmental heritage and scenic quality, recreation and tourism and agriculture.

Subject to the installation of suitable erosion and sediment control measures during construction works, the proposed development would be consistent with the objectives of the SREP.

2.4 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards

Clause 15 of the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 prescribes that the maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of development in the Residential A (Low Density) zone is 0.4:1. The gross floor area of the development is 411m² and would result in an FSR of 0.50:1, which does not comply with the development standard.

To address the variation to the 0.4:1 development standard, the applicant has submitted an objection pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 - Development Standards (SEPP 1). The application has been assessed against the requirements of SEPP 1. This Policy provides flexibility in the application of development standards in circumstances where strict compliance with those standards would, in any particular case, be unreasonable or unnecessary, or tend to hinder the attainment of the objectives of the Act.

The NSW Land and Environment Court has expressed the view that there are five different ways in which an objection may be well founded and that approval of the objection may be consistent with the aims of the Policy:

1. The objectives of the standard are achieved notwithstanding non-compliance with the standard;

2. The underlying objective or purpose of the standard is not relevant to the development and therefore compliance is unnecessary;

3. The underlying object or purpose would be defeated or thwarted if compliance was required and therefore compliance is unreasonable;

In regard to whether the objection may be well founded, the applicant contends that:

1. “Although the proposal does not strictly comply with the relevant floor space ratio design standard it remains consistent with the objectives in that the additions and alterations result in a development that is compatible with the established low density residential character of the locality;

2. The proposed development increases the current floor space ratio of the dwelling from 0.46:1 to 0.52:1, which is considered to be a marginal increase in the overall floor area of the dwelling;

3. The development as proposed is consistent with the relevant zone objectives, particularly in maintaining the low density residential character of the site and locality;

4. The development as proposed would have no adverse impact on the amenity of surrounding properties or detrimentally impact on the established streetscape;

5. The extent of non compliance does not result in an over development of the site;

6. The floor space ratio encroachment does not adversely impact on views enjoyed from the public place;

7. Approval of the development application would not adversely impact on the amenity of the neighbouring properties or detrimentally impact on the character of the existing streetscape.”

In further support of the SEPP 1 objection, the applicant has submitted that:

1. The additions are designed to provide accommodation for the applicant’s mother at the ground floor level as she has difficulty with the stairs to bathroom facilities on the upper level. Furthermore, the additions would enable the mother to have her furniture and personal effects with her that are currently in storage.

2. The addition would provide a living area, bedroom and en-suite bathroom, to allow the mother privacy on the ground floor of the dwelling. A rear covered balcony would extend from the door of her living area. There would be no additional entrance to the dwelling. The kitchen and laundry would be shared, although a small refrigerator, sink and microwave space would be provided.

3. The neighbours are supportive of the addition which would be largely invisible from the adjacent properties. Should be application be rejected the applicant submits they would have to sell and move to somewhere suitable for the mother.

All of the matters listed above have been taken into consideration in assessing the merits of the SEPP 1 objection.

The proposed alterations and additions to the dwelling-house do not comply with the required floor space ratio for low density residential areas. The proposal does not comply with the performance criteria and prescriptive measures stipulated under Council’s Dwelling House Development Control Plan.

· 330m², if the lot has an area of at least 450m² but less than 600m²;

· 380m², if the lot has an area of at least 600m² but less than 900m²; and

· 430m², if the lot has an area of at least 900m².

Accordingly, if applicable, the development would provide a gross floor area of 411 m²which does not satisfy the maximum floor area development standard of 380m²as prescribed under the NSW Housing Code.

Given that the recently introduced NSW Housing Code is now enacted in many parts of the Shire, it is anticipated that more developments would be approved under this Code, which will change the characteristics of dwelling-houses. Consequently, whilst Council has previously applied a maximum FSR of 0.4:1 for dwelling-houses in the low density residential zones within the Shire under the HSLEP, the introduction of the NSW Housing Code is changing the effect of this standard.

It is acknowledged that the development would have minimal environmental and amenity impacts on the site and adjacent properties in terms of overshadowing and privacy. However, approval of the additional floor space does not comply with the underlying objectives of the zoning and would set an undesirable precedent for further development in excess of what is permitted under Council’s Planning Controls and the NSW Housing Code.

2.5 Clause 74BA Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 - Purpose and Status of Development Control Plans

The provisions of a development control plan made for that purpose are not statutory requirements.

2.6 Dwelling House Development Control Plan

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

Dwelling House Development Control Plan
Control	Proposal	Requirement	Complies
Site Area	823.6m²	500m²	Yes
Gross Floor Area	411m²	380m²	No
Floor space ratio	0.50:1	0.4:1	No
Site cover	51%	40%	No
Setbacks Front (north) Rear (south) Side (east) Side (west)	2Unchanged 6m 1.6m 1.3m	6m 3m 1m 1m	Yes Yes Yes Yes
Height	Two-storey	Max. two storey	Yes
Unbroken Wall length	10m	10m	Yes
Building length	22m	24m	Yes
Cut and fill	0m	1m	Yes
Private Open Space	130m²	120m²	Yes
Landscaped area	38%	45%	No

As detailed in the above table, the proposed development does not comply with a number of prescriptive measures within the Dwelling-House DCP. The matters of non-compliance are detailed below.

2.6.1 Scale

The proposed development does not comply with the 0.4:1 prescriptive measure of the DCP and 0.4:1 development standard of the HSLEP. This matter has been addressed under Section 2.4 of this report.

2.6.2 Site Coverage

The proposed development would result in a site coverage of 51%, which does not comply with the 40% prescriptive measure of the Scale element of the DCP. The scale of the proposed development would set an undesirable precedent for the bulk and scale of development within the low density residential zone.

2.6.3 Landscaped Areas

The proposal would result in a landscaped area of 38%, which does not comply with the 45% prescriptive measure of the Landscaping element of the DCP. The NSW Housing Code, which allows alterations and additions to dwelling-houses to be carried out without the need to be assessed by Council, includes landscaping requirements. Under the Code, an allotment with an area of at least 600m² to 900m² is required to have a minimum 30% landscaped area. The proposal complies with the Code in this regard.

This variation would have minimal environmental impacts and is considered acceptable.

3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

3.1 Natural Environment

The proposed development would not require the removal of any trees from the site.

3.2 Built Environment

Approval of this development would set an undesirable precedence for similar developments in the immediate neighbourhood in terms of the bulk and scale of the proposal, based on the prescriptive requirements of the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 and the NSW Housing Code.

3.3 Social Impacts

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

4. SITE SUITABILITY

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

As demonstrated by the existing development onsite, the property is capable of accommodating a dwelling-house. However, the proposal would increase the intensity of development to an extent inconsistent with a low density residential environment. This is evident by the non-compliance with the prescriptive requirements of the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 and the NSW Housing Code, with respect to maximum dwelling size.

4.1 Bushfire Risk

The subject site is identified as being located on bushfire prone land. As a consequence, the application was referred to the NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) for comment. The RFS raised no objections to the proposal, subject to conditions.

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 24 April 2013 and 8 May 2013 in accordance with Council’s Notification and Exhibition Development Control Plan. During this period, Council received no submissions.

NOTIFICATION PLAN

• PROPERTIES NOTIFIED

X SUBMISSIONS

RECEIVED

PROPERTY SUBJECT OF DEVELOPMENT

6. THE PUBLIC INTEREST

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

The application is considered to have not satisfactorily addressed Council’s criteria and would provide a development outcome that, on balance, would result in a negative impact for the community in setting an undesirable precedent for the scale of dwelling-houses in low density residential areas. Accordingly, it is considered that the approval of the proposed development would not be in the public interest.

CONCLUSION

The application proposes alterations and additions to a dwelling-house in a style that would not be in keeping with the development in the surrounding low density residential zone in terms of bulk and scale.

The application does not comply with the Hornsby Shire Council Local Environmental Plan, 1994 in respect to Clause 15 ‘Floor Space Ratio’. The applicant has submitted a State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 objection to vary the floor space ratio development standard.

In consideration of the objection and the views of the NSW Land and Environment Court as to how an objection may be well founded, the objection is considered inadequate to support the proposal against the principles established by the Court.

The additional floor area would increase the intensity of development of the site and would not be consistent with the objectives of the low density zone and the existing surrounding development. The development would exceed the development standards of the NSW Housing Code and would create an undesirable precedent for further inappropriate development in the low density zone.

Having regard to the assessment of the proposed development, circumstances of the case and consideration of the SEPP 1 objection, it is recommended that the application be refused.

Rod Pickles

Manager - Development Assessment

Planning Division

James Farrington

Group Manager

Planning Division

Attachments:

1.View	Locality Map
2.View	Architectural Plans
3.View	Floor Plans
4.View	SEPP 1 Objection

File Reference: DA/404/2013

Document Number: D02197154

SCHEDULE 1

1. The proposal is unsatisfactory in respect to Section 79C(1)(a)(iii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 as it does not meet the objectives and prescriptive measures of the Scale and Landscaping elements of the Dwelling House Development Control Plan.

2. The proposal is unsatisfactory in respect to Clause 15 of the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan, 1994 due to the bulk and scale of the development and the environmental capacity of the site.

3. The SEPP 1 Objection submitted with the proposal does not satisfactorily justify the non-compliance with standards applicable under the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994 for development in the Residential A (Low Density) Zone.

4. The proposal is unsatisfactory in respect to Section 79C(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 as it would set an undesirable precedent for further inappropriate development in the low density zone.

5. The proposal is unsatisfactory in respect to Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 as it is considered to not be in the public interest.

- END OF REASONS FOR REFUSAL -

Group Manager’s Report No. PL66/13

Planning Division

Date of Meeting: 17/07/2013

12 DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - SUBDVISION OF ONE ALLOTMENT INTO THREE LOTS - 142 WOODCOURT ROAD, BEROWRA HEIGHTS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

DA No:	DA/1321/2012 (Lodged 14 December 2012)
Description:	Subdivision – Subdivision of one allotment into three lots
Property:	Lot 11 DP 225742, No. 142 Woodcourt Road, Berowra Heights
Applicant:	Mr Dudley Robert Collinson
Owners:	Mr Collinson and Ms McMahon
Estimated Value:	$215,000
Ward:	A

· The application proposes the Torrens Title subdivision of one allotment into three lots and the demolition of a garage.

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

· Nine submissions have been received in respect of the application.

· It is recommended that the application be approved.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Development Application No. DA/1321/2012 for subdivision of one allotment into three lots and the demolition of a garage at Lot 11 DP 225742, No. 142 Woodcourt Road, Berowra Heights be approved subject to the conditions of consent detailed in Schedule 1 of Group Manager’s Report No. PL66/13.

BACKGROUND

There is no history of the site that is relevant to this application.

SITE

The 2535m² site is a hatchet shaped allotment located on the eastern side of Woodcourt Road and contains a single storey dwelling-house with detached garage. Vehicular access to the site is provided via a 3.66m wide access handle off Woodcourt Road. The site experiences an average fall of 7% to the northern boundary.

Surrounding properties include single dwelling-houses on large suburban lots.

The site includes an open drainage channel that bisects the property and flows to the north and passes through adjacent properties. The site is identified as flood prone land.

The site is located within bushfire prone land.

The site is not a heritage listed item and is not in a heritage conservation area or in the vicinity of a heritage listed item.

THE PROPOSAL

The application proposed the subdivision of one allotment into three lots, known as proposed Lot 1, proposed Lot 2 and proposed Lot 3. The existing dwelling-house is to be retained on proposed Lot 3 as part of the subdivision. Access to all lots is proposed via the access handle.

Proposed Lot 1 is irregular in shape of having an area of 571m² and is located to north-eastern portion of the site with dimensions: western boundary 20.54, northern boundary 29.09m, southern boundary 35.34m, and eastern boundary 18.24m. Proposed Lot 1 does not have frontage to Woodcourt Road and would be accessed via a right of way created over proposed Lot 2 and Lot 3. Lot 1 would include a portion of the open drainage channel and experiences a slope of 3% to the northern, side boundary.

Proposed Lot 2 is mostly regular in shape having an area of 672m² and is located in the south-eastern portion of the site with dimensions: western boundary 19.54m (uneven), northern boundary 35.34m, southern boundary 38.34m , eastern boundary 18.34m. Proposed Lot 2 does not have frontage to Woodcourt Road and would be accessed via a right of way created over proposed Lot 3. The lot would be burdened by a right of way in favour of Lot 1. Lot 2 would include a portion of the open drainage channel and experience a slope of 4% to the northern boundary.

Proposed Lot 3 is a ‘hatchet-shaped’ allotment having an area of 1292m² (1005m² excluding access handle) and has direct access to Woodcourt Road with dimensions (excluding access handle): western boundary 37m, northern boundary 36.27m, southern boundary 28.88m, and eastern boundary 40.18 (uneven). Proposed Lot 3 can be accessed directly off Woodcourt Road via a 48.77m long, 3.66m wide access handle. The lot experiences a fall of 5% in the direction of the drainage channel to the east.

The detached garage on proposed Lot 3 would be demolished as part of the application to extend the driveway to service Lot 1 and Lot 2.

ASSESSMENT

1. STRATEGIC CONTEXT

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

Within the North Subregion, the Draft Metropolitan Strategy proposes:

· Population growth of 81,000 from the current 2011 baseline of 529,000

· Housing growth of 37,000 from the current 2011 baseline of 204,000

· Employment growth of 39,000 from the current 2011 baseline of 186,000

The proposed development would be consistent with the Metropolitan Plan for Sydney 2031, by providing additional housing allotments.

2. STATUTORY CONTROLS

2.1 Section 91 EP&A Act 1979 – Integrated Development

The proposed subdivision is within bushfire prone land and requires the approval of the NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) for the issue of a Bush Fire Safety Authority. The RFS raised no objections and has issued General Terms of Approval for the proposal.

The proposed subdivision is within 40 metres of an identified natural watercourse and required the approval of the NSW Office of Water for a controlled activity approval. The NSW Office of Water advised that the development is exempt from the approval under Part 3, Division 2, Subdivision 4, Clause 39 of the Water Management (General) Regulation 2011 due to the work being “carried out on waterfront land relating to a river where the channel of the river is fully concrete lined or is a fully enclosed pipe channel” as stated in Schedule 5, Clause 26 of the Water Management (General) Regulation 2011.

2.2 Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan 1994

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

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

b) To provide a variety of housing types and other land uses compatible with a low density residential environment.

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

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

2.2.1 Clause 14 - Density

Clause 14 of the HSLEP prescribes a minimum area of 500m² for allotments within the Residential A (Low Density) zone. The proposed allotment design complies with this requirement.

2.2.2 Clause 15 - Floor Space Ratio

Clause 15 of the HSLEP prescribes that the maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of development within the Residential A (Low Density) zone is 0.4:1. The proposed allotment design, with the retention of the existing dwelling-house, would result in an FSR on Lot 3 of 0.211. The proposal therefore complies with the maximum FSR requirements of the zone.

2.3 Draft Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan

The draft Hornsby Local Environmental Plan (DHLEP) was endorsed by Council at its meeting on 19 December 2012 to be forwarded to the Minister for Planning and Infrastructure to be made. In accordance with Council’s resolution, the draft Plan has been submitted to the Department for finalisation.

2.3.1 Zoning

Under the DHLEP, the subject land would be zoned R2 - Low Density Residential. A “subdivision” would be a permissible development in the zone under the DHLEP.

2.3.2 Minimum Lot Size

Clause 4.1 of the DHLEP provides that the size of any lot resulting from a subdivision of land must not be less than the minimum size show on the Lot Size Map. In accordance with the Lot Size Map, the minimum allotment size is 500m². The proposal would comply with this requirement.

2.4 Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 - Hawkesbury-Nepean River (No. 2-1997)

The site is located within the catchment of the Hawkesbury-Nepean River. As such the land is subject to the SREP 20. The aim of the Plan is to protect the environment of the Hawkesbury-Nepean River system by ensuring that the impacts of development are considered in the regional context. The plan addresses matters related to water quality, significant vegetation habitats, extraction, environmental heritage and scenic quality, recreation and tourism, and agriculture.

Subject to recommended conditions requiring the installation of sediment and erosion control measures, the proposed development would not have a detrimental impact upon the water quality of the catchment.

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

2.6 Clause 74BA Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 - Purpose and Status of Development Control Plans

2.7 Residential Subdivision Development Control Plan

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

Residential Subdivision DCP
Control	Proposal	Requirement	Complies
Proposed allotment size Lot 1 Lot 2 Lot 3	571m² 672m² 1292m²	500m²	Yes Yes Yes
Building Envelope Lot 1
Building Envelope Area	200m²	200m²	Yes
Private open space Minimum Dimension	147m² 5m	120m² 5m	Yes Yes
Setbacks Front (Western) Side (Northern) Side (Southern) Rear (Eastern)	6.8m 5.1m 1m 3m	6m 1m 3m 3m	Yes Yes Yes Yes
Landscaped area	50.2%	45%	Yes
Building Envelope Lot 2
Building Envelope Area	200m²	200m²	Yes
Private open space Minimum Dimension	185m² 5m	120m² 5m	Yes Yes
Setbacks Front (Western) Side (Northern) Side (Southern) Rear (Eastern)	10.5m 7.1m 1m 3m	6m 1m 1m 3m	Yes Yes Yes Yes
Landscaped area	51%	45%	Yes
Existing Dwelling Lot 3
Floor space ratio	0.21:1	0.4:1	Yes
Site cover	16%	40%	Yes
Private open space	379m²	120m²	Yes
Setbacks (Western) Side (Northern) Side (Southern) Rear (Eastern)	1.8m 2.3m 15.4m 10m	1m 1m 1m 3m	Yes Yes Yes Yes
Landscaped area	55.6%	45%	Yes
No. of spaces	2 spaces	2 spaces	Yes

As detailed in the above table, the proposed development complies with the prescriptive requirements within Council’s Residential Subdivision DCP. A brief discussion on compliance with relevant performance requirements is outlined below.

2.7.1 Density

Proposed Lot 1 and Lot 2 are of sufficient size to accommodate a 200m² building envelope and provide for private open space and landscaping. It is considered the proposed subdivision meets the density performance criteria of the Residential Subdivision DCP.

2.7.2 Allotment Design and Layout

The proposed subdivision is generally consistent with the pattern of subdivision that exists in the area. The dwelling on the site would be retained as part of the subdivision.

Suitable building envelopes have been identified on proposed Lot 1 and Lot 2 for the erection of a future dwelling house. The indicative building envelopes and the proposed accessway would involve the removal of a number of trees. These trees are not considered to be significant.

The setbacks of the indicative building envelopes provide sufficient opportunity to ensure the privacy of occupants within existing and future dwellings.

It is considered that the proposed subdivision meets the allotment layout and design performance criteria.

2.7.3 Setbacks

A submission raises concerns that the setbacks of the building envelopes on proposed Lot 1 and Lot 2 are not sufficient. The building envelopes on proposed Lot 1 and Lot 2 are setback 3 metres from the rear boundary and with appropriate design at the dwelling-house stage, a future dwelling constructed on the proposed allotments would have minimal impact on the privacy and solar access to neighbouring properties.

It is considered that the proposed subdivision meets the setbacks performance criteria.

2.7.4 Landscaping

The proposed subdivision provides sufficient area to landscape the sites in accordance with the Residential Subdivision DCP.

Four submissions raise concerns that the subdivision and associated works would result in the removal of a number of trees from the site. The proposal would result in the removal of 24 trees from the site. None of the trees have been identified as significant in accordance with Council’s Tree Preservation Order or worthy of retention.

2.7.5 Drainage

Five submissions raise concerns that due to the site being flood prone, is unsuitable for the development and adequate drainage does not existing on site.

The site naturally drains towards the drainage channel that passes through the subject site. Conditions are recommended to ensure that any drainage work would be connected to the inter-allotment drainage system and be constructed in accordance with Council’s Civil Works - Design and Construction Specifications 2005. See comment in Section 4.1 for flooding and drainage details.

2.7.6 Sewer

A submission raises concerns with respect to the potential location of a dwelling and the sewerage line located near the rear boundary of the site. A condition is recommended to ensure that the applicant apply for a Section 73 Certificate from Sydney Water prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

2.7.7 Accessway Design

Five submissions raise concerns that the accessway would not be adequate for the development of the site.

The existing accessway has a width of 3.66m and length of 48.77m. The subdivision allows sufficient space for vehicles to turn and exit the site in a forward direction.

2.7.8 Constructing Over the Drainage Channel

The accessway for proposed Lot 1 and Lot 2 would be constructed over the drainage channel above the 1 in 100 Annual Rain Interval.

Council’s engineering assessment concludes that the proposed subdivision meets the accessway design performance criteria and is considered acceptable.

2.8 Section 94 Contribution

The proposed development would result in the creation of two additional lots, accordingly, a Section 94 Contribution is proposed to be levied prior to the issue of the Subdivision Certificate (refer to condition No. 21).

3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

3.1 Natural Environment

The proposed development would necessitate the removal of 24 trees from the site. None of the trees are protected under Council’s Tree Protection Order.

Conditions ensuring sensitive construction methods have been recommended to minimise any damage to trees to be retained.

3.2 Built Environment

The subject site is a hatchet-shaped allotment and as a result, the subdivision would not alter the existing streetscape.

The traffic generated by two additional lots would be minimal and would not impact on local traffic.

3.3 Social Impacts

The proposal would not result in a social impact.

3.4 Economic Impacts

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

4. SITE SUITABILITY

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

4.1 Flooding

Part of the land the subject of the development is identified as being below the 1:100 year flood level. The application was accompanied by a Floor Report prepared by Craig & Rhodes Pty Ltd which identifies that the majority of the water during a 1 in 100 ARI is contained within the drainage channel located in the centre of the subject site.

The extent of the flooding that breaches the drainage channel is minimal and would not affect future development within the indicative building envelopes. Nevertheless, conditions are recommended that require for future dwellings, that any habitable room must be a minimum of 500mm and garage a minimum of 300mm, above the 100 year average recurrence interval storm level.

4.2 Bushfire Risk

The land is identified as being subject to bushfire risk. The application was forwarded to NSW Rural Fire Service and appropriate conditions of consent are recommended.

5. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

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

5.1 Community Consultation

The proposed development was placed on public exhibition and was notified to adjoining and nearby landowners between 7 January 2013 and 7 February 2013 in accordance with Council’s Notification and Exhibition Development Control Plan. During this period, Council received 9 submissions. Two submissions were received from a single address. The map below illustrates the location of those nearby landowners who made a submission.

NOTIFICATION PLAN

• PROPERTIES NOTIFIED

X SUBMISSIONS

RECEIVED

PROPERTY SUBJECT OF DEVELOPMENT

Eight submissions object to the development, generally on the following grounds:

· The proposed accessway is not adequate to service the two additional lots and allow for emergency access;

· The proposed building works would result in an unacceptable number of trees being removed;

· The subdivision is an overdevelopment of the site;

· The site is flood prone and not suitable for development; and

· The site is bushfire prone land and unsuitable for development.

One submission was neutral to the development, however requested that any future dwelling on the lots should be restricted to single storey.

The issues raised in submissions are addressed in this report.

5.2 Public Agencies

The development application is Integrated Development under the Act. Accordingly, the application was referred to the following Agencies for comment:

5.2.1 Rural Fire Service

The site is bushfire prone and as such, the development application constitutes integrated development for the purposes of the Rural Fires Act, 1997. The applicant provided a Bushfire Hazard Assessment Report prepared by Building Code and Bushfire Hazard Solutions Pty Ltd. The application was referred to the NSW Rural Fire Service seeking general terms of approval in accordance with Clause 66(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

The Service reviewed the plans and associated documentation received for the proposal and provided a response, which is deemed to be a bushfire safety authority as required under Section 100B of the Rural Fires Act 1997, subject to conditions to be imposed on the development consent to ensure the following:

· The existing dwelling-house is to be upgraded to improve ember protection;

· Safe access to/from the public road system for fire fighters providing property protection during a bush fire and for occupants faced with evacuation;

· Water, electricity and gas connections are to be fire resistant; and

· An on-site water supply is to be provided for fire-fighting purposes.

5.2.2 NSW Office of Water

The application was forwarded to the NSW Office of Water for approval. The NSW Office of Water considers the development to be exempt from the general terms of approval.

6. THE PUBLIC INTEREST

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

CONCLUSION

The application proposes the subdivision of one allotment into three lots and the demolition of a garage.

The development generally meets Council’s planning controls and is satisfactory having regard to the matters for consideration pursuant to Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Council received 9 submissions during the notification period.

Appropriate conditions of consent are recommended to provide for the proposed development and minimise impacts to surrounding residential amenity.

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

Rod Pickles

Manager - Development Assessment

Planning Division

James Farrington

Group Manager

Planning Division

Attachments:

1.View	Locality Map
2.View	Subdivision Plans

File Reference: DA/1321/2012

Document Number: D02211107

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.

Plan Title

Drawn by

Dated

Dwg File Ref:

01712C E02 [01] - 01

01712C E02 [01] - 02

01712C E02 [01] - 03

01712C E02 [01] - 04

Plans for subdivision

C.G.H

Craig & Rhodes Pty Ltd

6 December 2012

Document Name	Prepared by	Dated
Statement of Environmental Effects Ref: 17/2012	Craig & Rhodes Pty Ltd	10 December 2012
Flood Study Ref: 17/2012	Craig & Rhodes Pty Ltd	21 March 2012
Tree Assessment	Stuart Pittendrigh	November 2012
Survey Report Dwg File Ref: 01712T01 [00] - 001	N.F. Craig & Rhodes Pty Ltd	24 February 2012

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

2. 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.

3. 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.

4. Toilet Facilities

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

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

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

5. Traffic Control Plan

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

a) Arrangements for public notification of the works.

b) Temporary construction signage.

c) Permanent post-construction signage.

d) Vehicle movement plans.

e) Traffic management plans.

f) Pedestrian and cyclist access/safety.

6. Erosion and Sediment Control

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

REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION

7. Construction Work Hours

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

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

8. Landfill

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

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

9. Excavated Material

10. Works Near Trees

All works (including driveways and retaining walls) within 4m of any tree/s required to be retained (whether or not on the subject property, and pursuant to this consent or the Tree Preservation Order), must be carried out under the supervision of the Project Arborist / an ‘AQF Level 5 Arborist’ and a certificate submitted to the principal certifying authority detailing the method(s) used to preserve the tree(s).

The applicant is to ensure that no excavation, including sub-surface trenching for stormwater or other services or the Aerated Waste-water Treatment System (AWTS), filling or stockpiling of building materials, parking of vehicles or plant, the use of machinery other than hand held, disposal of cement slurry, waste water or other contaminants is to occur within the Tree Protection Zone as per the Australian Standard Protection of Trees on Development Sites (AS 4970-2009) of any tree to be retained.

11. Council Property

Note: This consent does not give right of access to the site via Council’s park or reserve. Should such access be required, separate written approval is to be obtained from Council.

12. Disturbance of Existing Site

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A SUBDIVISION CERTIFICATE

Note: For the purpose of this consent, a reference to ‘occupation certificate’ shall not be taken to mean an ‘interim occupation certificate’ unless otherwise stated.

13. Building Code of Australia

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

14. Internal Driveway/Vehicular Areas

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

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

b) The driveway be of rigid pavement.

c) The driveway grade must not exceed 25 percent and changes in grade must not exceed 8 percent.

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

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

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

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

h) Planting of a landscaping strip 0.5 metres wide along the length of the driveway.

i) Any structure including eaves gutters encroaching over the access driveway and/or new boundary shall be removed.

j) In accordance with the approved plans, a minimum of 2 car spaces shall be provided for proposed Lot 91.

k) Conduit for utility services including electricity, water, gas and telephone be provided. All existing overhead assets including electricity and telecommunications cabling shall be relocated underground at no cost to Council. A certificate from an appropriately licensed contractor shall be submitted to the principal certifying authority certifying that the service conduits have been installed in accordance with the relevant utility provider and Australian Standards.

l) A common turning area to service the proposed subdivision in accordance with Australian Standards AS 2890.1 to ensure vehicles can enter and leave the site in a forward direction. A right of access shall be created over the turning area to ensure access is maintained at all times.

m) Property access roads shall comply with section 4.1.3 (2) of 'Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006'

Note: A construction certificate shall be obtained prior to the commencement of these works and are to be completed prior to the issue of a subdivision certificate.

15. Vehicular Crossing

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

16. Stormwater Drainage

The stormwater drainage system for the development must be designed and constructed and a construction Certificate issued for these works. The stormwater drainage system is to be designed in accordance with Council’s Civil Works – Design and Construction Specification 2005 and the following requirements:

a) An inter-allotment stormwater drainage system to service the proposed lots with pits being constructed in situ.

b) The roof and stormwater drainage system from the existing dwelling to be connected to the proposed inter-allotment drainage system.

Note: A separate Construction Certificate is required to be submitted and approval obtained prior to the commencement of these works.

17. Design and Construction - Bushfire Attack Category

The existing building on proposed Lot 3 is required to be upgraded to improve ember protection. This is to be achieved by enclosing all openings (excluding roof tile spaces) or covering openings with a non-corrosive metal screen mesh with a maximum aperture of 2mm. Where applicable, this includes any sub floor areas, openable windows, vents, weepholes and eaves. External doors are to be fitted with draft excluders.

18. Water/Electricity Utility Services

a) Water, electricity and gas are to comply with section 4.1.3 of 'Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006'.

b) Due to the rear or most distant part of the existing dwelling being >70 metres from the nearest accessible hydrant, an onsite 5000 litre water supply shall be provided for fire fighting purposes.

c) If an above ground tank is provided a 65mm Storz fitting and a ball or gate valve made of metal shall be installed on the tank.

19. Sydney Water – s73 Certificate

An s73 Certificate must be obtained from Sydney Water.

20. Damage to Council Assets

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

21. Creation of Easements

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

a) A right of access and easement for services over the access corridor.

b) An inter-allotment drainage easement(s) over each of the burdened lots.

c) A drainage easement 6 metres wide over the existing concrete lined channel in favour of Council and in accordance with the terms set out in Memorandum B5341305V filed with the NSW Department of Lands.

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

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

f) The creation of a “Positive Covenant” over the proposed Lots 1 and 2 requiring that any future development is to provide an on-site detention system. The on-site detention system is to have a storage capacity of 5m³ metres and a maximum discharge of 8 litres per second into Council’s drainage system in accordance with Council’s prescribed wording.

g) An easement for letterboxes shall be created over proposed lot 3 benefiting proposed lot(s) 1 and 2. The 88b instrument shall be worded to reflect the obligations and responsibilities of the benefiting and burdening parties.

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

22. Works as Executed Plan

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

23. s94 Infrastructure Contributions

The payment to Council of a contribution of $40,000 for 2 additional lots towards the cost of infrastructure identified in Council’s Development Contributions Plan 2007-2011.

Note: The value of contribution is capped at $20,000 per additional lot in accordance with Ministerial Direction (Section 94E of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979) issued on 16 September 2010. In the event that this Direction is repealed or amended, Council will apply the value of the contribution from the date of this consent, adjusted from this date in accordance with the underlying consumer price index for subsequent financial quarters.

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

- END OF CONDITIONS -

ADVISORY NOTES

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

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 Requirements

The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 requires:

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

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

· Mandatory inspections of nominated stages of the construction inspected.

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

Long Service Levy

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

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

Tree Preservation Order

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.

Subdivision Certificate Requirements

A subdivision certificate application is required to be lodged with Council containing the following information:

· A surveyor’s certificate certifying that all structures within the subject land comply with the development consent in regard to the setbacks from the new boundaries.

· Certification that the requirements of relevant utility authorities have been met.

· A surveyor’s certificate certifying finished ground levels are in accordance with the approved plans.

Note: Council will not issue a subdivision certificate until all conditions of the development consent have been completed.

Fees and Charges – Subdivision

Dial Before You Dig

Telecommunications Act 1997 (Commonwealth)

House Numbering

Group Manager's Report No. PL60/13

Planning Division

Date of Meeting: 17/07/2013

13 HORNSBY WEST SIDE PRECINCT PLANNING PROPOSAL

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

· In November 2012, Council resolved that the Hornsby West Side Precinct Planning Proposal should include a minimum floor space ratio of 1:1 employment generating development and that strategic planning studies required to support the proposal be progressed on this basis.

· In December 2012, Council sought feedback from the community about the West Side.

· Strategic planning studies in urban design, economic feasibility, traffic and heritage have been undertaken to identify appropriate planning controls for the West Side precinct.

· The planning controls aim to rejuvenate the West Side through redevelopment and public domain improvements, to encourage people to live, shop and recreate in the West Side precinct and to reinforce the status of the Hornsby Town Centre as a Major Centre under the State Government’s Metropolitan Plan.

· Heights proposed range from 2 to 25 storeys with residential towers setback above commercial podiums of 2, 3 and 5 storeys, promoting opportunities for approximately 30,000m²of employment floor space and 1,000 new dwellings.

· Changes to the road layout within the precinct are proposed to facilitate improved traffic flow, pedestrian links and amenity.

· It is recommended that Council endorse the draft Hornsby West Side Precinct Planning Proposal and draft Development Control Plan for public exhibition.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT:

1. Council forward the revised Hornsby West Side Precinct Planning Proposal attached to Group Manager’s Report No. PL60/13 to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure seeking endorsement for exhibition.

2. Should endorsement be received, Council publicly exhibit the Planning Proposal for a period of two months in accordance with the consultation strategy outlined in the Planning Proposal (or as otherwise directed by the Minister).

3. The draft Development Control Plan amendments attached to Group Manager’s Report No. PL60/13 be exhibited concurrently with the Planning Proposal.

4. The General Manager be given delegated authority to endorse the exhibition material.

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

PURPOSE

The purpose of this report is to present a revised Hornsby West Precinct Planning Proposal and development controls to Council for endorsement for exhibition.

BACKGROUND

At its meeting on 6 April 2011, Council resolved to prepare revised planning controls for the Hornsby West Side precinct. The purpose of the revised controls was to transform the West Side precinct of the Hornsby Town Centre into a vibrant employment and residential hub of a scale befitting the Major Centre status of the Hornsby Town Centre.

In accordance with Council’s resolution, the Hornsby West Side Precinct Planning Proposal was sent to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure (DP&I) in June 2011 with a request for a Gateway Determination. On 31 August 2011, a Gateway Determination was received, advising that the project should proceed subject to conditions including the preparation of a revised planning proposal after undertaking the necessary strategic planning studies.

At its meeting on 21 November 2012, Council considered Report No. PL43/12 concerning the findings of a Preliminary Feasibility Analysis prepared for the Hornsby West Precinct. Council resolved to endorse an amendment to the Hornsby West Side Precinct Planning Proposal to include a requirement for a minimum floor space ratio of 1:1 employment generating development, and that the strategic planning studies required to be undertaken to support the Planning Proposal be progressed on this basis.

In accordance with Council’s resolution, urban design, traffic and further economic feasibility studies have been completed and an amended Planning Proposal has been prepared.

DISCUSSION

This report presents the results of the strategic planning studies and an amended Hornsby West Side Precinct Planning Proposal for submission to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure (DP&I) for endorsement for exhibition. Amendments to the draft Hornsby Development Control Plan (HDCP) have also been prepared which should be exhibited with the Planning Proposal.

Studies

In accordance with the Gateway Determination issued by the DP&I in August 2011, consultants were engaged to prepare urban design, traffic and economic studies for the Hornsby West Side precinct. A report on Heritage considerations was prepared by Council.

In light of the importance of gaining feedback before any planning controls or studies were completed, preliminary consultation was undertaken with the community and property owners to gain feedback. The consultation report informed the strategic planning studies. All of the study reports form Appendices to the Planning Proposal attached to this report, and are discussed below.

Consultation

In December 2012, Council sought feedback to understand what the community like and do not like about the West Side and what would be important in any revitalisation. The feedback was gathered through a workshop with property owners and a community survey.

There were 660 community survey responses gathered through a variety of communication methods such as online, hard copy, subscriber newsletter and Twitter. In summary, the survey responses indicate that there is support for redevelopment up to 5 or 8 storeys, if it includes more retail shops, improved pedestrian links, open space, landscaping and convenient access to shops.

The feedback has been used by the consultants in the preparation of the Urban Design Study. Heights proposed are higher than those indicated by the community. However, the heights are required to ensure the economic feasibility of development within the precinct. A significant increase in height limits is also 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.

The Planning Proposal aims to address the communities’ other priorities in relation to improved pedestrian links, open space, landscaping and convenient access to shops. Survey responses also identified the heritage characteristics of the Hornsby West Side to be one of the key important aspects of the precinct. These included the Odeon Cinema, the village character and atmosphere and the heritage facades. Respondents also identified the current rundown appearance and poor physical condition of the buildings to be the key aspects of the area that should be changed.

Urban Design

JBA Planning was engaged to prepare an Urban Design Analysis. The Urban Design Analysis includes a site analysis and identifies opportunities and constraints within the West Side precinct. The investigations cover the context and character of the precinct, existing heights, heritage, façade analysis, land ownership, open space and landscaping.

The Urban Design Analysis concludes that the following points should form key elements of a Structure Plan for the West Side:

· The character of the precinct should be retained through significant façade retention and reuse;

· The Odeon Cinema is an important heritage item to the community;

· Changes to the road layout are required to improve the pedestrian experience and improve traffic flows;

· There is opportunity to emphasise where the precinct starts and finishes through heights of buildings; and

· There is opportunity to create an iconic site as pedestrians arrive from the station.

The Structure Plan has been prepared as the guiding document outlining the future built form and public domain for the West Side precinct. The Structure Plan is based on the following principles:

· Elevate the West Side precinct as the “Heart of Hornsby”;

· Rejuvenate the West Side precinct through redevelopment and public domain improvements;

· Provide a point of difference to the East Side of Hornsby by retaining the traditional high street experience;

· Develop high quality public places for public gatherings, cultural and seasonal events and everyday casual meetings;

· Transform the Pacific Highway from a highway to a High Street creating an improved pedestrian experience;

· Increase development potential to allow for appropriate and feasible mixed use development;

· Encourage a new residential population to live, shop and recreate in the West Side precinct; and

· Connect the major public open spaces with street trees and landscaping.

The Structure Plan identifies building heights, commercial podium setbacks, residential tower setbacks, active frontages, heritage and façade retention, a changed street network (discussed below under Traffic) and public domain improvements. The Structure Plan also outlines options for the future of Council’s car park sites at William Street and Dural Street. It is proposed that the Dural Street car park be sold for redevelopment and the William Street car park be retained to service the car parking needs of the precinct in a decked car parking station.

The building heights proposed for the West Side precinct range from 2 storeys to 25 storeys, with residential towers setback above commercial podiums of 2, 3 and 5 storeys. The heights are proposed to reinforce the status of Hornsby Town Centre as a Major Centre under the Metropolitan Plan and to be consistent with other significant Town Centres and Major Centres.

The urban design principle is to re-establish the West Side precinct as the heart of Hornsby through signature buildings and increased building heights. Higher buildings of 20 storeys are proposed at the “gateways” of the northern and southern approaches to the precinct. Heights of 15 storeys are proposed along the main street ridge and an icon site has been nominated as 25 storeys in height at the pedestrian arrival point from Hornsby Station. Lower heights of 12 storeys are proposed to interface with residential areas to the west of the precinct. The heights scale down to 2 storeys at the northern-most and western-most parts of the precinct which contain significant heritage items that should be retained. The Structure Plan estimates a yield of approximately 30,000m² of employment generating floor space and 1,000 residential apartments.

Economic Feasibility

To assess the feasibility of development, a Detailed Economic Assessment was prepared, which includes a Commercial/Retail Demand Assessment and a Mixed Use Feasibility Assessment.

The Commercial/Retail Demand Assessment notes that there is some scope to accommodate additional retail floor space in the precinct, including a small scale supermarket to meet the needs of convenience/top-up shopping. However, there is limited scope to increase the commercial floor space provision beyond current levels. The report recommends a mix of uses within the precinct, allowing for new public spaces and establishing the precinct as a destination for residents and visitors.

The Mixed Use Feasibility Assessment tested density scenarios by comparing the mix of commercial and residential development required by the Planning Proposal and the heights of buildings proposed. The Assessment concludes that the requirement for a minimum amount of employment generating floor space in any proposed development affects feasibility. This leads to a requirement for higher buildings. However, the cost of construction increases with taller towers which also affects feasibility. Depending on the market, higher construction costs can be offset by higher sale prices of units on high floors with commanding views.

The Assessment analysed feasibility based on floor space ratio, and notes that development with a floor space ratio of at least 6:1 could be feasible. However, as a floor space ratio control is not recommended for the residential component of development, the floor space ratio has been converted to height. Despite the varying heights proposed across the precinct, the amount of floor space allocated to each site is similar. The feasibility threshold is met even though the floor space is delivered in varying heights depending on location and site characteristics.

The report also assesses the redevelopment of Council’s car park site at William Street as a mixed use development with retention of the existing parking spaces. The report states that development would not be feasible unless it incorporated 100% residential floor space or did not retain the existing car parking spaces. Alternatively, Council could offer the land for mixed use redevelopment in exchange for the provision of car parking spaces within the development. This would be subject to further investigation and expressions of interest should the Planning Proposal proceed.

The report recommends a flexible approach to defining the mix between residential and non-residential uses and the apportionment of residential floor space within buildings. In accordance with the findings of the Mixed Use Feasibility Assessment, a floor space ratio control for the residential component of development is not proposed. Instead, maximum height and building envelope controls are proposed subject to endorsement by the DP&I.

Traffic

To ensure the local road network can accommodate the proposed Structure Plan, a Traffic and Car Parking Study has been prepared to identify traffic management works required to facilitate future development.

To improve the pedestrian experience and traffic flows, the Structure Plan proposes the following changes to the local road layout:

· Closing the intersection of Station Street and the Pacific Highway;

· Allowing traffic to enter Station Street from Coronation Street to access properties and 90 degree parking for convenience shopping;

· Realigning the bus and taxi exit at the southern end of the station to operate as a four way signalised intersection with High Street and the Pacific Highway;

· Pedestrianise the eastern end of Dural Lane where it meets the Pacific Highway; and

· Formalise access lanes through Council car park sites to link Dural Street to Dural Lane and William Street to Dural Lane.

The Study tested the changes proposed to the road layout along with the future density of development proposed for the precinct through the preparation of a traffic model. The modelling indicates that the road layout and redevelopment is feasible subject to encouraging regional traffic to use the Arterial route of George Street. This outcome could be achieved by modifying signal phases and adjustments to the timing and coordination of traffic signals.

The Study concludes that the West Side precinct has limited free capacity to cater for additional trips beyond those identified in the Planning Proposal. Beyond the 2031 planning horizon, additional measures would need to be in place to ensure that the network continues to operate satisfactorily, particularly along George Street. The Study recommends that Council liaise with the Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) to ensure medium and long term solutions are planned for the George Street route to upgrade its capacity and reflect its role as the State Arterial Road. The RMS would be consulted during the exhibition of the Planning Proposal.

Heritage

The report on Heritage considerations outlines the history of the west side of Hornsby and its heritage significance and status. The Hornsby West Side Precinct Planning Proposal incorporates a number of heritage items and contributory items forming part of the Peats Ferry Road (Pacific Highway) Precinct within the Hornsby West Side Heritage Conservation Area. The report notes that the heritage values have been identified as a key public interest by the local community, along with the need for the current run-down appearance to be changed.

The precinct is of local historical significance for its association with the development of Hornsby as a railway town, its role within the old town centre and being one of the few surviving streetscapes of early commercial buildings in Hornsby Shire.

The Heritage considerations report acknowledges that the Urban Design Study includes principles to guide future redevelopment, and recommends that further prescriptive measures be incorporated into the Heritage chapter of the draft Hornsby Development Control Plan (DCP). The Heritage chapter of the draft HDCP provides planning controls for commercial heritage items. However, there are no specific guidelines for sympathetic development within the heritage listed commercial precinct. Accordingly, planning controls have been drafted to be added to the Heritage Chapter of the draft HDCP (see below under Draft Development Control Plan Amendments).

Planning Proposal

The Hornsby West Side Precinct Planning Proposal sets out the proposed changes to planning controls for the West Side. The Planning Proposal has been amended in accordance with Council’s resolution in November 2012 to reduce the minimum employment generating floor space ratio requirement to 1:1. The Planning Proposal has also been updated to outline the details of the proposed amendments to planning controls, based on the strategic studies discussed above.

Heights

As discussed above, the heights proposed for the precinct range from 2 to 25 storeys. The controls in the draft HLEP need to be measured in metres, which would translate to a height range of 8.5m to 77.5m. Part 2 (1) of the attached Planning Proposal aims to amend the Height of Buildings Map in the draft HLEP to permit these heights.

Floor Space Ratio

The existing floor space ratio under the draft HLEP for the West Side precinct is 3:1. The Planning Proposal aims to retain this, but allow a floor space ratio variation for development which combines retail or commercial development in a two to five storey podium with residential units above. The development would have to provide a floor space ratio of at least 1:1 employment generating development, and comply with height and building envelope controls. Part 2 (2) and (3) of the attached Planning Proposal aim to amend the Floor Space Ratio map in the draft HLEP and the corresponding floor space ratio clause to permit this.

Land Reservation Acquisition

The draft HLEP identifies road widening at the frontage of property Nos. 195 – 203 Pacific Highway, Hornsby. In accordance with a review by Council’s Engineers, Part 2 (4) of the attached Planning Proposal aims to amend the Land Reservation Acquisition Map to reduce the extent of road widening. The revised map identifies a 3m x 3m splay at the frontage of property No. 203 Pacific Highway to accommodate road works and traffic signal infrastructure for the Aquatic Centre access road.

Draft Development Control Plan Amendments

Draft development control plan amendments have been prepared to support the Planning Proposal. Chapter 4.5 of the draft HDCP contains the controls for the Hornsby Town Centre. Amendments are proposed to the controls as they relate to the West Side precinct, including the future character, scale, setbacks, open spaces, vehicle access and parking, public domain and traffic management and design detail elements.

Chapter 9 of the draft HDCP contains Heritage Controls. Amendments are proposed to the commercial heritage items and Hornsby West Side Heritage Conservation Areas elements, including changes to the character statement, statement of significance and prescriptive measures for the Peats Ferry Road (Pacific Highway) Precinct. The draft development controls are attached to this report. It is recommended that they be placed on public exhibition with the Planning Proposal.

The Structure Plan Poster attached to this report illustrates the outcomes of the strategic studies and the aims of the Planning Proposal. It identifies podium heights for the commercial component of development, tower heights and potential locations for the residential components, public domain improvements and the proposed changes to the road layout. It also highlights the facades which are considered important to be retained to protect the commercial heritage character and traditional streetscape experience of the precinct. The poster will be used to assist with the public consultation discussed below.

CONSULTATION

This report and the attached Planning Proposal and draft Development Control Plan amendments have been prepared based on preliminary consultation with the community and statutory authorities.

As discussed above, in December 2012, Council sought feedback to understand what the community like and do not like about the West Side and what would be important in any revitalisation. This feedback was used by the consultants to inform the preparation of the Planning Proposal and associated studies.

In accordance with the requirements of the Gateway Determination received from the DP&I, in October 2012 Council wrote to the Office of Environment and Heritage, the Roads and Maritime Services and the Rural Fire Service. Council advised that planning studies were about to be completed, and requested advice on any matters the authorities would like addressed in the preparation of the studies. The following responses were received:

· The Heritage Branch of the Office of Environment and Heritage requested that specific planning controls be established to ensure appropriate transitions in height and scale;

· The Road and Maritime Services verified the traffic modelling assumptions and confirmed that it supports the approach to traffic modelling; and

· The Rural Fire Service advised that the requirements of Planning for Bushfire Protection should be considered in the planning stages for high density development in relation to the capacity of the road network to support evacuation and availability of water supplies for fire fighting.

The same statutory authorities would be consulted further during the exhibition of the Planning Proposal and would be provided with copies of the completed studies and draft development controls. Consultation would also be required with the bus and taxi companies which utilise the Hornsby Transport Interchange concerning the proposed changes to the road layout.

Part 5 of the Planning Proposal contains the Consultation Strategy for public exhibition. The consultation strategy involves letters to affected and adjoining property owners, advertisements in local newspapers and on the Council website, displays at the Administration Building and libraries, an article in Council’s enewsletter and the preparation of a brochure and/or postcard. The Strategy and Communications Branch would assist with the preparation of exhibition material. It is recommended that the General Manager be delegated authority to endorse the exhibition material. Following the exhibition, a report on submissions would be presented to Council for its consideration.

BUDGET

Consultant costs associated with the preparation of strategic planning studies have been met with funds from the Strategic Planning Branch Annual Operating Budget. The costs of public exhibition of the Planning Proposal would be approximately $5,000 to $10,000 which can be met with funds from the 2013/2014 Advertising Budget.

Statutory Considerations

The Gateway Determination received from the Department of Planning and Infrastructure was issued with a number of conditions, including (in part):

· The preparation of strategic studies;

· A revised planning proposal based on the outcomes of the studies;

· Appropriate FSR, height of building and other relevant maps detailing the proposed amendments;

· Consultation with the Office of Environment and Heritage, NSW Rural Fire Service and Roads and Maritime Services; and

· Community consultation is not to commence until the Regional Director, Sydney Region West, has agreed to the content and form of the revised planning proposal.

The relevant studies and consultation have been undertaken and a revised Planning Proposal has been prepared. It is recommended that the Hornsby West Side Precinct Planning Proposal attached to this report be submitted to the DP&I seeking endorsement for public exhibition. Should endorsement be received, the draft Development Control Plan amendments attached to this report should be exhibited concurrently with the Planning Proposal.

Next Steps

Subject to endorsement by Council and the DP&I, it is anticipated that the exhibition of the Planning Proposal and development control plan amendments would occur in the later half of this year. Following the exhibition a report on submissions would be presented to Council.

Should Council be of a mind to progress the Planning Proposal and development control plan amendments (in their exhibited or an amended form) after exhibition, Council would need to request that the DP&I make the Planning Proposal. An amendment to the Section 94 Plan would be drafted and presented to Council for endorsement for exhibition, to fund the public domain and traffic improvement works associated with the Planning Proposal.

CONCLUSION

This report presents a revised Hornsby West Side Precinct Planning Proposal for submission to the DP&I. The revised Planning Proposal is based on preliminary community consultation, urban design, traffic, economic feasibility and heritage studies prepared by Council and consultants. The Planning Proposal outlines changes to the Height of Building, Floor Space Ratio and Land Reservation Acquisition Maps to permit mixed use commercial and retail development at varying heights, with residential towers above commercial podiums. Changes are also proposed to the road layout within the West Side precinct to facilitate improved pedestrian amenity and traffic flows. Draft Development Control Plan amendments have been prepared to support the Planning Proposal.

The planning controls aim to elevate the status of the West Side from the “old town centre” to the “Heart of Hornsby”, providing a point of difference to the East Side by retaining the streetscape character and historic heritage facades that the community values.

It is recommended that the Planning Proposal attached to this report be submitted to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure for endorsement for exhibition, and that the draft Development Control Plan amendments also attached to this report be exhibited concurrently with the Planning Proposal.

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER

The officer responsible for the preparation of this Report is the Manager, Strategic Planning – Fletcher Rayner - who can be contacted on 9847 6744.

Fletcher Rayner

Manager - Strategic Planning

Planning Division

James Farrington

Group Manager

Planning Division

Attachments:

1.View	Revised Hornsby West Precinct Planning Proposal - June 2013
2.View	Draft Development Control Plan Amendments
3.View	Structure Plan Poster - Urban Design - Hornsby West Side Planning Proposal

File Reference: F2011/00441

Document Number: D02191382

Group Manager's Report No. PL61/13

Planning Division

Date of Meeting: 17/07/2013

14 VEHICULAR ACCESS TO PROPERTIES IN NANCY PLACE, GALSTON

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

· Nancy Place is located within the Galston Village residential area to the north east of the Galston Commercial Centre.

· Council’s Rural Lands Development Control Plan contains controls which restricts vehicular access to Nancy Place only, for all properties with dual frontages to Nancy Place and Arcadia Road.

· The proposal by Sydney Water to sewer Galston by 2015, would facilitate the subdivision and development of allotments along the western side of Nancy Place.

· Property owners within Nancy Place, Galston have approached Council concerning the subdivision of their properties, and difficulty of complying with Council’s controls.

· If access was permitted to Arcadia Road, the streetscape may be improved through conventional street facing dwellings rather than rear facades and fences.

· Access to Nancy Place can currently be achieved in a variety of ways, including by battle-axe subdivision, right-of-carriageway, shared access way and partial demolition of dwellings.

· Should Council support an amendment to the existing controls, seventeen properties could potentially seek approval for vehicle access from Arcadia Road.

· It is recommended that Council maintain the existing policy of prohibiting direct access to Arcadia Road on the grounds that the benefit of private access to Arcadia Road is outweighed by the potential future impact on the safety and efficiency of Arcadia Road. It is also recommended that landscape screening of rear fences within the road reserve on the eastern side of Arcadia Road be implemented to improve the streetscape.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT:

1. Council retain the existing controls in the Rural Lands Development Control Plan restricting direct access to Arcadia Road from properties on the western side of Nancy Place, Galston.

2. Landscape screening of rear fences within the road reserve on the eastern side of Arcadia Road, be extended between Galston Road and Gribbenmount Road.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this Report is to present options to Council concerning a review of Council controls relating to direct vehicular access from Arcadia Road for properties on the western side of Nancy Place, Galston.

BACKGROUND

The Galston area is comprised of approximately 2,364 hectares and is generally bound by Galston Road, Mid-Dural Road, Old Northern Road and Arcadia Road. Nancy Place is located within the Galston Village residential area to the north east of the Galston Commercial Centre. Subdivision of the properties along the western side of Nancy Place occurred in the 1970s. Access to Nancy Place is off Arcadia Road via Martin Road.

Nancy Place is characterised by detached single and two storey brick dwelling houses ranging from modest, post-war design to dwelling houses of a contemporary appearance, with relatively generous front setbacks set in landscaped surrounds.

Arcadia Road, which borders the eastern edge of the Galston Commercial Centre, is a Classified Regional Road. The NSW Road Management Arrangements defines a Regional Road as:

A route of secondary importance between State Roads and Local Roads which together with State Roads, provide the main connections to and between smaller towns and districts and perform a sub-arterial function in major urban areas.

Based on the NSW Road Management Arrangements, Regional Roads are the responsibility of Council's to fund, determine priority and carry out works.

In 1964, a road widening plan for Arcadia Road was registered. To preserve the future function of the road, a restriction as to user was placed on properties from the 1970s at the time of subdivision for lots with dual frontages to Arcadia Road and Nancy Place, Galston. The restriction (discussed below) imposes a setback from Arcadia Road and prohibits vehicular access to Arcadia Road.

Widening of the road reservation of Arcadia Road between Galston Road and Gribbenmount Road has been completed. The road corridor is capable of accommodating a six lane road, with a central median and footpaths on either side to cater for future development between Galston town centre and Berowra Waters.

According to the Roads and Maritime Services (RMS), Regional Roads are expected to carry up to 20,000 vehicles per day. Based on the most recent Council survey in 2010, average traffic movements were approximately 1,400 vehicles per day. By this measure, Arcadia Road functions more like a local or collector road and is unlikely to carry significantly more vehicles within the foreseeable future.

The current rural zones embodied in the Hornsby Shire Local Environmental Plan (HSLEP) 1994 and the Rural Lands Development Control Plan (DCP) which includes the Galston Village Masterplan and controls for subdivision and vehicular access for Nancy Place, came into force in 2001 and are based on the recommendations of the Rural Lands Study. The Study reviewed the environmental, social, economic and planning issues relevant to the rural areas of the Shire, including Galston and identified

that the character and identity of the Galston commercial area could be improved through the preparation of a Village concept or Masterplan.

DISCUSSION

Property owners within Nancy Place, Galston have approached Council concerning the provision of direct vehicular access to Arcadia Road as part of the subdivision of existing properties. This issue has arisen due to the difficulty that some landowners are experiencing with respect to designing an appropriate subdivision layout that does not require alterations to their existing dwelling.

Options for the review of controls regarding vehicle access from Arcadia Road were presented to Council at an informal briefing in May 2013. At the briefing it was agreed that the options should be presented within a Report to Council. Accordingly, this report outlines the existing planning framework that applies in the locality and considers the opportunities and constraints of permitting vehicle access from Arcadia Road as presented at the Councillor briefing.

Local Environmental Plan

Under HSLEP 1994, properties in Nancy Place are zoned Residential AR (Low Density) Rural Village. The HSLEP 1994 specifies a minimum allotment size for the Residential AR zone of 500sqm.

Council adopted the draft HLEP in December 2012 which is currently awaiting finalisation by the Department of Planning and Infrastructure. Under the draft HLEP the properties within Nancy Place are zoned R2 (Low Density Residential) which reflects the residential character of the area. The minimum allotment size for Residential R2 zone is maintained at 500sqm.

Development Controls

The Rural Lands DCP contains general controls for development on rural lands as well as Village Masterplans which aim to enhance the character of the Villages. The Galston Village Masterplan identifies that vehicular access on the eastern side of Arcadia Road should be from Nancy Place only.

Council adopted the draft Hornsby Development Control Plan (HDCP) in December 2012 that is to be read in conjunction with the Draft HLEP. The draft plan will come into effect once the draft HLEP is finalised.

The following setback and access controls are relevant to the existing Rural Lands DCP and draft HDCP.

Setbacks

The ‘Setback’ element of the Rural Lands DCP prescribes that a 30m setback applies to buildings and other structures fronting arterial roads in rural and residential zones.

A minimum setback of 30m should apply to buildings and other structures fronting arterial roads in Rural and Residential zones, namely Hastings Road, Old Northern Road, Mid-Dural Road, Galston Road, Arcadia Road, (from Galston Road to Bayfield Road and Blacks Road to Bay Road), Bayfield Road, Blacks Road (from Bayfield Road to Arcadia Road) and Bay Road.

At its meeting on 20 February 2002, Council considered the setback requirements to Arcadia Road within the Rural Lands DCP. This matter was considered in relation to a refused proposal for subdivision of property Nos. 14-16 Nancy Place under DA/438/2001 and subsequent Court appeal. Council resolved that:

The Manager, Town Planning Services prepare an amendment to the Setbacks Element of the Rural Lands Development Control Plan, which reduces the 30m setback to Arcadia Road within Galston Village to a setback of generally 15m which provides additional housing choices for the village, subject to additional controls pertaining to setback landscaping, restricted fencing and the presentation of dwellings to Arcadia Road.

In light of previous approvals for subdivision of properties in Nancy Place, and Council’s resolution, Council officers when assessing the setback of buildings and structures from Arcadia Road, now apply a lesser setback that is more compatible with lot sizes and character of the area.

With respect to the draft HDCP, setbacks from Arcadia Road have been reduced as part of the proposed controls, in recognition of the lots sizes and residential character of the area. The draft HDCP prescribes a 9m front boundary to main roads which includes Arcadia Road (from Galston Road to Bayfield Road and Blacks Road to Bay Road). The rear boundary setback for a 1 storey element is 3m and for a 2 storey element is 8m.

Access Provisions

The Galston Village Masterplan and Rural Lands DCP contain provisions which prohibit access to Arcadia Road for properties with dual frontages to Arcadia Road and Nancy Place. With respect to the draft HDCP, the Galston Village Masterplan has been included within Part 2 Rural, which includes the restriction of access from Arcadia Road. Part 6 Subdivision also includes a prescriptive measure which prohibits new direct vehicle access to Arcadia Road (between Arcadia Road and Nancy Place).

Recent changes to the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 have resulted in changes to the status and purpose of Development Control Plans (DCPs). Under the changes, the status of DCPs has been returned to their original purpose as a guideline document only. The amendments have reinforced that the provisions contained in a DCP are not statutory requirements, enabling Council to consider innovative solutions when assessing development approvals.

Restriction as to User

A Restriction as to User applies to the western boundary of all properties with dual frontage to Nancy Place and Arcadia Road. This restriction was placed on the titles in the 1970s and prohibits development within 15.24m of the Arcadia Road property boundary. The Restriction also prohibits vehicular access from these allotments to Arcadia Road.

The owners of these properties can submit a form from the NSW Office of Land & Property Information with Council requesting the removal of the restriction. However, if the restriction was included as a condition of consent as part of a development approval, the applicant would also need to submit a Section 96 Application to have the condition removed.

Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) Policy

The policy of the RMS is to limit the number of vehicle conflict points along the arterial road network to maintain network efficiency and road safety. This practice is reflected in Section 6.2.1 of the RMS publication ‘Guide to Traffic Generating Development’ which states “access across the boundary with a major road is to be avoided wherever possible”. Sites with dual frontages such as Arcadia Road and Nancy Place which have alternate vehicular access via a local road would not meet the RMS requirement for access.

In accordance with the Roads Act 1993, the RMS is the responsible Authority in relation to road works, traffic control facilities, connections to roads and other works to classified roads. The Act requires the concurrence of the RMA for any proposal that seeks direct access to Arcadia Road.

The RMS was consulted as part of the review of current vehicle access controls from Arcadia Road (see comments below under the heading ‘Consultation’).

Approved Development Applications

There are twenty-four lots which have dual frontages to Arcadia Road and Nancy Place. Of these properties, Council’s records indicate that there have been eleven development applications (covering twelve properties) approved for subdivision. According to Council records, the consent for one of the subdivision proposals has lapsed.

Out of the eleven development applications two have sought vehicular access from Martin Road and nine from Nancy Place. Access to Nancy Place was achieved in the following ways:

· 1 battle-axe subdivision;

· 1 right of carriageway over the front lot;

· 4 lots with a shared access way; and

· 6 lots with partial or whole demolition of the existing house or ancillary structures.

Council records also indicate that there have been four development applications for dwelling houses on newly created lots. To date, two of these dwellings have been constructed.

Potential Development

A desk top assessment of the remaining twelve sites on the western side of Nancy Place indicate they all meet the minimum lot requirements for subdivision. Access to Nancy Place could be achieved in the following ways:

· 6 lots may require alteration and/or partial demolition of existing dwellings;

· 5 lots that have sufficient setbacks to permit access (in a couple of cases with removal of a detached garage or carport); and

· 1 lot with insufficient side setbacks to allow for an access handle, could possibly share access with an adjoining site.

Streetscape

Appropriately designed streetscapes enhance the character of communities. Streets that have a good sense of visual continuity generally create better streetscapes. For example, streets that contain buildings with similar setbacks, siting, fence heights and landscaping typically appear more unified and contribute to creating a better streetscape.

The current streetscape of Arcadia Road, between Galston Road and School Road, consists of wide grassed verges with vegetation close to property boundaries. The rear façade of dwellings within Nancy Place face the eastern side of Arcadia road, which predominately contains a continuous line of lapped and capped, colorbond and wooden rear fences, partly screened by vegetation.

If access was permitted to Arcadia Road, the streetscape may be improved through having front facades of dwellings facing Arcadia Road rather than rear facades and fences. Establishment of front gardens and maintenance of the large grassed verges may also positively contribute to the streetscape.

However, considering that a number of subdivisions with access to Nancy Place have been approved, it is possible that permitting access to Arcadia Road, could result in a streetscape consisting of buildings with front and rear facades to Arcadia Road. This outcome would be inconsistent with good practice and would impact on the visual continuity of the streetscape.

Should Council retain the existing controls restricting direct access to Arcadia Road from properties on the western side of Nancy Place, the streetscape could be improved by extending existing landscaping screening of rear fences within the road reserve along this section of Arcadia Road.

Kerb and Guttering Requirements

For subdivision, applicants are required to provide kerb and guttering within Residential zones but not Rural zones. The majority of Arcadia Road, between Galston Road and Gribbenmount Road, does not currently contain kerb and guttering. Should Council resolve to progress permitting vehicle access from Arcadia Road for properties within Nancy Place, kerb and guttering would be desirable for this section of Arcadia Road.

Council can only require applicants, through conditions of consent, to undertake works that have a direct nexus to their proposal. Assuming access to Arcadia Road was permitted, Council would only be able to require applicants to undertake kerb and guttering to the frontage of their property.

Seven subdivision approvals with vehicle access to Nancy Place or Martin Road, have been registered with the office of Land and Property Information and two subdivision approvals have been issued with a Subdivision Certificate. Accordingly, these properties would not be required to provide kerb and guttering along Arcadia Road, unless a new Development Application was lodged to achieve direct access to Arcadia Road. Subdivision of the remaining twelve lots may occur over the longer term, if at all. Should Council support an amendment to the existing controls, there is potential for 17 properties to seek vehicle access from Arcadia Road.

Therefore, permitting access to Arcadia Road may result in missing sections of kerb and gutter that would be the responsibility of Council to complete. This outcome may result in future pressure from residents to advance works by Council at a cost of approximately $33,000 per lot.

Sewage Connection

In November 2011, the NSW Government announced that Sydney Water would provide a reticulated sewerage system to Galston and Glenorie Villages, under Sydney Water’s Priority Sewage Programme. Construction is programmed to commence by 2014, with connections to be progressively available within the serviced area by mid 2015. The project has been sized to serve the existing urban area that is zoned residential, including current and potential infill development. The proposed Galston Village service area includes Nancy Place and would accommodate existing lots and potential lots created via subdivision under existing controls. The system will not accommodate future growth beyond this provision.

The provision of a reticulated sewer system is likely to improve the feasibility of development and the demand for the subdivision of existing allotments is likely to increase.

Opportunities and Constraints

The table below summarises the opportunities and constraints for Council’s current policy of permitting vehicle access only from Nancy Place and for the possible scenario of permitting vehicle access from Arcadia Road.

Option

Opportunities

Constraints

Vehicle access only from Nancy Place

· Preserves current streetscape of Arcadia Road

· Simpler assessment process – would not require referral to RMS for concurrence

· Developers would not be required to undertake shoulder, kerbing and/or drainage works to Arcadia Road

· Feasibility of redevelopment improved by Sydney Water servicing

· No future cost for Council for kerb and guttering

· Some lots do not have sufficient side setbacks from the existing dwelling to allow for vehicle access to the rear lot

· May have physical or amenity impacts on existing dwelling

· Marketability may be impacted by no direct road frontage for rear lots

Vehicle access from Arcadia Road

· Direct house and driveway access to Arcadia Road

· Improved marketability as a traditional lot and dwelling

· Does not impact on amenity of rear lot facing Nancy Place

· Feasibility of redevelopment improved by Sydney Water servicing

· Streetscape of Arcadia Road may be improved through the presentation of front rather than rear of dwellings to the road

· May compromise the future efficiency and safety of Arcadia Road

· Requires RMS concurrence for access

· May result in higher construction costs for developers – access driveway, stormwater, kerb and guttering to Arcadia Road

· Council may bear future cost of kerb and guttering

Options

With respect to direct vehicular access to Arcadia Road associated with the subdivision of land on the western side of Nancy Place, Galston, the following options are proposed.

Option 1 – Retain Existing Controls in the Rural Lands DCP

This option retains the existing controls and restrictions for vehicular access from Arcadia Road. It is acknowledged that achieving vehicle access to the rear of some properties from Nancy Place is restricted due to setbacks. However, there are alternate options for lots which do not have sufficient side setbacks such as partial demolition/alteration to the existing dwellings or a shared access way with adjoining lots. Based on the assessment of opportunities and constraints outlined above, the private benefit of direct access to Arcadia Road is outweighed by the potential impact on road user safety of the Regional Road and existing streetscape. This option is also consistent with RMS policy in regards to vehicle access to Regional roads.

Accordingly, Option 1 to maintain the existing policy of prohibiting direct access to Arcadia Road is recommended.

Option 2 – Amend Existing Controls to Allow Direct Vehicular Access from Arcadia Road

This option would result in more traditional lots for properties along the western side of Nancy Place, with direct house and vehicle access to Arcadia Road, resulting in reduced amenity impacts for existing dwellings within Nancy Place. The Arcadia Road streetscape may be improved with the development of conventional street facing dwellings instead of the current rear facades and fences. The feasibility of development would also be improved by the provision of a reticulated sewage system by Sydney Water.

Under this option, amendments would be required to Council’s draft Hornsby Development Control Plan. If vehicle access was permitted from Arcadia Road it would be appropriate to consider measures to reduce possible vehicle access points to maximise pedestrian and vehicle safety. Consultation with the RMS would be required regarding any provisions for vehicle access.

Should Council wish to proceed with this option an appropriate resolution would be:

THAT:

1. The draft amendments to the draft Hornsby Development Control Plan attached to Group Manager’s Report No. PL61/13 to permit vehicle access to Arcadia Road be exhibited.

2. Following exhibition, a report on submissions be presented to Council for its consideration.

CONSULTATION

On 25 March 2013, Council Officers requested that the RMS comment on whether or not direct access to Arcadia Road would be supported. The RMS declined to comment without a specific development application or information on future projected growth within the area and advised it would be willing to assist Council in future strategic planning of the area.

Should Council wish to proceed with Option 2, the exhibition of amended controls would include letters to affected and adjoining property owners, an advertisement in the local newspaper and on the Council website and displays at the Administration Building and Galston Library. Following the exhibition, a report on submissions would be presented to Council for its consideration.

BUDGET

There may be budgetary implications associated with the progression of Option 2 to amend Council’s policy to allow direct access to Arcadia Road. The cost to Council to complete sections of kerb, gutter and drainage along Arcadia Road would be approximately $33,000 per lot subject to detailed design. As detailed within the report, potential exists for up to 17 of 24 lots to directly access Arcadia Road.

POLICY

Should Council resolve to progress Option 2, Council’s policy and development controls would need to be amended to permit vehicle access from Arcadia Road for properties within dual frontages to Nancy Place and Arcadia Road. As stated within this report, the draft HDCP will come into effect once the draft HLEP is finalised. The draft HLEP is currently with the DP&I awaiting finalisation. Accordingly, it would be appropriate to exhibit amendments to the draft HDCP as it is likely to come into effect in the near future.

CONCLUSION

The issue of permitting direct access to Arcadia Road from properties with dual access to Nancy Place relates primarily to the difficulty of achieving an access way without impacting on the existing dwelling. A survey of development applications issued by Council indicates that half of the lots with dual frontage have been approved with satisfactory access to Nancy Place. Of the remaining lots, only 6 appear to be constrained by the existing dwelling and would require alteration to achieve an appropriate access solution.

Given that only two dwellings have been constructed based on current approvals, a decision to relax the access restriction to Arcadia Road may result in submissions to modify existing approvals. Up to 17 properties could potentially seek approval for vehicle access from Arcadia Road. A substantial private benefit would be obtained by permitting conventional street facing dwellings to be constructed. This benefit, however, is outweighed by the likely impact on the safety and efficiency of the regional road network and streetscape impact of permitting an ad-hoc arrangement of front and rear fences long the length of Arcadia Road.

Accordingly, based on the existing practice of the RMS and Council to restrict direct access, it is recommended that Council support Option 1 and retain the existing controls in the Rural Lands DCP.

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER

The officer responsible for the preparation of this Report is the Manager, Strategic Planning – Fletcher Rayner - who can be contacted on 9847 6744.

Fletcher Rayner

Manager - Strategic Planning

Planning Division

James Farrington

Group Manager

Planning Division

Attachments:

1.View	Locality Plan
2.View	Draft DCP Amendments

File Reference: F2013/00231

Document Number: D02193465

Deputy General Manager's Report No. IR20/13

Infrastructure and Recreation Division

Date of Meeting: 17/07/2013

16 HORNSBY STATION FOOTBRIDGE

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

· Council has identified the need to construct a replacement footbridge at George Street, Hornsby. The majority of people use the existing bridge to access the NSW Government’s transport interchange.

· Consultants have prepared a wide range of design options for a new pedestrian bridge, which has resulted in a preference for a single freestanding bridge aligned centrally in Florence Street. A lift and stair arrangement for the Florence Street end of the bridge and a ramp arrangement for the Hornsby Station side are favoured. It is also proposed to develop an extension to the existing Florence Street Mall to facilitate pedestrian access and enhance business activity at the western end of Florence Street.

· A number of photomontages demonstrating alternative bridge appearances, particularly for the eastern, Florence Street end of the bridge have been developed for community discussion. It is estimated that a new pedestrian bridge and mall extension will cost up to $7 million. It is proposed that one third of this cost be met by Council with the other two thirds met by the NSW Government. Representatives from Transport for NSW have indicated in-principle support for the proposed alignment and construction of a new pedestrian bridge.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Council:

1. Note the findings of design investigations for a replacement footbridge at Hornsby Station contained in Deputy General Manager’s Report No. IR20/13.

2. Endorse commencement of community consultation for the development of a replacement footbridge over George Street, Hornsby, including:

a) the proposal to centrally align a freestanding bridge in Florence Street

b) the incorporation of stairs and a lift into the Florence Street portion of the bridge and a ramp on the Hornsby Station side of the bridge; and

c) the use of available photomontages to assist in discussing options for the visual character of the bridge.

3. Receive a report advising of the findings following the completion of the consultation.

4. Council authorise the General Manager and Deputy General Manager, Infrastructure and Recreation to commence discussions with relevant NSW Government agencies and the local member for Hornsby seeking to secure partial funding for a replacement pedestrian bridge over George Street, Hornsby.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this Report is to outline the scope of current design investigations and consultations for a replacement bridge over George Street, Hornsby and to seek endorsement to proceed to community consultation on the proposals.

BACKGROUND

In 2009 Council received a consultant report prepared by Parsons Brinkerhoff Australia stating that:

· An estimated that 14,720 persons cross the George Street every day and 93% are for people accessing the Hornsby Transport Interchange

· The bridge is highly congested at peak operating times

· The bridge does not meet the minimum standards for passing wheelchairs and accessible gradients for disabled access

· There is expected to be a growth in population and rail patronage of around 20% by 2031

· The population of Hornsby aged over 65 is higher than the Sydney average and is expected to increase to above 20% by 2031, therefore increasing the need for improved facilities for those with mobility impairments.

In addition it is known that the bridge does not meet Road and Maritime Services’ (RMS) requirements for minimum clearance over an arterial road.

Council set aside approximately $1 million dollars towards the development of a new pedestrian bridge in Hornsby following extensive community consultations that rated the replacement of the bridge as a high priority. The funding contributes towards a portion of the costs of the bridge redevelopment, with the balance of funds expected to be contributed by the NSW Government.

Council has consulted with representatives of Transport for NSW which includes RMS and Railcorp, with a view to ensuring the design solution is acceptable to the NSW Government and to ensure the outcome is appropriate for gaining its support for funding.

RMS has committed to contributing 50% of the cost of current design investigations and informal discussions with NSW Government representatives have indicated that they are supportive of the approach being taken with the bridge design.

DISCUSSION

In September 2012 Council engaged Cardno Pty Ltd to develop concept design options for a replacement bridge and to undertake community consultations.

Investigations have identified a range of issues and constraints associated with the design of the bridge within the context of the site.

Issues and Constraints – Site Context

From the outset it was clear that the project needed to consider its wider context. This includes:

· The redevelopment potential of adjoining properties in Florence Street, particularly the Council owned 12-14 George Street

· The visual, physical and commercial impacts of a new bridge on adjoining properties

· The opportunity to extend the pedestrian mall to George Street and the need to retain vehicle access

· The future expansion of Hornsby Station including the potential development of an additional Platform ‘0’ and rail line on the east side of the station and a possible future airspace development

· The operation of George Street as an arterial road.

Issues and Constraints - Design

To date a wide range of options have been investigated, focused on questions of:

· The alignment of the bridge in relation to existing roadway and adjoining properties

· The choice of incorporating lifts, escalators, ramps and stairs

· The visual impact of the new bridge and desired character

· The need to keep the bridge open 24 hours per day and ensuring users of the bridge are highly visible, in accordance with Safer by Design principles

· The constraints of existing services located within the area, including above ground powerlines, underground telecommunication, stormwater and sewer services and the RMS requirement for a 5.5 metre clearance to the underside of the bridge

· Construction constraints requiring a pedestrian bridge and service vehicle access to be maintained for the duration of the construction of a new bridge

· Operational constraints associated with mechanical plant such as lifts and escalators.

Bridge Alignment Options

A range of options for the bridge redevelopment has been identified. The options focus on alternative alignments of the bridge and how it will enter Florence Street.

Alignment options include:

· Bridge incorporated into the adjoining building redevelopment at 12-14 George Street

· Bridge aligned to north or south of Florence Street

· Bridge centrally aligned in Florence Street.

Consultations with Railcorp led to the identification of a single ramp solution for the connection of the bridge into the station. These options are further explored below.

Bridge Incorporated into the Adjoining Building Redevelopment at 12-14 George Street, Hornsby

In these options the bridge construction is incorporated into the redevelopment of the adjoining Council owned property at 12-14 George Street and potentially other adjoining properties on the north side of Florence Street. Alternatively they involve the complete removal of the building at 12-14 George Street and placement of a new bridge within a new expanded plaza space.

The advantages of this approach are that:

· The bridge has the potential to improve the commercial return in the redeveloped properties by taking an increased number of potential customers through the property

· The building redevelopment may cover some costs associated with the bridge construction and have a lower net cost to Council and the NSW Government.

The disadvantages are that:

· A significant portion of the Council owned property is given over to pedestrian circulation and will not return rent

· The overall cost of development will be significantly higher than a freestanding bridge and is likely to require more complex funding arrangements which can be expected to take time

· Council has received advice through specialist commercial feasibility consultants that the property at 12-14 George Street is not a commercially viable site for redevelopment in its own right. Larger scale redevelopment may be feasible but will require agreements with adjoining landowners. Although there have been calls to relax existing zoning controls to assist in encouraging redevelopment, these changes will require NSW State Government support and will take time to get approved

· It is not a desirable location to have an expanded plaza as it will be influenced by the busy George Street and will be a space that is largely in shade and not comfortable in winter. Redevelopment of adjoining properties to create active frontages would be required for success. The potential for commercial rental return or sale of the 12-14 George Street property is lost in the event that the space is turned into a plaza.

On balance this approach relies on either a developer coming forward with a redevelopment proposal incorporating a new bridge or effectively an additional funding contribution by Council. Such an approach can be expected to take time and any proposals will need careful consideration of the merits to establish if it is advantageous to Council.

Northern or Southern Alignment in Florence Street, Hornsby

In these options the bridge would be freestanding either aligned in a similar position to the existing bridge, or on the southern side of Florence Street adjacent to the commercial properties at 10A George Street and 2-6 Florence Street.

The northern alignment allows for a continuation of the current arrangement of the bridge with no changes required to the roadway. It would require all pedestrians to continue to cross the Florence Street roadway to enter the mall.

The southern alignment would require realignment of the Florence Street roadway meaning pedestrians would not need to cross any roads to enter the mall and the mall may be extended to provide easy pedestrian access to the bridge.

Both of these options can be expected to have a negative impact on the commercial viability of adjoining properties due to the close proximity of the bridge. These solutions are considered less favourable than an option to locate the new bridge in a central alignment in Florence Street as discussed below.

Central Alignment in Florence Street Hornsby

This option proposes a freestanding bridge aligned centrally in Florence Street with the road access into Florence Street realigned. Detailed design investigations have confirmed that the bridge is able to form a central focal point and the Florence Street roadway can be sited to the north.

The advantages of this approach are that:

· Pedestrians entering the mall will not be required to cross any roads and the bridge can form a part of an extended pedestrian mall, providing an appropriate setting for the bridge

· The bridge redevelopment can proceed quickly

· The bridge will provide a focal point to views west along Florence Street

· The properties on both sides of Florence Street have good visual access and can prosper commercially with minimal negative impact from the bridge development

· It is possible that links to adjoining properties on either side of Florence Street may be established from the upper level of the bridge, when redevelopment occurs

· The existing bridge can continue to be used during the construction period.

The disadvantages are that:

· The construction works will need to be carefully managed to ensure minimal interruption to pedestrian and vehicle access into Florence Street.

On balance the central alignment of the bridge has merit as a solution that can proceed quickly, at minimal cost and provides future options for connection into adjoining redevelopment.

Managing the Level Changes

A key consideration of the bridge design is managing the level changes for pedestrians crossing the bridge, particularly for people moving between the bridge deck level and Florence Street.

Options that have been considered for the level changes include ramps, a lift, escalators and stairs.

Ramps

The existing bridge is arranged with a non-compliant disabled access ramp that leads people down to the Florence Street level. The bridge does not provide adequate clearance over George Street and the ramp structure dominates views of the western end of Florence Street. As well as being detrimental to the streetscape, the structure blocks views of the adjacent 12-14 George Street building, undermining its commercial viability.

In considering the design of a new bridge, options for a compliant ramp on the Florence Street side of the bridge were considered, however it was found that it will be more visually obstructive than the existing ramp, because it will be longer and require more switch backs, reflecting negatively on adjoining properties and the visual character of Florence Street.

On balance it is considered that a ramp on the Florence Street side is not appropriate on urban design grounds. A ramp is however considered appropriate on the Hornsby Station side as it is compatible with adjacent land uses.

Lifts

A lift is a key mechanism for ensuring the bridge is able to meet Australian Standards for access, especially where a decision is made to not provide a compliant ramp. Lifts are used extensively in railway stations and pedestrian bridges to address level change requirements. Ramps are generally only used where space permits or where they are complementary to adjacent land uses.

Lifts have the advantage of occupying a small area and to contribute significantly to reducing the scale of the structure. Modern lifts can be designed as transparent attractive structures that can have capacity to shift a large number of wheelchairs, prams and people with limited mobility.

The disadvantages of lifts are their potential to be vandalised and the relatively high operating costs of maintaining and operating them. Where a lift is used an alternative method of access needs to be available in the event of the lift breaking down. In this case the alternative would be to direct pedestrians to use existing footpaths and cross at the traffic lights approximately 75 metres south of the bridge at the intersection of George Street and the Pacific Highway.

It is considered that it is appropriate to incorporate a lift on the Florence Street side as it will complement the adjacent land uses and contribute to minimise the bulk and form of the bridge.

Escalators

Escalators have the advantage of being able to move a large number of people quickly, particularly where there is a significant level change.

Escalators do not comply with any access standards for disabled people and are always complemented by alternative lift or ramp structures that meet Australian Standards for disabled access.

Escalators have a high maintenance and operating cost and are expensive to construct. They are commonly installed where it is easy for management to recover operating costs, where for example a body corporate is able to recover the costs of operation, or alternatively where there is a substantial level change that can not be easily dealt with via stairs, at say a deep underground railway station.

This means that escalators may be appropriate where the bridge is incorporated into a commercial redevelopment, but are not as clearly favourable where the bridge is freestanding in public land. Design studies have confirmed that it may be appropriate to include escalators in the stairs in the Florence Street side of the bridge; however it is considered that they should not be included in the initial construction due to high capital and operating costs and maintenance requirements.

It is possible that escalators could be installed at a later date after development of the bridge however it appears unlikely that the NSW Government will accept any responsibility for the operating costs of such a structure.

Stairs

Stairs are the simplest most robust method of assisting people to move between different levels and are used extensively at railway stations and in freestanding pedestrian bridges. They rely on the mobility of the pedestrian and are not suitable for mobility impaired people.

Stairs also have the advantage of being a structure that has less visual mass than a ramp, ensuring greater visual access to surrounding areas.

The level change in Florence Street is approximately 5.0 metres and is similar to the height encountered at many railway stations.

Given the commercial land uses on either side of Florence Street it is considered most appropriate to develop the bridge with stairs and a lift.

Bridge Structural Form

The project brief to the consultants called for the design of a bridge that is visually distinctive and contributes to providing a gateway marker in the town centre, while also being relatively low cost to build and maintain.

While aiming to achieve these goals, it has been recognised that this may be achieved in either:

· The central span

· The Florence Street stair

· The station ramp connection or

· Any combination of these.

Council’s consultant Cardno has advised that the most cost effective method of constructing the bridge is to utilise a truss system that effectively places the structure equally in the side walls, roof and floor. There are many variations to the design of truss bridges which can include curved space frames or square truss forms.

A curved space frame can be highly attractive but is significantly more expensive to construct. In contrast a simple square truss is highly economical but possibly not as distinctive.

In order to meet the goals of the brief, design investigations have found that adopting a square truss form for the main bridge span will achieve the cost control objectives. In adopting this approach it has been considered that the design can be enhanced with the use of colour in the structure and fixtures of the bridge.

It also leaves the possibility to discuss a range of options for the design of the Florence Street stairs and roof above.

Photomontages

A series of photomontages have been developed that demonstrate:

· Variations to the colour scheme

· Incorporation of advertising into the main elevations of the central structure

· Location of the stairs in Florence Street; and

· Options for alternative treatments to the bridge on the Florence Street side.

It is considered appropriate to utilise these images in community consultations, to assist in explaining the nature of the proposal, the options for development and in gaining community support for the development.

Community Consultation

A community consultation plan has been prepared that outlines key elements of a proposed consultation including:

· Conducting a specific landowners and tenants presentation directed towards tenants of George Street near Florence Street, tenants of the railway concourse and tenants of both sides of Florence Street between George Street and Hunter Lane

· Presentation to landowners in the broader vicinity as well as other interested stakeholders such as the Police and Railcorp

· Holding a community market stall for one day in Florence Street Mall with structured questions to enable easy collation of feedback

· Publicising the proposals through Council’s monthly newsletter, facebook and twitter pages

· Establishing and managing a ‘Have Your Say’ online discussion with structured questions similar to those developed for the market stall in the mall.

A report will be prepared documenting the findings of the consultation, collating the results of structured questions and making recommendations to Council on the outcome of the consultations.

CONSULTATION

Council has also consulted with Transport for NSW, which includes Roads and Maritime Services and Railcorp representatives, in the development of options for the bridge redevelopment.

BUDGET

Estimates indicate the cost of construction of a footbridge and associated ground works as currently proposed to be approximately $7.0 million, which includes approximately $5.5 million to construct a freestanding bridge and $1.5 million to undertake works in Florence Street for a mall extension.

It is not possible to identify the cost of works involving a new bridge in the redevelopment of the adjoining 12-14 George Street and potentially other adjoining commercial properties.

Council is able to identify funding to cover one third of the estimated cost of a freestanding bridge and mall extension.

Council is continuing to seek funding from the NSW State Government to cover the remaining two thirds of the works or $4.6 million.

POLICY

Council’s current Hornsby Town Centre Development Control Plan (DCP) promotes the idea that the pedestrian overpass should open views into the mall and promote extension of the Florence Street Mall to George Street as proposed in the current design studies for the pedestrian bridge.

The proposal to develop a freestanding pedestrian footbridge means that views into the mall are enhanced for pedestrians. The visual mass of the new bridge will be significantly less than the existing structure.

The DCP is also supportive of the incorporation of a pedestrian bridge into redevelopment of 12-14 George Street. The current proposals do not preclude such an option in the future.

There are no other policy implications associated with this Report.

CONCLUSION

The current pedestrian bridge over George Street is unattractive, highly congested at peak operating times and does not meet the minimum standards for passing wheelchairs and accessible gradients for disabled access.

A number of alternative locations have been evaluated for a replacement bridge with investigations concluding that a free standing bridge that aligns centrally in Florence Street offers the best solution. Such a solution retains vehicular access to existing businesses and does not rely on either a developer coming forward with a redevelopment proposal incorporating a new bridge or effectively an additional funding contribution by Council.

A freestanding bridge as proposed would allow for the extension of the existing mall towards George Street, which would enhance outdoor activities adjacent to existing businesses in Florence Street and improve pedestrian movement between Westfield and the new bridge.

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER

The officer responsible for the preparation of this Report is the Deputy General Manager, Infrastructure and Recreation – Robert Stephens - who can be contacted on 9847 6665.

Robert Stephens

Deputy General Manager

Infrastructure and Recreation Division

Attachments:

1.View

Attachment - Issue I - Design Evaluation Report

File Reference: F2012/00817

Document Number: D02207941

Year	Estimated cost ‘shift’ amount
2009-10	$9.2 million
2010-11	$9.3 million
2011-12	$9.6 million

1.View	Policy POL00365 - Property Numbering
2.View	Policy POL00290 - Feral Cat Policy
3.View	Policy POL00078 - Proposed Council Developments
4.View	Policy POL00291 - Smoke Free Environment
5.View	Policy POL00163 - Code - Compliance - Environment
6.View	Policy POL00162 - Code - Animals - Keeping
7.View	Policy POL00168- Code - Deelopment Disputes
8.View	Policy POL00280 - Managing Contamined Land
9.View	Policy POL00176- Code - Mount Kuring-gai Sewerage Scheme Connection
10.View	Policy POL00164 - Code - Brooklyn and Dangar Island Sewerage Scheme Connection
11.View	Policy POL 00170 - Code - Greywater Reuse

1.View	HSC Investment Portfolio as at 31 May 2013
2.View	HSC Borrowings Schedule as at 31 May 2013

1.View	DLG Circular 13-27 - Local Government Remuneration 2013
2.View	Remuneration Tribunal Report 2013