Page 1

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

GENERAL BUSINESS

Local Planning Panel

Item 1     LPP22/19 Development Application - Alterations and Additions including Signage to Existing Vehicle Sale Premises -  Nos. 64-72 Pacific Highway, Waitara................................................................ 1  

 

LPP Report No. LPP22/19

Local Planning Panel

Date of Meeting: 24/09/2019

 

1        DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION - ALTERATIONS AND ADDITIONS INCLUDING SIGNAGE TO EXISTING VEHICLE SALE PREMISES -  NOS. 64-72 PACIFIC HIGHWAY, WAITARA

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

DA No:	DA/565/2019 (Lodged 28/6/2019)
Description:	Signage, external recladding and interior upgrades to existing vehicle sale or hire premises.
Property:	Pt Lot 14 DP 3250, Lot 15 DP 657352, Lot 16 DP 657353, Pt Lot 17 DP 3250, Lot 1 DP 575743, Lot B DP 383724, Nos. 64-72 Pacific Highway, Waitara.
Applicant:	Centric Architects Pty Ltd
Owner:	Bafiran Pty Ltd
Estimated Value:	$221,980
Ward:	B

·             The application proposes signage, external recladding and interior upgrades to existing vehicle sale or hire premise.

·             The proposal does not comply with maximum building height development standard in Clause 4.3 of the Hornsby Local Environmental Plan 2013.  The applicant has made a submission in accordance with Clause 4.6 ‘Exceptions to development standards’ of the Hornsby Local Environmental Plan 2013 to vary Clause 4.3.  The submission is considered well founded and is supported.

·             One submission has been received in respect of the application.

·             The application is required to be determined by the Hornsby Shire Local Planning Panel as the development contravenes the HLEP maximum building height standard by more than 10%.

·             It is recommended that the application be approved.

RECOMMENDATION THAT Development Application No. DA/565/2019 for signage, external recladding and interior upgrades to existing vehicle sale or hire premise at Lot 14 DP 3250, Lot 15 DP 657352, Lot 16 DP 657353, Pt Lot 17 DP 3250, Lot 1 DP 575743 and Lot B DP 383724, Nos. 64-72 Pacific Highway, Waitara be approved subject to the conditions of consent detailed in Schedule 1 of LPP Report No. LPP22/19.

 

BACKGROUND

On 1 August 2007, DA/213/2007 was approved for alterations and additions to an existing motor showroom, demolition of existing sign and construction of a new sign, subject to conditions. This development consent included approval for the demolition of the existing structure at the frontage of No. 64-68 Pacific Highway and replacement with a pole sign. The demolition and replacement of the sign was never completed. The applicant has advised it is no longer the intention to construct the approved pole sign.

On 6 August 2008, Council refused Development Application No. DA/43/2008 for the erection of a customer service building ancillary to an existing motor showroom.

On 1 April 2010, Council approved Development Application No. DA/1657/2009 for the removal of two existing signs and the erection of an illuminated pylon sign for a motor showroom.

On 9 August 2011, Council approved Development Application No. DA/1657/2009/A to modify the approved consent by amending the location of the approved pylon sign.

On 11 October 2011, Council approved Development Application No. DA/704/2011 for alterations and additions of an existing motor showroom, subject to conditions.

On 1 August 2012, Council approved Development Application No. DA/704/2011/A to modify the roof pitch and side setbacks of the approved additions, subject to conditions.

On 28 May 2013, Council approved Development Application No. DA/704/2011/B to modify the approved plans, subject to conditions.  These modifications included amending the air-conditioned enclosed handover area and the orientation of the stairs and lift, installing a secondary plant room above the offices and installing a fire hydrant boost pump.

On 28 June 2019, the subject application was lodged with Council.

SITE

The site comprises 6 allotments with an area of 2,107.95m² and is located on the northern side of the Pacific Highway.  The site experiences a fall of 6m to the rear north eastern corner.

The site contains a Mazda vehicle maintenance building within Lot 14 DP 3250 and Lot 1 DP 575743, and a Mazda showroom and office within Lot 16 DP 657353 and Pt Lot 17 DP 3250.  Lot B DP 383724 provides vehicle access from Pacific Highway to the rear of the site.  The Mazda showroom building contains two signs along the south western elevation that has a frontage to Pacific Highway. These signs are backlit illuminated.

An illuminated pylon sign and car parking spaces are located within Lot 15 DP 657352.

The southern boundary of the site has a 103-metre frontage to Pacific Highway and a vehicle crossing and driveway which provides vehicular access to the site.

The northern rear boundary of the site adjoins the North Shore Railway corridor.

The Pacific Highway streetscape on the northern side, in the near vicinity of the site, comprises a mix of uses including BMW and Toyota motor showrooms, a take away shop, beauty salon, a café and a chemist. 

A senior living development is located on the opposite side of the Pacific Highway, known as ‘The Grange’.

 

PROPOSAL

The application proposes alterations and additions, including replacement signage and new cladding and replacement wording to the existing pylon sign to the existing eastern Mazda showroom building.

The development specifics of the proposal are provided below:

·             Construction of an internal partition wall with the installation of a television within the customer lounge.

·             Installation of an internal counter and bar stools to customer lounge.

·             Replace the existing flooring of the internal customer lounge with ‘timber look vinyl’.

·             Installation of a suspended internal timber feature for ‘hero car display’.

·             Installation of an internal Mazda reception sign including brand symbol.

·             Replace cladding to existing entry portal for the Mazda showroom.

·             Installation of a sign adjacent to the entry portal which would contain the Mazda corporate logo and read ‘Mazda’.  This sign would be 0.5m (length) by 0.55m (width) and have a total area of 0.275m².

·             Installation of a timber batten lining above café joinery and a new splashback to the café. 

·             Modification to the existing pylon sign at the front of the site.  The application proposes to replace the cladding of the pylon sign and install a total of four signs on the pylon sign.  The eastern elevation of the pylon sign would contain two signs, the top sign would read ‘Mazda’ and would contain Mazda’s corporate logo, this sign would be 2.4m (length) by 2.56m (width) and have a total area of 5.144m².  This sign would be illuminated with a ‘white or blue light back illumination’.  The sign below would read ‘Hornsby Mazda’ and would be 0.73m (length) by 1.4m (width) with a total area of 1.022m².  This sign would be illuminated with a ‘white light back illumination’.  Identical signs are also proposed on the western elevation of the pylon sign.

·             Construction of a ‘performance wall’ (signage wall) adjacent the existing entrance to the Mazda showroom.  This wall would contain two signs, one on the eastern side and the other on the western side of the performance wall.  The two signs would be identical and would read ‘Mazda’ with the Mazda corporate logo above.  Both signs would be 2.56m (length) by 2.4m (height) for a total area per sign of 4.96m².  The proposed signs would be illuminated with ‘white or blue light back illumination on black ACM cladding’; and

·             Replacement of the two existing signs along the south western elevation orientated towards the Pacific Highway.  The first proposed sign within the centre of the building would read ‘Mazda’ with the Mazda corporate logo and the second sign along the south eastern side of the building would read ‘Hornsby Mazda’. The first sign would be 5.8m (length) by 1.175m (height) for a total area of 6.185m². The second sign would be 6.3m (length) by 1.175m (height) for a total area of 7.4m².  The proposed signs would be illuminated with ‘white or blue light back illumination on black ACM cladding’.

No changes are proposed to the existing use, floor space ratio or operating times of the vehicle sales premises.

No trees would be removed or impacted by the proposed development.

ASSESSMENT

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

1.         STRATEGIC CONTEXT

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

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

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

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

2.         STATUTORY CONTROLS

Section 4.15(1)(a) requires Council to consider “any relevant environmental planning instruments, draft environmental planning instruments, development control plans, planning agreements and regulations”.

2.1       Hornsby Local Environmental Plan 2013

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

2.1.1     Zoning of Land and Permissibility

The subject land is zoned B6 Enterprise Corridor under the HLEP.  The objectives of the zone are:

·             To promote businesses along main roads and to encourage a mix of compatible uses.

·             To provide a range of employment uses (including business, office, retail and light industrial uses).

·             To maintain the economic strength of centres by limiting retailing activity and

·             To provide for residential uses, but only as part of a mixed-use development.

The current use of the existing buildings are defined as a ‘Vehicle sale or hire premises’ and is permissible in the zone with Council’s consent.

2.1.2     Height of Buildings

Clause 4.3 of the HLEP provides that the height of a building on any land should not exceed the maximum height shown for the land on the Height of Buildings Map.  The maximum permissible height for the subject site is 10.5m.  The height of the performance wall would be 16.6m which does not comply with this provision.

2.1.3     Exceptions to Development Standards

The application has been assessed against the requirements of Clause 4.6 of the HLEP.  This clause provides flexibility in the application of the development standards in circumstances where strict compliance with those standards would, in any particular case, be unreasonable or unnecessary or tender to hinder the attainment of the objectives of the zone.

The proposal exceeds the 10.5m Height of Buildings development standard.

The objective of the Heights of Buildings control is to permit a height of building that is appropriate for the site constraints, development potential and infrastructure capacity of the locality. 

The applicant has made a submission in support of a variation to the development standard in accordance with Clause 4.6 of the HLEP.  The development application seeks to vary the development standard to 16.6m (58 percent variation) for the proposed ‘performance wall’ (signage wall).  The applicant states the proposed variation is considered to be consistent with the objectives of the control and is justified as follows:

·             The technical maximum building height is not representative of the actual perceptible building height.

·             The RL at the top of the proposed signage wall is 192.510, and this signage wall is considered to be a minor architectural element in the overall design and built form.

·             The existing Mazda building to the west of the subject built form has a higher maximum RL than that proposed by the performance wall, and this RL is to the main bulk of the built form rather than a minor element of the built form.

·             The new BMW showroom which adjoins the subject site to the east would have a higher maximum RL to its main built form than the subject minor signage wall element.

·             It is also well separated from residential land uses to the south by the southern setbacks of the built form (which are significant and more than compliant) and the width of the Pacific Highway. This combined with the recessive nature of the signage wall within the streetscape and on site and its height above the podium ensure that the proposed maximum building height does not adversely impact the residential land uses.

·             The visually perceptible height of the signage wall to the streetscape and properties to the south, east and west is the height above the podium element. The height of the signage wall above the podium element is 10.01m which complies with Clause 4.3 of HLEP 2013. The proposed signage wall is therefore considered to be an appropriate height, visually fitting in with its context and

·             The proposal is consistent with all other key HLEP requirements.

State Government Guidelines on varying development standards recommend considering the provisions of Clause 4.6 of the LEP and the ‘five-part test’ established by the Land and Environment Court as follows:

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

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

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

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

5.         The compliance with development standard is unreasonable or inappropriate due to existing use of land and current environmental character of the particular parcel of land.  That is, the particular parcel of land should not have been included in the zone.

The applicant’s submission to vary the 10.5m development standard is considered well founded for the following reasons:

·             The height of a building is defined under HLEP as “the vertical distance from ground level (existing) to the highest point of the building.” The site has been subject to previous earthworks to construct existing buildings and basement floor levels.  As a result of the prior works, the ground levels have been significantly altered.

·             Notwithstanding the above, the definition of height of buildings adopts the existing ground level whereas if an extrapolated natural ground level was used, the height of the performance wall would comply with the 10.5 m height standard.

·             The perceivable maximum building height when viewed from the streetscape of Pacific Highway would be 10.1m which would comply with Clause 4.3 of the HELP.

·             The width of the non-compliant performance wall is 1.2m which represents 1.16% of the total frontage of the site to the Pacific Highway.

·             The building height is a direct result of the existing excavated ground levels to construct the basement carpark and

·             Considering the unique characteristics and context of the site, the proposal achieves a reasonable environmental outcome and design excellence for the site. 

Based on this assessment, it is considered that compliance with the development standard would be unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case.  Accordingly, the Clause 4.6 submission is supported.

2.1.4     Heritage Conservation

Clause 5.10 of the HLEP sets out heritage conservation provisions for Hornsby Shire.  The subject property is located in close proximity to heritage listed item (item No. 772) along Alexandria Parade, Waitara, namely ‘Street trees and bushland’ as listed in Schedule 5 (Environmental Heritage) of the HLEP.

The proposed development would not impact on the heritage listed trees and bushland given the minor nature of the proposed development and separation by the Northshore Rail line.

2.2       State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

It is noted that the proposed development is located adjacent to the rail corridor to the rear of the site.

Clause 85(1) of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 (ISEPP) requires concurrence to be sought from the relevant rail authority if any of the following requirements are triggered for development in or adjacent to a rail corridor:

 (1)    This clause applies to development on land that is in or adjacent to a rail corridor, if the development:

(a)      is likely to have an adverse effect on rail safety, or

Comment: The proposed development is towards the Pacific Highway and would not impact on rail safety.

(b)     involves the placing of a metal finish on a structure and the rail corridor concerned is used by electric trains, or

Comment: The proposed development does not propose any metal finishes.

(c)      involves the use of a crane in air space above any rail corridor, or

Comment: The proposed development would not encroach or require a crane to encroach into the airspace above the rail corridor.

(d)     is located within 5 metres of an exposed overhead electricity power line that is used for the purpose of railways or rail infrastructure facilities.

Comment: The proposed development is not located within 5m of an exposed overhead electricity power line.

Therefore, the proposed development is not required to be referred to Sydney Trains.

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

The application has been assessed against the requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 Advertising and Signage (SEPP 64) which aims to improve the amenity of urban and natural settings by managing the impact of outdoor advertising.

In accordance with Part 3, Clause 9, the proposed signage is defined as a ‘business identification sign’ and the provisions of Part 3 of the Policy do not apply.

Clause 13(1)(b) of SEPP 64 requires that the advertising sign be assessed in accordance with the criteria in Schedule 1 as follows:

 

Criteria	Compliance
Character of the Area
Is the proposal compatible with the existing or desired future character of the area or locality in which it is proposed to be located?	Yes - The subject site fronts the Pacific Highway and is surrounded by mixed developments including two vehicle sale premises and commercial premises. Signage of various forms is a character of the road in the near vicinity of the site. Given the level of activity on this major arterial road and the volume of traffic carried on the road, the proposed signage would reflect the business character of the area and be compatible with the existing and desired future character of the locality.
Is the proposal consistent with a particular theme for outdoor advertising in the area or locality?	Yes - There is no particular theme for advertising within the locality. The business identification signs and advertisements relate to specific premises. Accordingly, the proposal is not inconsistent with an outdoor advertising theme for the area.
Special Areas
Does the proposal detract from the amenity or visual quality of any environmentally sensitive areas, heritage areas, natural or other conservation areas, open space areas, waterways, rural landscapes or residential areas?	No - It is considered that the public domain visual catchment of the signage is predominantly restricted to the Pacific Highway corridor for a limited section of the road. The proposed signs would increase the visual interest of the wall and would be integral to the “Enterprise Corridor” zone objectives without detracting from the amenity and visual character of the surrounding residential areas, open spaces and the heritage items.
Views and Vistas
Does the proposal obscure or compromise important views	No - There are no important view corridors in this area.
Does the proposal dominate the skyline and reduce the quality of vistas?	No – The proposed performance wall would be below the building height of adjacent development.
Does the proposal respect the viewing rights of other advertisers?	Yes
Streetscape, Setting or Landscape
Is the scale, proportion and form of the proposal appropriate for the streetscape, setting or landscape?	Yes - Given the varied nature of the streetscape fronting the site, the proposal would not be inappropriate for the immediate locality.
Does the proposal contribute to the visual interest of the streetscape, setting or landscape?	Yes - It is considered that the proposed signs align with contemporary advertising structures and would create visual interest within the B6 zone and the transport corridor.
Does the proposal reduce clutter by rationalising and simplifying existing advertising?	Yes – The proposed signage would be replacing existing signage like for like by incorporating the corporate colours of Mazda.
Does the proposal protrude above buildings, structures or tree canopies in the area or locality?	No - The performance wall would be below the building height of adjacent development.
Does the proposal require ongoing vegetation management?	No
Site and Building
Is the proposal compatible with the scale, proportion and other characteristics of the site or building, or both, on which the proposed signage is to be located?	Yes
Does the proposal respect important features of the site or building, or both?	Yes
Does the proposal show innovation and imagination in its relationship to the site or building, or both?	Yes - The advertising signage utilises the Mazda corporate logo.  Once installed, the signs would create visual interest in the immediate locality.
Associated Devices and Logos
Have any safety devices, platforms, lighting devices or logos been designed as an integral part of the signage or structure on which it is to be displayed	Yes - The Mazda corporate logo integrates with the design of the proposed signage.
Illumination
Would illumination result in unacceptable glare?	No - As discussed below in Section 2.3.3 of this report, conditions are recommended regarding the illuminance of the proposed signage.
Would illumination affect safety for pedestrians, vehicles or aircraft?	No
Would illumination detract from the amenity of any residence or other form of accommodation?	No – As discussed below in Section 2.3.3 of this report, conditions are recommended regarding the illuminance of the proposed signage.
Can the intensity of the illumination be adjusted, if necessary?	Yes
Is the illumination subject to a curfew?	Yes – Discussed below in Section 2.3.3 of this report.
Safety
Would the proposal reduce the safety for any public road?	No - The proposal was referred to Roads and Maritime Services and no objections were raised regarding road safety.
Would the proposal reduce the safety for pedestrians or bicyclists?	No
Would the proposal reduce the safety for pedestrians, particularly children, by obscuring sightlines from public areas?	No

2.3.1     Concurrence with the Roads and Maritime Services (RMS)

The development has frontage to a classified road, being the Pacific Highway.  Clause 31 of SEPP 64 requires any signage within 250m of a classified road be referred to the RMS for comment. 

The application was referred to the RMS for comment and the RMS raised no objections to the proposed development, subject to conditions recommended in Schedule 1 of this report.

2.3.2     Wall Advertisements

Clause 22(2) of SEPP 64 states that the consent authority may grant consent to a wall advertisement only if:

a)      The consent authority is satisfied that the advertisement is integrated with the design of the building on which it is to be displayed, and

b)      for a building having an above ground elevation of more than 100 square metres but less than 200 square metres - the advertisement does not exceed 20 square metres.

The proposed signage has a total area of 14m² and would be affixed to the southern building elevation which has a total area of 196m². The signage complies with the maximum permissible area prescribed above.

2.3.3     Illumination of Signage

The Transport Corridor Outdoor Advertising and Signage Guidelines are prepared by NSW Department of Planning and Environment to assist in assessing development applications under SEPP 64. The guideline provides a number of controls including controls for digital signs.

Part 2.5.8 “Digital signs” of the guidelines outlines the design criteria for digital signs, which a consent authority must be satisfied that a proposal meets in granting approval. These criteria relate to restrictions on the content and brightness levels of signs. Due to the signs proposed location, facing into the streetscape of Pacific Highway which is a classified road, the principles outlined in this part have been adopted as appropriate conditions to ensure road safety is not compromised by the proposal.

Allowable maximum luminance levels are based on lighting condition and zones. Council has determined that the sign is classified as being located in a “Zone 4” location, defined by the guidelines as “areas with generally high off-street ambient lighting e.g. some major shopping/commercial centres with a significant number of off-street illuminated advertising devices and lights.” Appropriate conditions have been included in Schedule 1 to ensure compliance with the guidelines in relation to signage content and brightness levels.

The site contains existing illuminated signs previously approved through DA/1657/2009, in which condition 13 of that consent required “the advertising sign approved under this consent is not to be illuminated between 10pm and 7am. The lighting is to be fitted with an automatic timing device, controlling the illumination hours.”

Therefore, to be consistent with the existing illuminated signage within this section of Pacific Highway, if this application is to be approved, an appropriate condition is recommended in Schedule 1 of this report requiring that all illuminated signage approved through this consent is not to be illuminated between 10pm and 7am.

2.4       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.

Noting that the excavations for the foundations for the proposed performance wall would have a minimal disturbance to the supporting soils and would have minimal, if any, impacts on adjoining properties, drainage patterns and soil stability of the locality, the installation of sediment erosion controls for this development would not be necessary.

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

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

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

2.6       Hornsby Development Control Plan 2013

The proposed development has been assessed having regard to the relevant desired outcomes and prescriptive requirements within the Hornsby Development Control Plan 2013 (HDCP).  The following table sets out the proposal’s compliance with the prescriptive requirements of the Plan:

As detailed in the above table, the proposed development does not comply with the height requirement within the HDCP.  A discussion on the performance requirements and Part 1C General Controls of the HDCP is provided below.

2.6.1     Building Height

The proposed development would result in a maximum height of 16.6m above ground level.  The proposal does not comply with the permissible height limit of 10.5m, applicable to the site.  This matter has been discussed in Section 2.1.3 of this report and the height non-compliance is supported.

2.6.2     Signage

The application has been assessed against the relevant requirements of Part 1C.2.11 Signage of the HDCP.  The following table sets outs the proposal’s compliance with the prescriptive requirements of Part 1C.2.11 of the HDCP.

Criteria	Compliance
a)   Signs should be designed and located to:
·       Relate to the use of the premises.	The proposed Mazda signage relates to the use of the premises as a vehicle sales dealership.
·       Be consistent with best practice guidelines.	Discussed in Section 2.3.3 of this report.
·       Be integrated with the architecture of the supporting building, not obscure significant architectural features and maintain the dominance of the architecture.	Proposed signage would be integrated with the proposed performance wall.
·       Be limited in number to avoid cluttering, distraction and unnecessary repetition.	The application proposes to replace existing signs and install two new signs within the performance wall.  It is generally considered that the addition of the two signs would not create cluttering or distraction.
·       Not cover mechanical ventilation inlets or outlets.	The proposed signs do not cover mechanical ventilation, inlets or outlets.
·       Not comprise a roof sign.	No roof signs are proposed.
·       Not compromise road or pedestrian safety.	The proposal would not compromise road or pedestrian safety.
·       Be a minimum of 2.6 metres above any footpath where the sign is not flush with the wall.	Yes
·       Be at least 600mm from a kerb or roadway edge where the sign is over a public road.	Yes
b) In addition to the above, illumination of signage should:
·       Be integrated with the design of the sign,	The proposed signs would be illuminated from behind.
·       Not cause light spillage into nearby residential properties,	As discussed in Section 2.3.3 of this report, conditions are recommended to reduce light spillage.
·       Not use complex displays, moving signs, flashing lights or the like that hold driver’s attention beyond ‘glance appreciation’, and	Conditions are recommended in Schedule 1 of this report to ensure the signs do not flash or move.
·       Be fitted with an automatic timing device, controlling the illumination hours.	As discussed in Section 2.3.3 of this report, a condition is recommended in Schedule 1 of this report to ensure the signs are not to be illuminated between 10pm and 7am.
c)    In residential zones, signage should not be illuminated.	The land is zoned as B6 Enterprise Corridor.
d)   All commercial advertising should comply with SEPP No.64-Advertising and Signage.	Yes - Discussed in Section 2.3 of this report.
e)   Business identification signs should:
·       identify the significant owners, tenants and uses of buildings,	The proposed signs identify the tenant of the site (Mazda).
·       consolidate signs for multiple tenancies,	Only one tenant is within the site (Mazda) and the proposed signage relates to Mazda.
·       not incorporate advertising of products and services that are not directly related to the approved use of the premises, and	The proposed signage relates to the use of the premises as a vehicle sale or hire premises.
·       comply with the general controls and the relevant prescriptive measures in the following Tables 1C.2.11(a) to (f).	The existing pylon sign which is to be modified relates to Table 1C.2.11(e) Pole or pylon sign of the HDCP which is discussed below.
Table 1C.2.11(e) Pole or pylon sign requirements
·       Signage for multiple businesses within the one complex should be advertised on a single sign structure	N/A – Sign only relates to one business (Mazda).
·       Should not exceed a maximum height of 8m above ground	No - The existing pylon sign is and would remain at 9m in height which was approved through DA/1657/2009.
·       Should not exceed 2m in width	No - The existing pylon sign would be 3m in width which is the same width which was approved through DA/1657/2009.
·       Should not exceed 0.5m in depth	Yes - The existing pylon sign which is to be modified would be in 0.31m in depth.
·       Should be located:
-     Within property boundaries, and	Yes – The pylon sign would be sited entirely within the property boundaries.
-     A minimum of 2.6m above any footpath.	No - The location of the existing pylon sign which is to be modified was approved through DA/1657/2009.

2.6.3     Design Details

The application has been assessed against the relevant requirements of Part 4.2.10 Design Details of the HDCP.

The application proposes the external recladding of the existing entry portal for the Mazda showroom and the construction of a performance wall adjacent to this entry portal.

In assessing the proposal, it is noted that the construction of the performance wall would provide a balance between vertical and horizontal elements and would avoid a long expansive blank wall along the Pacific Highway street frontage.  The proposed dark grey cladding for the performance wall and black recladding of the entry portal would result in a positive visual impact of the façade of the Mazda showroom.

The proposal meets the desired outcome of Part 4.2.10 Design Details of the HDCP and is considered acceptable.

2.6.4     Setbacks and Landscaping

The proposed development complies with the setback requirements of the HDCP. It is also noted that no change is proposed to the existing landscaping of the site.

2.7       Section 7.12 Contributions Plans

Hornsby Shire Council Section 94A Contributions Plan 2014–2024 applies to the development as the estimated costs of works is greater than $100,000.  Should the application be approved, an appropriate condition of consent is recommended requiring the payment of a contribution in accordance with the Plan.

3.         ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

Section 4.15(1)(b) of the Act requires Council to consider “the likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impacts in the locality”.

3.1       Natural Environment

3.1.1     Tree and Vegetation Preservation

The site contains two pine trees and shrubs within Lot 15 DP 657352 and small shrubs along the south eastern portion of the front boundary. The proposed works would not have any impact on the existing vegetation.  No further assessment is necessary in this regard.

3.1.2     Stormwater Management

The proposal has been assessed against the relevant requirements of Part 1C.1.2 of the HDCP.

The application proposes a downpipe from the proposed performance wall to be connected to the existing internal drainage system which drains to the street drainage system.

No objections are raised to the proposed development in regards to stormwater management, subject to an appropriate condition recommended in Schedule 1 of this report requiring all stormwater to be directed to the existing internal drainage system.

4.         SITE SUITABILITY

Section 4.15(1)(c) of the Act requires Council to consider “the suitability of the site for the development”.

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

5.         PUBLIC PARTICIPATION

Section 4.15(1)(d) of the Act requires Council to consider “any submissions made in accordance with this Act”.

5.1       Community Consultation

The proposed development was placed on public exhibition and was notified to adjoining and nearby landowners between 18 July 2019 to 2 August 2019. Due to an error with the newspaper advertisement, the application was r-notified between 8 August 2019 to 6 September 2019 in accordance with the Notification and Exhibition requirements of the HDCP.  During the initial notification period, Council received one submission.  The map below illustrates the location of this nearby landowner who made a submission who is in close proximity to the development site.

 

NOTIFICATION PLAN
•      PROPERTIES NOTIFIED	X     SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED	PROPERTY SUBJECT OF DEVELOPMENT

 

One submission objected to the development, generally on the grounds that the development would result in an increased amenity impact to the residential properties which forms part of the seniors living development located opposite the car dealership due to the proposed illuminated signage.

In addressing this concern, it is noted that this matter is discussed in Section 2.2.3 and 2.3.3 of this report.  If consent is granted, appropriate conditions are recommended in Schedule 1 of this report to limit the hours of illumination and luminance levels of the proposed signage.

5.2       Public Agencies

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

5.2.1     Roads and Maritime Services

The application required concurrence from RMS pursuant to the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007 and Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993. The RMS reviewed the proposal and raised no objections subject to implementation of recommended conditions of consent which are included in Schedule 1 of this report.

6.         THE PUBLIC INTEREST

Section 4.15(1)(e) of the Act requires Council to consider “the public interest”.

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

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

CONCLUSION

The proposal involves modification to the existing pylon sign, external wall signage, the construction of a performance wall which would be elevated above the existing building and interior and exterior upgrades to existing commercial premise.  The signage proposed would be illuminated.  No changes are proposed to the existing use of the site, operating hours or floor space ratio.

The proposal does not comply with Clause 4.3 “Height of Building” of the HLEP. The applicant has made a submission in accordance with Clause 4.6 ‘Exceptions to development standards’ of the HLEP  to vary Clause 4.3. The submission is considered well founded and is supported.

The development generally meets the desired outcomes of Council’s planning controls and is satisfactory having regard to the matters for consideration under Section 4.15C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Conditions are recommended to minimise disruption to residential amenity.

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

The reasons for this decision are:

·             The proposed development generally complies with the requirements of the relevant environmental planning instruments and the Hornsby Development Control Plan 2013 with the exception of the maximum building height. The applicant has made a submission in support of a variation to this development standard in accordance with Clause 4.6 of the HLEP. The request is considered well founded.

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

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

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER

The officer responsible for the preparation of this report is Tim Buwalda.

 

 

Cassandra Williams Major Development Manager Planning and Compliance Division

Rod Pickles Manager - Development Assessments Planning and Compliance Division

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

1.⇨	Locality Plan
2.⇨	Plans Architectural
3.⇨	Clause 4.6 Variation
4.⇨	Aerial X

 

 

File Reference:          DA/565/2019

Document Number:    D07726825

 

SCHEDULE 1

1.         Approved Plans and Supporting Documentation

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

Approved Plans:

Plan No.	Plan Title	Drawn by	Dated	Council Reference
0322 - 2001	Proposed Site Plan	WH & DH for Centric Architects	04/06/2019
0322 – 4000 issue C	Showroom Floor Plan	WH & DH for Centric Architects	04/06/2019
0322 – 4001 issue B	Roof Plan & Stormwater Concept Plan	WH & DH for Centric Architects	04/06/2019
0322 – 5000 issue B	Elevations North and South	WH & DH for Centric Architects	04/06/2019
0322 – 5001 issue C	Elevations East and West	WH & DH for Centric Architects	04/06/2019
0322 – 6000 issue A	Building Section	WH & DH for Centric Architects	04/06/2019

Supporting Documentation:

Document Title	Prepared by	Dated	Council Reference
Waste Management Plan	Paul Smit of Centric Architects	26 June 2019	D07709147
RMS Letter Ref: SYD19/00940	Roads and Maritime Services	7 August 2019	D07750059

2.         Construction Certificate

a)         A construction certificate must be approved by either Council or a Private Certifying Authority (PCA) prior to the commencement of any works on the site approved under this development consent.

b)         The plans submitted with the application for the construction certificate must not be inconsistent with the plans approved under this development consent.

3.         Section 7.12 Development Contributions

a)         In accordance with Section 4.17(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 and the Hornsby Shire Council Section 94A Development Contributions Plan 2014 - 2024, $2,219.80 must be paid towards the provision, extension or augmentation of public amenities or public services, based on development costs of $221,980.

b)         The value of this contribution is current as at 29 August 2019. If this contribution is not paid within the financial quarter that this condition was generated, the contribution payable will be adjusted in accordance with the provisions of the Hornsby Shire Council Section 94 Development Contributions Plan and the amount payable will be calculated at the time of payment in the following manner:

$C_{PY   =}   $C_DC  x CPI_PY

CPI_DC

Where:

$CPY   is the amount of the contribution at the date of Payment

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

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

CPIDC is the Consumer Price Index (Sydney – All Groups) for the financial quarter at the date applicable in this Development Consent Condition.

c)         The monetary contributions must be paid to Council:

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

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

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

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

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

Council’s S94A Development Contributions Plan may be viewed at www.hornsby.nsw.gov.au or a copy may be inspected at Council’s Administration Centre during normal business hours.

4.         Building Code of Australia

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

5.         Fire Safety Schedule

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

6.         Stormwater Drainage

Stormwater drainage must be connected to the existing internal drainage system.

7.         Erection of Construction Sign

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

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

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

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

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

 

8.         Protection of Adjoining Areas

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

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

b)         Could cause damage to adjoining lands by falling objects; and/or

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

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

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

9.         Toilet Facilities

a)         To provide a safe and hygienic workplace, toilet facilities must be available or be installed at the works site before works begin and must be maintained until the works are completed at a ratio of one toilet for every 20 persons employed at the site.

b)         Each toilet must:

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

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

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

10.       Construction Work Hours

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

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

11.       Demolition

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

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

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

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

12.       Council Property

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

13.       Fire Safety Statement – Final

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

14.       Damage to Council Assets

To protect public property and infrastructure, any damage caused to Council’s assets as a result of the construction or demolition of the development must be rectified by the applicant in accordance with Council’s Civil Works Specifications. Rectification works must be undertaken prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, or sooner, as directed by Council.

15.       Fire Safety Statement – Annual

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

16.       Signage

The signage approved under this consent must comply with the following requirements:

a)         The signage is not to be illuminated between 10pm and 7am. The lighting is to be fitted with an automatic timing device, controlling the illumination hours.

b)         The signage must be displayed in a completely static manner, without any motion, for the approved dwell time as per criterion (c) below, including no flashing or scrolling of messages.

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

Lighting Condition	Requirement
Full Sun on face of Signage	No limit
Day Time Luminance	6000 cd/m2
Morning/ Evening/ Twilight and Inclement Weather	700 cd/m2
Night Time	350 cd/m2

 

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

17.       RMS 1

Roads and Maritime has previously resumed and dedicated a strip of land as road along the Pacific Highway frontage of the subject property, as shown by grey colour on Aerial - "X" (attachment 7).

Therefore, all buildings and structures (including signage), together with any improvements integral to the future use of the site, are to be wholly within the freehold property (unlimited in height or depth) along the Pacific Highway boundary.

18.       RMS 2

All demolition and construction vehicles are to be contained wholly within the site and vehicles must enter the site before stopping. A construction zone will not be permitted on Pacific Highway.

19.       RMS 3

A Road Occupancy Licence should be obtained from Transport Management Centre for any works that may impact on traffic flows on Pacific Highway during construction activities.

20.       RMS 4

All works/regulatory signposting associated with the proposed development are to be at no cost to Roads and Maritime.

- END OF CONDITIONS -

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.

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 and Vegetation Preservation

A person must not ringbark, cut down, top, lop, remove, injure or wilfully destroy any tree or other vegetation protected under the Hornsby Development Control Plan 2013 without the authority conferred by a development consent or a permit granted by Council.

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

Tree protection measures and distances are determined using the Australian Standard AS 4970:2009, “Protection of Trees on Development Sites”.

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

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.

Covenants

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

Telecommunications Act 1997 (Commonwealth)

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

Asbestos Warning

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

www.enviroment.nsw.gov.au

www.adfa.org.au

www.workcover.nsw.gov.au

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