Agenda of Local Planning Panel meeting - Wednesday, 25 August 2021

LPP Report No. LPP14/21

Local Planning Panel

Date of Meeting: 25/08/2021

1 DA/149/2021 - TORRENS TITLE SUBDIVISION OF ONE LOT INTO TWO - NO. 34 DAY ROAD, CHELTENHAM

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

DA No:	DA/149/2021 (Lodged on 15 February 2021)
Description:	Torrens Title subdivision of one lot into two lots
Property:	Lot 1 DP 1256358, No. 34 Day Road Cheltenham
Applicant:	Mr. Peter Stewart Graham
Owner:	Mrs. Janet Ashlyn Loibner
Estimated Value:	$12,000
Ward:	C

· The application involves the Torrens Title subdivision of one allotment into two lots.

· The proposal generally complies with the Hornsby Local Environmental Plan 2013 and the Hornsby Development Control Plan 2013.

· A total of 18 submissions have been received in respect of the application.

· The application is required to be determined by the Hornsby Council Local Planning Panel as 10 or more unique submissions were received by way of objection.

· It is recommended that the application be approved.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Development Application No. DA/149/2021 for Torrens Title subdivision of one allotment into two lots at Lot 1 DP 1256358, No. 34 Day Road Cheltenham be approved subject to the conditions of consent detailed in Schedule 1 of LPP Report No. LPP14/21.

BACKGROUND

Site History

On 7 January 1960, Council approved the Torrens Title subdivision of the parcel of land formally known as DP 31594 into 6 allotments (Nos. 30, 32, 32A, 34, 34A and 36 Day Road), creating the subject site. It is noted that No. 32 Day Road has since been subdivided into two lots (No. 32 and 32B Day Road).

On 25 May 2020, Council approved Subdivision Certificate SC/32/2019 for a boundary adjustment between No. 34 and 34A Day Road resulting in an increase in the size of No. 34 Day Road from 2,004m²to 2,170m².

Application History

On 16 February 2021, Council requested the submission of written owners consent from the adjacent landowners at No. 34A Day Road consenting to the proposed works on their land. Subsequently, Council received the requested owner’s consent.

On 20 April 2021, Council requested the submission of an amended Plan of Proposed Subdivision to indicate the provision of a common turning area over proposed Lot 11. It is noted that the requested changes would not result in additional works within the carriageway owned by the adjacent landowners at No. 34A Day Road.

On 4 May 2021, Council received the requested amended Plan of Proposed Subdivision.

On 23 July 2021, Council received GTAs from the NSW RFS. The GTAs agree to the deletion of the 4m wide accessway requirement and acknowledges that the provision of a water hydrant along the carriageway for firefighting purposes would be permitted in place of fire truck access into the site.

SITE

The site is legally described as Lot 1 DP 1256358 (No. 34 Day Road, Cheltenham). The battle-axe allotment has an area of 2,170m², is vacant of any improvements and contains dense vegetation including large canopy trees.

The site experiences a fall of 16m to the front boundary, representing an average gradient of 14.8%.

Vehicular access to the site is provided by an s-shaped driveway located within a right of carriageway (ROC) burdening the adjacent properties at Nos. 32, 32A and 34A Day Road. Six properties benefit from the ROC (Nos. 30, 32, 32A, 32B, 34 and 34A Day Road).

Day Road is a low-density residential area comprising a mixture of single and two storey residential buildings. Numerous battle-axe allotments are located along Day Road in the vicinity of the site.

The site is bushfire prone with ‘Category 1’ vegetation located approximately 165m east of the site.

The site is burdened by an unformed right of carriageway which covers 965m²to the front of the site.

The site does not contain a heritage listed item, however the site is located within the C2 Beecroft-Cheltenham Heritage Conservation Area under Schedule 5 of the HLEP.

PROPOSAL

The application proposes the Torrens Title subdivision of one allotment into two lots.

Proposed Lot 11 would be a vacant allotment and have an area of 600m²(excluding access).

Proposed Lot 12 would be a vacant allotment and have an area of 605m².

The application proposes the construction of the following physical works:

· A combined passing bay and common vehicle turning area on proposed Lot 11.

· The construction of three narrow strips of driveway within the Right of Carriageway owned by the adjacent property at No. 34A Day Road, between the existing carriageway and the southern boundary of proposed Lots 11 and 12.

· An inter-allotment stormwater drainage easement to the southern side of the site to service both proposed lots.

The application seeks to retain the existing s-shaped carriageway to provide vehicular access to the proposed allotments.

The application proposes the removal of 21 trees to facilitate the proposed development and future dwelling houses on the allotments.

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 the North District Plan by providing an additional allotment capable of accommodating future dwelling houses and contributing to achieving the dwelling targets for the region.

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 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 - Section 4.46

The proposed subdivision is ‘integrated development’ subject to approval of the NSW Rural Fire Service for the issue of a Bushfire Safety Authority under the Rural Fires Act 1997.

The approval of the NSW Rural Fire Service has been obtained for the issue of a Bushfire Safety Authority subject to General Terms of Approval (GTAs). Section 3.1.1.2 of this report discusses the RFS GTAs and the implications regarding tree preservation.

2.2 Hornsby Local Environmental Plan 2013

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

2.2.1 Zoning of Land and Permissibility

The site is zoned R2 Low density residential pursuant to the Land Use Table of the HLEP. The objectives of the R2 zone are:

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

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

The proposed development is defined as ‘subdivision’ and is permissible in the R2 zone with Council’s consent. It is considered that the proposed development would provide for the growing housing needs of the community and meets the objectives of the R2 Low density residential zone.

2.2.2 Minimum Subdivision Lot Size

Clause 4.1 of the HLEP prescribes that the minimum subdivision lot size is not to be less than shown for the land on the Minimum Lot Size Map, which is 600m².

The proposed subdivision would result in proposed Lot 11 having an area of 600m² (ex. ROC) and Lot 12 having an area of 605m². The proposal complies with the minimum subdivision lot size development standard pursuant to Clause 4.1 of the HLEP.

2.2.3 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 8.5m.

There are no buildings proposed as part of this application.

2.2.4 Heritage Conservation

Submissions have been received from the community raising heritage concerns, summarised as follows:

· The nearby heritage listed property ‘Ahimsa’ has not been properly considered.

· The loss of vegetation would pose a detrimental impact to the HCA.

· The subdivision is inappropriate for the HCA.

Clause 5.10 of the HLEP sets out heritage conservation provisions for Hornsby Shire. The site does not contain a heritage listed item, however the site is located within the Gullies Precinct of the Beecroft-Cheltenham Heritage Conservation Area (HCA) under Schedule 5 of the HLEP.

The site is not in the immediate vicinity of any heritage items in Schedule 5 of the HLEP. In addressing the submission, the heritage listed item (‘Ahimsa’) is located approximately 250m north of the site at No. 67 Cobran Road Cheltenham and would not be visible from the subject site.

The Gullies Precinct is defined by its sloping topography with exposed buffs, rock outcrops and remnant forest communities. Its urban form is characterised by an irregular subdivision pattern and a mix of single and two storey dwellings from the post war and modern periods. Landscaping and mature trees are prominent in the streetscape and front gardens are often open without fences, or with low fences constructed in stone or freestone.

Context

Day Road is intersected by Sutherland Road at its south and follows a ridgeline that ends at the bushland at Byles Creek Gully to the north. It was sparsely developed until after World War 2 and typical of the HCA Precinct, its urban form is characterised by both street-facing and battle-axe lots and a stylistically eclectic mid to late 20th Century built form. The streetscape value is defined by tall native and exotic trees.

With regard to visibility of the site from Day Road, the indicative building envelopes are not visible with only a portion the dwelling house on the adjacent battle-axe allotment visible from the street.

Subdivision

Part 9.3.5 of the HDCP provides prescriptive requirements for land subdivision in Heritage Conservation Areas, summarised as follows:

· Subdivisions should retain characteristic subdivision patterns.

· New lots should be capable of development that is compatible with the established character of the heritage conservation area, especially in terms of the orientation of buildings and setbacks.

· Subdivisions should not result in new dwellings being constructed in the front setback area of existing characteristic buildings.

· Potential impacts from associated development such as driveways and hard stand areas on the streetscape and heritage significance of the heritage conservation area should be minimised.

· Changes affecting significant gardens should be avoided.

Council’s heritage assessment concluded that the proposed subdivision satisfies the requirements of Part 9.3.5 the HDCP. Battle-axe subdivision is common along Day Road and the new dwellings would be substantially setback from the street, screened by trees and unlikely to be seen from the public domain. The common single driveway would remain, and no heritage significant gardens would be affected.

There is no heritage objection to the proposed subdivision as it is consistent with the existing subdivision pattern of the street and would provide for appropriate setbacks and screening from the street. The subdivision would not result in a development form that would detract from the values of the HCA or adversely impact streetscape character.

Tree Removal

Part 9.3.3 of the HDCP provides requirements for gardens, fences and gates within the HCA. Of relevance to the proposal, the HDCP stipulates that:

· Development should not impact upon or remove trees that contribute to the significance of the Heritage Conservation Area.

· Mature trees that are removed should be replaced with trees in a similar or more appropriate location that will mature to similar size and canopy.

· Proposed works should comply with AS 4970 Protection of Trees on Development Sites.

It is considered that the proposal is consistent with the requirements of Part 9.3.3 of the HDCP with regard to tree removal in HCAs as the proposal would not adversely impact streetscape or landscape heritage values given the depth of the site and the dense canopy being retained at the street frontage. There are no trees within the subject site or adjacent sites that have been identified in the Arborist Report or HDCP as having cultural heritage significance. With respect to replacement planting and tree protection measures, Sections 3.1.1.1 and 3.1.1.4 of this report addresses these considerations.

Council’s heritage assessment raises no objection to the proposed tree removal at the site, subject to the imposition of a recommended condition under Schedule 1 requiring replacement planting.

2.2.5 Earthworks

A submission has been received that the site is steep, and the proposal does not comply with the earthwork requirements of the HLEP.

Clause 6.2 of the HLEP states that consent is required for proposed earthworks on site. Before granting consent for earthworks, Council is required to assess the impacts of the works on adjoining properties, drainage patterns and soil stability of the locality.

The proposed physical works consists of the construction of an above grade passing bay/vehicle turning area, driveway strips and an inter-allotment stormwater drainage system. The application has demonstrated that future dwelling houses could be sited on the level portions of the proposed lots to minimise earthworks.

Subject to compliance with the recommended conditions, the proposal is considered acceptable in this regard.

2.2.6 Flood Planning

The site is not identified as a flood planning area on the ‘Flood Planning Map’ and further assessment under Clause 6.3 of the HLEP is not required.

2.3 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 Remediation of Land

The application has been assessed against the requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 Remediation of Land (SEPP 55) under which consent must not be granted to the carrying out of any development on land unless the consent authority has considered whether the land is contaminated or requires remediation for the proposed use.

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.

An examination of Council’s records and aerial photography has determined that the site has been historically vacant of any improvements. It is not likely that the site has experienced any significant contamination, and further assessment under SEPP 55 is not required.

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

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

Part 3, Clause 9(2) of the Vegetation SEPP states that a Development Control Plan may make a declaration in any manner relating to species, size, location and presence of vegetation. Accordingly, Part 1B.6.1 of the Hornsby Development Control Plan 2013 (HDCP) prescribes works that can be undertaken with or without consent to trees and objectives for tree preservation.

The application has been assessed against the requirements of the Vegetation SEPP and it has been determined that the proposal would meet the objectives of the Vegetation SEPP. This matter is addressed further in Section 3.1.1 of this report.

2.5 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 general planning considerations and strategies to ensure that the catchment, foreshores, waterways and islands of Sydney Harbour are recognised, protected, enhanced and maintained.

Subject to the implementation of installation of sediment and erosion control measures and stormwater management to protect water quality, the proposal would have minimal potential to impact on the Sydney Harbour Catchment.

2.6 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.

2.7 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:

Subdivision of one lot into two

HDCP – Part 6 Subdivision
Control	Proposal	Requirement	Complies
Site Area	2,170m²	N/A	N/A
Lot Area
- Lot 11	1565m² / 600m² (ex. ROW)	600m²	Yes
- Lot 12	605m²	600m²	Yes
Minimum Lot Width
- Lot 11	25.7m	15m	Yes
- Lot 12	25.7m	15m	Yes
Accessway Width
- Carriageway Width	3m – 6m	5.65m	No
- Landscaping Width	>1m	1m	Yes
Indicative Building Envelope
- Lot 11	200m²	200m²	Yes
- Lot 12	200m²	200m²	Yes
Setbacks Lot 11
- Street (west)	62m	900mm	Yes
- Front (south)	5.5m	900mm	Yes
- Side (east)	1m – 2.5m	900mm	Yes
- Rear (north)	5m	5m	Yes
Setbacks Lot 12
- Front (south)	7.5m	900mm	Yes
- Side (east)	5m	900mm	Yes
- Side (west)	2.1m	900mm	Yes
- Rear (north)	5m	5m	Yes
Landscaping
- Lot 11	85%	45%	Yes
- Lot 12	67%	30%	Yes
Open Space
- Lot 11	>24m²	min. 24m²	Yes
- Lot 12	>24m²	min. 24m²	Yes
Car Parking
- Lot 11	2 spaces	2 spaces	Yes
- Lot 12	2 spaces	2 spaces	Yes

As detailed in the above table, the proposed development generally complies with the prescriptive requirements within the HDCP, with the exception of the carriageway width. The matters of non-compliance are detailed below, as well as a brief discussion on compliance with relevant desired outcomes.

2.7.1 Allotment Size and Shape

Submissions have been received raising concerns that the proposed lots are small and irregular in shape compared to surrounding properties.

The proposed subdivision would result in the proposed lots having a minimum lot size of 600m² and a minimum lot width of 15m, which complies with the minimum subdivision lot size and width requirements of the HDCP. The subdivision pattern within Day Road is comprised of regular shaped, battle-axe and irregular shaped lots. The proposed subdivision design provides for battle-axe lots consistent with adjoining allotments and those in the vicinity. Furthermore, the application has demonstrated that the proposed allotments are capable of supporting future dwelling houses on the level portions of the proposed lots whilst avoiding dense vegetation to the front of the site.

The proposal is deemed acceptable with regard to the Lot Size and Shape requirements of the HDCP.

2.7.2 Privacy and Amenity

A submission has been received raising concerns that large scale future dwelling houses on the proposed allotments would give rise to negative privacy and amenity impacts to adjacent properties.

The proposal has demonstrated compliance with the setback, lot shape and lot size considerations of the HDCP and it is considered that the allotments would be capable of accommodating future dwelling houses that provide appropriate privacy and amenity to adjacent properties. Development Applications for future dwelling houses on these allotments would be required to be submitted to Council for assessment with regard to the privacy, amenity and scale provisions of Part 3.1 of the HDCP.

2.7.3 Bushfire

A submission has been received raising concerns that the proposal does not comply with Planning for Bushfire Protection 2019 including that the accessway and turning area is not of adequate width to facilitate access by RFS fire trucks.

The site is mapped as bushfire prone with ‘Category 1’ vegetation located approximately 165m east of the site.

The application has been accompanied by a Bushfire Assessment Report and an addendum letter prepared by Australian Bushfire Protection Planners Pty Ltd dated 15 December 2020 and 27 January 2021, respectively. The report indicates that an existing water supply main with hydrants is located within the verge along Day Road at spacing/locations which meet the performance requirements of Australian Standard AS 2419.1-2005. Further, the report states that the eastern extent of the indicative building envelope on proposed Lot 12 is located more than 80m from the street boundary and recommends that a reticulated water supply be extended from the street mains with a hydrant located adjacent to the proposed passing bay.

The application was referred to the NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) pursuant to Section 4.46 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

The approval of the NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) has been obtained for the issue of a Bushfire Safety Authority. The NSW RFS raise no concerns with the proposed development, subject to General Terms of Approval (GTAs) requiring the establishment of an Inner Protection Area (IPA) on proposed Lots 11 and 12 and the provision of water, electricity and gas in accordance with Table 5.3c of Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2019. It is noted that the GTAs do not necessitate upgrade works to the existing accessway and does not require on-site vehicular access by fire trucks. In its place, the RFS seeks to rely upon a proposed water hydrant along the carriageway for firefighting purposes.

Section 3.1.1.1 of this report discusses the RFS GTAs and its implications with regard to tree preservation.

2.7.4 Accessway Design

Submissions have been received raising concerns that:

· The proposal would not comply with the driveway width, turning head, passing bay, waste collection, gradient and lighting requirements of the HDCP.

· The proposed use of the existing accessway is unsafe for vehicles and pedestrians.

· The width of the accessway does not permit 2 vehicles using the accessway at any one time.

· There is not enough space along the street frontage to accommodate the additional bins.

Carriageway Width

The application seeks to retain the existing s-shaped carriageway to provide vehicular access to the proposed allotments. The existing Right of Carriageway provides vehicular access to 6 allotments within the existing subdivision (Nos. 30, 32, 32A, 32B, 34 and 34A Day Road). The proposed subdivision would result in seven allotments having benefit of the accessway.

The HDCP stipulates that a carriageway serving between 7-24 allotments should have a minimum width of 5.65m. The existing carriageway has a width of between 3m-6m and does not comply with the HDCP in this regard.

The proposed development would result in one additional lot accessing the carriageway. Council’s engineering assessment has determined that the existing accessway is of adequate width to facilitate safe vehicular movement and is capable of accommodating the proposed subdivision. Strict compliance with the HDCP carriageway width prescriptive measure is considered unnecessary in this instance, given that the proposal has included improvements to the existing carriageway through the provision of an additional passing bay and turning area. Widened the carriageway to 5.65m for its full length would require removal of additional trees that contribute to the heritage streetscape and provide vegetation screening to the proposed allotments.

It is noted the NSW RFS GTAs do not require fire trucks to have vehicular access within the site and seeks to rely upon a proposed water hydrant along the carriageway for firefighting purposes.

Common Turning Area

The HDCP requires the provision of a common vehicle turning area for subdivisions with an accessway serving 2 or more lots where the site has a slope greater than 15% and where vehicles would otherwise have to reverse more than 50m. Given that the existing accessway has a gradient greater than 15% and exhibits a length greater than 50m, the provision of a common turning area is necessitated in this instance.

The application proposes the construction of a common turning area to the northern side of the accessway within proposed Lot 11. Council’s engineering assessment has determined that the common turning area would facilitate egress from the site in a forward direction in accordance with Australian Standard AS2890.1 and AS2890.2.

The proposal complies with the prescriptive requirement of Part 6.4.1(g) of the HDCP and is considered acceptable.

Passing Bays

The HDCP stipulates that a passing bay should be provided adjacent to the street boundary and every 40m where the accessway serves seven or more lots. Accordingly, 2 passing bays are required to service the proposed subdivision.

The application proposes the construction of a single passing bay approximately 40m from the Day Road boundary within proposed Lot 11. Although the proposed passing bay would not be located at the street frontage, it is considered that the passing bay would be more appropriately sited at its proposed location to avoid impact to vegetation and the addition of handstand areas within the heritage streetscape. Whilst the application proposes the construction of a single passing bay, the submitted Plan of Proposed Subdivision has adequately demonstrated that the carriageway accommodates adequate width to facilitate the passing of vehicles at three separate locations and is deemed acceptable in this regard.

Waste Collection Vehicles

The HDCP provides that waste collection vehicles should be accommodated on-site if the accessway serves seven or more lots. The application seeks to retain the existing on-street Council waste collection arrangement that benefits the existing allotments.

It is noted that this HDCP requirement is intended to be applied to new subdivisions resulting in seven or more additional allotments, rather than for applications that propose the addition of a single allotment to an existing subdivision arrangement. Given that the proposal results in the addition of a single allotment to the existing arrangement, the widening of the accessway to provide for on-site waste vehicle access is deemed particularly onerous in this instance. Council’s waste management assessment raises no concerns to the collection of bins from the street frontage.

Street Lighting

The HDCP states that an accessway serving seven or more lots should provide street lighting pursuant to Australian Standards AS1158.3 and AS4282. The application seeks to retain the existing accessway, which does not incorporate street lighting.

It is noted that this control is intended to be applied to new subdivisions resulting in 7 or more additional allotments and street lighting would not be appropriate along the existing right-of-carriageway.

2.8 Section 7.11 Contributions Plans

Hornsby Shire Council Section 7.11 Contributions Plan 2020-2030 applies to the development as it would result in an additional allotment. Accordingly, the requirement for a monetary Section 7.11 contribution is recommended as a condition of consent.

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

Submissions have been received from the community raising tree and vegetation concerns, summarised as follows:

· The proposed tree canopy loss is understated and unacceptable and provides habitat for wildlife.

· Endangered Species (Syzygium paniculatum) are growing on the subject site.

· The large number of trees proposed to be removed is unacceptable.

· The ability to provide offset planting is limited due to the NSW Rural Fire Service APZ requirements.

· Trees proposed to be removed within the indicative building envelopes should not be removed and are to be considered upon future applications for dwelling houses on the allotments.

· There is a conflict between the positioning of the private open space and offset planting area.

The application has been supported by an Arboricultural Impact Assessment prepared by Australis Tree Management dated 22 January 2021.

The site contains 2 trees listed as vulnerable under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1995, identified as tree Nos. 25 and 35 (Magenta Lilly Pilly).

Council’s tree assessment has been undertaken with consideration of the submitted Arboricultural Impact Assessment. The Report has determined that 44 trees on the subject site are ‘moderate’ to ‘high’ value trees worthy of retention, identified as tree Nos. 5, 6, 7, 9, 12, 13, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 31, 33, 35, 36, 38, 39, 40, 41, 42, 50, 53, 54, 60, 64, 67, 70, 71, 73, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 87, 89, 91, 94, 97, 99 and 103.

3.1.1.1 Tree Removal and Replacement Planting

The application proposes the removal of 21 trees on the subject site to facilitate the proposed works and to accommodate future dwelling houses on the proposed allotments.

The trees proposed to be removed have been identified on the Tree Protection Plan as tree Nos. 1 (Sweet Pittosporum), 47 (Smooth-barked Apple), 58 (Gum Tree), 62 (Smooth-barked Apple), 63 (River Oak), 64 (Smooth-barked Apple), 65 (Bangalay), 66 (Bhutan Cypress), 67 (Lemon-scented Gum), 69 (Willow Bottlebrush), 70 (Tallowwood), 71 (Gum Tree), 74 (Smooth-barked Apple), 77 (Queensland Brush Box), 78 (Queensland Brush Box), 79 (Broad-leaved Paperbark), 80 (Broad-leaved Paperbark), 81 (Broad-leaved Paperbark), 82 (Willow Bottlebrush), 93 (Smooth-barked Apple) and 103 (Pistachio).

Of the 21 trees proposed to be removed, the submitted Arboricultural Impact Assessment has assessed 9 trees as achieving a ‘low’ significance rating (tree Nos. 1, 47, 58, 62, 63, 65, 66, 69 and 74) with the remaining 12 trees achieving a ‘moderate/high’ significance rating (tree Nos. 64, 67, 70, 71, 77, 78, 79, 80, 81, 82, 93 and 103).

Council’s tree assessment recommends that consideration be given to the retention of 15 additional trees identified as Nos. 47, 58, 63, 64, 65, 66, 67, 70, 71, 77, 79, 80, 81, 82 and 93 as the proposed stormwater works and passing bay / common vehicle turning area would not impact these trees, or the trees are located towards the perimeter of the indicative building envelopes. Accordingly, a condition has been recommended under Schedule 1 limiting tree removal to a total of 6 trees, identified as tree Nos. 1, 62, 69, 74, 78 and 103.

Of the 6 trees recommended by Council for removal, 2 trees achieve a ‘moderate/high’ significance rating (tree Nos. 78 and 103) with the remaining trees achieving a ‘low’ rating.

Council’s tree assessment raises no concerns to the removal of these 6 trees, subject to the replacement planting of 6 trees. With regard to replacement planting, Council’s tree assessment is satisfied that adequate space exists on the site to accommodate 6 replacement trees whilst achieving the RFS IPA requirements. In addressing the submission, it is noted that the offset planting locations shown on the Plan of Proposed Subdivision are indicative only. A condition has been recommended under Schedule 1 that permits replacement planting outside of these identified areas.

The Bushfire Report indicates that there is no requirement for the removal of additional trees to satisfy the Asset Protection Zone requirements of Planning for Bushfire Protection 2019.

3.1.1.2 Tree Retention

With regard to the impact of the development on trees to be retained on-site and adjacent sites, Council’s tree assessment concurs with the conclusions of the submitted Arboricultural Impact Assessment that the trees proposed to be retained can be successfully retained through the utilisation of sensitive methods of construction as prescribed in Australian Standard AS4970-2009. Accordingly, conditions have been recommended under Schedule 1 requiring the appointment of a Project Arborist to oversee the installation of tree protection fencing and the use of sensitive construction techniques for all works within the TPZ of retained trees.

3.1.2 Stormwater Management

Submissions have been received raising concerns that the proposal would increase stormwater runoff into adjacent waterways.

Stormwater from each allotment is to be drained via a proposed inter-allotment stormwater drainage easement that would traverse the southern side of the site to Council’s drainage system along Day Road. Future dwellings would also require the provision of onsite detention systems.

Council’s engineering assessment is satisfied that the proposal would not result in adverse stormwater runoff and raises no concerns to the proposed method of stormwater disposal. Accordingly, a condition has been recommended under Schedule 1 requiring the creation of an inter-allotment drainage easement over the site pursuant to Section 88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919.

3.2 Social Impacts

The development would improve housing choice in the locality by providing additional Torrens Title allotments capable of accommodating future dwelling houses. This is consistent with Council’s Housing Strategy which identifies the need to provide a mix of housing options to meet future demographic needs in Hornsby Shire.

3.3 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 4.15(1)(c) of the Act requires Council to consider “the suitability of the site for the development”.

The proposal has demonstrated the ability to retain the majority of trees on the site and provides a subdivision design that is appropriate for the locality and heritage conservation area. The indicative building envelopes are located on the flattest portions of the site and provide ample amenity to adjacent properties. The site is mapped as bushfire prone, however the removal of vegetation to accommodate an Asset Protection Zone is not required.

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 16 February 2021 and 9 March 2021 in accordance with the Hornsby Community Participation Plan. During this period, Council received 18 submissions. The map below illustrates the location of those nearby landowners who made a submission that are in close proximity to the development site.

NOTIFICATION PLAN

• PROPERTIES NOTIFIED

X SUBMISSIONS

RECEIVED

PROPERTY SUBJECT OF DEVELOPMENT

9 SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED OUT OF MAP RANGE

18 submissions objected to the development, generally on the grounds that:

· Future dwelling houses on the allotments could be large scale and affect the amenity of the area.

· The application has been insufficiently supported with regard to documentation, plans and detail.

· The site provides poor vehicular access for firefighters and emergency services.

· The impact to on-street parking is substantial.

· Additional trees can be removed on the site pursuant to the RFS 10/50 code.

· The proposal would result in a reduction in on-street parking.

· The submitted Arborist Report includes numerous errors and inconsistencies, including numerous trees that have not been plotted on the Survey Plan.

· An Ecological Assessment is required to be submitted.

· The nearby heritage listed property ‘Ahimsa’ has not been properly considered.

· The loss of vegetation would pose a detrimental impact to the HCA.

· The subdivision is inappropriate for the HCA.

· The site is steep, and the proposal does not comply with the earthwork requirements of the HLEP.

· The proposed lots are small and irregular in shape compared to surrounding properties.

· The indicative location of future dwelling houses on the proposed allotments would give rise to negative privacy and amenity impacts to these properties.

· The proposal does not comply with Planning for Bushfire Protection 2019 including that the accessway and turning areas is not of adequate width to facilitate access by RFS fire trucks.

· The driveway width, turning head, passing bay, waste collection, gradient and lighting requirements of the HDCP.

· The proposed use of the existing accessway is unsafe for vehicles and pedestrians.

· The width of the accessway does not permit 2 vehicles using the accessway at any one time.

· There is not enough space along the street frontage to accommodate the additional bins.

· The proposed tree canopy loss is understated and unacceptable and provides habitat for wildlife.

· Endangered Species (Syzygium paniculatum) are growing on the subject site.

· The large number of trees proposed to be removed is unacceptable.

· The ability to provide offset planting is limited due to the NSW Rural Fire Service APZ requirements.

· Trees proposed to be removed within the indicative building envelopes should not be removed and are to be considered upon future applications for dwelling houses on the allotments.

· There is a conflict between the positioning of the private open space, offset planting area and tree removal.

· The proposal would increase stormwater runoff into adjacent waterways.

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 Insufficient Information

Submissions have been received raising concerns that the application has been insufficiently supported with regard to documentation, plans and detail, including that numerous trees that have not been plotted on the Survey Plan.

In addressing these submissions, it is acknowledged that Council’s assessment has taken into consideration the quality of the submitted plans and documentation and has deemed the submitted information to be adequate for the purposes of development assessment and for the determination of the application. It is noted that the submitted Plan of Proposed Subdivision has mistakenly not plotted numerous trees on the subject site. The submitted Tree Protection Plan prepared by Australis Tree Management dated 22 January 2021 has rectified this issue which is also accurately reflected in the Arboricultural Impact Assessment.

5.1.2 Street Parking

Submissions have been received raising concerns that the proposal would result in a reduction in on-street parking.

In addressing these submissions, the proposal accommodates capacity for on-site parking of 2 vehicles per allotment and complies with the HDCP in this regard. In addition, the application does not propose the construction of an additional vehicular crossing at Day Road and would not reduce street parking in this respect. There is no requirement under the HDCP for the provision of onsite visitor car parking for low density residential development.

5.1.3 Ecological Assessment

A submission has been received raising concerns that an Ecological Assessment is required to be submitted given the site contains 2 Magenta Lilly Pilly trees, listed as vulnerable under the Commonwealth Environment Protection and Biodiversity Conservation Act 1995.

The site is not mapped as containing ‘Terrestrial Biodiversity’ and is not subject to the ‘Terrestrial Biodiversity’ considerations of the HLEP.

The 2 Magenta Lilly Pilly trees (tree Nos. 25 and 35) located to the front of site are proposed to be retained. Council’s tree assessment concurs with the submitted Arboricultural Impact Assessment that the proposed works, including the proposed stormwater line, would not encroach into the TPZ of these 2 trees. The trees are located approximately 35m from the indicative building envelope on Lot 11 and the construction of dwelling houses on the proposed lots would not impact upon these trees. Council’s biodiversity assessment is satisfied that the proposal would not impact threatened species habitat, populations or ecological communities pursuant to section 5A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act and an Ecological Assessment is not required in this instance.

5.2 Public Agencies

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

5.2.1 Rural Fire Service

The application is integrated development in accordance with Section 4.46 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 as the site is subject to bushfire risk. The proposal was referred to the NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS). The RFS provided a Bushfire Safety Authority as required under Section 100b of the Rural Fires Act 1997 and the General Terms of Approval have been included in Schedule 1 of the 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 application proposes the Torrens Title subdivision of one allotment into two lots.

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

Council received 18 submissions during the public notification period. The matters raised have been addressed in the body of the report.

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

The reasons for this decision are:

· The proposed development complies with the requirements of the relevant environmental planning instruments and the Hornsby Development Control Plan 2013.

· The proposed development does not create unreasonable environmental impacts to adjoining development with regard to amenity, privacy, heritage conservation, tree preservation, bushfire management, vehicle access and stormwater management.

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 Thomas Dales

Cassandra Williams

Major Development Manager - Development Assessments

Planning and Compliance Division

Rod Pickles

Manager - Development Assessments

Planning and Compliance Division

Attachments:

1.	Locality Map
2.	Subdivision Plan
3.	Survey Plan
4.	Drainage Plan
5.	Tree Protection Plan

File Reference: DA/149/2021

Document Number: D08153472

SCHEDULE 1

GENERAL CONDITIONS

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

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

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

1. Approved Plans and Supporting Documentation

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

Approved Plans

*Plan No.*	*Plan Title*	*Drawn by*	*Dated*	*Council Reference*
S.15630A2, Rev B	Plan of Proposed Subdivision	P.S. Graham & Associates	27.4.21
S.15630A2, Rev A2	Concept Drainage Plan	P.S. Graham & Associates	29.1.21
20211720.5, Page 3/4	Tree Protection Plan	Australis Tree Management	22.1.21

Supporting Documents

*Document Title*	*Prepared by*	*Dated*	*Council Reference*
Bushfire Protection Assessment Report	ABPP	15.12.20	D08106037
Arboricultural Impact Assessment	Australis Tree Management	22.1.21	D08106036
Addendum to Bushfire Protection Assessment Report	ABPP	27.1.21	D08106035
Waste Management Plan	P.S. Graham & Associates	23.12.20	D08106032
General Terms of Approval (GTA) (Ref: A20210510001876-CL55-1)	NSW Rural Fire Service	23.7.21	D08213550

2. Removal of Existing Trees

This development consent permits the removal of 6 trees numbered 1, 62, 69, 74, 78 and 103 as identified on the Tree Protection Plan prepared by Australis Tree Management dated 22 January 2021. All other trees must be retained.

3. Construction Certificate

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

b) A Subdivision Works Certificate is required to be approved by Council or a Private Certifying Authority with relevant accreditation in B and C Category, prior to the commencement of any subdivision works under this consent.

c) A separate Subdivision Works Certificate must be obtained from Council for all works within the public road reserve under S138 of the Roads Act 1993.

d) The Construction Certificate / Subdivision Works Certificate plans must be consistent with the Development Consent plans.

4. Section 7.11 Development Contributions

a) In accordance with Section 4.17(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the Hornsby Shire Council Section 7.11 Development Contributions Plan 2020-2030, the following monetary contributions must be paid to Council to cater for the increased demand for community infrastructure resulting from the development:

Description	Contribution (4)
Roads	$1,456.60
Open Space and Recreation	$11,413.95
Community Facilities	$7,029.95
Plan Preparation and Administration	$99.50
TOTAL	$20,000

being for an additional allotment.

b) The value of this contribution is current as at 29 July 2021. If the 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 7.11 Development Contributions Plan and the amount payable will be calculated at the time of payment in the following manner:

$C_PY
=$C_DC x CPI_PY

CPI_DC

Where:

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

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

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

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

c) The monetary contribution must be paid to Council:

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

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

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

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

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

Council’s 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.

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE

5. Appointment of a Project Arborist

a) A project arborist with AQF Level 5 qualifications must be appointed.

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

6. Stormwater Drainage

The stormwater drainage system for the development must be designed in accordance with AUS-SPEC Specifications (www.hornsby.nsw.gov.au/property/build/aus-spec-terms-and-conditions) and the following requirements:

a) Connected directly to Council’s street drainage system in Day Road with a galvanised box section with a 100mm maximum depth.

b) An inter-allotment stormwater drainage system to service the proposed subdivision with pits being cast in situ or pre-cast concrete pits being used.

7. Service Conduits

a) Conduit for utility services including electricity, water, gas and telephone is to be provided. All existing overhead assets within the subject site 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.

b) The relocated services are to be located within the proposed Easement for Services as depicted on the approved Plan of Proposed Subdivision.

8. Internal Driveway/Vehicular Areas

The proposed passing bay/turning head and the three narrow strips of driveway within the Right of Carriageway owned by the adjacent property at No. 34A Day Road must be designed, constructed and a Construction Certificate issued in accordance with Australian Standards AS2890.1, AS2890.2, AS3727 and the following requirements:

a) The driveway be a rigid pavement.

b) A passing bay a minimum 5.5 metres wide and 6 metres long with 4-metre-long transition splays shall be provided along the existing access driveway to enable vehicles to pass each other.

c) 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.

d) Longitudinal sections along both sides of the access driveway shall be submitted to the principal certifying authority in accordance with the relevant sections of AS 2890.1. The maximum grade shall not exceed 1 in 4 (25%) with the maximum changes of grade of 1 in 8 (12.5%) for summit grades and 1 in 6.7 (15%) for sag grades. Any transition grades shall have a minimum length of 2 metres. The longitudinal sections shall incorporate the design levels obtained by Council.

Note: A construction certificate shall be obtained prior to the commencement of these works and are to be completed prior to the issue of an occupation certificate.

9. Building Code of Australia

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

10. Utility Services

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

a) Ausgrid - a letter of consent demonstrating that satisfactory arrangements have been made to service the proposed development.

b) Telstra or NBN Co. - a letter of consent demonstrating that satisfactory arrangements have been made to service the proposed development.

11. Sydney Water – Approval

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

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

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE COMMENCEMENT OF ANY WORKS

12. Installation of Tree Protection Measures

All trees to be retained must have tree protection measures for the ground, trunk and canopy installed by the project arborist as follows:

a) For the duration of construction works, in accordance with Tree Protection Plan prepared by Australis Tree Management dated 22/1/2021.

b) Tree protection fencing for the trees to be retained must be installed by the engaged AQF 5 project arborist and consist of 1.8m high temporary fencing panels installed in accordance with Australian Standard AS4687-2007 Temporary fencing and hoardings.

c) The installation of all required tree protection fencing must include shade cloth attached to the fencing to reduce transport of dust, particulates and liquids from entering the tree protection zone.

d) Tree crown protection measures are required and must be installed by the AQF 5 project arborist.

e) The circumference of the trunk(s) must be wrapped in hessian material to provide cushioning for the installation of timber planks.

f) Timber planks (50 x100mm) must be spaced at 100mm intervals and must be attached using adjustable ratchet straps.

g) All tree protection zones must have a layer of wood-chip mulch at a depth of between 150mm and 300mm.

h) Where wood-chip mulch is permitted by Council instead of tree protection fencing within the tree protection zones, the wood-chip must be covered with a layer of geotextile fabric and rumble boards.

13. Erection of Construction Sign

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

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

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

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

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

14. Protection of Adjoining Areas

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

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

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

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

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

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

15. 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.

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

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

16. Erosion and Sediment Control

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

Note: On the spot penalties may be issued for any non-compliance with this requirement without any further notification or warning.

REQUIREMENTS DURING CONSTRUCTION

17. Prohibited Actions Within the Fenced Tree Protection Zone

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

a) Soil cutting or filling, including excavation and trenching.

b) Soil cultivation, disturbance or compaction.

c) Stockpiling storage or mixing of materials.

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

e) The disposal of liquids and refuelling.

f) The disposal of building materials.

g) The siting of offices or sheds.

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

18. Maintaining the Health of Trees Approved for Retention

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

19. Maintaining Tree Protection Measures

The Tree Protection Measures must be maintained by the project arborist for the duration of works.

20. Approved Works Within Tree Protection Zone Incursions

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

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

ii) The maximum diameter of roots permitted to be cut is 50mm.

b) The new driveway components and passing bay/turning head must be constructed using the following process:

i) To minimise soil compaction the proposed driveway must be built above grade using sensitive construction techniques in the form of piers or screw pilings.

ii) To minimise soil compaction all imported material in the vicinity of the replacement driveway must be distributed by hand.

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

d) Approved excavations within the Tree Protection Zone of trees to be retained not associated with installation of services must be undertaken as follows:

i) Excavations for the construction and/or installation of the driveway components and turning area in the Tree Protection Zone of trees to be retained on the approved plans must be supervised by the project arborist for the first 1.000 meter undertaken manually to locate roots and allow for pruning.

e) No changes of grade within the Tree Protection Zone of trees to be retained on the approved plans are permitted.

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

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

ii) The installation of any underground services which either enter or transect the designated TPZ must be undertaken manually.

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

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

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

ii) Installation of geotextile fabric ground covering.

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

21. Building Materials and Site Waste

The stockpiling of building materials, the parking of vehicles or plant, the disposal of cement slurry, waste water or other contaminants must be located outside the tree protection zones as prescribed in the conditions of this consent of any tree to be retained.

22. 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.

23. Environmental Management

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

24. 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.

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.

25. 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.

26. Waste Management

All work must be carried out in accordance with the approved waste management plan.

REQUIREMENTS PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A SUBDIVISION CERTIFICATE

27. RFS Requirements / Reticulated Water Supply

a) In accordance with the recommendations of the submitted Bushfire Protection Assessment prepared by ABPP dated 15 December 2020 and consistent with the NSW Rural Fire Service’s General Terms of Approval (GTA), the reticulated water supply is to be extended from the street mains to the proposed hydrant located adjacent to the proposed passing bay; and

b) A Certificate prepared by a BPAD accredited Bushfire Consultant is to be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority (PCA) certifying the completion of any works required by the NSW RFS General Terms of Approval (GTAs) prior to the issue of the Subdivision Certificate.

Note: Figure 1 on Page 6 of the submitted Bushfire Protection Assessment prepared by ABPP dated 15 December 2020 indicates the proposed location of the hydrant.

28. Replacement Tree Requirements

a) The 6 trees approved for removal under this consent must be offset through replacement planting of a minimum of 6 trees within Lot 11.

b) All replacement plantings must be species selected from the ‘Trees Indigenous to Hornsby Shire (as of 1 September 2011)’ document available for viewing on the Hornsby Council’s website http://www.hornsby.nsw.gov.au/environment/flora-and-fauna/tree-management/indigenous-trees

c) The location and size of tree replacement planting must comply with the following:

i) All replacement trees must be located in either front or rear setbacks and planted 4 metres or greater from the indicative building envelopes.

ii) The pot size of the replacement trees must be a minimum 45 litres.

iii) All replacement trees must be a minimum of 3 metres in height at the time of planting.

iv) All replacement trees must have the potential to reach a mature height greater than 10 metres.

29. Final Tree Certification

a) The AQF 5 Project arborist must submit to the Principal Certifying Authority a certificate that includes the following:

b) All tree protection requirements complied with the as approved tree protection plan for the duration of demolition and/or construction works and.

c) All completed works relating to tree protection and maintenance have been carried out in compliance with the conditions of consent and approved plans and;

d) Dates, times and reasons for all site attendance and;

e) All works undertaken to maintain the health of retained trees and;

f) Details of tree protection zone maintenance for the duration of works and;

Note: Copies of monitoring documentation may be requested throughout DA process.

30. Sydney Water – s73 Certificate

A s73 Certificate must be obtained from Sydney Water and submitted to the PCA.

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.

31. 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 over the access corridor and the proposed passing bay and turning head;

b) An easement for services at the location shown on the approved Plan of Proposed Subdivision;

c) The creation of a “Positive Covenant” over the proposed Lot 11 and 12 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 5 cubic metres and a maximum discharge of 8 litres per second into Council’s drainage system in accordance with Council’s prescribed wording;

d) The creation of a “Positive Covenant” over the entire site requiring that the site be managed as an inner protection area (IPA) in accordance with the requirements of Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2019;

e) An easement for letterboxes shall be created over Lot 11 benefiting Lot 12. 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.

32. Construction of Engineering Works

All engineering works identified in this consent are to be completed and a Compliance Certificate issued prior to the release of the Subdivision Certificate.

33. Preservation of Survey Marks

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

34. Works as Executed Plan

A works-as-executed plan(s) must be prepared by a registered surveyor and submitted to Council for completed on-site detention, council drainage, road pavement and kerb & gutter. 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.

35. Damage to Council Assets

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

GENERAL TERMS OF APPROVAL – NSW RURAL FIRE SERVICE

The following conditions of consent are General Terms of Approval from the nominated State Agency pursuant to Section 4.47 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and must be complied with to the satisfaction of that Agency.

36. Asset Protection Zones

At the issue of a subdivision certificate, and in perpetuity to ensure ongoing protection from the impact of bush fires, the entire site must be managed as an inner protection area (IPA) in accordance with the requirements of Appendix 4 of Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2019. When establishing and maintaining an IPA the following requirements apply:

a) Tree canopy cover should be less than 15% at maturity.

b) Trees at maturity should not touch or overhang the building.

c) Lower limbs should be removed up to a height of 2m above the ground.

d) Tree canopies should be separated by 2 to 5m.

e) Preference should be given to smooth barked and evergreen trees.

f) Large discontinuities or gaps in vegetation should be provided to slow down or break the progress of fire towards buildings.

g) Shrubs should not be located under trees.

h) Shrubs should not form more than 10% ground cover.

i) Clumps of shrubs should be separated from exposed windows and doors by a distance of at least twice the height of the vegetation.

j) Grass should be kept mown (as a guide grass should be kept to no more than 100mm in height).

k) Leaves and vegetation debris should be removed.

37. Water and Utility Services

The provision of water, electricity and gas must comply with Table 5.3c of Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2019.

- END OF CONDITIONS

ADVISORY NOTES

The following information is provided for your assistance to ensure compliance with the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, other relevant legislation and Council’s policies and specifications. This information does not form part of the conditions of development consent pursuant to Section 4.17 of the Act.

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 Requirements

The Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 requires:

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

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

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

· Mandatory inspections of nominated stages of the construction inspected.

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

Tree and Vegetation Preservation

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

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

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

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

Dial Before You Dig

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

Asbestos Warning

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

www.environment.nsw.gov.au

www.adfa.org.au

Alternatively, telephone SafeWork NSW on 13 10 50.

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.

· 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

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

The house numbering for this subdivision shall be:

Lot	Street Number	Street Name	Street Type	Locality
Lot 11	34	Day	Road	Cheltenham
Lot 12	34B	Day	Road	Cheltenham

LPP Report No. LPP21/21

Local Planning Panel

Date of Meeting: 25/08/2021

2 DA/275/2021 - DEMOLITION OF STRUCTURES AND CONSTRUCTION OF A SINGLE STOREY 35 PLACE CHILDCARE CENTRE WITH BASEMENT CARPARK - 1 CAMERON AVENUE, WEST PENNANT HILLS

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

DA No:	DA/275/2021 (Lodged on 23 March 2021)
Description:	Demolition of existing structures and construction of a single storey 35 place child care centre with a basement carpark
Property:	Lot 18 DP 203971, No. 1 Cameron Avenue West Pennant Hills
Applicant:	Childcare Development Group
Owner:	Mr Gerard John Duane and Mrs Nora Teresa Duane
Estimated Value:	$1,101,829
Ward:	C

· The application involves the demolition of existing structures and construction of a single storey 35 place child care centre with a basement carpark and business identification signage.

· The proposal complies with the Hornsby Local Environmental Plan 2013, the Hornsby Development Control Plan 2013, State Environmental Planning Policy (Educational Establishments and Childcare Facilities) 2017 and the Child Care Planning Guideline with respect to landscaping, privacy, noise, traffic and safety, scale, site suitability, contamination, setbacks, tree preservation and sunlight access.

· A total of 31 submissions have been received in respect of the application.

· The application is required to be determined by the Hornsby Council Local Planning Panel as 10 or more unique submissions were received by way of objection.

· It is recommended that the application be approved.

RECOMMENDATION

THAT Development Application No. DA/275/2021 for demolition of existing structures and construction of a single storey 35 place child care centre with a basement carpark and business sign at Lot 18 DP 203971, No. 1 Cameron Avenue West Pennant Hills be approved subject to the conditions of consent detailed in Schedule 1 of LPP Report No. LPP21/21.

BACKGROUND

Site History

On 5 November 2020, Council held a pre-lodgement meeting (PL/72/2020) with the applicant to discuss the merits of a 35-place single storey child care centre with basement carpark.

Application History

On 26 April 2021, Council requested additional information/ amended plans to enable Council to undertake a comprehensive assessment regarding landscaping, acoustics, site contamination, pedestrian/ vehicle safety and construction traffic management. Between the dates of 20 May 2021 and 22 June 2021, Council received the requested plans and documentation.

On 22 June 2021, Council requested further revisions to the submitted Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP). Council received the revised CTMP on 5 July 2021.

On 2 August 2021, Council sought clarification from the applicant’s acoustic consultant regarding whether the proposed 1.8m high boundary fences along the side boundaries could be tapered to 1.2m within the front setback for vehicle visibility and to improve streetscape presence, whilst maintaining acoustic requirements. On 3 August 2021, Council received a letter from the acoustic consultant along with revised Architectural Plans (Rev C).

SITE

The 752.5m² site legally described as Lot 18 DP 203971 is located on the western side of Cameron Avenue West Pennant Hills and contains a split-level dwelling house and a shed outbuilding to the rear.

The site experiences an average fall of 9% (3.5m) to the front, south-eastern corner.

Cameron Avenue is a low-density residential street with a streetscape comprising a mixture of single and two storey dwelling houses.

The two adjoining properties to the south at Nos. 178 and 180 Victoria Road comprise a single storey dwelling house with garage and shed outbuildings and a split-level dwelling house, respectively. The adjoining property to the north at No. 3 Cameron Avenue contains a newly constructed single storey dwelling house. The adjacent property to the rear at No. 14 Wesson Road contains a single storey dwelling house.

The site is not bushfire or flood prone and is not burdened by any easements or restrictions.

The site is sparsely vegetated and contains a variety of small to large scale shrubs and trees along its perimeter.

Cherrybrook Metro Station is located approximately 1.3km walking distance from the site. A bus stop servicing the Transport for NSW ‘632’, ‘633’ and ‘642X’ bus routes is located 210m walking distance from the site at Castle Hill Road, connecting the site to locations including Rouse Hill, Castle Hill and the Sydney CBD.

PROPOSAL

The application seeks demolition of existing structures and construction of a purpose-built single storey child care centre with basement carpark.

The centre would cater for a maximum of 35 children within the following age groups:

· 2-3 years 15 Children

· 3-5 years 20 Children

The ground floor would contain a lift, kitchen, laundry, entry, office/reception, disabled toilet, staff room, store room, nappy change/kids’ toilets, two playrooms and outdoor store room. The basement comprises 10 car parking spaces (including 1 disabled space), a lift and a bin storage room.

An outdoor play area would be provided to the rear and sides of the site and would comprise a combination of soft fall synthetic and natural grass.

A pedestrian access ramp is proposed to the northern side of the frontage which would provide direct access to the front entry of the centre.

Ten trees are proposed to be removed to facilitate the proposed development. Landscaping is proposed within the front, side and rear setbacks, including the planting of 2 ‘native frangipani’ trees within the frontage, along with 3 trees (Maple, Bottlebrush and Flowering Pear) within the side and rear boundaries. Additionally, 108 shrubs (with mature heights between 1.5m to 3m) and groundcovers would be planted around the perimeter of the site.

A 1.8m high solid boundary fence would be installed along the side and rear boundaries of the site for privacy and acoustic attenuation purposes. In addition, a 10m² (5m x 2m) cantilevered roof is to be provided at the north-western corner of the site to provide a partially covered outdoor play area and additional acoustic attenuation.

The proposed operating hours of the child care centre would be 7:00am to 7:00pm, Monday to Friday.

The centre would be staffed by a maximum of 5 educators. Child care staff will commence work on a staggered basis between 7.00am and 9.30am.

A business identification sign comprising a single non-illuminated flush wall sign measuring 1500mm(W) x 1000mm(H) is to be located on the front façade. The top of the sign has a maximum height above ground level of 2700mm.

ASSESSMENT

1. STRATEGIC CONTEXT

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

Part 3 of the strategy relates to “Infrastructure and Collaboration” and a key objective is to provide services and infrastructure to meet communities’ changing needs. Further, the strategy cites changing demographics will affect the types and distribution of services required in neighbourhoods.

Over the 20 years to 2036, projections show an expected increase of 6,150 children aged four years and under. The identified challenge for Hornsby Shire would be to provide additional infrastructure for students and young people. The proposed child care centre would be consistent with the objectives of the strategy by providing 35 additional child care places to support a growing population.

2. STATUTORY CONTROLS

2.1 Hornsby Local Environmental Plan 2013

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

2.1.1 Zoning of Land and Permissibility

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

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

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

Submissions have been received raising concerns that the proposed child care centre is an inappropriate form of development in the R2 Low Density residential zone.

The proposed development is defined as a ‘centre-based child care facility’ and is permissible in the R2 zone with Council’s consent. The proposed development would provide facilities and services to meet the day to day needs of residents and would contribute in meeting the increasing demand for child care in the Hornsby Shire.

2.1.2 Height of Buildings

Clause 4.3 of the HLEP provides that the height of a building on any land should not exceed the maximum height show for the land on the Height of Buildings Map. The maximum permissible height for the subject site is 8.5m. The proposed building would have a maximum height of 5.6m and complies with this provision.

2.1.3 Heritage Conservation

Clause 5.10 of the HLEP sets out heritage conservation provisions for Hornsby Shire. The site does not include a heritage item, is not located in a heritage conservation area and is not within the immediate vicinity of any heritage items. Accordingly, no further assessment regarding heritage is necessary.

2.1.4 Earthworks

A submission has been received raising concerns that Sydney Water infrastructure and decommissioned septic tanks are potentially present under the site and that the proposed basement may impact upon these.

The application has been supported by a Preliminary Geotechnical Assessment prepared by Martens Consulting Engineers.

It is anticipated that the proposed development would require excavation works for the building footings, basement carpark and general levelling of the site. Council’s assessment has determined that the proposed development would require the removal of 1,245m³ of excavated material and the utilisation of minimal fill. The submitted Geotechnical Report raises no concerns with the proposed development with regard to earthworks and ground conditions, subject to the implementation of the geotechnical recommendations under Section 4 of the report and the provision of a dilapidation report detailing the structural condition of the adjoining properties before the commencement of works. Council concurs with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Assessment.

In addressing the submission, Council’s mapping system provides an indication that Sydney Water sewer infrastructure may be located within the adjacent sites at Nos. 178 and 180 Victoria Road. Notwithstanding, a standard condition has been recommended under Schedule 1 requiring that an application be submitted to Sydney Water for approval to determine whether the development would affect any Sydney Water infrastructure, prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. In addition, a condition has been recommended that all demolition work be carried out in accordance with Australian Standard AS2601-2001 Demolition of structures to ensure that the decommissioned septic tanks are removed safely (if it is determined during excavations that they are indeed present under the site).

The proposed earthworks would not detrimentally impact the surrounding natural and built environment with regard to drainage patterns and soil stability of the locality.

The proposal complies with Clause 6.2 of the HLEP and is considered acceptable in this regard.

2.2 State Environmental Planning Policy (Educational Establishments and Childcare Facilities) 2017

State Environmental Planning Policy (Educational Establishments and Childcare Facilities) 2017 (Childcare SEPP) commenced on 1 September 2017.

Clause 23 of the Childcare SEPP requires Council to consider the relevant provisions of the Child Care Planning Guideline 2017 (CCPG). The CCPG will generally take precedence over the HDCP with the exception of building height, side and rear setbacks and car parking rates.

An assessment of the application against Part 1.3 Planning objectives, Part 2 Design quality principles, Part 3 Matters for consideration and Part 4 Applying the National Regulations to development proposals is provided below:

2.2.1 Part 1.3 - What Are the Planning Objectives?

The planning objectives contained within Part 1.3 of the CCPG include requirements that child care facilities are compatible with the existing streetscape, context and neighbouring land uses and that they seek to minimise adverse impacts of development on adjoining properties and the neighbourhood.

As per the discussion provided in response to Part 3 of the CCPG, the proposal is considered consistent with these objectives.

2.2.2 Part 2 - Design Quality Principles

As per the discussion provided in response to Part 3 of the CCPG, the proposal is considered consistent with the design quality principles of Part 2 in relation to built form, landscaping, safety and amenity, privacy, solar access and noise.

2.2.3 Part 3.1 - Site Selection and Location

Submissions have been received that the existing road infrastructure is inadequate to accommodate the child care centre and additional traffic.

The objectives of Part 3.1 of the CCPG include that the siting of child care centres should be clear of potential environmental contaminants and incompatible social activities or uses and should not be located on flood or bushfire prone sites. In addition, Part 3.1 encourages that the land characteristics and slope be suitable for the scale of the development and that the type of adjoining road is appropriate for the proposed use.

Centre-based child care facilities are a permissible land use within the R2 low density residential zone. The site is located approximately 210m walking distance from a bus stop along Castle Hill Road and Cherrybrook Metro Station is located approximately 1.3km walking distance from the site. The site is not mapped as flood or bushfire prone and is an appropriate site in this regard.

The site experiences an average slope of 9% to the rear boundary and is considered to be a reasonably level site as is encouraged by the CCPG for child care centre developments. The site is located approximately 465m from a 7-Eleven service station along the western side of Pennant Hills Road and is not within proximity to any land uses that generate potential environmental contaminants.

Further discussion regarding site contamination and the appropriateness of the width of the street and traffic conditions is provided under Sections 2.3 and 2.8.2 of this report, respectively.

The proposal meets the objectives of Part 3.1 of the CCPG and the proposal is supported in this regard.

2.2.4 Part 3.2 - Local Character, Streetscape and the Public Domain Interface

Submissions have been received raising concerns that the existing and future desired character of the area would be detrimentally impacted by the proposal.

The objectives of Part 3.2 of the CCPG include that child care centre developments should contribute to and recognise existing streetscape qualities including form and scale and integrate car parking into the building design. In addition, child care centre developments should ensure that front fences respond to and complement the character of the area and do not dominate the public domain. Further, the proposal should not impact upon local heritage and the windows of the development should include street facing windows to provide passive surveillance to the street as a safety measure.

Cameron Avenue is a low-density residential street with a streetscape predominantly comprising single storey dwelling houses. The child care centre would present to the streetscape as a single storey structure and complements the setbacks and scale of built form along Cameron Avenue. The proposal includes basement carparking and is consistent with the CCPG requirement to integrate carparking into the building design. Although a 1.2m high masonry / timber front boundary fence has been proposed as indicated in the submitted Statement of Environmental Effects, the submitted plans do not provide any detail in this regard and accordingly approval of this fence cannot be considered under this application. Notwithstanding, 1.2m high front boundary fences are permitted to be constructed without consent under the exempt development provisions of the State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008.

The proposal would not be located within close proximity to a heritage item or heritage conservation area and would not pose a detrimental heritage impact consistent with the requirements of the CCPG. Further, the proposal includes street facing windows and provides opportunity for passive surveillance as a safety measure.

The proposal as amended includes provision for 1.8m high acoustic fencing around the sides and rear of the site, which tapers to 1.2m within the front setback to improve vehicle sight lines, streetscape character and landscape prominence.

The proposal meets the objectives of Part 3.2 of the CCPG and is supported in this regard.

2.2.5 Part 3.3 - Building Orientation, Envelope and Design

The objectives of Part 3.3 of the CCPG stipulate that child care centres should be orientated to minimise visual privacy and minimise noise impacts to adjacent properties. In addition, the objectives encourage built form, setbacks and scale of development that relates to its context and allows for accessibility and sunlight access.

Building Orientation and Design

Submissions have been received raising concerns that the proposal would be of a poor design given its residential context.

As previously discussed, Cameron Avenue is a low-density residential street with a streetscape predominantly comprising single storey dwelling houses, with numerous exhibiting face-brick, Colourbond and cladding materials and finishes. The child care centre would present to the streetscape as a single storey building and complements the setbacks and predominantly single storey scale of built form along Cameron Avenue. It is considered that the proposed use of a combination of face-brick, Colourbond, glass and cladding finishes positively contribute to the visual interest of the building and compliments the character of the local area. In addition, it is considered that the proposed boundary setbacks and building orientation would be in keeping with the expectation for development within a low-density residential context, with outdoor play areas provided to the rear of the site and access to the building provided from the front elevation.

Sunlight Access

The proposed single storey building would be setback between 2m-4.2m from the side boundaries and achieves a moderate scale consistent with the expectation for built form in the R2 Low density residential zone. Although the application has not been supported by Sunlight Access Diagrams, the Hornsby Development Application Submission Guideline only requires the submission of shadow diagrams for buildings greater than 1 storey in height. Given the modest scale of the structure, it is considered that all adjacent properties would receive a minimum of 3 hours of unobstructed solar access between 9am and 3pm in June. The proposal is acceptable with regard to sunlight access impacts to adjacent properties.

As addressed under Section 2.2.10 of this report, solar access for outdoor play meets the requirements of Part 4 of the CCPG.

Accessibility

The application has been accompanied by an Access Report prepared by Building Innovations Australia.

The CCPG indicates that Child care facilities need to allow equitable access by all members of the community, including those with disabilities. The submitted architectural plans indicate the provision of a disabled car parking space with access to a lift, an access ramp to the front of the building, a disabled toilet and accessible internal and external areas.

Council’s accessibility assessment concurs with the conclusions of the Access Report, subject to the imposition of a condition under Schedule 1 requiring that the building meets the requirements of the Disability (Access to Premises Buildings) Standards 2010.

2.2.6 Part 3.4 - Landscaping

The objectives of Part 3.4 of the CCPG include providing landscape design that contributes to the streetscape and amenity and along the boundary integrated with fencing. In addition, Part 3.4 encourages the use of existing landscaped areas where feasible.

Landscaping is proposed within the front, side and rear setbacks, including the planting of 2 ‘native frangipani’ trees within the frontage, along with 3 trees (Maple, Bottlebrush and Flowering Pear) within the side and rear boundaries. The trees have an expected mature height of 5m-10m and can be considered medium/ large canopy trees. Additionally, 108 shrubs (with heights between 1.5m-3m) and groundcovers would be planted around the perimeter of the site and would provide vegetation screening to the adjacent properties to the north (No. 3 Wesson Road), south (No. 178 Victoria Road) and rear (No. 14 Wesson Road).

Notwithstanding, the submitted Landscape Plan indicates that the south-western corner of the site would not be subject to the provision of landscaping. To provide vegetation screening to the adjacent property to the south at No. 180 Victoria Road, a condition has been recommended under Schedule 1 requiring that the Landscape Plan be amended to include the planting of shrubs/ trees with a mature height of 3m at the south-western corner. Council’s assessment has determined that the additional landscaping would have an approximate area of 16m² and would reduce the unencumbered outdoor space from 7.6m² to 7.1m² per child, which complies with Part 4 of the CCPG.

The proposal meets the objectives of Part 3.4 of the CCPG and the proposal is supported in this regard.

2.2.7 Part 3.5 - Visual and Acoustic Privacy

The objectives of Part 3.5 of the CCPG encourage the protection of the privacy and security of children attending the facility and to minimise impacts on privacy of adjoining properties. In addition, Part 3.5 seeks to minimise the impact of child care facilities on the acoustic amenity of neighbouring residential developments.

Privacy

Submissions have been received raising concerns that the proposal would result in privacy impacts and overlooking into adjacent properties.

The site experiences an average fall of 9% (3.5m) to the front, south-eastern corner. As evidenced on the submitted Survey Plan, the existing site achieves a ground level of between RL 168.75 AHD and RL 170.03 AHD within the rear yard. As a means of achieving a level building floorplate and outdoor play areas, excavation of between 900mm-1.9m has been proposed to the rear and sides of the site, with the outdoor play areas achieving a ground level of RL 168.00 AHD and the north-western corner provided at existing grade (RL 169.00 AHD). Given that the proposed outdoor play areas would be recessed into the site, substantial privacy is afforded to adjacent properties in this regard.

Similarly, excavation with a depth between 100mm-1.4m is proposed to facilitate the siting of the proposed child care centre building when viewed from the side elevations. It is anticipated that the proposed boundary fences in conjunction with the proposed landscaping would provide considerable privacy to the adjoining property to the north and south.

Despite extensive excavation being proposed to the rear of the site, the proposed boundary fencing to the rear of the site would be provided at existing ground level and would add privacy to adjacent properties at Nos. 3 Cameron Avenue and 14 Wesson Road.

The proposal meets the objectives of Part 3.5 of the CCPG with respect to privacy and the proposal is supported in this regard.

Acoustic Amenity

Submissions have been received with regard to acoustic amenity, summarised as follows:

· The proposed child care centre would generate an unacceptable level of operational noise to adjacent residential properties and would result in a loss of amenity.

· The submitted Acoustic Report is inaccurate, includes inconsistencies and is general in nature.

· The proposed western boundary fence is large and intrusive.

The application has been supported by an Acoustic Report prepared by Renzo Tonin & Associates dated 10 March 2021.

The proposed physical acoustic attenuation measures comprise the construction of a 1.8m high solid boundary fence along the side and rear boundaries and a 10m² (5m x 2m) cantilevered awning at the north-western corner of the site to provide a partially covered outdoor play area and additional acoustic attenuation.

For child care centre developments, Council strictly requires that background levels (L90) are not exceeded by 5dB(A) when measured at all sensitive residential receiver locations. Council’s assessment of the Acoustic Report identified that insufficient detail had been provided within the report and raised the following concerns:

· The predicted noise levels from outdoor play areas with the proposed acoustic mitigation measures will not achieve acoustic compliance at receiver R4 (No. 14 Wesson Road).

· An assessment of the noise impacts associated with mechanical plant has not been included in the Acoustic Report.

· The assessment of noise impacts associated with the indoor play areas assumes that windows and doors are closed.

· An assessment of the amenity criteria has not been provided.

· The proposed 1.8m high side boundary fence should be tapered to 1.2m within the front setback to improve vehicle sightlines and streetscape character.

· The Plan of Management refers to ‘special events’. The noise impacts associated with special events have not been assessed in the Acoustic Report.

· Whilst the proposed hours of operation are from 7:00am, it is anticipated staff will arrive prior to 7:00am. An assessment of the noise impacts of staff arriving prior to 7:00am is required.

· The Acoustic Report does not include an assessment of noise impacts associated with delivery and service vehicles.

In addressing these concerns, the applicant submitted an Addendum to the Acoustic Report dated 24 May 2021. Upon review of the Addendum, Council is satisfied that sufficient detail has now been provided to undertake a comprehensive acoustic assessment of the proposal. To ensure that background levels (L90) are not exceeded by 5dB(A) when measured at all adjacent properties (including No. 14 Wesson Road), the Addendum recommends that the number of children in the outdoor play area at any one time be limited to the following:

· 20 x 3-5 years old children in the outdoor play areas

· 15 x 2-3 years old children in the outdoor play areas

Council raises no acoustic concerns to the proposal as amended. In accordance with the acoustic recommendations, Council has recommended the imposition of an operational condition under Schedule 1 requiring that the 2-3 and 3-5-year age groups not be together within the outdoor play area at any one time.

It is noted that the Addendum has undertaken the acoustic assessment for indoor play noise on the basis that the windows in Playroom 1 and Playroom 2 are fixed with natural ventilation solely provided through the sliding doors. Council understands that whilst the ground floor level windows would be fixed, automatically controlled highlight awning windows have also been proposed along the northern elevation. A condition has been recommended under Schedule 1 that the highlight windows be fixed to ensure compliance with the acoustic limits.

Further, a condition has been recommended under Schedule 1 to ensure the tapering of the 1.8m high side boundary fences to 1.2m within the frontage.

The proposal meets the objectives of Parts 3.5 of the CCPG and is considered acceptable.

2.2.8 Part 3.6 - Noise and Air Pollution

The objectives of Part 3.6 of the CCPG include ensuring that outside noise levels of the facility are minimised to acceptable levels and to ensure air quality is acceptable where child care facilities are proposed. The CCPG stipulates that the location of child care facilities should be selected to avoid or minimise external sources of significant noise on the facility.

The site is located on a low-density residential street and is sited approximately 120m from a major road in the form of Castle Hill Road to the south-west. In addition, the site is not located in the vicinity of industrial land uses. The site would not be subjected to external sources of significant noise and air pollution and is considered acceptable with regard to the requirements of Part 3.6 of the CCPG. Section 2.2.7 of this report addresses the findings of the submitted Acoustic Report.

The proposal meets the objectives of Parts 3.6 of the CCPG and is considered acceptable.

2.2.9 Part 3.7 - Hours of Operation

A submission has been received raising concerns that parents may remain on the premises after closing hours.

Part 3.7 of the CCPG indicates that the hours of operation within areas where the predominant land use is residential are to be confined to the core hours of 7.00am to 7.00pm weekdays. The proposed operating hours of the child care centre would be 7:00am to 7:00pm, Monday to Friday.

In addressing the submission, page No. 7 the submitted Plan of Management indicates that the majority of children will have been collected between the hours of 3:00pm to 5:00pm. Council concurs with this statement and it is anticipated that only on rare occasions will parents collect their children at closing time.

The proposed hours of use of the child care facility complies with this requirement.

2.2.10 Part 3.8 - Traffic, Parking and Pedestrian Circulation

Part 3.8 of the CCPG indicates that a Traffic and Parking Study should be prepared to support the proposal to quantify potential impacts on the surrounding land uses and demonstrate how impacts on amenity will be minimised. In addition, the CCPG indicates that child care facilities proposed within narrow roads should ensure that safe access can be provided to and from the site and that vehicles can enter and leave the site in a forward direction.

Given that the CCPG delegates car parking rates and traffic to the requirements of the HDCP, Section 2.8.2 of this report addresses parking, traffic and safety.

The following table sets out the proposal’s compliance with the measures of Part 4 of the CCPG:

Child Care Planning Guideline 2017 - Part 4
Control	Proposal	Requirement	Compliance
Unencumbered indoor space	3.4m²	3.25m² per child	Yes
Unencumbered outdoor space	7.6m²	7m² per child	Yes
Storage
- External	0.485m³	0.3m³ per child	Yes
- Internal	0.65m³	0.2m³ per child	Yes
On site laundry	Provided on site	Provided on site	Yes
Child toilet facilities	Provided on site	Provided on site	Yes
Administration space	Provided on site	Provided on site	Yes
Nappy change facilities	Provided on site	Provided on site	Yes
Solar Access for outdoor play	34%	30-60% solar access	Yes

As detailed in the above table, the proposed development complies with Part 4 of the CCPG.

Clause 25 of the Childcare SEPP contains non-discretionary development standards. This prevents the consent authority from imposing more onerous standards or refusing an application on the basis that they have not been complied with. An assessment of the application against Clause 25 of the Childcare SEPP has been carried out below:

Centre-based child care - non-discretionary development standards

(a) Location - the development may be located at any distance from an existing or proposed early childhood education and care facility.

Submissions have been received raising concerns that the proposed development would be located within close proximity to other child care centres in the locality and that there is an undesirable saturation in the area.

Whilst there are other child care centres located at a distance of 450m or greater from the site, the child care centre can be located at any distance from an existing or proposed childhood education and care facility in accordance with Clause 25(a) of the Childcare SEPP.

(b) Indoor or outdoor space

(i) For development to which clause 107 (indoor unencumbered space requirements) or 108 (outdoor unencumbered space requirements) of the Education and Care Services National Regulations applies - the unencumbered area of indoor space and the unencumbered area of outdoor space for the development complies with the requirements of those clauses, or

(ii) For development to which clause 28 (unencumbered indoor space and useable outdoor play space) of the Children (Education and Care Services) Supplementary Provisions Regulation 2012 applies - the development complies with the indoor space requirements or the useable outdoor play space requirements in that clause;

Comment: The regulations require a minimum of 3.25m² of unencumbered indoor play area and a minimum of 7m² of unencumbered outdoor play area per child. The proposal complies with this requirement.

(c) Site area, site coverage and site dimensions—the development may be located on a site of any size, cover any part of the site and have any length of street frontage or any allotment depth.

Submissions have been received raising concerns that the site is not of adequate size to accommodate a child care centre.

Comment: The site has an area of 752.5m²and a frontage width of 22.86m and complies with Clause 25(c) of the Childcare SEPP.

(d) Colour of building materials or shade structures—the development may be of any colour or colour scheme unless it is a heritage item or in a heritage conservation area,

Comment: The centre would not be located within a heritage conservation area and the site is not a heritage listed item.

In summary, the proposed centre-based child care centre would comply with the Childcare SEPP provisions and is assessed as satisfactory in this regard.

2.3 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 Remediation of Land

Submissions have been received raising concerns that effluent is leaking onto the site from disused septic tanks located within upstream properties.

The application has been assessed against the requirements of State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 Remediation of Land (SEPP 55) under which consent must not be granted to the carrying out of any development on land unless the consent authority has considered whether the land is contaminated or requires remediation for the proposed use.

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 application has been supported by a Preliminary Site Investigation (PSI) prepared by Martens Consulting Engineers to identify whether the potential for contaminants are present on the site. The PSI identified the potential for contamination in all areas of concern. The conclusion of the PSI is provided below:

· The dwelling construction and maintenance have the potential to have introduced contaminants in the form of asbestos (fibrous cement sheets as a construction material), pesticides (pest control) and heavy metals (paints, pest control, use of galvanised materials).

· Past shed construction, storage and maintenance could have introduced asbestos (possible construction material), pesticides (pest control) and heavy metals (paints, galvanised metals, pest control).

· Potential onsite filling includes the entire western portion of site (retaining wall area and previous swimming pool footprint). Fill imported on site have unknown origins and may have introduced asbestos (possible construction material), pesticides (pest control) and heavy metals (paints, galvanised metals, pest control).

Given the PSI identified the potential for contaminants, the applicant provided a Detailed Site Investigation (DSI) prepared by Martens Consulting Engineers dated 12 March 2021 to further investigate the areas of concern and provide potential remediation actions if necessary. The DSI was conducted with on-site borehole contamination sampling. Council’s assessment of the DSI raised concerns that insufficient detail was provided within the report to undertake a comprehensive assessment of whether the site is suitable for a child care centre. Principally, Council raised concerns that that not all samples were examined for all analytes and no sample results for sample SS08, BH 203 or BH 206 have been included in the Detailed Site Investigation.

Accordingly, Council requested that the DSI be amended to address these issues. The amended DSI (dated 19 May 2021) showed that all samples undertaken were below the National Environment Protection (Assessment of Site Contamination) Measure Health Investigation Levels for child care centre land uses.

Council’s environmental protection assessment raises no concerns to the proposal as amended, subject to conditions recommended under Schedule 1 requiring that the removal of asbestos material to be undertaken by a contractor that holds an appropriate licence issued by SafeWork NSW. In addition, a condition has been recommended requiring that a licenced asbestos assessor provide a Clearance Certificate certifying that the site is suitable for its proposed use after the asbestos has been disposed.

2.4 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64 Advertising and Signage

The aims of the Policy are to ensure that advertising and signage is compatible with the desired amenity and visual character of an area, to provide effective communication in suitable locations and to ensure signage is of high-quality design and finish.

SEPP 64 defines a ‘business identification sign’ as a sign that identifies or names a building or the nature of the business. The proposed signage complies with the definition of business identification signs under the SEPP.

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

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 64
Control		Requirement	Assessment
Division 1, 2 and 3 development controls
Objectives		Does the proposal satisfy the objectives in Clause 3 of the SEPP?	Yes
Schedule 1 – Assessment Criteria (to be considered for all advertising structures including “business identification signs”)
Character of the area	Is the proposal compatible with the existing or desired future character of the area or locality in which it is proposed to be located?		The sign to be affixed to the front of the building would have dimensions of 1m(h) x 1.5m(w) and is considered to be of a small scale. The signage would be consistent with the existing and future character of the area.
	Is the proposal consistent with a particular theme for outdoor advertising in the area or locality?		There is no particular theme regarding outdoor advertising within the locality.
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		The proposal would not detract from the visual quality of the residential area
Views and vistas	Does the proposal obscure or compromise important views?		The proposed signage will not obscure or compromise any important views
	Does the proposal dominate the skyline and reduce the quality of vistas?		No
	Does the proposal respect the viewing rights of other advertisers?		The signage would not obstruct any views to other advertisements in the area.
Streetscape, setting or landscape	Is the scale, proportion and form of the proposal appropriate for the streetscape, setting or landscape?		The scale and proportion of the proposed signage is suitable for the site and locality
	Does the proposal contribute to the visual interest of the streetscape, setting or landscape?		The proposed sign would have a neutral contribution to the visual interest of the streetscape and setting
	Does the proposal reduce clutter by rationalising and simplifying existing advertising?		The proposed signage would provide for a neat, uncluttered finish.
	Does the proposal screen unsightliness?		The proposed signage will not screen unsightliness.
	Does the proposal protrude above buildings, structures or tree canopies in the area or locality?		The sign would not protrude vertically above structures or the building
	Does the proposal require ongoing vegetation management?		The signage does not require ongoing vegetation management
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?		The proposal would be compatible with the scale and proportion of the existing building on the site.
	Does the proposal respect important features of the site or building, or both		The proposed sign respects the architectural features of the building and site and would complement its features
	Does the proposal show innovation and imagination in its relationship to the site or building, or both?		The sign is of a simple design, is placed in a visible location and would not be unsightly in the residential context
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?		The signage does not have any lights or safety devices
Illumination	Would illumination result in unacceptable glare?		The signage is not illuminated
	Would illumination affect safety for pedestrians, vehicles or aircraft?		N/A
	Would illumination detract from the amenity of any residence or other form of accommodation?		N/A
	Can the intensity of the illumination be adjusted, if necessary?		N/A
	Is the illumination subject to a curfew?		N/A
Safety	Would the proposal reduce the safety for any public road?		The proposed signage will not reduce the safety of any public road.
	Would the proposal reduce the safety for pedestrians or bicyclists?		The proposed signage will not reduce the safety for pedestrians or cyclists.
	Would the proposal reduce the safety for pedestrians, particularly children, by obscuring sightlines from public areas?		The proposed signage will not reduce pedestrian safety or impact sightlines from public areas.

The proposed signage is assessed as acceptable pursuant to the provisions of Schedule 1 of SEPP64.

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

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

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

Section 3.1.1 of this report addresses proposed tree removal.

2.6 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.

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

2.8 Hornsby Development Control Plan 2013

Hornsby Development Control Plan 2013 - Part 7 Community Uses
Control	Proposal	Requirement	Compliance
Site Area	752.5m²	N/A	N/A
Floor Area	265m²	380m²	Yes
Site Coverage	36%	50%	Yes
Height	5.6m - 1 storey	8.5m - 2 storey	Yes
Number of Children	35 children	max. 40 Children	Yes
Recreation Space
- Indoor	3.4m²	3.25m² per child	Yes
- Outdoor	7.6m²	7m² per child	Yes
Landscaping	45%	min. 30%	Yes
Car Parking (@ 1/ 4 children)	10 spaces	9 spaces	Yes
Setbacks (To Buildings)
- Front	6.1m	6m	Yes
- Side (north)	2m	2m	Yes
- Side (south)	2m	2m	Yes
- Rear	8.67m	8m	Yes

As detailed in the above table, the proposed development complies with the prescriptive measures within the HDCP. A brief discussion on compliance with relevant performance requirements and Part 1C General Controls is provided below. It is noted that the CCPG would take precedence over the HDCP with the exception of building height, side and rear setbacks and car parking rates.

2.8.1 Site Requirements

The HDCP provides selection criteria that aim to encourage the location of community land uses to minimise potential land use conflicts. The HDCP recommends that community uses should be separated from intensive, offensive or hazardous land uses. It also suggests that the preferred location would be corner sites, sites with a frontage to a park and within 400m walking distance to public transport. As the provisions of the CCPG take precedence over the HDCP with regard to site selection and land use conflicts, Section 2.2.3 of this report addresses the relevant CCPG site requirements.

Notwithstanding, the site is separated from intensive, offensive or hazardous land uses and is within 400m walking distance to public transport. It is considered that the site is suitable for the proposed use and complies with Part 7.1.1 Site Requirements of the HDCP.

2.8.2 Parking, Traffic and Safety

Submissions have been received from the community raising concerns in relation to traffic, parking and safety, summarised as follows:

· The width of the street is inadequate for two-way traffic when vehicles are parking on either side.

· The street is short and has poor visibility.

· The submitted Traffic Report underestimates traffic generation and includes numerous errors.

· Vehicle manoeuvrability in the proposed basement carpark would be restricted.

· The proposal would result in a significant increase in traffic in the low-density residential area.

· Public transport would be rarely used by parents and staff resulting in the reduction in on-street parking.

· The proposal would generate vehicle / pedestrian safety impacts along the street and there are poor sight lines when existing the centre.

· There would be a lack of parking within the basement and parents would instead utilise on-street parking.

· Waste vehicles would restrict two-way traffic along Cameron Avenue whilst collecting waste from the facility.

· There would be a general reduction in on-street parking as a result of the proposal.

· The proximity of the proposed driveway to adjacent driveways would present a safety issue to vehicles and pedestrians.

· Stacked parking (staff stacked with parents) within the proposed basement will be impractical.

· The proposal does not include the provision of bicycle or motorbike parking on-site.

· The submitted Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) is erroneous and is general in nature.

· Pedestrians currently walk on the road as there is no footpath provision along Cameron Avenue and adjacent streets, presenting a safety issue.

The application has been supported by a Traffic and Parking Impact Assessment prepared by Hemanote Consultants dated 10 March 2021.

Existing Traffic

Cameron Avenue is a two-way undivided local road with a speed limit of 50km/h. Cameron Avenue runs in a north to south direction, between Wesson Road (local road) to the north and Victoria Road (local road) to the south. As identified Traffic and Parking Impact Assessment, a traffic volume count was undertaken at the intersection of Cameron Avenue / Victoria Road near the subject site on Wednesday 17 February 2021, during morning period (7.00am to 10.00am) and afternoon period (3.00pm to 6.00pm), considering the child care centre proposed hours of operation and traffic peak periods. The findings of the existing traffic flows in the morning and afternoon peak hours have been provided below:

Traffic movement	Morning Peak Hour 7.45am-8.45am (Vehicles Per Hour)	Evening Peak Hour 2.45pm - 3.45pm (Vehicles Per Hour)
Cameron Avenue
- Northbound	18	48
- Southbound	58	32
Victoria Road (East of Cameron Avenue)
- Eastbound	48	83
- Westbound	90	40
Victoria Road (West of Cameron Avenue)
- Eastbound	40	107
- Westbound	122	48

The results of the traffic volume counts undertaken determined that the traffic morning peak period was between 7.45am to 8.45am and the afternoon peak period was between 2.45pm to 3.45pm on a typical weekday. The traffic flows on Cameron Avenue and Victoria Road are appropriate for local roads in a mainly residential area, where traffic is free flowing without major queuing or delays near the subject site in peak hours, with spare capacity.

Traffic Generation

It is acknowledged that there is significant concern from the community that the proposed 35 place child care centre would result in a significant increase in vehicular traffic along Cameron Avenue and adjoining streets. An indication of the potential traffic generation of the proposed development is provided by the RMS Guide to Traffic Generating Development - 2002. The Guide specifies the following traffic generation rates for long-day care centres:

· 0.8 peak period vehicle trips per child between 7:00am and 9:00am.

· 0.7 peak period vehicle trips per child between 4:00pm and 6:00pm.

Therefore, the proposed development with a total of 35 children places has a total estimated traffic generation as follows:

· 28 morning peak period vehicle trips (14 In and 14 Out trips).

· 25 afternoon peak period vehicle trips (12.5 In and 12.5 Out trips).

It should be noted that the rate used by the RMS Guide is based on surveys of child care centres, where it was determined that the mean proportion of children transported to the centre by car was 93% for long-day care centres. The estimated peak period traffic generation is of low impact on existing flows on Cameron Avenue and the surrounding road network and can be readily accommodated without adverse impacts.

Street Parking

To determine the availability of kerbside parking along Cameron Avenue, Council has reviewed historical aerial photography provided by Nearmap comprising 46 separate photographs captured between 2010 and 2021. During this period, it is calculated than an average of two vehicles were parked along either side of Cameron Avenue at the time of capture. It is considered that there is sufficient provision for kerbside parking along Cameron Avenue to accommodate any potential overflow from the proposed child care centre. Notwithstanding, the proposal has demonstrated compliance with the on-site parking rates of the HDCP and it is anticipated that any overflow would be infrequent.

Road Width, Sight Distances and Safety

Cameron Avenue is a two-way undivided carriageway with a width between kerbs of approximately 7m and includes unrestricted kerbside parking on both sides. It is understood that a typical large Australian car is 1.9m wide plus mirrors. In this knowledge, Cameron Avenue provides one travel lane per direction, assuming that only one of the two sides of the road are occupied by a parked vehicle. As previously discussed, kerbside parking along Cameron Avenue is currently continually available throughout all portions of the day and kerbside parking directly adjacent to the site may be used infrequently for pickup / drop-off periods on occasions that the basement carpark is at capacity. On the rare occasion that vehicles are parked along both sides of the street, a single shared travel lane will be available to vehicles travelling in both directions. Council’s traffic assessment raises no concerns to the width of the street for the purposes of a child care centre on traffic and safety grounds.

With regard to egress from the basement ramp, the basement carpark includes a vehicle turning area and facilitates vehicle egress from the site in a forward direction. In addition, an unobstructed sightline triangle (2.5m x 2m) between the driver’s eye view and pedestrians has been provided on the egress side of the driveway pursuant to Figure 3.3 of Australian Standard AS2890.1:2004.

A separate pedestrian access gate is also provided at the front of the site, to separate pedestrians and vehicles and improve safety within the site. Within the basement, wall mounted convex mirrors and pedestrian pathways would be provided as an added safety measure.

On-Site Parking

The HDCP requires on-site car parking for child care centres to be provided at a minimum rate of 1 car space per 4 children. The proposed 35 place child care centre generates a demand for a minimum of 9 on-site parking spaces. The basement provides 10 car parking spaces (including 1 disabled space) and complies with the HDCP requirement.

The HDCP stipulates that 1 motorbike space should be provided for every 50 on-site car parking spaces. Although bike parking is not provided within the site, the proposal complies with this requirement.

Swept Path Diagrams have been provided within the submitted Traffic and Parking Impact Assessment demonstrating that all vehicle manoeuvring within the site has been designed utilising B99 and B85 design vehicle turning paths from Australian Standard AS2890.1:2004.

Construction Traffic Management

A Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP) has supported the application prepared by The Traffic Planner dated 3 June 2021. Council requested revisions to the CTMP to rectify numerous errors and inconsistencies including (but not limited to) works hours, the identification of LGA, vehicle access and egress. Council’s review of the revised CTMP dated 5 July 2021 has determined the amendments to be satisfactory for the purposes of development assessment and provides Council with a level of certainty that the amenity of nearby residential properties will be maintained during demolition and construction works. A condition has been recommended under Schedule 1 requiring that the CTMP be enforced for the duration of works unless otherwise approved by Council.

2.8.3 Scale

Submissions have been received raising concerns that the proposed centre would have an excessively large scale.

The HDCP provides that the floor area of a child care centre should be 380m², and the maximum number of children should be 40 children.

The single storey child care centre achieves a maximum floor area of 265m², has maximum capacity for 35 children and would have a height of 5.6m. The proposal complies with the scale requirements of the HDCP in this regard. Notwithstanding, the provisions of the CCPG take precedence over the HDCP with respect to scale and built form (except building height). Sections 2.2.4 and 2.2.5 of this report address the built form and design requirements of the CCPG.

The proposal complies with Part 7.1.2 Scale of the HDCP and is considered acceptable in this regard.

2.8.4 Waste Management

Waste generation rates for child care centres are 20L/child/week for garbage and 10L/child/week for recycling. Accordingly, the centre would generate a demand for 3 x 240L garbage bins and 2 x 240L recycling bins weekly. The proposed number of bins (3 x 240L garbage bins weekly and 3 x 240L recycling bins weekly) is acceptable.

A bin storage room has been proposed within the basement and provides sufficient space for bin storage and for access and manoeuvrability. Given the 1:4 gradient of the driveway is unsuitably steep to utilise for the bin carting route, the bins will be required to be carted by staff from the storage room to the lift, followed by the access ramp to the nature strip prior to collection by a private waste contractor.

It is noted that 240L bins have dimensions of 600mm(w) and 740mm(d) and would be able to enter the lift.

The proposal complies with the waste management requirements of Part 1C.2.3 of the HDCP and is considered acceptable in this regard.

2.8.5 Setbacks

The provisions of the CCPG take precedence over the HDCP with respect to front boundary setbacks, however the HDCP side and rear boundary controls override the CCPG in this regard.

The proposed building would be setback between 2m-4.2m from the side boundaries and 8.67m to the rear boundary and complies with the HDCP in this regard. The centre would exhibit a moderate scale consistent with the built form characteristics along Cameron Avenue and provides ample separation from the adjacent residential land uses. In conjunction with the HDCP compliant side and rear boundary setbacks, excavation of between 100mm-1.9m has been proposed to the rear half of the site. It is anticipated that the proposed excavation would reduce the perception of bulk and scale of the single storey building to the adjoining properties.

Section 2.2.5 of this report addresses the front boundary setback requirements of the CCPG.

The proposal complies with the side and rear boundary setback requirements of the HDCP and is considered acceptable in this regard.

2.8.6 Building Code of Australia

The submitted Architectural Plans (Drawing No. A1.03, Issue B) indicates the construction of a retaining wall to achieve level outdoor play areas to the rear of the site. The retaining wall would achieve a height of 1m, with a bottom of wall height of RL 168.00 AHD and a top of wall height of RL 169.00 AHD. The plans do not provide any indication that a safety barrier or balustrade would be provided as a child safety measure to the top of the retaining wall. Accordingly, a condition has been recommended under Schedule 1 requiring that a balustrade/ barrier be provided to the top of the retaining wall pursuant to the requirements of the National Construction Code - Building Code of Australia.

2.9 Section 7.12 Contributions Plans

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

3. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

3.1 Natural Environment

3.1.1 Tree and Vegetation Preservation

Submissions have been received with regard to tree and vegetation preservation, summarised as follows:

· The removal of vegetation from the site is unacceptable and would result in impacts to fauna.

· Tree No. 1 would be impacted by the proposed development and should be removed to prevent damage to property and for child safety reasons.

The application has been supported by an Arboricultural Impact Assessment prepared by Monaco Designs. Council’s tree assessment has been undertaken with consideration of the submitted Arboricultural Impact Assessment.

Tree Removal

The application proposes the removal of 10 trees on the subject site to facilitate the proposed works and to provide a child-safe outdoor play area. The trees proposed to be removed have been identified on the Landscape Plan as Tree Nos. 1 (Lagerstroemia indica), 2 (Picea abies), 3 (Unidentified), 4 (Camellia species), 5 (Acer palmatum), 6 (Cordyline australis), 7 (Palm species), 8 (Erythrina species), 9 (Callistemon ’cv’) and 10 (Syagrus romanzoffianum).

Of the 10 trees proposed to be removed, the submitted Arboricultural Impact Assessment has assessed 6 trees as achieving a ‘low’ retention value (tree Nos. 4, 6, 7, 8, 9 and 10) with the remaining 4 trees achieving a ‘moderate’ retention value (tree Nos. 1, 2, 3 and 5). Council’s tree assessment concurs with the retention values of the submitted Arborist Report and deems that the trees do not particularly contribute to the amenity of the area and are not worthy of retention in this instance. The proposed landscaping scheme presents an opportunity to improve the amenity of the area and provide child-safe play areas. Council’s tree assessment raises no concerns to the removal of the specified trees, subject to replacement planting in accordance with the recommendations under Section 2.2.6 of Council’s report.

In addressing the submission, it is noted that the Arboricultural Impact Assessment designates a ‘very high’ retention value for trees considered to have potential to harbour habitat for endangered or threatened fauna. The trees proposed to be removed do not achieve a ‘very high’ retention value and consequently the potential for impact to fauna habitat is considered minor.

Tree Retention

No trees are proposed to be retained on the subject site. Trees Nos. 11 (Quercus robur) and 12 (Corymbia maculate) are located within adjacent properties to the rear of the subject site and have been assessed in Arboricultural Impact Assessment as achieving a ‘very high’ retention value.

Council’s tree assessment has determined that the proposed development would generate an encroachment into the TPZ of tree Nos. 11 and 12 of 11% (including 3% soft landscaping) and 5%, respectively. These two trees are considered resilient species in relation to impacts resulting from development and there are numerous examples where these trees have been successfully retained where minor incursions have occurred, and appropriate tree protection measures and management has been applied in accordance with the Australian Standard AS4970-2009 Protection of trees on development sites. It is considered that these trees would be unaffected by the proposed works and no concerns are raised in this regard. Accordingly, conditions have been recommended under Schedule 1 requiring the appointment of a Project Arborist to oversee the installation of tree protection fencing and the use of sensitive construction techniques for all works within the TPZ of retained trees.

3.1.2 Stormwater Management

A submission has been received raising concerns that there are existing stormwater drainage issues present on the property.

The application proposes to drain the stormwater captured by the proposed development to Council’s drainage system along Cameron Avenue via a proposed On-Site Detention System. Council’s engineering assessment raises no concerns to the proposed method of stormwater disposal, subject to the imposition of conditions as recommended under Schedule 1.

In addressing the submission, Council does not have any record of flooding at the subject site. Any existing overland flows would be collected and piped to Council’s stormwater system.

3.2 Social Impacts

The proposed child care centre would make a positive social contribution to the local community by providing services for the needs of local residents. This is consistent with the State Government’s ‘A Metropolis of Three Cities’ which identifies the need to provide an additional 85,000 child care places by 2036.

3.3 Economic Impacts

The proposal would have a minor positive impact on the local economy by generating an increase in employment opportunities.

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 and generally complies with the site selection considerations of the CCPG and HDCP for child care centre developments. The site is considered to be capable of accommodating the proposed development and would not detrimentally impact surrounding road infrastructure. The scale of the 35-place child care centre 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 24 March 2021 and 15 April 2021 in accordance with the Hornsby Community Participation Plan. The amended application was re-notified to the public between 22 June 2021 and 13 July 2021. During these periods, Council received 31 submissions. The map below illustrates the location of those nearby landowners who made a submission that are in close proximity to the development site.

NOTIFICATION PLAN

• PROPERTIES NOTIFIED

X SUBMISSIONS

RECEIVED

PROPERTY SUBJECT OF DEVELOPMENT

5 SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED OUT OF MAP RANGE INCLUDING A SUBMISSION FROM THE TENANT OF THE SUBJECT SITE

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

· The proposed child care centre is an inappropriate form of development in the R2 Low Density Residential zone.

· Sydney Water infrastructure and unused septic tanks are potentially present under the site and that the proposed basement may impact upon these.

· The existing road infrastructure is inadequate to accommodate the child care centre and additional traffic.

· The existing and future desired character of the area would be detrimentally impacted by the proposal.

· The proposal would result in privacy impacts and overlooking into adjacent properties.

· The proposed child care centre would generate an unacceptable level of operational noise to adjacent residential properties and would result in a loss of amenity.

· The submitted Acoustic Report is inaccurate, includes inconsistencies and is general in nature.

· The proposed western boundary fence is large and intrusive.

· Parents may remain on the premises after closing hours resulting in noise impacts.

· The proposed development would be located within close proximity to other child care centres in the locality and that there is an undesirable saturation in the area.

· The site is not of adequate size to accommodate a child care centre.