BUSINESS PAPER
Local Planning Panel meeting
Wednesday 31 July 2024
at 4:00pm
BUSINESS PAPER
Local Planning Panel meeting
Wednesday 31 July 2024
at 4:00pm
Hornsby Shire Council Table of Contents
GENERAL BUSINESS
Local Planning Panel
Item 1.. LPP14/24 DA/1003/2023 - Construction of a Dwelling House and Swimming Pool - 11A Malton Road, Beecroft......................................................................................................................................... 1
Report No. LPP14/24 Page 1
LPP Report No. LPP14/24
Local Planning Panel
Date of Meeting: 31/07/2024
1 DA/1003/2023 - CONSTRUCTION OF A DWELLING HOUSE AND SWIMMING POOL - 11A MALTON ROAD, BEECROFT
|
DA No: |
DA/1003/2023 (Lodged on 12 October 2023) |
|
Description: |
Demolition of existing structures and construction of a dwelling house and swimming pool - PAN-366979 |
|
Property: |
Lot 5 DP 4551, No. 11A Malton Road, Beecroft |
|
Applicant: |
Stefano Adamo Di Lorenzo |
|
Owner: |
Miss Chantelle Noorizadeh |
|
Estimated Value: |
$964,000 |
|
Ward: |
C Ward |
|
Clause 4.6 Request: |
N/A |
|
Submissions: |
Eleven |
|
LPP Criteria: |
10 or more unique submissions were received by way of objection |
|
Author: |
Amelia Xu, Town Planner |
|
COI Declaration: |
No Council staff involved in the assessment of this application have declared a Conflict of Interest. |
|
THAT the Hornsby Local Planning Panel, exercising the functions of Council as the consent authority, approve Development Application No. DA/1003/2023 for demolition of existing structures and construction of a dwelling house and swimming pool at Lot 5 DP 4551, No. 11A Malton Road, Beecroft subject to the conditions of consent in Attachment 1 of LPP Report No. LPP14/24. |
executive summaryd
· The application involves demolition of existing structures and construction of new dwelling house and swimming pool.
· A total of 11 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.
BACKGROUND
On 11 November 2023, Council requested additional information regarding planning, heritage and tree management concerns.
On 18 December 2023, Council received the amended plans, response letters and updated arborist report.
On 20 February 2024, Council requested additional information including an Integrated Bushfire and Vegetation Management Plan, landscaping, construction management, privacy and roof material details.
On 23 February 2024, Council received the response letter from the bushfire consultant.
On 8 April 2024, Council received updated plans, landscape plan, Integrated Bushfire and Vegetation Management Plan, construction management plan and response letters.
On 16 May 2024, Council requested additional information regarding the submitted Integrated Bushfire and Vegetation Management Plan and construction management plan.
On 24 May 2024, Council received the amended Integrated Bushfire and Vegetation Management Plan, a cut and fill plan, and updated landscape plan.
SITE
The 2512m2 site is located on the northern side of Malton Road and contains a dwelling house, garage and shed. The site experiences a fall of 21 metres to the rear of the site. The site is bushfire prone land and flood prone land.
The site is burdened by open space zoning at the rear of the site. The rear of the site is of high biodiversity value and comprises Black Gully Forest.
The subject property is located within the Beecroft - Cheltenham Plateau of the Beecroft-Cheltenham Heritage Conservation Area (HCA) listed under Schedule 5 of the Hornsby Local Environmental Plan 2013, however the site does not contain a heritage listed item.
The property is also located adjacent and within the immediate vicinity of numerous heritage items located along Malton Road.
PROPOSAL
The application proposes demolition of existing structures and construction of new dwelling house and swimming pool.
The lower ground floor would comprise a four-car garage, two storage room, a bathroom, and an inground pool.
The ground floor would comprise an entry, five bedrooms, two bathrooms, two ensuites, a walk-in-robe, laundry, pantry, living, dining, kitchen and outdoor terrace.
The existing dwelling house and garage are proposed to be demolished.
The development would result in the removal of 13 trees.
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 over 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 over the next 20 years.
The identified challenge for Hornsby Shire will be 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 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 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 RE1 Public recreation and R2 Low density residential under the HLEP. The proposed dwelling house is located wholly within the R2 zone. 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 ‘dwelling house’ and is permissible in the R2 zone with Council’s consent.
2.1.2 Height of Buildings
Clause 4.3 of the HLEP provides that the height of a building on any land should not exceed the maximum height shown for the land on the Height of Buildings Map. The maximum permissible height for the subject site is 8.5m. The proposal has a maximum height of 7.49m 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. The subject property is located within the Beecroft - Cheltenham Plateau of the Beecroft-Cheltenham Heritage Conservation Area (HCA) listed under Schedule 5 of the HLEP.
The property is also located adjacent and within the immediate vicinity of numerous heritage items located along Malton Road.
The proposal has been considered regarding the documentation submitted with the application and the heritage requirements of the HLEP and the Hornsby Development Control Plan 2024 (HDCP).
The proposal seeks to demolish the existing dwelling, detached shed, garage and front fence on the site.
The existing dwelling and associated structures are attributed to the housing stock of the Post War Period. While it is a typical example of infill development from the mid-20th century, it has a low contribution and low retention value to the characteristic values and significant historical phases of development within the HCA. Demolition would not erode the architectural or built form or character that are contributory to the streetscape.
The proposal seeks to construct a new part single storey and part two storey dwelling with the two pavilions connected via a narrow link.
Malton Road contains a mixture of single and two storey buildings dating from a range of early residential periods. The proposed design draws on simple detailing from the built forms that make up the late 19th century and early 20th century character of the HCA. It is a contemporary interpretation of a colonial period cottage, with a bulk, height and scale that would successfully retain the neutral presence of the subject property adjacent the heritage items in Malton Road, as well as complement the traditional built character of the streetscape. It also successfully utilises the sloping landform to incorporate a two-storey element in a pavilion style form.
The proposed external materials are notably contemporary but would generally complement the traditional building materials extent within the HCA. No objections are raised to the bagged brick exterior or metal detailing in the joinery and veranda columns, and tile in a terracotta colour on planes visible from the street. Colourbond is retained for the flat roof proportions of the roof which cannot be achieved in tile or slate.
Trees numbered 2, 3 and 4 located at the front of the dwelling are proposed to be retained. The front building setback has been amended to be in line with the footprint of the existing dwelling to ensure significant views to the heritage item are retained and to decrease the dominance of the new development within streetscape.
The proposal seeks to remove 18 trees, install a swimming pool, new landscaping along the front, side and rear boundaries; and a new metal front fence.
Most of the trees to be removed are small shrubs/ trees and some noxious weeds located in the rear which are of low heritage and ecological value and removal would be adequately compensated by replacement planting within the site.
Tree 31 has minimal presence in the streetscape; thus, removal would have a lesser heritage impact. No heritage concerns are raised to the removal of Tree 31.
Tree 17 (a Himalayan Cypress or similar) is partly visible above the ridgeline of the existing dwelling and forms part of the treed canopy backdrop to the site. While removal would not impact the bushland setting of the property, it would remove a mature cultural planting which contributes to the domestic garden landscaped character of the site and HCA.
Tree 17 is considered by Council to have a moderate retention value from a heritage perspective. However, it is understood removal may be necessary to enable the proposed dwelling form to be constructed, which successfully utilises the sloping landform of the site to deliver a new infill development that is compatible to the elements that are significant to the build character of the area.
Council’s heritage assessment noted that removal of Tree 17 would have a heritage impact on the significant landscape elements of the site and that modification of the rear of the house is preferred to retain Tree 17.
However, the site is identified as bushfire prone land with a BAL rating of flame zone. It is noted that Tree 17 would still be required to be removed even if the rear pavilion was deleted, to address asset protection zone requirements. Furthermore, the siting of the dwelling has an increased front setback to retain the significant street trees and the development has addressed heritage design in the HCA with a single storey design at the front of the site and a pavilion that steps down the site.
As such, removal would be acceptable as a compromise to enable the sympathetic new building form and retain the significant native trees at the front. An unsympathetic built form would have a greater impact than removal of Tree 17. In addition, the submitted Landscape Plan demonstrates that compensatory planting for removal of tree 17 has been proposed at the rear of the dwelling and the proposal has been amended to include a planting schedule with period-appropriate species.
The proposed planting schedule is now horticulturally sympathetic to the landscape character of the Beecroft-Cheltenham HCA with a mixture of native species complementary to the traditional garden layouts within the precinct.
The proposal has been amended to incorporate a low-height palisade style fence with iron rods and masonry soldier piers framing the pedestrian and driveway gate entry to complement the period, style and materials used in traditional fencing located in Malton Road as requested.
The proposed wheel strip driveway is compliant with principal controls for new driveways in an HCA provided under Section 9.3.3 of the Hornsby DCP.
In summary, no heritage concerns are raised to demolition of the existing dwelling or to the concept to construct a new part single and part two storey dwelling in a pavilion form.
2.1.4 Earthworks
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 plans indicate that construction will step down following the natural contours of the land which slopes steeply to the rear more than 3m. The earthworks would be generally located with the building footprint, with additional fill for the rear terrace and pool deck which is generally located within 1.5m of the existing ground level. The proposal would not pose a detrimental privacy, environmental or outlook impact to adjoining properties and no concerns are raised in this regard.
A cut and fill plan prepared by Adonis Building & Maintenance has been submitted. The plan details a total of 325.5m3 of cut and 287.4m3 of fill, leaving an excess of 38m3 to be exported from the site requiring a total of 6 trucks loads. Conditions are recommended in Attachment 1 that all excavated material removed from the site must be classified by a suitably qualified person and disposed of at an approved waste management facility and that a construction management plan be provided prior to the issue of a construction certificate.
The proposal has been reviewed by Council’s Environmental Protection Team has reviewed the proposal and recommended that due to site constraints and the significant earthworks to occur on the site, a condition should be imposed requiring that a detailed Construction Management Plan be prepared by a suitably qualified person to document construction measures to protect the public and the surrounding environment. This has been included in Attachment 1.
The proposal is deemed acceptable with respect to the desired outcomes of Earthworks and Slope of the HDCP.
2.2 State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021
The application has been assessed against the requirements of chapter 2 and 6 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Biodiversity and Conservation) 2021.
2.2.1 Chapter 2 Vegetation in Non-Rural Areas
Chapter 2 of this policy aims to protect the biodiversity and amenity values of trees within non-rural areas of the state.
Part 2.3 of the policy states that a development control plan may make a declaration in any manner relating to species, size, location and presence of vegetation. Accordingly, Part 1.2.6.1 of the HDCP prescribes works that can be undertaken with or without consent to trees and objectives for tree preservation.
Section 3.1.1 of this report provides an assessment in accordance with Part 1.2.6.1 of the HDCP.
2.2.2 Chapter 6 Waterways
The site is located within the catchment of Sydney Harbour. The aim of this chapter is to ensure that the catchment, foreshores, waterways and islands of Sydney Harbour are recognised, protected, enhanced and maintained. This chapter provides general planning considerations and strategies to ensure that the catchment, foreshores, waterways and islands of Sydney Harbour are recognised, protected, enhanced and maintained.
The plan addresses matters related to biodiversity, ecology and environment protection; public access to, and use of, foreshores and waterways; maintenance of a working harbour; interrelationship of waterway and foreshore uses; foreshore and waterways scenic quality; maintenance, protection and enhancement of views and boat storage facilities.
Subject to the implementation 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 and would comply with the requirements of chapter 6 of the Biodiversity and Conservation SEPP.
2.3 State Environmental Planning Policy (Sustainable Buildings) 2022
The application has been assessed against the requirements of chapter 2 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Sustainable Buildings) 2022 which seeks to encourage the design and delivery of more sustainable buildings.
Chapter 2 sets out the Standards for residential development. The proposal includes a BASIX certificate in accordance with the requirements of the SEPP including the list of commitments to be complied with at the construction stage and during the use of the premises. The BASIX certificate achieves the minimum scores for energy and water use, and thermal performance.
The proposal is acceptable in this regard.
2.4 State Environmental Planning Policy (Resilience and Hazards) 2021
2.4.1 Chapter 4 Remediation of Land
Should the land be contaminated, Council must be satisfied that the land is suitable in a contaminated state for the proposed use. If the land requires remediation to be undertaken to make the land suitable for the proposed use, Council must be satisfied that the land will be remediated before the land is used for that purpose.
An examination of Council’s records and aerial photography has determined that the site has been historically used for residential purposes. It is not likely that the site has experienced any significant contamination, and further assessment under chapter 4 of the Resilience and Hazards SEPP is not required.
2.5 Section 3.42 Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 - Purpose and Status of Development Control Plans
Section 3.42 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 states that a DCP provision will have no effect if it prevents or unreasonably restricts development that is otherwise permitted and complies with the development standards in relevant Local Environmental Plans and State Environmental Planning Policies.
The principal purpose of a development control plan is to provide guidance on the aims of any environmental planning instrument that applies to the development; facilitate development that is permissible under any such instrument; and achieve the objectives of land zones. The provisions contained in a DCP are not statutory requirements and are for guidance purposes only. Consent authorities have flexibility to consider innovative solutions when assessing development proposals, to assist achieve good planning outcomes.
2.6 Hornsby Development Control Plan 2024
The proposed development has been assessed having regard to the relevant desired outcomes and prescriptive requirements within the Hornsby Development Control Plan 2024 (HDCP). The following table sets out the proposal’s compliance with the prescriptive requirements of the Plan:
|
HDCP - Part 3.1 Dwelling Houses |
|||
|
Control |
Proposal |
Requirement |
Complies |
|
Site Area |
2512m2 |
N/A |
N/A |
|
Building Height |
7.49m |
8.5m |
Yes |
|
No. storeys |
2 |
max. 2 + attic |
Yes |
|
Site Coverage |
14.05% |
max. 30% |
Yes |
|
Floor Area |
541.75m2 |
430m2 |
No |
|
Setbacks |
|
|
|
|
- Front |
10.5m |
6m |
Yes |
|
- Side(east) |
|
|
|
|
Ground floor |
1.055m |
900mm |
Yes |
|
First floor |
1.055m |
1.5m |
No |
|
- Side(west) |
|
|
|
|
Ground floor |
4.36m |
900mm |
Yes |
|
First floor |
4.36m |
1.5m |
Yes |
|
- Rear |
|
|
|
|
Ground floor |
>3m |
3m |
Yes |
|
First floor |
>8m |
8m |
Yes |
|
Landscaped Area |
>40% |
min. 40% |
Yes |
|
Private Open Space |
|
|
|
|
- minimum area |
24m2 |
min. 24m2 |
Yes |
|
- minimum dimension |
3m |
min. 3m |
Yes |
|
Car Parking |
4 spaces |
2 spaces |
Yes |
As detailed in the above table, the proposed development generally 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.
2.6.1 Scale
The desired outcome of Part 3.1.1 Scale of the HDCP are to encourage “Development with a height, bulk and scale that is compatible with a low density residential environment”.
This is supported by the prescriptive measure Part 3.1.1 Scale of the HDCP states sites with a lot size of 900m2 or larger should comply with the maximum floor area coverage in Table 3.1.1(c) Maximum Floor area of a Dwelling House being a maximum floor area of 430m2.
The application proposes a total floor area of 541.75m2 which exceeds the 430m2 maximum floor area prescriptive measure of Part 3.1.1 Scale for a 2512m2 lot size.
In support of this non-compliance, the following is noted:
· The 2512m2 lot size is significantly greater than the 900m2 range, the minimum lot size for the subject site is 600m2 which means the subject site can potentially be subdivided into three lots which allows a floor area of 440m2 (380m2 dwelling house + 60m2 ancillary outbuilding) on each lot, resulting in the site having the potential for a total floor area of 1320m2. The proposed development does not include any ancillary outbuildings. Furthermore, as a result of the proposed swimming pool and existing trees at the rear, there is no scope for any additional outbuildings. As such, the proposed floor area of 541.75m2 is considered acceptable.
· The proposed design would maintain a compliant site coverage of 14.05%.
· The bulk is not larger than the existing dwelling on site and the adjacent dwellings at No. 11 and 15 Malton Road. The dwelling presents as single storey to the streetscape which maintains the existing street characters in the surrounding area.
· The proposal complies with Council’s prescriptive measures with respect to height, site coverage, sunlight access and open space requirements.
· The proposal would result in a dwelling with a height, bulk and scale that is compatible with the low density residential environment, with negligible environmental and amenity impacts.
The proposal meets the desired outcomes of Part 3.1.1 Scale of the HDCP and is considered acceptable.
2.6.2 Setbacks
The desired outcomes of Part 3.1.2 Setbacks of the HDCP are to encourage “setbacks that are compatible with adjacent development and complement the streetscape” and “setbacks that allow for canopy trees to be retained and planted along the front and rear property boundaries.”
This is supported by the prescriptive measure set out in Table 3.1.2(a) which prescribes a minimum side boundary setback of 1.5m for second storey elements.
The application proposes a western side setback of 1.055m which does not comply with the prescriptive measure.
In support of the 0.445m non-compliance, it is noted that the extent of non-compliance solely relates to the rear portion of the proposed dwelling and does not extend across the full extent of the façade. No window openings are proposed to the living room, two windows proposed for the stair and bathroom would provide natural light and ventilation to ‘non-active’ use rooms in compliance with Council’s planning guidelines. The encroachment is unlikely to result in any overlooking to the adjoining property at No. 11 Malton Road. The non-compliance is a direct result of the sloping topography of the site. The design of the dwelling is single storey at the front and two storey at the rear to satisfy the HDCP requirement for a one storey element at the front.
As demonstrated in this report, the proposed non-compliance will not give rise to any adverse amenity impacts to neighbouring properties with regard to solar access or visual privacy.
The desired outcomes are also supported by the prescriptive measures set out in Table 3.1.2(a) Minimum Boundary Setbacks which prescribes a 0.9m setback for developments in relation to side boundaries.
The applicant proposes a retaining wall up to approx.1.3m in height which would have a 0.5m setback to the eastern side boundary which does not comply with the prescriptive measure.
In assessing this non-compliance, the following matters have been considered:
· The retaining wall would be required to retain excavations made to accommodate the driveway access of the dwelling house. These walls would be necessary to prevent soil shift and erosion within the eastern side of the property.
· As the walls would be located below existing ground level, it would have negligible visual presence when viewed from adjoining properties.
· Shrubs and trees are proposed along the eastern side boundary between the retaining wall and side fence, the proposed retaining walls are unlikely to create any adverse visual impacts to the adjoining property.
Whilst the proposed retaining wall would not comply with the prescriptive setback measure, it is considered that these structures would have acceptable visual and environmental impacts to adjoining properties whilst maintaining and enhancing the residential amenity of the subject site.
In this regard, the proposal meets the desired outcomes of Part 3.1.2 Setbacks under the HDCP and is considered acceptable.
2.6.3 Sunlight Access
The desired outcome of Part 3.1.5 Sunlight Access under the HDCP is for dwelling houses to “provide solar access to open spaces.” In addition, dwellings are to be “designed to provide reasonable sunlight to adjacent properties.”
Within this context, Part 3.1.5 outlines the following prescriptive measures:
(a) On 22 June, 50% of the required principle private open space should receive 3 hours of unobstructed sunlight access between 9am and 3pm.
(b) On 22 June, 50% of the required principle private open space on any adjoining property should receive 3 hours of unobstructed sunlight access between 9am and 3pm.
The proposal is supported by shadow diagrams from 9am to 3pm midwinter. The diagrams demonstrate that the private open space to the rear of the subject site will maintain a minimum of 50% sunlight access between 9am and 3pm.
The proposal will result in minor additional overshadowing to the rear yard and eastern building façade of the property adjoining the site to the west (No. 11 Malton Road) and will result in minor additional overshadowing to the rear yard and western building façade of the property adjoining the site to the east (No. 15 Malton Road). Notwithstanding, over 50% of the private open space of these properties will receive at least 3 hours of unobstructed sunlight access.
Accordingly, the proposal satisfies Part 3.1.5 of the HDCP and is considered acceptable.
2.6.4 Privacy
The desired outcome of Part 3.1.6 Privacy of the HDCP is to encourage “development that is designed to provide reasonable privacy to adjacent properties.”
This is supported by the prescriptive measures that state that:
a) “Living and entertaining areas of dwelling houses should be located on the ground floor and oriented towards the private open space of the dwelling house and not side boundaries.
b) A proposed window in a dwelling house should have a privacy screen if:
· it is a window to a habitable room, other than a bedroom, that has a floor level of more than 1 metre above existing ground level,
· the window is setback less than 3 metres from a side or rear boundary, and
· the window has a sill height of less than 1.5 metres.
c) A deck, balcony, terrace or the like should be located within 600mm of existing ground level where possible to minimise potential visual and acoustic privacy conflicts.
d) Decks and the like that need to be located more than 600mm above existing ground should not face a window of another habitable room, balcony or private open space of another dwelling located within 9 metres of the proposed deck unless appropriately screened.”
It is noted that an entry deck, upper floor living room, and outdoor terraces are proposed. The entry deck would be located more than 600mm above existing ground level, but it is located over 9m from a window of another habitable room, balcony or private open space of the adjoining property and is considered acceptable. The upper floor living room window has a setback of over 3m from the site boundary and is considered acceptable. The rear outdoor terraces are located more than 600mm above existing ground level, to minimise potential overlooking to neighbouring property to the east and west (Nos. 11 and 15 Malton Road), the application has been amended to provide privacy planter boxes on both sides of the terraces and a condition has been recommended to ensure the shrubs in the privacy planter must have a minimum height of 1.5m at time of planting.
All other first floor level windows would provide natural light and ventilation to ‘non-active’ use rooms (bathroom and bedrooms) in compliance with Council’s planning guidelines.
The proposal meets the desired outcome of Part 3.1.6 Privacy of the HDCP and is considered acceptable.
2.6.5 Vehicular Access and Parking
The desired outcome of Part 3.1.7 Vehicle Access and Parking of the HDCP is for “Development that provides sufficient and convenient parking for residents with vehicular access that is simple, safe and direct” with the prescriptive measure that car parking for dwelling houses should be provided behind the front building line.
In this instance, the proposed dwelling includes a large garage within the lower ground floor level, with a new driveway in the same position as the current driveway. The HDCP requires 2 spaces for the dwelling house, a four-car garage would be located in the basement that comply with the prescriptive requirements.
The proposal meets the desired outcome of Part 3.1.7 Vehicle Access and Parking of the HDCP and is considered acceptable.
2.7 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
Section 4.15(1)(b) of the Act requires Council to consider “the likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impacts in the locality”.
3.1 Natural Environment
3.1.1 Tree and Vegetation Preservation
The prescriptive measures of Part 1.2.6.1 Tree Preservation of the HDCP state that:
a) “the prescribed trees that are protected by the Vegetation SEPP and/or Clause 5.10 of the HLEP and this section of the DCP include:
· all trees except exempt tree species in Hornsby Shire as listed in Table 1.2.6 or subject to a Biodiversity Offset Scheme,
· all trees on land within a heritage conservation area described within the HLEP, and
· all trees on land comprising heritage items listed within the HLEP.
b) To damage or remove any tree protected under the HDCP is prohibited without the written consent of Council, except in accordance with the exemptions prescribed in this part (under the heading ‘Exempt Tree Work’).”
To address the proposal’s impact on trees, an Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA) prepared by NSW Trees dated 14 December 2023 was submitted with the application.
The AIA identifies 37 trees in proximity to the proposed works of which 13 trees, numbered 6, 11, 12, 14-18, 21, 22, 30, 31 and 37 are nominated for removal as they would be subject to unsustainable encroachments into the tree protection zones (TPZ). No objections are raised to the removal of these 13 trees subject to compensatory planting of 12 replacement trees to offset their loss.
A submission has been received raising concerns regarding the removal of large tree numbered 17 (Himalayan Cedar) at the rear of the dwelling.
The retention of T17 has been considered in the AIA noting that:
‘the Himalayan Cedar is a tree with good amenity, the tree has no heritage value as stated in the Heritage Report provided by Edwards Heritage Consultants, dated 4 December 2023. Furthermore, it is not a species reflective of the Blackbutt Gully Forest, and its amenity or contribution to the HCA also is questionable from Malton Ave, given that it is only the head of the tree that is seen from the street, and whether the building footprint is reduced or not, the new proposal will be a multi-level home and that amenity will be voided given changes in building height of the new dwelling.’
The removal of tree 17 is supported noting that the siting of the dwelling has an increased front setback to retain the significant street trees and the development has addressed heritage design in the HCA with a single storey design at the front of the site and a pavilion that steps down the site. Furthermore, the site is located in the bushfire flame zone, it is noted that Tree 17 would still be required to be removed even if the rear pavilion was deleted, to address Asset Protection Zone requirements. The submitted Landscape Plan indicates that compensatory planting for removal of tree 17 has been proposed at the rear of the dwelling.
All other trees are marked for retention and recommendations have been made for the implementation of appropriate tree protection measures during the demolition and construction phases of the development.
Council’s tree assessment raises no objections to the anticipated impacts to trees subject to arboricultural conditions as recommended in Notice of Determination.
The proposal meets the requirements of Part 1.2.6.1 Tree Preservation under the HDCP and is considered acceptable.
3.1.2 Biodiversity
The desired outcomes of Part 1.3.1.1 Biodiversity of the HDCP are to encourage “development that provides for the conservation of biodiversity including threatened species and populations, endangered ecological communities, remnant indigenous trees, regionally and locally significant terrestrial and aquatic vegetation” and “development that maintains habitat for native wildlife and wildlife corridors to provide for the movement of fauna species”.
An Arboricultural Impact Assessment (AIA) was submitted prepared by NSW Trees dated 14 December 2023, and an Integrated Bushfire and Vegetation Management Plan (IBVMP) prepared by SIA Ecological and Environmental Planning, dated 24 May 2024 has been submitted and reviewed by Council’s Natural Resources Team.
At the front of the property are three large, mature Blackbutts trees (numbered 2, 3 and 4), which are proposed for retention and a scattering of native groundcover species. The groundcover species occur beneath the canopies of the three trees and comprise Scurvy Weed (Commelina cyanea), Northern Cranesbill (Geranium homeanum), Basket Grass (Oplismenus aemulus), Love Creeper (Glycine tabacina) and Kidney Weed (Dichondra repens).
The rear of the APZ, at the edge of the forest, is heavily infested with a wide variety of common weeds. Native species present within this IBVMP Area include Native Daphne (Pittosporum undulatum), Giant Maidenhair, Slender Grape Vine (Cayratia clematidea) and Indian Hemp (Sigesbeckia orientalis). Weeds include, for example, Fishbone Fern (Nephrolepis cordifolia), Madeira Vine (Anredera cordifolia), Balloon Vine (Cardiospermum halicacabum), Morning Glory (Ipomoea indica), Black Eyed Susan (Thunbergia alata), Green Cestrum (Cestrum parqui), to name but a few.
Beyond the APZ, inside the forest at the rear of the property there is a high proportion of weeds close to the dwelling, but these appear to diminish and largely disappear towards the rear of the property within the forest proper. The complete list of flora observed within the IBVMP Area is provided in Appendix C of the IBVMP.
Essentially planted exotic and environmental weed trees are proposed for removal. Weed management requirements and criteria have been recommended for all areas.
The proposal is unlikely to have significant impact upon species, populations and communities listed under the NSW Biodiversity Conservation Act 2016 (BC Act).
In summary, the proposal does not require the removal or modification of a significant area of vegetation or habitat, is generally consistent with the Biodiversity element of HDCP and will not have a significant impact on matters listed under the NSW BC Act.
3.1.3 Stormwater Management
The desired outcomes of Part 1.3.1.2 Stormwater Management of the HDCP is to encourage development “that protect waterways from erosion, pollution and sedimentation and maintains or improves water quality and aquatic habitats” and “water management systems that minimise the effects of flooding and maintains natural environmental flows.”
Subject to conditions, the proposal meets the desired outcomes of Part 1.3.1.2 Stormwater Management of the HDCP and is considered acceptable.
3.2 Built Environment
3.2.1 Built Form
The built form would not be highly visible from the street, it appears as a single storey building and would be screened by existing and proposed landscaping/ trees. The proposal would be consistent with residential development within the locality and HCA.
3.2.2 Traffic
The proposal is for a single dwelling, and it would not intensify traffic generation.
3.3 Social Impacts
The construction of a dwelling house result in a positive social contribution by providing for the housing needs of the community within a low-density residential environment.
3.4 Economic Impacts
The proposal would have a minor positive impact on the local economy in conjunction with other new low density residential development in the locality by generating an increase in demand for local services.
4. SITE SUITABILITY
Section 4.15(1)(c) of the Act requires Council to consider “the suitability of the site for the development”.
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.
4.1 Flooding
The rear of the land the subject of the development is identified as being below the 1:100 year flood level. The proposed dwelling house would be located outside the flood area and would be over 50m away from the flood extent. As such, the proposed development is considered acceptable.
4.2 Bushfire Risk
The desired outcomes of Part 1.3.1.1 Bushfire of the HDCP is to encourage “development that is located and designed to minimise the risk to life and property from bushfires” and “development that balances the conservation of native vegetation and bushfire protection”.
The site is mapped as bushfire prone land. The application includes a Bush Fire Assessment Report prepared by Australian Bushfire Consulting Services dated 20 September 2023 indicating that the proposed development would be subject to BAL-FZ. An Integrated Bushfire and Vegetation Management Plan (IBVMP) prepared by SIA Ecological and Environmental Planning dated 24 May 2024 has been submitted to conserve the native ecological communities that occur within the IBVMP Area while at the same time achieving compliance with the bushfire management requirements for the dwelling. The application has been referred to the NSW Rural Fire Service (RFS) for review. The RFS raised no objections subject to conditions as recommended in Attachment 1.
Subject to conditions as recommended within the report, the proposal would meet the desired outcomes of Part 1.3.1.1 Bushfires under the HDCP 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 October 2023 to 6 November 2023, and 3 May 2024 to 24 May 2024 with the Hornsby Community Engagement Plan. During this period, Council received 11 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 |
|
|
|
7 SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED OUT OF MAP RANGE |
|||
A total of 11 submissions objected to the development, generally on the grounds that the development would result in:
· Development that is excessive in bulk and scale
· Unacceptable overlooking of adjoining properties
· Setback non-compliance
· Concerns regarding Colorbond / metal roofing and wall type
· The front soft landscape area does not appear to be adequate
· Concerns regarding the grade of the decking to be non-compliant
· Lower ground garage and storage area potentially be used as habitable area
· The removal of a significant tree
· Impact to Critically Endangered Ecological Community
· Concerns regarding weed management
· Concerns regarding APZ
· Opposed to building works taking place 6 days a week from 7am to 5 pm
· Concerns regarding the front of the dwelling has no front entry as is expected in a Heritage Conservation Area
· Concerns regarding the IBVMP did not address multiple species of threatened fauna and flora.
· The garage does not comply with DCP controls
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 Landscaping
A submission has been received raising concerns regarding the front soft landscape area does not appear to be adequate. To address this concern, it is noted that over 50% of the front yard has been maintained as landscaped area which complies with the prescriptive measures under the HDCP.
5.1.2 Use of dwelling
A submission has been received raising concerns regarding the lower ground garage and storage space potentially being used as habitable area. It is noted that the area has been proposed to be used as garage and storage and the assessment has been based on the submitted plans.
5.1.3 Construction Time
A submission has been received opposed to building works taking place 6 days a week from 7am to 5pm and advised that the construction time should be limited within Monday to Friday. To address this concern, it is noted that all work on site (including remediation, demolition, construction, earth works and removal of vegetation), must only occur between 7am and 5pm Monday to Saturday in compliance with Council’s planning guidelines, and consistent with permissible work hours under complying development.
5.1.4 Deck
A submission has been received raising concerns regarding the grade of the decking to be non-compliant. To address this concern, it is noted a condition has been recommended to ensure all building work must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the National Construction Code - Building Code of Australia.
5.2 Public Agencies
The development application was referred to the following Agencies for comment:
5.2.1 NSW Rural Fire Service
The application has been referred to NSW Rural Fire Service seeking advice regarding bush fire protection in accordance with Section 4.14 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The New South Wales Rural Fire Service (NSW RFS) has considered the information submitted and raised no objections subject to the conditions in Attachment 1 to minimise the risk of bush fire attack and provide protection for emergency services personnel, residents and others assisting firefighting activities.
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 demolition of existing structures and construction of new dwelling house and swimming pool.
The development generally meets the desired outcomes of Council’s planning controls and is satisfactory having regard to the matters for consideration under Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
Council received 11 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/refusal 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 visual bulk, solar access, amenity or privacy.
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.
|
Cassandra Williams Major Development Manager - Development Assessments Planning and Compliance Division |
Rod Pickles Manager - Development Assessments Planning and Compliance Division |
|
1.⇩ |
Draft Conditions of Consent |
|
|
|
2.⇩ |
Architectural Plans |
|
|
|
3.⇩ |
Landscape Plans |
|
|
File Reference: DA/1003/2023
Document Number: D08915963
