Agenda of Ordinary Meeting of Council - Tuesday, 18 March 2025

Ordinary Meeting of Council

TO BE HELD ON Tuesday, 18 March 2025 AT 7:00 PM

Level 3, Council Chamber

Agenda

** ** ** ** ** **

NOTE: For Full Details, See Council’s Website –

https://www.krg.nsw.gov.au under the link to business papers

The Livestream can be viewed here:

https://www.krg.nsw.gov.au/Council/Council-meetings/Council-meeting-live-stream

Disclaimer: All Ku-ring-gai Council Ordinary Meetings of Council are livestreamed for on-demand viewing on the KRG website. Although Council will do its best to ensure the public is excluded from the livestream, Council cannot guarantee a person’s image and/or voice won’t be broadcast. Accordingly, attendance at Council meetings is considered consent by a person for their image and/or voice to be webcast. Council accepts no liability for any damage that may result from defamatory comments made by persons attending meetings. As per clause 15.21 of Council’s Code of Meeting Practice, a person must not live stream or use an audio recorder, video camera, mobile phone or any other device to make a recording or photograph of the proceedings of a meeting of the council or a committee of the council without the prior authorisation of the council.

In accordance with clause 3.23 of the Model Code of Meeting Practice, Councillors are reminded of the oath or affirmation of office made under section 233A of the Act, and of their obligations under the Council’s Code of Conduct to disclose and appropriately manage conflicts of interest.

Please refer to Part 4 of Council’s Code of Conduct for Pecuniary Interests and Part 5 of Council’s Code of Conduct for Non-Pecuniary Interests.

The Oath or Affirmation taken is as below:

Oath:

I [name of Councillor] swear that I will undertake the duties of the office of Councillor in the best interests of the people of the Ku-ring-gai Local Government area and the Ku-ring-gai Council, and that I will faithfully and impartially carry out the functions, powers, authorities and discretions vested in me under the Local Government Act 1993 or any other Act to the best of my ability and judgement.

Affirmation:

I [name of Councillor] solemnly and sincerely declare and affirm that I will undertake the duties of the office of Councillor in the best interests of the people of the Ku-ring-gai Local Government area and the Ku-ring-gai Council, and that I will faithfully and impartially carry out the functions, powers, authorities and discretions vested in me under the Local Government Act 1993 or any other Act to the best of my ability and judgement.

APOLOGIEs

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Documents Circulated to Councillors

Confirmation of Reports to be Considered in Closed Meeting

NOTE:

That in accordance with the provisions of Section 10 of the Local Government Act 1993, all officers’ reports be released to the press and public, with the exception of following confidential report(s) and attachments:

C.1 Update on Council land acquisitions for open space

In accordance with 10A(2)(c):

NOTE:

That in accordance with the provisions of Section 10 of the Local Government Act 1993, all officers’ reports be released to the press and public, with the exception of confidential attachments to the following General Business reports:

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTEs

Minutes of Ordinary Meeting of Council 11

File: EM00046/1

Meeting held 18 February 2025

Minutes numbered 1 to 23

minutes from the Mayor

MM.1 Recognition of the service of Dr Anthony Rigney 31

File: CY00455/13

On behalf of Council and our community I would like to pay tribute to the invaluable contribution and service of Dr Anthony Rigney, who has recently stepped down as CEO of the KYDS organisation.

KYDS is the leading support organisation for young people experiencing mental health challenges in Ku-ring-gai.

Dr Rigney joined KYDS as the Clinical Services Manager in 2017 and since then has built an excellent clinical team at KYDS, earning the organisation a distinguished reputation within the industry for its compassionate, accessible, and effective approach to supporting young people in crisis and their families.

Dr. Rigney’s expertise and willingness to contribute across a wide range of projects have been highly sought after and deeply valued. He has been a steadfast supporter of Ku-ring-gai Council initiatives for young people, always advocating for the mental health and wellbeing of young people in our area.

In particular the support provided to the St Ives Youth Hub by Dr Rigney and the staff of KYDS has been greatly appreciated and we look forward to continuing this valuable partnership.

Dr Rigney’s leadership and vision have played a pivotal role in shaping mental health services in this community, and the work he has done will continue to benefit many lives for years to come.

On behalf of our Council and our community, I extend our heartfelt thanks to Dr. Anthony Rigney. His leadership will be deeply missed, but his legacy will undoubtedly continue to inspire and shape the future of mental health services for young people in our area.

Recommendation:

That the Mayor write to Dr Rigney and enclose a copy of this Mayoral Minute.

Petitions

GENERAL BUSINESS

i. The Mayor to invite Councillors to nominate any item(s) on the Agenda that they wish to have a site inspection.

ii. The Mayor to invite Councillors to nominate any item(s) on the Agenda that they wish to adopt in accordance with the officer’s recommendation allowing for minor changes without debate.

GB.1 Investment Report as at 28 February 2025 32

File: FY00623/7

To present Council’s investment portfolio performance for February 2025.

Recommendation:

That the summary of investments performance for February 2025 be received and noted; and that the Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer be noted and the report adopted.

GB.2 Youth Advisory Committee -
Minutes of Meeting Tuesday 3 February 2025 40

File: S04141

To provide Council with the minutes from the Youth Advisory Committee meeting held on 3 February 2025.

Recommendation:

A. That Council endorse the minutes of the Youth Advisory Committee meeting held on 3 February 2025.

B. That four (4) new members from the reserves list be appointed to the Youth Advisory Committee to replace members who are no longer able to participate in the committee.

GB.3 Status of Women's Advisory Committee - Minutes of Meeting Tuesday 11 February 2025 46

File: S04141

To provide Council with the minutes from the Status of Women’s Advisory Committee meeting held on 11 February 2025.

Recommendation:

That Council endorse the minutes of the Status of Women’s Advisory Committee meeting held on 11 February 2025.

GB.4 Multicultural Advisory Committee -
Minutes of Meeting 13 February 2025 54

File: S04141

To provide Council with the minutes from the Multicultural Advisory Committee meeting held on 13 February 2025.

Recommendation:

That Council endorse the minutes of the Multicultural Advisory Committee meeting held on 13 February 2025.

GB.5 Arts and Culture Committee -
Minutes of Meeting 17 February 2025 61

File: S04141

To provide Council with the minutes from the Arts and Culture Committee meeting held on 17 February 2025.

Recommendation:

That Council endorse the minutes of the Arts and Culture Committee meeting held on 17 February 2025.

GB.6 Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee -
Minutes of Meeting 26 February 2025 71

File: CY00022/17

To consider the Minutes from the Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee (KTC) Meeting held on 26 February 2025.

Recommendation:

A. That Council receive and note the Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee Minutes from 26 February 2025.

B. That Council approve the recommendations of the Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee.

C. That the frequency of meetings of the Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee change from quarterly to monthly (excluding December). The Committee would be able to postpone a meeting if there is insufficient business but would still meet at least once in each quarter on the remaining dates as set being 28/5/25, 27/8/25 and 26/11/25.

GB.7 Delivery Program and Operational Plan: December 2024 Biannual report 83

File: FY00382/16

To report to Council on the progress of the Delivery Program 2022-2026 and Operational Plan 2024-2025, for the six-month period July to December 2024.

Recommendation:

That the report on the six-monthly progress review of the Delivery Program 2022-2026 and Operational Plan 2024-2025 for the period July to December 2024 be received and noted.

GB.8 Norman Griffiths Oval Upgrade Project Update 177

File: S13191

The purpose of this report is for Councillor’s to note that there will be a further, late report provided to the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 18 March 2025 detailing an update on the Norman Griffiths Oval Project.

Recommendation:

That this report be received and note that a further report will be provided as a late item for the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 18 March 2025.

GB.9 Vernon Street Dog Park Lighting 181

File: S03670

The purpose of this report is to inform Council of a project timeline for completion to install cost-effective lighting in the Vernon Street South Turramurra dog off-leash area.

Further, this report will also outline how proposed minor works under the Parks Development Program are collated, considered and prioritised, including a schedule for FY26 that ensures allocation of Council's resources is transparent and equitable across all Council areas.

Recommendation:

A. That Council install cost-effective lighting in the Vernon Street South Turramurra dog off-leash area subject to funding being made available in the Parks Development Program (114008) for FY26.

B. That Council notes how proposed minor works under the Parks Development Program are collated, considered and prioritised that ensures allocation of Council's resources is transparent and equitable across all Council areas including a schedule for FY26, subject to funding being made available in the Parks Development Program (114008) for FY26.

GB.10 Auluba Oval Facilities Upgrade Project 188

File: S02811

The purpose of this report is to provide an update on the proposed upgrade works on the amenities building at Auluba Oval South Turramurra.

Recommendation:

That the proposed upgrade works on the amenities building at Auluba Oval, South Turramurra proceed.

GB.11 Planning Proposal for 77 Kulgoa Road Pymble 193

File: S14501

For Council to consider the private Planning Proposal for 77 Kulgoa Road, Pymble.

Recommendation:

That the Planning Proposal should proceed to Gateway Determination, subject to amendments.

GB.12 Dual Occupancy Minimum Lot Size
post-exhibition 502

File: S14428

To report on the public consultation and confirm a minimum lot size for dual occupancy development within Ku-ring-gai to forward to the NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure.

Recommendation:

That Council endorse a 1015 sqm minimum lot size for dual occupancy development in Ku-ring-gai, and forward it to the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure for finalisation.

That Council prepare DCP planning standards based on the minimum lot size.

GB.13 Receipt of Letter of Offer to enter into a Planning Agreement with a Planning Proposal - 345 Pacific Highway Lindfield 604

File: S06198

To advise of the receipt of a letter of offer to enter into a Planning Agreement associated with a Planning Proposal to alter the planning controls at 345 Pacific Highway, Lindfield.

Recommendation:

That the letter of offer be noted, that authority be delegated to the General Manager and his staff to liaise with the proponents and their solicitors to progress the matter before reporting back to Council.

Extra Reports Circulated to Meeting

Motions of which due Notice has been given

NM.1 Financial and Operational Review of Ku-ring-gai Council - Surviving in a Cost of Living Crisis 613

File: S14726

Notice of Motion from Councillors Pettett and Devlin dated 28 February 2025

We have seen a number of northern Sydney councils recently propose very large rate increase much to the anger and dismay of their residents. Northern Beaches Council has recently proposed a 39.6% rate increase and North Sydney Council proposing a massive 87% rate increase. These proposed rates rises have received widespread condemnation and has many people wondering how did things gets so bad in those councils whilst attracting much media attention across New South Wales. At its meeting on 27 November 2023, Willoughby Council selected a 15% increase as its preferred rate rise option for 2024/25, which includes the NSW Government rate peg of 5%.

Let’s look at other Sydney councils in 2023. We had the following

City of Canada Bay Council - 32.53% over four years

Hornsby Shire Council - 31.05% over four years

Strathfield Municipal Council - 92.83% over four years

Woollahra Municipal Council - 22.23% over two years

Source: Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal NSW

Ku-ring-gai Council in its long-term plan has also flagged a potential 22% rate rise but has yet to determine whether or not to proceed with a special rate variation and what amount that increase might be. We are currently experiencing a long-prolonged cost of living crisis and we Council should endeavour to minimise any further rates burden on our residents. Noting too, that 56% of Council's revenue is generated from rates & annual charges (Source: Ku-ring-gai Council: Annual Report 2023/24 ).

Our residents are demanding more from Council whist many residents are suffering mortgage stress, cost of living pressures, how to put food on the table and how to pay their ever-increasing bills such as electricity and council rates. It is also important to note that in recent years, and in an attempt to alleviate the State Government's budgetary position as well as an unintended consequence of amendments to planning controls, there has been a significant cost shift on to Local Government, further straining an already stretched budget. Councils are faced with either increasing their revenue base or reducing the services and quality of facilities provided to the community. It is crucial that this Council ensures that is operating as efficient as possible, before considering either of these two options.

Therefore, before proceeding down any special rate variation discussions with the community, Ku-ring-gai Council should be able to demonstrate to the community that the Council is running at its best both financially and operationally. Our staff are very passionate about doing their best and strongly adhere to the core values of the organisation. Council has a staff retention rate which is the envy of many other councils.

An external review may yield further efficiencies, financially and operationally, which may well avoid the need for a special rate increase.

Under the current challenging environment, we believe that there is no harm in running an Expressions of Interest (EOI) process to invite external parties to potentially look at Ku-ring-gai’s financial records, processes and activities, and then present their recommendations on the best way forward. The process could be as follows:

1. Ku-ring-gai Council advertises an EOI process for third parties to review Ku-ring-gai’s costs, operations, and future funding options. Parties have one month to respond.

2. Interested parties register their interest by which would contain such things as:

a. Their background, capabilities, and experience with the local government sector

b. An overview of Ku-ring-gai’s challenges

c. Proposed scope of activity and anticipated costs

d. Any other relevant information

3. After the closing date of the EOI, council staff to provide each submission to the councillors in their entirety. Council staff may also provide a report and/or briefing on which party or parties, if any, they believe should be engaged for a further discussion on expected scope and costs of work.

4. Next steps would be decided by resolution of council in May or June 2025.

We, therefore, move that:

A. Ku-ring-gai Council commences and advertises an Expression of Interest process, seeking the input of consultants on matters such as cost management, service delivery, funding options, project pipeline and talent retention/development;

B. Residents are informed for example via the Council website, press releases and social media that EOI process is being undertaken for a Financial and Operational Review of Ku-ring-gai Council; and,

C. For the May or June 2025 Ordinary Meeting of Council, staff provide the Councillors with the EOI submissions from each interested party as well as a report on whether, in their view, there should be a way forward to negotiate on scope and costs with one or more specific parties.

Recommendation:

That the above Notice of Motion as printed be adopted.

BUSINESS WITHOUT NOTICE – SUBJECT TO CLAUSE 9.3 OF code of meeting practice

Questions With Notice

QN.1 Norman Griffiths Oval 616

File: EM00046/2

InspectionS– SETTING OF TIME, DATE AND RENDEZVOUS

Confidential Business to be dealt with in Closed Meeting

C.1 Update on Council land acquisitions for open space

File: S04601/16

In accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 and the Local Government (General) Regulation 2021, in the opinion of the General Manager, the following business is of a kind as referred to in section 10A(2)(c), of the Act, and should be dealt with in a part of the meeting closed to the public.

Section 10A(2)(c) of the Act permits the meeting to be closed to the public in respect of information that would, if disclosed, confer a commercial advantage on a person with whom the Council is conducting (or proposes to conduct) business.

The matter is classified confidential because it deals with the proposed acquisition and/or disposal of property.

It is not in the public interest to release this information as it would prejudice Council’s ability to acquire and/or dispose of the property on appropriate terms and conditions.

Report by Manager Property

David Marshall

General Manager

** ** ** ** ** **

Minute Ku-ring-gai Council Page

MINUTES OF Ordinary Meeting of Council
HELD ON Tuesday, 18 February 2025

Present:	The Mayor, Councillor Christine Kay (Chairperson) Councillors M Devlin & J Pettett (Comenarra Ward) Councillors I Balachandran & B Ward (Gordon Ward) Councillors S Ngai & A Taylor (Roseville Ward) Councillor M Smith (St Ives Ward) Councillors C Spencer & K Wheatley (Wahroonga Ward)

Staff Present:	General Manager (David Marshall) Director Community (Janice Bevan) Director Corporate (Angela Apostol) Director Development & Regulation (Michael Miocic) Director Operations (Peter Lichaa) Director Strategy & Environment (Andrew Watson) Corporate Lawyer (Jamie Taylor) Manager Corporate Communications (Virginia Leafe) Manager Governance and Corporate Strategy (Christopher M Jones) Governance Support Officer (Eliza Gilbank-Heim)

The Meeting commenced at 7:01PM

The Mayor offered the Acknowledgement of Country and Prayer.

Apologies

File: S02194

Nil.

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

The Mayor referred to the necessity for Councillors and staff to declare a Pecuniary Interest/Conflict of Interest in any item on the Business Paper.

The General Manager declared a significant, pecuniary interest in MM.4 General Manager performance review panel members as it directly relates to his performance review. The General Manager will be leaving the room during debate on this item.

DOCUMENTS CIRCULATED TO COUNCILLORS

The Mayor referred to the documents circulated in the Councillors’ papers and advised that the following matters would be dealt with at the appropriate time during the meeting:

Late Items:	MM.5 - Establishment of Ku-ring-gai Council Women’s Leadership and Inspiration Award 2025 - Report by the Mayor, Councillor Kay dated 17 February 2025.
Memorandums:	An explanatory memorandum for item GB.11 Draft Submission - IPART Discussion Paper: Review of our approach to assessing contributions plans from the Manager of Urban & Heritage Planning was circulated to the Mayor and Councillors on 18 February 2025.

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTEs

Minutes of Ordinary Meeting of Council

File: EM00043/11/1

Meeting held 17 December 2024

Minutes numbered 233 to 249

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Wheatley/Balachandran)

That Minutes numbered 233 to 249 circulated to Councillors were taken as read and confirmed as an accurate record of the proceedings of the Meeting.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

minutes from the Mayor

2025 Australia Day Honours
and Citizen of the Year Awards

File: CY00785/4

Vide: MM.1

I am pleased to inform you that two members of the Ku-ring-gai community, through their outstanding achievements and services to the community, have been awarded 2025 Australia Day Honours.

We are very proud to have these dedicated and talented Australians as members of the Ku-ring-gai community.

I would like to read to you the names of these Australia Day Honours recipients and, on behalf of Council, congratulate them on their excellent contributions to Australian society.

Mrs Jennifer Gai ANDERSON OAM, for service to the community of Ku-ring-gai

Mrs Jennifer Anderson OAM was a longstanding Ku-ring-gai Mayor and a Councillor between 2006 and 2021. In 2021 she became Ku-ring-gai’s longest serving mayor, holding the position from 2011 to 2012, 2013 to 2015 and consecutive terms during 2016-2017, 2017-2019 and 2019-2021. In 2017 she was presented with the NSW Ministers' Award for Women in Local Government for her service to the Council. She is recognised as an Emeritus Mayor of Ku-ring-gai by the NSW Local Government Association and received the Excellence Award from Local Government NSW in 2021.

In addition to her contribution to local government, Mrs Anderson has a distinguished and wide-ranging record of service to numerous community organisations. She has served as a board member of the Hornsby Ku-ring-gai Women’s Shelter; the Ku-ring-gai Youth Development Service; Ku-ring-gai Meals on Wheels; Eryldene Historic House; Tulkiyan Historic House; the NSW Parents Council and the NSW Federation of Parents' and Citizens' Association.

Mrs Anderson has been a Company Director of Ku-ring-gai Financial Services (Lindfield Community Bank) since 2023. She is a current Patron of the Hornsby Ku-ring-gai Women’s Shelter, the Ku-ring-gai Historical Society and the Ku-ring-gai division of St John’s Ambulance Brigade. She is also a former Patron of the Ku-ring-gai Horticultural Society, Gordon District Cricket Club and the Ku-ring-gai Amateur Swimming Club.

Mr Samuel Stuart CLARK AM AFSM, for distinguished service as a member of an Australian fire service

Mr Samuel Stuart Clark AM joined the Elouera Rural Fire Brigade in 1973 and has since served as a member of the Ku-ring-gai, Killara and Hornsby Communications brigades. He served as the Communications Brigade captain from 2017 to 2024 and is currently the Killara Brigade deputy captain and president.

Mr Clark has played a key role in the Killara Brigade’s establishment, engaging both state and local governments to secure land and build a brigade station, delivering enhanced local firefighting capability. A respected senior member, he has given his time and legal expertise freely for the betterment of the NSW Rural Fire Service (NSW RFS), contributing to projects including the development of the Code of Conduct and Ethics, disciplinary processes, Brigade Constitutional reform and the Brigade Management Handbook.

Mr Clark has played an integral role in the establishment of the modern NSW RFS, mentoring generations of leaders and contributing to the professionalism for which the agency is now known. As the architect of the service’s organisational structure, he worked with successive commissioners to implement necessary legislative and corporate changes to shape the service. The NSW RFS is indebted to Mr Clark for his unwavering commitment.

I also congratulate Ku-ring-gai Citizen of the Year winners for 2025:

Citizen of the Year – Madeleine Steel

Young Citizen of the Year – Matthew Hayes

Environmental Citizen of the Year – Sofia Zvolanek

Mayor’s Award for an Outstanding

Contribution by a Community Group – Hornsby Ku-ring-gai Women’s Shelter

On behalf of Council, I congratulate all these award winners on their outstanding achievements.

Ku-ring-gai should be proud that it has citizens being recognised at the highest level for their selfless dedication, commitment and contribution to local, national and international communities.

Resolved:

(Moved: The Mayor Councillor Kay)

A. That Council acknowledge the outstanding contribution made by these recipients of 2025 Australia Day Honours to the Ku-ring-gai community and to the well-being of our society.

B. That the Mayor write to the recipients on behalf of Council to congratulate them on receiving their award, including a copy of this Mayoral Minute

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Vale Geoffrey Basser, An Inspirational Mentor For Youth

File: CY00455/13

Vide: MM.2

It is my sad duty to inform Council and our community of the passing of a much-loved mentor and passionate advocate for youth, Geoffrey Basser.

Geoffrey passed away last month at the age of 95. During his long life he never stopped pursuing ways to support and encourage young people.

Born in Lithgow, Geoffrey became interested in community service at a young age, joining the APEX organisation in 1947.

He continued participating in APEX when he moved to Sydney for work and then joined Rotary.

Through his involvement with the Lindfield Rotary Club in the early 2000s, Geoffrey helped establish the KYDS youth counselling service in Lindfield.

From its inception KYDS fulfilled a deep need for youth-based mental health support, long before it was funded by various government agencies.

Thanks to Geoffrey’s pioneering leadership, KYDS now provides a range of free counselling services to support young people aged 10-18 without the need for referrals, a health plan or even a Medicare card.

In Port Stephens where he eventually retired, he also pioneered the creation of a free youth mental health counselling service known as Jupiter.

Geoffrey’s obituary had the words ‘We thought he’d live forever’, a testament to his energy, selflessness and inspirational presence in his family and the Port Stephens and Ku-ring-gai communities.

On behalf of Council and our residents, I extend our deepest condolences to his widow Nanette and sister Barbara, his children Ian, Elise, Susan and Pru and his nine grandchildren. Rest in peace Geoffrey, you will be missed.

Resolved:

(Moved: The Mayor Councillor Kay)

A. That the Mayoral Minute be received and noted

B. That we stand for a minute’s silence to honour Geoffrey Basser

C. That the Mayor write to Geoffrey Basser’s family and encloses a copy of the Mayoral Minute

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Memorandum of Understanding between Ku-ring-gai Council and the Ku-ring-gai Chamber of Commerce

File: S09435

Vide: MM.3

This Mayoral Minute seeks Council's endorsement of a draft Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between Ku-ring-gai Council and the Ku-ring-gai Chamber of Commerce.

The intent of the MOU is to establish a formal collaborative relationship between Council and the Chamber, in the interests of stimulating local economic growth and assisting small to medium local businesses.

Since 2009 the Ku-ring-gai Chamber of Commerce has played a vital role in supporting local small businesses through networking opportunities and providing advocacy within the Ku-ring-gai area.

The Council has developed its own program of business support, delivering training programs, events, networking and professional development opportunities and providing information on other business support available through government agencies and associated organisations.

Council and the Chamber share a fundamental goal of fostering a thriving local business community and supporting a strong local economy. Given the complementary nature of their activities and shared goals, establishing a formal collaborative framework through an MOU presents a logical step forward.

The proposed MOU aims to:

Provide a structured approach to strengthening connections and mutual collaboration
Leverage the distinct strengths and resources of both organisations
Heighten support for the local business community and raise awareness of the support available
Foster stronger working relationships between the parties
Establish clear protocols for collaboration

Similar arrangements are already established in neighbouring council areas, with Willoughby City Council and Hornsby Council having implemented MOUs with their respective Chambers of Commerce.

Such agreements facilitate collaboration while maintaining open channels for feedback and ideas.

As Mayor, I believe that strengthening relationships with organisations such as the Ku-ring-gai Chamber of Commerce will play an important role in promoting local businesses. It is a view that I am sure my Council colleagues also share.

Resolved:

(Moved: The Mayor, Councillor Kay)

A. That Council endorse the draft Memorandum of Understanding between Ku-ring-gai Council and Ku-ring-gai Chamber of Commerce

B. That the Mayor and General Manager are authorised to execute the MOU on behalf of Council

C. That the General Manager or his delegate are to implement the collaborative framework outlined in the MOU

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

After declaring an interest in MM.4, the General Manager withdrew from Chambers during discussion.

General Manager performance review panel members

File: EM00046/1

Vide: MM.4

At the 17 October 2023 Council meeting, Council resolved to establish a selection panel to oversee the recruitment of a new General Manager with the assistance of an independent recruitment consultant. It was also agreed that the panel be comprised of the Mayor (then Councillor Sam Ngai), Deputy Mayor (then myself) and two other Councillors. Following a vote, Councillors Alec Taylor and Kim Wheatley were appointed to the panel.

Following the successful appointment of the General Manager, the selection panel reconvened to work with the external consultant and GM to develop a comprehensive performance agreement.

Under the Office of Local Government (OLG) Guidelines for the Appointment and Oversight of General Managers (Attachment A1), the governing body must establish a panel to undertake the General Manager’s performance reviews. The guidelines state that “performance review panels should comprise of the mayor, the deputy mayor, another councillor nominated by council and a

councillor nominated by the general manager”. The General Manager has advised that he does not wish to nominate a panel member.

Performance must be reviewed at least annually against the agreed criteria for the position. The Guidelines recommend that full responsibility for performance management be delegated to the panel, including discussions about performance, any actions that should be taken and the determination of a new performance agreement.

Following the local government elections in September last year, I would like to provide new and returning Councillors with the opportunity to express an interest in joining myself and the Deputy Mayor on the panel.

As outlined in the Guidelines, all Councillors will be able to contribute to the review process by providing feedback on the General Manager’s performance against the agreed performance criteria. The panel will report back to Council in a closed session on the findings and recommendations of the performance review, and further information about the process and timeframes will be communicated separately.

Motion:

(Moved: The Mayor, Councillor Kay)

That Council:

A. Delegate the review of the General Manager’s performance to the panel comprised of the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and two Councillors

B. Engage the independent external consultant to support the review

C. Appoint Councillors Sam Ngai and Alec Taylor to the performance review panel.

Amendment:

(Moved: Councillors Ngai/Spencer)

That Council:

Delegate the review of the General Manager’s performance to the panel comprised of the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and two Councillors

Engage the independent external consultant to support the review

Appoint Councillors Sam Ngai and Barbara Ward to the performance review panel.

The Amendment was put and declared CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

The Motion was put and declared CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Ngai/Spencer)

That Council:

Delegate the review of the General Manager’s performance to the panel comprised of the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and two Councillors

Engage the independent external consultant to support the review

Appoint Councillors Sam Ngai and Barbara Ward to the performance review panel.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

The General Manager returned to Chambers.

Establishment of Ku-ring-gai Council Women’s Leadership and Inspiration Award 2025

File: CY00074/17

Vide: MM.5

Council support is sought for the establishment of the Ku-ring-gai Council Women’s Leadership and Inspiration Award 2025, aimed at recognising, and celebrating outstanding women in our community who demonstrate leadership, advocacy, and a commitment to advancing gender equality.

International Women’s Day (IWD) provides an important opportunity to acknowledge and celebrate the contributions of women who make a meaningful impact in our community. Consistent with Ku-ring-gai Council’s commitment to gender equality and women’s empowerment, this award will highlight the achievements of local women who are dedicated to fostering positive change. This initiative aligns with the objectives of Council’s Prevention of Violence Against Women Plan and broader national and state gender equality strategies. The establishment of this award reinforces Council’s role in promoting gender equity and encouraging women’s participation in leadership and community development.

The Ku-ring-gai Council Women’s Leadership and Inspiration Award will recognise women aged 18 years or older who reside within the Ku-ring-gai Local Government Area and demonstrate exceptional leadership, advocacy, and dedication to advancing gender equality. Nominees must have made meaningful contributions in one or more of the following areas: addressing systemic barriers, supporting women in underrepresented fields, or empowering vulnerable women and girls. Sitting Local, State, or Federal politicians, current vice-regal officers, and current Council employees will not be eligible. A selection panel, chaired by the Mayor and comprising members of the Status of Women Advisory Committee and relevant staff, will assess nominations against clear criteria focused on leadership, advocacy, and community impact. Nomination guidelines and selection criteria will be developed to ensure a transparent and fair assessment process. Final eligibility assessment will include a referee check to ensure the integrity of the process.

The recipient will be recognised at the Council’s International Women’s Day celebration, with their achievements promoted throughout the year via Council’s communication channels. This year, due to timing considerations the award will be aligned with another significant day related to women's causes. Nomination forms and supporting documentation will be required to provide a clear understanding of the nominee’s contributions. The award will celebrate not only the recipient’s accomplishments but also their role in inspiring others and fostering gender equity in the community.

At the Status of Women Advisory Committee meeting on Tuesday, 11 February, members strongly endorsed the proposal to establish the Ku-ring-gai Council Women’s Leadership and Inspiration Award 2025. The establishment of this award represents a meaningful step in fostering gender equality and celebrating the contributions of women in our community. By providing recognition and a platform to amplify their work, the award will empower recipients and inspire future generations of women leaders. This initiative underscores Council’s commitment to inclusivity, representation, and the advancement of women in leadership roles across various sectors.

Resolved:

(Moved: The Mayor, Councillor Kay)

That Council:

A. Endorse the establishment of the Ku-ring-gai Council Women’s Leadership and Inspiration Award, to be launched in 2025 and awarded annually at the International Women’s Day celebration or another significant day aligned with women's causes, as appropriate.

B. Authorise the development of nomination guidelines and selection criteria to ensure a transparent and fair assessment process, to be reported back to Council for endorsement.

C. Promote the award through Council’s communication channels to maximise community engagement and recognition of outstanding women leaders.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

PETITIONS

Petition to add more parking spots on Robert Street and stop the installation of a wombat crossing

File: TM4/17

Vide: PT.1

Petition to Ku-ring-gai Council

Principal petitioner: The Wyatt

We, the undersigned customers and community members, are writing to express our deep concern regarding the proposed installation of a wombat crossing on Robert Street, directly adjacent to The Wyatt cafe, located opposite the Gordon train station. While we appreciate the council’s efforts to improve pedestrian safety, we believe the current plan will have significant negative impacts on the local businesses and community.

The Wyatt is a vital part of our community, serving local guests in their daily lives and providing a welcoming space for social connection. As a local community cafe, it plays an essential role in supporting neighbourhood engagement and small business vitality. The proposed loss of car parking spaces would further strain our ability to operate effectively and serve our customers.

The implementation of the wombat crossing as proposed will result in the loss of at least 2 vital car parking spaces in an area that already suffers from severe parking shortages (from the previous upgrade of the kerb blister, we lost 2 car spaces already). This issue has been a long-standing challenge for customers visiting local businesses, including The Wyatt. The further reduction of parking will:

· Make it increasingly difficult for local customers to find parking, discouraging them from visiting our establishments.

· Adversely impact our customer service and community engagement, as convenient access is essential for quick visits.

· Potentially cause a decline in customer footfall, negatively affecting our business viability and the livelihoods of staff.

We respectfully request the council reconsider the proposed wombat crossing placement and explore alternative solutions that balance safety improvements with local business needs. Specifically, we propose:

1. Evaluating other locations for the wombat crossing where it may cause less disruption to parking.

2. Adding 6 additional 1/2 P car parking spaces on Robert Street to compensate for the parking loss and better serve the community and local businesses.

3. Allocating some of the available funding to improve cleanliness and maintenance of public areas, including cleaning and upkeep of outdoor seating barriers (concert-style fencing) and other shared spaces that enhance the local environment and customer experience

While we recognize that this project is being funded by the NSW Government, we hope that the council will allocate the funding in a more reasonable and considerate manner that prioritizes both pedestrian safety and the accessibility needs of local businesses.

We believe these suggestions will enhance both pedestrian safety and accessibility without compromising the vitality of the local business community. We trust the Council will give due consideration to our concerns and suggestions. Thank you for your attention to this matter. We look forward to your prompt response and a collaborative resolution that benefits all stakeholders.

(99 signatures)

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Ward/Balachandran)

That the petition be received and referred to the appropriate Officer of Council for attention.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

GENERAL BUSINESS

Minutes of Audit, Risk & Improvement Committee meeting held on 12 December 2024

File: CY00458/13

Vide: GB.1

To provide Council with the minutes from the Audit, Risk & Improvement Committee meeting held on 12 December 2024 for adoption.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Taylor/Ward)

That the minutes from the Audit, Risk & Improvement Committee meeting held on 12 December 2024 be adopted.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Audit, Risk & Improvement Committee - Extension of Appointment: Independent Chair and Independent Member

File: CY00458/12

Vide: GB.2

To consider offering an extension of appointment to the current Independent Chair and an Independent Member of Council’s Audit, Risk & Improvement Committee.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Taylor/Ward)

It is recommended that:

The current Independent Chair of the Audit, Risk & Improvement Committee, is offered an extension of appointment for a period of 2 years commencing from 2 March 2025.

B. The subject Independent Member of the Audit, Risk & Improvement Committee, is offered an extension of appointment for a period of 1 year commencing from 2 March 2025.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Status of Women's Advisory Committee meeting minutes of 27 November 2024

File: S13683

Vide: GB.3

To provide Council with the minutes from the Status of Women’s Advisory Committee meeting held on 27 November 2024.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Taylor/Ward)

That Council:

A. Consider and endorse the minutes of the Status of Women’s Advisory Committee meeting held on 27 November 2024.

B. Acknowledge the resignation of Rhonda Smyth from the Status of Women’s Advisory Committee.

C. Endorse the appointment of Leanne Fry to the Status of Women’s Advisory Committee.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Heritage Reference Committee meeting minutes of 5 December 2024

File: CY00413/12

Vide: GB.4

To have Council consider the minutes from previous Heritage Reference Committee (‘HRC’) meeting held on 5 December 2024.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Taylor/Ward)

That Council receive and note the HRC minutes from the meeting held on 5 December 2024.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

2024 - 2025 Budget Review - 2nd Quarter ended December 2024

File: EM00046/1

Vide: GB.5

To inform Council of the results of the second quarter budget review of 2024/25 and proposed adjustments to the annual budget based on the actual financial performance and trend for the period 1 July 2024 to 31 December 2024.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Taylor/Ward)

That the December 2024 Quarterly Budget Review and the recommended changes be received and noted.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Analysis of Land and Environment Court Costs - 2nd Quarter 2024 to 2025

File: FY00623/7

Vide: GB.6

To report legal costs in relation to development control matters in the Land and Environment Court for the quarter ended 31 December 2024.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Taylor/Ward)

That the analysis of Land and Environment Court costs for the period ended 31 December 2024 be received and noted.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Investment Report as at 31 December 2024

File: FY00623/7

Vide: GB.7

To present Council’s investment portfolio performance for December 2024.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Taylor/Ward)

That:

A. The summary of investments and performance for December 2024 be received and noted.

B. The Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer be noted and the report adopted.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Investment Report as at 31 January 2025

File: FY00623/7

Vide: GB.8

To present Council’s investment portfolio performance for January 2025.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Taylor/Ward)

That:

A. The summary of investments and performance for January 2025 be received and noted.

B. The Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer be noted and the report adopted.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Disclosures of Interest Returns Register

File: EM00046/1

Vide: GB.9

To table Council’s Clause 4.23 Disclosure of Interest Returns Register inclusive of the Returns made by Councillor Balachandran and Councillor Devlin in accordance with Schedule 1 of the Ku-ring-gai Council Code of Conduct (the Code).

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Taylor/Ward)

That the updated Disclosure of Interest Returns Register be noted.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Submission on the Office of Local Government's Proposed Amendments to the Model Code of Meeting Practice

File: EM00046/1

Vide: GB.10

To approve a submission to the Office of Local Government’s (OLG) consultation on the proposed amendments to the Model Code of Meeting Practice.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Taylor/Ward)

That Council approve the draft submission to the OLG’s consultation on the proposed amendments to the Model Code of Meeting Practice, at Attachment A2.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Alternative Scenarios to the TOD SEPP - Project Update

File: S14427

Vide: GB.12

To provide Council with an update on the development of alternative scenarios to the TOD SEPP.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Taylor/Ward)

That Council receive and note the update report on planning for alternative scenarios to the TOD SEPP.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Draft Submission - IPART Discussion Paper: Review of our approach to assessing contributions plans

File: S12758

Vide: GB.11

The purpose of this report is to put the draft response prepared by staff in response to IPART’s invitation for submissions to Council for consideration.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Balachandran/Wheatley)

That Council resolve to forward the final draft submission to IPART as a formal submission ahead of the revised deadline for submissions of 21 February 2025.

That the General Manager be authorised to make minor changes to the submission where they are of a minor or editorial nature and otherwise progress the interests of Council consistent within this matter.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Motions of which due Notice has been given

Norman Griffiths Oval Upgrade Project Update

File: S13191

Vide: NM.1

Notice of Motion from Councillors Pettett and Devlin dated 31 January 2025

The Norman Griffiths Oval at West Pymble is currently undergoing a major upgrade. Council resolved in March 2023 to proceed with the project as planned. Acknowledging that there was some concern, the broader community was excited that this project was finally underway after many years in the pipeline. The Oval upgrade incudes a new all-weather synthetic surface, new lighting and pathways, an electronic scoreboard and an improved drainage system, catering for environmental factors.

The initial total cost of the upgrade was estimated at $3.3m, (later revised estimated budget is $4.77m as of April 2024) with local football clubs contributing around $1m in club funds and government grants. The current estimated budget of this upgrade as of January 2025 is yet to be advised. The latest update (Council’s eNews 29th November 2024) has an estimated completion in mid-2025. The community is concerned about the significant budget blowout and substantial time-delays in completing this project.

Given the delays, cost and heightened community concern, it is prudent that Council provide greater transparency and understanding of the project management, and progress status of the upgrade works for Councillors and the community.

We, therefore, move:

That Council staff provide a detailed report to the Ordinary Meeting of Council in March 2025 about the cost and time to completion of the Norman Griffiths upgrade. The report to include, but not limited to, the following, some of which may include confidential information:

Current cost versus budgeted cost;

The nature of current variations under contention and associated costs. Including a forecast cost of completion;

The status of the negotiations pertaining to aforementioned variations;

Updated scope of works, specifying responsibilities for both Council and contractors;

The timeframe in place to complete remaining works, including handover date and return to public use;

The details of – if any – dealings with NSW Environmental Protection Agency;

The details of – if any – dealings with Sydney Water;

Full breakdown of all environmental protection provisions incorporated into the project, differentiating what was included in the initial design and what have been additional inclusions since construction began;

Full breakdown of delays, detailing responsible party and cause; and but not limited to,

The point at which – if necessary – that Council may need to decide to terminate the existing contract and pursue completion of works with other parties.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Pettett/Devlin)

That the above Notice of Motion as printed be adopted.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Vernon Street Dog Park Lighting

File: S03670

Vide: NM.2

Notice of Motion from Councillors Pettett and Devlin dated 31 January 2025

The dog park on Vernon Street, South Turramurra, is well-used and is an integral open space for the secluded South Turramurra community. This park is allowing dogs to play and exercise safely in an off-leash area, as well as allowing residents to meet-up, socialise and support their physical and mental wellbeing.

This off-leash area requires appropriate lighting to allow usage in the evenings. As the days become shorter in the cooler months, and after day-light-savings ends, there are less hours available for dogs to be exercised as there is no lighting at this location. In winter there is no option to utilise the off-leash area after hours for those that come home from work after 5:00pm. This causes access and safety risks for the community. The off-leash area at Lofberg Oval West Pymble, for example, is well utilised after hours because of the installation of appropriate cost-effective lighting which is on a timer.

mOTION:

(Moved: Councillors Devlin/Pettett)

That Council install cost effective lighting in the Vernon Street South Turramurra dog off-leash area, with a report outlining a project timeline for completion to the Ordinary Meeting of Council in March 2025.

That the report outlines how proposed minor works are collated, considered and prioritised, including a schedule for FY26 that ensures allocation of Council's resources is transparent and equitable across all Council areas.

The Motion was put and declared CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Devlin/Pettett)

That Council install cost effective lighting in the Vernon Street South Turramurra dog off-leash area, with a report outlining a project timeline for completion to the Ordinary Meeting of Council in March 2025.

That the report outlines how proposed minor works are collated, considered and prioritised, including a schedule for FY26 that ensures allocation of Council's resources is transparent and equitable across all Council areas.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Auluba Oval Facilities Upgrade Project

File: S02811

Vide: NM.3

Notice of Motion from Councillors Pettett and Devlin dated 31 January 2025

Council staff have been working with the Kissing Point Sporting Club since 2022 to upgrade the existing outdated change rooms and toilet amenities. The change rooms are used for both winter and summer sports, with the toilets also used by the public. Noting that there are no separate public toilets at the South Turramurra shopping village precinct. These facilities are no longer fit for purpose and require a much-needed upgrade.

To date, several design configurations have been drafted by staff and explored with the football club. Each configuration had an approximate budget. Since 2022 building costs have escalated, and Councillors and the community need to be informed of the current status of this project, including estimated costs, the program of works – noting a date for the resumption of public use, as well as the planning project responsibilities of Council and any contractor.

As we are now in early-2025, it is time to refocus efforts on this project, with a focus on delivery before the end of 2026.

We, therefore, move:

Council staff to provide a report to the Ordinary Meeting of Council in April 2025, which includes the following; but not limited to,

Current plans for the upgrade;

Budget estimates for the current proposal, and the funding source and any funding gap;

The timeframe for the tender process, intended works program, and commencement and handover dates.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Pettett/Devlin)

That the above Notice of Motion as printed be adopted.

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

BUSINESS WITHOUT NOTICE – SUBJECT TO CLAUSE 9.3 OF code of meeting practice

Nil.

QUESTIONS WITH NOTICE

Norman Griffiths Oval

File: EM00046/1

Vide: QN.1

QUESTIONs:

Questions from The Mayor, Councillor Kay dated 31 January 2025

1. What are the potential legal risks and liabilities of proceeding with the proposed work without obtaining an independent flood study that includes Probable Maximum Flood (PMF) assessment (as required by Regulation 171A of the EPA regulations), especially important in the event of continued flooding, water pollution or damaging environmental impact?

2. Has an independent expert provided any written confirmation or formal ”sign-off” that the design will actually work as a 2.4 million litre detention tank?

3. Has a formal written opinion of the cost to completion of the current design, including a financial risk analysis quantifying additional cost blowouts, been obtained? If so, what are these projected cost?

4. What would be the cost of installing a natural turf surface at Norman Griffiths Oval given the works already completed, and would it lower the financial and environmental risks associated with the project?

5. Has a pollutant load analysis been undertaken for the oval?

6. Has council examined the environmental impact of any changes to groundwater seepage associated with the aquifer referred to in ecologist Roger Lembits report sent to council staff and councillors in 2023?

7. Has Council conducted a survey of Quarry Creek’s water path to establish a benchmark for assessing future flood impacts on water flow?

Answer by the General Manager:

There will be a written response for these questions on the Agenda for the March Ordinary Meeting of Council.

Inspections– SETTING OF TIME, DATE AND RENDEZVOUS

Nil.

The Meeting closed at 7:51

The Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 18 February 2025 (Pages 1 - 31) were confirmed as a full and accurate record of proceedings on <Insert confirmation date …>.

__________________________ __________________________

General Manager Mayor / Chairperson

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 18 March 2025	GB.1 / 1

Item GB.1	FY00623/7
	6 February 2025

Investment Report as at 28 February 2025

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

PURPOSE OF REPORT:	To present Council’s investment portfolio performance for February 2025.

background:	Council’s investments are reported monthly to Council in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993, the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and Council’s Investment Policy.

comments:	The net return on investments for the financial year to the end of February 2025 was $6,937,000, against the revised budget of $6,933,000 giving a year-to-date favourable variance of $4,000.

recommendation:	That the summary of investments performance for February 2025 be received and noted; and that the Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer be noted and the report adopted.

Purpose of Report

To present Council’s investment portfolio performance for February 2025.

Background

Council’s investments are reported monthly to Council in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993, the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and Council’s Investment Policy.

Comments

Investment Portfolio Performance Snapshot

The table below provides the investments portfolio performance against targets identified in Council’s Investment Policy as well as other key performance indicators based on industry benchmarks.

Cumulative Investment Returns against Revised Budget

The net return on investments for the financial year ending 28 February 2025 was $6,937,000, compared to the revised budget of $6,933,000, resulting in a favourable year-to-date variance of $4,000. It must be noted that a budget adjustment has been reflected in the Quarterly Budget Review in February 2025 to align with the actual investment return.

A comparison of the cumulative investment returns against year-to-date revised budget is shown in the chart below.

Cash Flow and Investment Movements

Council’s total cash and investment portfolio as at 28 February 2025 was $207,610,000 compared to $204,638,000 at the end of January 2025, a net cash inflow of $2,972,000 were mainly due to third instalment of rates income.

During the month, one investment has matured, two new investments were made in February 2025.

Investment Performance against Industry Benchmark

Overall, the investment performance in February was above the industry benchmark.

The benchmark is specific to the type of investment and the details are provided below. AusBond Bank Bill Index is used for all Council’s investments.

Table 1 - Investments Performance against Industry Benchmarks

Table 2 below provides a summary of all investments by type and performance during the month.

Table 2 - Investments Portfolio Summary during February 2025

* Weighted average returns.

** Funds in at-call/short term accounts are working funds kept for the purpose of meeting short term cash outflow requirements. Large balance for the month is due to planned property acquisitions. At-call investments portfolio is being monitored on a regular basis to ensure funds are reinvested at higher rates when opportunities arise, whilst also keeping and adequate balance for short-term cash outflows.

*** Market Values as at 28 February 2025 were not available at the time of writing the report.

Investment by Credit rating and Maturity Profile

The allocation of Council’s investments by credit rating and the maturity profile are shown below:

integrated planning and reporting

Leadership & Governance

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

L2.1 Council rigorously manages its financial resources and assets to maximise delivery of services

Council maintains and improves its long-term financial position and performance

Continue to analyse opportunities to expand the revenue base of Council

Governance Matters

Council’s investments are made in accordance with the Local Government Act (1993), the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and Council’s Investment Policy.

Section 212 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 states:

(1) The responsible accounting officer of a council:

(a) must provide the council with a written report (setting out details of all money that the council has invested under section 625 of the Act) to be presented:

(i) if only one ordinary meeting of the council is held in a month, at that meeting, or

(ii) if more than one such meeting is held in a month, at whichever of those meetings the council by resolution determines, and

(b) must include in the report a certificate as to whether or not the investment has been made in accordance with the Act, the regulations and the council’s investment policies.

(2) The report must be made up to the last day of the month immediately preceding the meeting.

Risk Management

Council manages the risk associated with investments by diversifying the types of investment, credit quality, counterparty exposure and term to maturity profile.

Council invests its funds in accordance with The Ministerial Investment Order.

All investments are made with consideration of advice from Council’s appointed investment advisor, CPG Research & Advisory.

Financial Considerations

The revised budget for interest on investments for the financial year 2024/2025 is $8,999,900. Of this amount approximately $4,903,200 is restricted for the benefit of future expenditure relating to development contributions, $2,090,900 transferred to the internally restricted Infrastructure & Facility Reserve, and the remainder of $2,005,800 is available for operations.

Social Considerations

Not applicable.

Environmental Considerations

Not applicable.

Community Consultation

None undertaken or required.

Internal Consultation

None undertaken or required.

Certification - Responsible Accounting Officer

I hereby certify that the investments listed in the attached report have been made in accordance with Section 625 of the Local Government Act 1993, clause 212 of the Local Government General Regulation 2005 and Council’s Investment Policy.

Summary

As at 28 February 2025:

· Council’s total cash and investment portfolio is $207,610,000, an increase of $2,972,000 from the previous month due to third instalment of rates income.

· The net return on investments for the financial year to the end of 28 February 2025 was $6,937,000 against the revised budget of $6,933,000, resulting in a favourable year-to-date variance of $4,000. It must be noted that a budget adjustment has been reflected in the Quarterly Budget Review in February 2025 to align with the actual investment return.

Recommendation:

That:

A. The summary of investments and performance for February 2025 be received and noted.

B. The Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer be noted and the report adopted.

Tony Ly

Financial Accounting Officer

Angela Apostol

Director Corporate

Mette Kofoed

Acting Manager Finance

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective	Delivery Program Term Achievement	Operational Plan Task
C4.1: Harmonious communities that understand, value and accept each other, and embrace our evolving cultural identities.	C4.1.2: Expanded programs and events support our diversity.	C4.1.2.1: Deliver cultural and community programs and events that celebrate our diversity.

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective	Delivery Program Term Achievement	Operational Plan Task
C4.1: Harmonious communities that understand, value and accept each other, and embrace our evolving cultural identities.	C4.1.1: Barriers to social inclusion and participation, and access to social services and community facilities are reduced.	C4.1.1.2: Implement programs in response to Development identified community needs that promote social inclusion.

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective	Delivery Program Term Achievement	Operational Plan Task
C4.1: Harmonious communities that understand, value and accept each other, and embrace our evolving cultural identities.	C4.1.1: Barriers to social inclusion and participation, and access to social services and community facilities are reduced.	C4.1.1.2: Implement programs in response to identified community needs that promote social inclusion.

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 18 March 2025	GB.7 / 1

Item GB.7	FY00382/16

Delivery Program and Operational Plan: December 2024 Biannual report

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To report to Council on the progress of the Delivery Program 2022-2026 and Operational Plan 2024-2025, for the six-month period July to December 2024.

background:	Section 404 of the Local Government Act 1993 requires a progress report to be presented to Council, with respect to the principal activities detailed in the Delivery Program, at least every 6 (six) months.

comments:	This report provides a summary of progress results for one-year tasks and four-year term achievements contained in the Delivery Program 2022-2026 and Operational Plan 2024-2025.

recommendation:	That the report on the six-monthly progress review of the Delivery Program 2022-2026 and Operational Plan 2024-2025 for the period July to December 2024 be received and noted.

Purpose of Report

To report to Council on the progress of the Delivery Program 2022-2026 and Operational Plan 2024-2025, for the six-month period July to December 2024.

Background

Council adopted the current Delivery Program 2022-2026 and Operational Plan 2024-2025 in June 2024. A progress report must be presented to Council on the principal activities in the Delivery Program every 6 months. Progress on the Operational Plan is also included in the review due to the plan’s important contribution to the Delivery Program, and to provide Council with a comprehensive view of progress for the period.

This report provides comments on the progress of one-year tasks and four-year term achievements, overall percentage achievement statistics and exception reporting for those items behind schedule in the Delivery Program and Operational Plan. Information is presented under the 6 themes in the Delivery Program and Operational Plan.

Council has received quarterly budget reports during 2024-2025 to provide data on the financial position of Council in terms of its income and expenditure, as well as the status of its adopted capital works program. The December 2024 quarter budget review was reported to Council’s Ordinary Meeting of 18 February 2025.

A new Community Strategic Plan (CSP), Resourcing Strategy and Delivery Program and Operational Plan are currently in development and will be provided at the April meeting for Council’s consideration and approval to release for public exhibition. The first report against these new plans will be published in early 2026.

Comments

The December biannual report (Attachment A1) presents the organisation’s progress against term achievements and tasks in the Delivery Program and Operational Plan.

Reasons for delays and remedial actions are provided for term achievements and tasks behind schedule. Explanatory comments are provided for performance indicators not achieved.

Summary of performance

The following table provides the summary of results at the end of the reporting period:

Item

Green traffic light /tick

Amber traffic light

Red traffic light

White traffic light

Tasks

94%

2.5%

3.5%

Nil

Term Achievements

92%

8.0%

Nil

Explanation of traffic lights/ticks

Tick/ green traffic light – completed (tick) or progressed to schedule (green traffic light).

Amber traffic light - Behind schedule (delayed progress with remedial action required.)

Red traffic light - Significantly behind schedule with actions to address issues included.

White traffic light – Council resolved to not proceed, place on hold or work cannot progress as a direct result of Council’s decision. There were nil tasks or term achievements with a white traffic light in the reporting period.

Performance against term achievements

92% of the 63 term achievements were satisfactorily progressed at the end of December 2024. This is a very satisfactory result for the December review. Remedial actions are included in the commentary for 8% (5) of term achievements not progressed to schedule.

Performance against one-year tasks

94% of the 200 one-year Operational Plan tasks were reported as progressing to schedule at the end of December 2024 with 2.5% (5) tasks behind schedule and 3.5% (7) tasks significantly behind schedule. Despite the delayed tasks, the overall result is very satisfactory.

Remedial actions are included in the commentary for tasks reported as not progressing to schedule for the reporting period.

Key achievements

Key achievements for the six-month reporting period included the following:

Ø Housing policy

· Reached agreement with the NSW Government through the Land and Environment Court regarding the development of alternative locally responsive planning controls in the TOD precincts at Roseville, Lindfield, Killara and Gordon.

· Completed significant work on the development of land use strategies and plans in response to the Transport Oriented Development (TOD) program. This has included the development and public exhibition of alternative TOD land use options around Roseville, Lindfield, Killara and Gordon stations.

· The consultation and communications program for the TOD alternatives included a major mailout to residents, managing resident enquiries, drop-in sessions, public forums (in person and online), a printed and online brochure, press ads, social media posts and presentations.

Ø Community engagement

· Comprehensive community engagement programs were completed for the TOD scenarios and development of a new Community Strategic Plan as well as engagement for local centre upgrades, streetscape and traffic works, surveys of youth and art centre and library users and policy updates.

· Community engagement undertaken as part of the development of a new Community Strategic Plan included community forums attended by 100 participants, an online platform attracting over 3,000 visits and a survey which captured the views of 170 residents.

· Established a staff community engagement champions group who meet regularly to discuss engagement projects and areas for improvement.

· Completed a youth survey and held a workshop at Lindfield Learning Village to contribute to the development of the Community Strategic Plan and for discussions at the youth forum in February 2025.

Ø Urban planning and heritage

· Completed two heritage studies to inform alternative scenarios for housing density increases in Ku-ring-gai. These studies independently checked the area listings and boundaries and found new evidence for the relative rareness of Ku-ring-gai’s areas compared to others in Sydney.

· Commenced a new 7.11 Contributions Plan which provides funds towards the cost of providing local public infrastructure and facilities.

Ø Housing affordability

· An Affordable Housing Policy was prepared and endorsed for public exhibition in December 2024.

Ø Environmental protection

· Implementation and monitoring of the Urban Forest Strategy and administration of policies and processes to identify and manage urban canopy.

· A draft Green Grid Strategy was endorsed for public exhibition at the December Ordinary Meeting of Council.

· The Earthwatch Biodiversity Monitoring Day was held at West Pymble Village Green Tiny Forest.

Ø Sustainability and climate change

· High utilisation of Council’s public EV chargers with each charger being used around 8 hours every day indicating strong community uptake and support.

· Installation of new public electric vehicle chargers at the Ku-ring-gai Fitness & Aquatic Centre (KFAC), Turramurra Library, and the North Turramurra Recreation Area. A solar shade was also installed at KFAC to demonstrate the pairing of solar and electric vehicle charging technology.

· Decreased emissions from electricity, gas and transport.

· Continued success in using recycled water on Council’s sporting facilities and full reliance on sewer mining plants at both golf courses.

· Shared resources and advice on building successful Net Zero community strategies across the local government sector.

· Held a Bushfire Expo at West Pymble, where community members were able to speak to experts about how to protect their homes and family. This event was supported by the Sydney North Health Network.

Recreation, open space and community facilities

· Completed works at Pymble Town Hall.

· Completed major upgrades at Eldinhope Green (Wahroonga) and Hassall Park (St Ives) including construction of accessible and inclusive facilities.

· Completed the acquisition of three properties for future open space and roads.

Ø Local roads and pedestrian facilities

· Secured additional funding of $815K from Transport for NSW (TfNSW) towards the Eastern Road HPAA project.

· Completed three wombat crossings Lady Game Drive (Lindfield), Bangalla Street (Warrawee) and Rosedale Road (St Ives) and received additional funding of $76,000 to upgrade street lighting.

· Received $2.33 million funding to complete pedestrian crossing facilities at several locations through The Federal Road Safety Program.

· Secured $470,000 in funding to complete several Black Spot projects during the financial years 2024/25 and 2025/26.

Ø Community events

· Delivered Australian Citizenship Ceremonies welcoming 156 new citizens.

· Established a new partnership with Aboriginal Affairs NSW receiving a $3,000 grant for the NAIDOC Week program.

· Expanded delivery of Indigenous programs and events at Ku-ring-gai Wildflower Garden and St Ives Showground including Season of Ngoonungi Nature Play, Aunty Time, School Holiday Aboriginal Bush Skills, a Children's Fauna and Bushfoods Experience, children's sand stories, Deadly Ed traditional indigenous games, children's weaving, a Bushfoods Experience and a traditional dance workshop.

· Over 42,000 people attended events in Ku-ring-gai including community run events the St Ives Food & Wine Fair, and Wahroonga Village Fair. Other major events held in Ku-ring-gai were the Wahroonga Food & Wine Festival and the popular trail running event Bare Creek Trail Run.

· A variety of events were held at the St Ives Showground and Ku-ring-gai Wildflower Garden including the Gai-mariagal Festival, Eco Festival, Wildflower Garden Open Day (Teddy Bears Picnic), multiple weekend commercial ski gear and rug sales, annual 3-day St Ives Orchid Fair, the new trail running event Sydney Ultra Marathon, the Sydney Backyard UltraTuffnutterz inflatable obstacle course, Sydney Trail Series, $2 ride amusement fair, St Ives Christmas Market and an outdoor production called the Snow Queen. Three weddings were held at Caleys Pavilion and general hire of picnic areas was strong across both venues.

Ø Volunteering

· Implemented new safety culture software to improve risk management and reporting processes for environmental volunteers.

Ø Community programs

· Established a Youth Advisory Committee with the objective of improving youth participation and engagement in future service provision, offering young people a vital platform for civic involvement.

· The Youth Advisory Committee Engagement Plan received 445 responses to assist in the future work of the Committee and preparation of a Youth Plan and long term strategic planning for the local government area.

· Received official endorsement for the Ku-ring-gai Dementia Friendly Community Action Plan by Dementia Australia.

· Held successful events on Dementia Awareness, Duty of Care, in-home support, rights and advocacy, Body Image and Eating Disorder Awareness and a Brain Heath Summit.

· Aged Services Programs are reaching more older people with new attendees making up around 15% at each activity.

Ø Business support

· Launch of 2030 Visitor Economy Strategy.

· Engaged with the business community on various Council projects and identified collaborative opportunities that would allow local businesses to provide input on centre upgrades and improvements.

· Completed engagement with the business community for the Community Strategic Plan about current and future challenges and opportunities for the future.

· Delivered four face-to-face and nine virtual business sessions including three half day marketing training sessions, and the ‘Mental Health and Financial Wealth’ program delivered with the MAP Institute, which looked at wellbeing, cash flow and costs management.

· The Better Business Partnership website was significantly improved and increased engagement with the business sector.

Ø Service improvements

· Progressed service reviews of development assessment processes, sports fields and communications/community engagement.

· Completed NSW Planning Portal integration

· Completed internal audits on property management and records management.

Ø Workforce

· Established the Early Career Program, policy and procedure. This program aims to provide career and professional development opportunities for graduates, undergraduates, trainees and apprenticeships.

· Delivered a tailored organisational wide risk training program to enhance risk awareness and risk management capabilities

Ø Governance

· Council supported the successful delivery of the 2024 Local Government Elections and induction of new and returning councillors.

· Completed preparation of Council`s Annual Report 2023-2024 and State of Our Ku-ring-gai Report 2021-2024 which were both presented to and endorsed by Council in November 2024 and published on Council`s website.

· Council improved accessibility and transparency by publishing the video of Council forums to the website and enabling speakers to address Council via Zoom.

Challenges

The primary challenge during this period was the need to prioritise the development of alternative Transport Oriented Development (TOD) scenarios. This significantly impacted progress on other planned projects

integrated planning and reporting

Theme 6 - Leadership

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

L1.1: A shared long-term vision underpins strategic collaboration and partnerships and builds leadership capacity.

L1.1.1: The priorities of our community, as reflected in the Community Strategic Plan, inform Council’s policy development, decision-making and program delivery.

L1.1.1.3: Provide regular reporting to the community on performance and progress against Council's Delivery Program and Operational Plan.

Governance Matters

The Local Government Act requires a progress report to be presented to Council on the principal activities detailed in the Delivery Program and Operational Plan at least every six (6) months. This requirement is met through the biannual reports presented to Council for the six-month periods July to December and January to June each year.

Risk Management

Consistent with the Local Government Act 1993, the preparation, reporting and consideration by Council on the progress of the Delivery Program and Operational Plan is undertaken every six (6) months through biannual reports.

Financial Considerations

There are no direct financial considerations associated with the adoption of the recommendations contained within this report. A report on the December quarterly budget review for 2024-2025 was presented to Council’s Ordinary Meeting of 18 February 2025 (Item GB.5).

ENVIRONMENTAL CONSIDERATIONS

There are no specific environmental impacts associated with the preparation of this report.

COMMUNITY CONSULTATION

Although no specific community consultation was undertaken for the preparation of this report, community engagement and consultation played a significant role in the delivery of services, programs, projects and actions as detailed in the bi-annual progress report.

INTERNAL CONSULTATION

All Departments have provided status updates and comments on the progress of term achievements and tasks as provided at Attachment A1.

Summary

This report provides progress results for one-year tasks and four-year term achievements contained in the Delivery Program 2022-2026 and Operational Plan 2024-2025 for the December Biannual review period.

A very satisfactory result was achieved for the review period with 94% of Operational Plan tasks progressed to schedule or completed and 92% of term achievements progressed to schedule at the end of December 2024.

Recommendation:

That the report on the six-monthly progress review of the Delivery Program 2022-2026 and Operational Plan 2024-2025 for the period July to December 2024 be received and noted.

Christopher M Jones

Manager Governance & Corporate Strategy

Helen Lowndes

Integrated Planning Coordinator

Kim Thomas

Corporate Planner

Attachments:

A1⇩

December 2024 Bi-annual Report - Revised Delivery Program 2022-2026 and Operational Plan 2024-2025 - Council version

2025/061087

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 18 March 2025	GB.9 / 1

Item GB.9	S03670

Vernon Street Dog Park Lighting

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	The purpose of this report is to inform Council of a project timeline for completion to install cost-effective lighting in the Vernon Street South Turramurra dog off-leash area. Further, this report will also outline how proposed minor works under the Parks Development Program are collated, considered and prioritised, including a schedule for FY26 that ensures allocation of Council's resources is transparent and equitable across all Council areas.

background:	This report is in response to a Notice of Motion (NoM) from the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 18 February 2025 (File: S03670 Vide: NM.2).

comments:	The provision of cost-effective lighting in the Vernon St South Turramurra dog off-leash area would benefit users of the facility. The proposal is subject to further investigations to determine the type and number of lights required so as to provide sufficient ambient lighting. Further, consultation and a REF would be necessary. Other minor works as identified and proposed for the Park Development Program for FY26 are contained within the body of this report. These may also require further investigation, design, consultation and relevant approvals.

recommendation: (Refer to the full Recommendation at the end of this report)	A. That Council install cost-effective lighting in the Vernon Street South Turramurra dog off-leash area subject to funding being made available in the Parks Development Program (114008) for FY26. B. That Council notes how proposed minor works under the Parks Development Program are collated, considered and prioritised that ensures allocation of Council's resources is transparent and equitable across all Council areas including a schedule for FY26, subject to funding being made available in the Parks Development Program (114008) for FY26.

Purpose of Report

The purpose of this report is to inform Council of a project timeline for completion to install cost-effective lighting in the Vernon Street South Turramurra dog off-leash area.

Background

This report is in response to a Notice of Motion from the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 18 February 2025 (File: S03670 Vide: NM.2):

Notice of Motion from Councillors Pettett and Devlin dated 31 January 2025

MOTION:

(Moved: Councillors Devlin/Pettett)

A. That Council install cost effective lighting in the Vernon Street South Turramurra dog off-leash area, with a report outlining a project timeline for completion to the Ordinary Meeting of Council in March 2025.

B. That the report outlines how proposed minor works are collated, considered and prioritised, including a schedule for FY26 that ensures allocation of Council's resources is transparent and equitable across all Council areas.

The Motion was put and declared CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY.

Resolved:

(Moved: Councillors Devlin/Pettett)

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

Comments

Proposed lighting at Vernon Street South Turramurra dog off-leash area

The provision of cost-effective lighting at the Vernon Street South Turramurra dog off-leash area will require some site investigations to identify the most suitable lighting and location for the lighting, and other associated works. The number of lights is yet to be determined but at this stage, it is considered two (2) solar lights would be sufficient to provide ambient lighting. The lights can be operated on a timer.

The installation of lights may have the potential to extend the use of the area (i.e. longer stay of dogs and their owners) which may concern neighbouring properties. Hence, community consultation and a Review of Environmental Factors (REF) will be required.

A preliminary timeline is:

· Conduct REF – by June 2025

· Complete investigation and design – by August 2025

· Supply and install solar lights – by October 2025

Future Minor Works

The Park Development Program (114008) is generally approved funding available each year within Council’s budget, with funding of $297,000 proposed for FY26 subject to Council’s approval when considering the budget for FY26.

Generally, this program funds minor works within parks such as but not limited to bubblers, seats, lights, the repair/upgrade of park related infrastructure and replacement of aged items of play equipment, as identified by the staff or as requested by the community or user groups. Most works delivered under this program are scheduled under the discretion of staff in consultation with the Director Operations, including some reactive type works undertaken as required. The proposed works range in cost up to about $50,000. This program may also be used to supplement other larger projects.

For FY26, the following program has been identified at this stage, subject to competing priorities and unexpected circumstances which may alter the program accordingly.

Location	Ward	Description	Cost Estimate ($)	Identified / Requested by
Vernon Street South Turramurra dog off-leash area	Comenarra	Provision of cost-effective lighting.	$50,000	Community
St Ives Showground	St Ives	Provision of bubbler/drinking fountain	$20,000	User group
Melaleuca Park	St Ives	Minor Playground Refurbishment	$30,000	Internal
Regimental Park, Killara	Gordon	Provision of bubbler/drinking fountain	$20,000	User group
Yarrawonga Reserve	Gordon	Minor playground refurbishment.	$30,000	Community
Roseville Park - Tennis Courts	Roseville	Replacement of sandstone retaining wall and associated work	$50,000	Community
Samuel King Oval	Wahroonga	Lighting Upgrade	$50,000	User group Note: further contributions from sporting clubs.
Various Locations	LGA wide	Furniture, fixtures, maintenance works as required.	$47,000	Internal
Total			$297,000

integrated planning and reporting

Theme 3: Places, Spaces and Infrastructure.

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

P6.1: Recreation, sporting and leisure facilities are available to meet the community’s diverse and changing needs.

P6.1.1: A program is implemented to improve existing recreation, sporting and leisure facilities and deliver new multi-use sporting facilities and opportunities.

P6.1.1.3: Construct parks which incorporate accessible and inclusive passive recreation facilities.

Governance Matters

N/A.

Risk Implication statement

There are no material risks that arise from the recommendations contained in this report. Minor issues may occur, but these can be managed within Council’s current policies, procedures, resources and budget.

Financial Considerations

Subject to Council’s approval when considering the budget for FY26, funding of $297,000 would be available in FY26 in the Parks Development Program (114008).

Social Considerations

Providing lighting in the Vernon Street South Turramurra dog off-leash area will provide members of the community the opportunity for extended use of the facility.

The delivery of the Parks Development Program provides improvements to amenities with social benefits.

Environmental Considerations

With respect to the proposed lighting, a Review of Environmental (REF) would be required as lighting is permitted without consent under the SEPP (Transport and Infrastructure), Division 12 Parks and Other Public Reserves:

2.73 Development permitted without consent;

(3) Any of the following development may be carried out by or on behalf of a public authority without consent on land owned or controlled by the public authority—

(a) development for any of the following purposes—

(iv) lighting, if light spill and artificial sky glow is minimised in accordance with the Lighting for Roads and Public Spaces Standard,

Other proposed works will be subject to either a REF or Exempt Development.

Community Consultation

Community consultation and notification will be undertaken in line with Council’s current practices for project delivery.

Internal Consultation

The relevant internal teams have been consulted.

Summary

The delivery of the minor works referenced in this report would make improvements to the locations identified and provide some benefit to the community.

Recommendation:

A. That Council install cost-effective lighting in the Vernon Street South Turramurra dog off-leash area subject to funding being made available in the Parks Development Program (114008) for FY26.

Peter Lichaa

Director Operations

William Birt

Acting Manager Technical Services

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 18 March 2025	GB.11 / 1

Item GB.11	S14501

Planning Proposal for 77 Kulgoa Road Pymble

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	For Council to consider the private Planning Proposal for 77 Kulgoa Road, Pymble.

background:	A formal pre-lodgement meeting was held on 1 August 2022.The Planning Proposal was submitted on 6 February 2024. The Planning Proposal was incomplete. Following the submission of revised documentation, the assessment of the Planning Proposal commenced on 19 September 2024. The KLPP considered the planning proposal on 17 February 2025.

comments:	The Planning Proposal seeks to: · Rezone the site from C4 Environmental Living to R2 Low Density Residential; · amend Minimum Lot Size from 1500sqm to 930sqm; and · amend Floor Space Ratio from 0.2:1 to 0.3:1.

recommendation: (Refer to the full Recommendation at the end of this report)	That the Planning Proposal should proceed to Gateway Determination, subject to amendments.

Purpose of Report

For Council to consider the private Planning Proposal for 77 Kulgoa Road, Pymble.

Background

Site Description and Local Context

The site that is the subject of this Planning Proposal is 77 Kulgoa Road, Pymble (Lot 4, DP29244). The site is a battle-axe block, which has a frontage of 4.6m to Kulgoa Road. The access handle is approximately 50m long. The main portion of the site is generally rectangular in shape. The site has a total area of 2555sqm.

The site is currently zoned C4 Environmental Living under KLEP 2015 and contains a part one/part two storey dwelling house with detached garage. The site also contains ancillary structures including a swimming pool adjoining the house and a tennis court is located on the eastern portion of the site.

The portion of the site developed with the dwelling, garage and ancillary swimming pool and tennis court is relatively flat. From the eastern boundary of the tennis court the site falls steeply to the north-east.

The perimeter of the site is vegetated with a mixture of native and exotic trees. Remnant Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest (Critically Endangered Ecological Community) canopy trees are located along the northern and eastern boundaries of the site. The subject site is mapped as containing Biodiversity on the KLEP 2015 Biodiversity Map and mapped as Support for Core Biodiversity Lands and Biodiversity Corridor and Buffer on the KDCP Greenweb map. The subject site is not mapped as containing bushfire prone land.

Image: Aerial 77 Kulgoa Road, Pymble

KLEP 2015 Biodiversity Mapping Extract

KDCP Greenweb Mapping

Support for Core Biodiversity Lands

Biodiversity corridors and buffer

Adjacent to the northern boundary of the site are two long, narrow pieces of land comprising:

· an easement for water supply, zoned SP2 Infrastructure; and

· the Vista Street Bushland Reserve zoned C2 Environmental Conservation and owned by Ku-ring-gai Council.

The other surrounding sites are all residential, with those sites adjoining the water supply easement and Bushland Reserve being zoned C4 Environmental Living, and all others being zoned R2 Low Density Residential.

Image – Zoning Map Extract 77 Kulgoa Road Pymble and surrounding sites

Comments

The Planning Proposal seeks to amend the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 to rezone the site from C4 Environmental Living to R2 Low Density Residential and amend the development standards applying to the site as follows:

KLEP 2015 – Zoning and Development Standards – 77 Kulgoa Road, Pymble
	Existing	Proposed
Zoning	C4 Environmental Living	R2 Low Density Residential
Floor Space Ratio	0.2:1 (mapped) 0.24:1 (Clause 4.3(2D)	0.3:1
Minimum Lot Size	1500sqm	930sqm

The intended outcome of the Planning Proposal is to rezone the subject site and reduce the minimum lot size so that the site may be subdivided into two lots of approximately 1168sqm and 1391sqm in size.

The subject site is in the same ownership as the adjoining battleaxe lot, 73 Kulgoa Road which is zoned R2 Low Density Residential

Chronology of Assessment

A pre-lodgement meeting was held on 1 August 2022. The Planning Proposal was submitted on the Planning Portal on 6 February 2024. The Planning Proposal was incomplete. Revised information was submitted on 11 July 2024 and 6 September 2024. Following the payment of fees, the Planning Proposal was formally lodged and assessment commenced on 19 September 2024.

Merit

A Planning Proposal is not a Development Application and does not consider the specific detailed matters for consideration under Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. A Planning Proposal only relates to an LEP amendment and cannot be tied to a specific development. The proposed amendments need to be acceptable as an outcome on the site regardless of the subsequent approval or refusal of a future Development Application.

A Planning Proposal must demonstrate the site specific and strategic merit of the proposed amendments.

The Planning Proposal and Appendices are included at Attachments A2-A8.

The following is an assessment of the relevant merits of the Planning Proposal:

Site Specific Merit Assessment

Zoning

The Planning Proposal seeks to rezone the site from C4 Environmental Living to R2 Low Density Residential. The C4 Environmental Living zone is a residential zone which provides for low impact residential development in areas with special ecological, scientific or aesthetic values. The main permitted land use for both the C4 Environmental Living zone and the R2 Low Density Residential zone is ‘dwelling houses’, with both zones also permitting secondary dwellings.

In considering the Planning Proposal, the reason for the C4 Environmental Living zoning applying to 77 Kulgoa has been investigated, particularly given the similarity with the neighbouring battle axe site 73 Kulgoa Road which is zoned R2 Low Density Residential.

During the preparation of the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 the C4 Environmental Living zone was applied to areas ‘where a combination of ecological values and risks support greater restrictions on land uses and development’. At the time that the KLEP 2015 was prepared, the subject site was mapped as containing both biodiversity values relating to the remnant Blue Gum High Forest / Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest and as being Bushfire Prone Land category 1. As a result of these factors, the site was zoned C4 Environmental Living.

KLEP 2015

Biodiversity Map

2008 Ku-ring-gai Bushfire Prone Land Map

Category 1 BFPL shown in orange

Subsequent to the C4 Environmental Living being put in place in 2015, Council’s Bushfire Prone Land Map was updated in 2017. As part of this update, the subject site was not identified as bushfire prone land. The Bushfire Prone Land Map was again updated in 2024, which resulted in further retreat of the bushfire prone land mapping in the surrounding area.

Since 2002 there have been 3 revisions of the Guide For Bush Fire Prone Land Mapping (NSW Rural Fire Service). This guideline is the basis for defining what land parcels are defined as being termed ‘bush fire prone land’. The differences in the classification of the three categories of Bush Fire Prone Land (and their associated buffers) and the spatial delineation of the landscape in terms of bush fire hazard is due to the refinement of the guidelines since 2002, particularly as to what spatial arrangements of vegetation constitute a real hazard in terms of fire behaviour and potential impact.

The latest version of the guideline gives details of how vegetation (hazard) is assessed in terms of being/not being an area of Bush Fire Prone Land. The vegetation exclusion ‘rules’ have assisted in refining the mapping – in terms of actual hazard.

In the case of 77 Kulgoa Road, Pymble the bushland tracts of Dalyrmple-Hay Nature Reserve (to the north) and High Ridge Creek Reserve (to the southeast) are the nearest defined Category 1 and 2 hazard areas and with the latest exclusion guidelines, smaller vegetation remnants and narrow corridors are now not included as Bush Fire Prone Land.

2017 Ku-ring-gai Bushfire Prone Lane Map

77 Kulgoa Road Pymble is no longer identified with any bushfire prone land mapping

2024 Ku-ring-gai Bushfire Prone Land Map

Further retreat of bushfire prone land mapping from area surrounding site.

Given the current mapping attributes on the site and the lack of a ‘combination’ of environmental values and risks, it is reasonable to consider the proposed R2 Low Density Residential zone appropriate, consistent with the zoning of the adjoining battle axe site 73 Kulgoa Road Pymble.

Low and Mid-Rise Housing Policy – Dual Occupancy

On 1 July 2024 Stage 1 of the Low and Mid-Rise Housing (LMR) SEPP commenced which:

· Permitted dual occupancies and semi-detached dwellings on all R2 Low Density Residential zoned land via a development application; and

· Switched off the Complying Development pathway under the Codes SEPP until 1 July 2025 to allow Councils to consider an evidence based minimum lot size for their local government area. Failure to nominate a minimum lot size will result in the automatic application of a 400sqm minimum lot size as per

As the Planning Proposal is seeking to rezone the site to R2 Low Density Residential, it must now be assumed that development for dual occupancy is a permissible land use within the proposed zone.

The Complying Development pathway for dual occupancy under the Codes SEPP does not apply to battle axe lots, so any development for dual occupancy would have to be through a Development Application pathway.

Council is currently in the process of seeking feedback from the community and the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure on potential options for a minimum lot size for dual occupancy development. Based on the options the minimum lot size for dual occupancy on the subject site could be between 1015sqm – 1075sqm.

Minimum Lot Size

The Planning Proposal seeks to amend the minimum subdivision lot size development standard applying to the site from 1500sqm to 930sqm. This would enable the potential subdivision of the site into two (x2) lots. The proposed 930sqm minimum lot size is consistent with the minimum lot size applying to the adjoining R2 Low Density Residential zoned sites and is considered appropriate.

Floor Space Ratio

The Planning Proposal seeks to amend the mapped Floor Space Ratio Development Standard applying to the site from 0.2:1 to 0.3:1.

Despite the mapped 0.2:1, Clause 4.4(2D) provides a slide scale calculation for land zoned C4 Environmental Living which overrides the mapped FSR. As the site is over 1,500sqm the calculation is ((250 + (0.15 x site area))/site area :1, which equates to maximum FSR of 0.24:1 currently applying to the site.

The proposed mapped Floor Space Ratio Development Standard of 0.3:1 is consistent with the Floor Space Ratio development standard that applies to the adjoining R2 Low Density Residential sites and is considered appropriate. Also noting, that despite the mapped Floor Space Ratio Clause 4.4 (2A) will apply to land zoned R2 Low Density Residential. This clause provides a sliding scale based on lot size.

More than 1,700 square metres	0.3:1
More than 1,000 square metres but not more than 1,700 square metres	((170 + (0.2 × site area)) / site area):1
More than 800 square metres but not more than 1,000 square metres	((120 + (0.25 × site area)) / site area):1
800 square metres or less	0.4:1

Biodiversity

The subject site is mapped on the KLEP 2015 Biodiversity Map due to vegetation on the site being identified as Blue Gum High Forest / Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest, (Critically Endangered Ecological Community), and mapped as Support for Core Biodiversity Lands and Biodiversity Corridor and Buffer on the KDCP Greenweb map.

The Planning Proposal does not seek to amend the current biodiversity mapping. Accordingly, the KLEP 2015 Biodiversity mapping and Clause 6.3, KDCP Greenweb mapping and controls, and CEEC protections will still continue to apply to any proposed R2 Low Density Residential development on the site. These protections should be manageable as the main biodiversity assets are located towards the boundaries of the subject site.

Strategic Merit Assessment

Greater Sydney Region Plan and North District Plan

The Planning Proposal is consistent with the objectives of the Greater Sydney Region Plan – A Metropolis of Three Cities, in particular:

· Objective 10. Greater housing supply

· Objective 11. Housing is more diverse and affordable

· Objective 27. Biodiversity is protected, urban bushland and remnant vegetation is enhanced

The Planning Proposal is consistent with the planning priorities of the North District Plan, in particular:

· Planning Priority N5. Providing housing supply, choice and affordability, with access to jobs, services and public transport

· Planning Priority N16. Protecting and enhancing bushland and biodiversity

Ku-ring-gai Local Strategic Planning Statement

The Planning Proposal is consistent with the following local planning priorities:

· K3. Providing housing close to transport, services and facilities to meet the existing and future requirements of a growing and changing community

· K4. Providing a range of diverse housing to accommodate the changing structure of families and households and enable ageing in place

· K12. Managing change and growth in a way that conserves and enhances Ku-ring-gai’s unique visual and landscape character

· K28. Improving the condition of Ku-ring-gai’s bushland and protecting native terrestrial and aquatic flora and fauna and their habitats

· K29. Enhancing the biodiversity values and ecosystem function services of Ku-ring-gai’s natural assets

· K31. Increasing, managing and protecting Ku-ring-gai’s urban tree canopy

Section 9.1 Ministerial Directions and State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs)

The Planning Proposal is not inconsistent with the State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs) applicable to the site. Many of these SEPPs contain detailed provisions and controls which would only apply at the Development Application stage.

The Planning Proposal is consistent with the applicable s9.1 Ministerial Direction, specifically those relating to:

· 3.1 Residential Zones

Ku-ring-gai Local Planning Panel 17 February 2025

The Planning Proposal was considered by the KLPP on 17 February 2025 (Attachment A10). At this meeting the KLPP advised:

A. The Planning Proposal, amended as per the Table of Amendments (Attachment A1), be submitted to the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure for a Gateway Determination.

B. That Council authorise the General Manager to correct any minor anomalies of a non-policy and administrative nature that may arise during the plan making process.

C. Date of the decision: 17 February 2025.

D: Reason for the decision: The Panel concurs with the recommendation in Council’s Planning Proposal Assessment Report.

Voting: Unanimous

Amendments required to Planning Proposal

The assessment of the Planning Proposal has found that there are a number of amendments required to the Planning Proposal and supporting studies in order to provide more clarity prior to the public exhibition of the Planning Proposal. The amendments are generally minor editorial in nature or requests for further clarification in supporting studies and are required to ensure the Planning Proposal is in accordance with the Local Environmental Plan Making Guideline (August 2023).

The table of amendments is included at Attachment A1 which details the required amendments to be made to the Planning Proposal if Council is to support it being submitted to the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure and proceed to public exhibition.

integrated planning and reporting

Theme 3: Places, Spaces and Infrastructure

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

P2.1 A robust planning framework is in place to deliver quality design outcomes and maintain the identity and character of Ku-ring-gai

P2.1.1 Land use strategies, plans and processes are in place to protect existing character and effectively manage the impact of new development

P2.1.1.2 Continue to review the effectiveness of existing strategies, local environmental plans, development controls plans and processes across all programs

Governance Matters

The process for the preparation and implementation of Planning Proposals is governed by the provisions contained in the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2021.

The Planning Proposal was referred to the Ku-ring-gai Local Planning Panel for advice under Local Planning Panel’s Direction – Planning Proposals issued by the Minister for Planning under Section 9.1 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 .

Risk Management

This is a privately initiated Planning Proposal. Council needs to determine its position on the matter as to whether the Planning Proposal should proceed to Gateway Determination.

Financial Considerations

The Planning Proposal was subject to the relevant application fee under Council’s 2024/2025 Schedule of Fees and Charges. The cost of the review and assessment of the Planning Proposal is covered by this fee.

Social Considerations

The amendments sought by the Planning Proposal would enable the delivery of one additional residential lot with one additional dwelling house to meet existing and future requirements of a growing and changing community.

Environmental Considerations

Remnant Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest (Critically Endangered Ecological Community) canopy trees are located along the northern and eastern boundaries of the site. The subject site is mapped as containing Biodiversity on the KLEP 2015 Biodiversity Map and mapped as Support for Core Biodiversity Lands and Biodiversity Corridor and Buffer on the KDCP Greenweb map.

It is considered that R2 Low Density Residential zoning is appropriate for the site, and any future development will be required to comply with the existing biodiversity protections of the KLEP, KDCP and CEEC. Future low density residential development should be manageable on the site, noting the main biodiversity assets are located towards the boundaries of the site.

Community Consultation

The Planning Proposal has not been subject to community consultation. In the event that the Planning Proposal is issued a Gateway Determination by the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure the Planning Proposal would be placed on statutory public exhibition in accordance with the requirements of the Gateway Determination and Council’s community participation plan.

Internal Consultation

The assessment of the Planning Proposal has involved consultation and assessment with Council’s Natural Areas Team Leader.

Summary

A Planning Proposal has been submitted for 77 Kulgoa Road, Pymble which seeks to make the following amendments to the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015:

· Rezone from C4 Environmental Living to R2 Low Density Residential;

· amend mapped Floor Space Ratio development standard from 0.2:1 to 0.3:1; and

· amend Minimum Lot Size development standard from 1500sqm to 930sqm.

The Planning Proposal has been assessed and found to have sufficient strategic and site-specific merit to enable it to proceed to Gateway Determination and public exhibition, subject to the amendments outlined in Attachment A1.

Recommendation:

A. The Planning Proposal, amended as per the Table of Amendments Attachment A1, be submitted to the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure for a Gateway Determination.

B. That Council requests the plan making delegation under Section 3.36(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 for this Planning Proposal

C. That Council authorise the Director of Strategy and Environment to correct any minor anomalies of an administrative nature that might arise during the plan making process.

Alexandra Plumb

Urban Planner

Craige Wyse

Team Leader Urban Planning

Antony Fabbro

Manager Urban & Heritage Planning

Andrew Watson

Director Strategy & Environment

Attachments:	A1⇩	Table of Amendments - Planning Proposal 77 Kulgoa Road, Pymble	2025/006335
	A2 ⇩	Planning Proposal 77 Kulgoa Road, Pymble 21 August 2024-PP-2024-1994	2025/006348
	A3 ⇩	Appendix A - Aboricultural Report - 77 Kulgoa Road, Pymble	2025/006365
	A4 ⇩	Appendix A - Tree Protection Plan - 77 Kulgoa Road, Pymble	2025/008055
	A5 ⇩	Appendix B - Biodiversity Development Assessment Report (BDAR) - 77 Kulgoa Road, Pymble	2025/006356
	A6 ⇩	Appendix C - Urban Design Outcome Study Plan of Subdivision R2 zone - 77 Kulgoa Road, Pymble	2025/006351
	A7 ⇩	Appendix D - Concept Stormwater Outcome Study - 77 Kulgoa Road, Pymble	2025/006361
	A8 ⇩	Appendix E - Site Photographs 77 Kulgoa Road, Pymble	2025/006353
	A9 ⇩	Appendix D - Pre-Planning Proposal Meeting Minutes - 77 Kulgoa Road, Pymble	2025/006352
	A10 ⇩	KLPP Advice 17 February 2025 Planning Proposal for 77 Kulgoa Road Pymble	2025/048831

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 18 March 2025	GB.12 / 1

Item GB.12	S14428

Dual Occupancy Minimum Lot Size
post-exhibition

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To report on the public consultation and confirm a minimum lot size for dual occupancy development within Ku-ring-gai to forward to the NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure.

background:	In July 2024 the NSW Government permitted dual occupancy housing across all land zoned R2 (Low Density Residential) within Ku-ring-gai, except for land with bushfire risk, heritage items, or within a Transport Oriented Development area. The NSW Government has asked Council to nominate a minimum lot size able to deliver dual occupancies on 50% of eligible land. Failure to nominate a minimum lot size will result in the SEPP (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008 minimum lot size of 400 sqm automatically applying to complying development applications from 1 July 2025. On 17 December 2024, Council supported three minimum lot size options prepared by specialist consultant Hill Thalis. These options were presented to the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure on 19 December 2024. Only two options were agreed. The two options (Option A and Option B) were exhibited from 22 January to 20 February 2025.

comments:	Comment from the community has been received via written submissions, online surveys, an online community forum, and via face to face and phone call enquiries to Council staff. This report presents the feedback received and proposes a final minimum lot size for the Ku-ring-gai local government area.

recommendation: (Refer to the full Recommendation at the end of this report)	That Council endorse a 1015 sqm minimum lot size for dual occupancy development in Ku-ring-gai, and forward it to the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure for finalisation. That Council prepare DCP planning standards based on the minimum lot size.

Purpose of Report

To report on the public consultation and confirm a minimum lot size for dual occupancy development within Ku-ring-gai to forward to the NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure.

Background

In July 2024 the NSW government permitted dual occupancy housing across all land zoned R2 (Low Density Residential) within Ku-ring-gai, except for land with bushfire risk, heritage items, or within a Transport Oriented Development area.

Thirteen NSW Councils, including Ku-ring-gai Council, limit dual occupancy development within their R2 (Low Density Residential) areas and do not stipulate a minimum lot size.

The NSW government has temporarily suspended the complying development pathway for dual occupancies within these Council areas as that pathway currently enables dual occupancy on a minimum 400 sqm lot size. It is recognised that intensified development on such small lot sizes would irreversibly alter key characteristics of most established local areas where lot sizes are generally double or triple this size.

In Ku-ring-gai, the larger lot sizes are fundamental to sustaining the area character of high quality built forms within landscaped garden settings including tall canopy trees.

The area’s large lot size has been a contributing factor in:

· retention of threatened Blue Gum High Forest and Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest trees within private land;

· retention of heritage fabric associated with early settlement subdivision patterns along the ridgeline transport routes;

· increasing tree canopy cover contributing to reduction in heat island effects and improving biodiversity corridors to support survival of flora and fauna;

· establishing valued local character through streetscapes that support large trees by limiting driveway crossings, and delivery of well resolved built form within high quality landscaped garden settings.

The reduction in lot size will inevitably result in the loss of gardens, trees, heritage and streetscape presentation due to the pressure of providing suitably sized dwellings on small parcels of land. The resulting multiple driveway crossings will diminish the ability to plant or retain large street trees and increase canopy that can deliver street shading to reduce urban heat effects.

The NSW Government has given the thirteen Councils the opportunity to nominate a minimum lot size that would manage the impacts of small lot sizes within their established areas, provided the proposed minimum lot size delivers dual occupancies on 50% of eligible R2 (Low Density Residential) land across the local government area.

The thirteen Councils have been requested to forward their endorsed minimum lot size to the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure (DPHI) for final consideration and inclusion into an amended State Environment Planning Policy (SEPP). It is intended that the SEPP will come into effect by 1 July 2025 and amend each Council’s Local Environmental Plan to include minimum lot sizes for dual occupancy development.

In discussions between DPHI and Ku-ring-gai Council officers, DPHI confirmed they would accept the inclusion of a minimum lot width in association with the minimum lot size, provided the 50% lot number target could be met.

Failure to nominate a minimum lot size will result in the SEPP (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008 minimum lot size of 400 sqm automatically applying to complying development applications from 1 July 2025.

The potential application of a 400 sqm dual occupancy lot size (200 sqm per dwelling) across the local government area for complying development will significantly impact the key Ku-ring-gai values.

Consultant Hill Thalis Investigation and Report

In August 2024, Council engaged Hill Thalis Architecture and Urban Projects to investigate and identify lot sizes for dual occupancy development in the Ku-ring-gai local government area.

Hill Thalis are highly regarded for their competency in complex assessment. They have an inherent understanding of the values of the Ku-ring-gai built and natural environment. Hill Thalis regularly assists Council in court representations defending Council’s development standards against poor development proposals.

The scope of the Hill Thalis Urban Design Dual Occupancy Lot Size Study, was consistent with the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure requirements to:

· establish a minimum lot size for dual occupancies; and

· capture 50% of available R2 zoned lots across the LGA.

Utilising the NSW Government’s parameters, Hill Thalis presented three options that met the criteria for dual occupancy delivery in Ku-ring-gai. The options achieved the 50% delivery of dual occupancy development on eligible R2 (Low Density Residential) land across the local government area.

The study also conducted sampling of lots across Ku-ring-gai to put forward a suitable lot width that could apply to dual occupancy lots. The sampling indicated that in general, large lots had widths of 18-20m and that a lot width of 18m would enable sufficient development to meet the 50% requirement.

The study also included testing of dual occupancy standards under both the NSW Government’s complying development policy (with 400 sqm lots) and their policy to include non-discretionary standards for the Local Housing Areas (with 450 sqm lots). The testing demonstrated the standards would directly conflict with the current controls that Ku-ring-gai has in place to retain and enhance its high quality environment for current residents and for future generations.

Since lot size is a key mechanism that determines the intensity of land development (how much land is covered by building), it is vital to select a lot size that will deliver the required 50% dual occupancy sites and which at the same time enables the retention of the area’s established and valued character which is highly reliant on deep soil, tree canopy, landscaping, and streetscapes including heritage conservation areas.

Council Resolution

On 17 December 2024, Council supported the three minimum lot size options (Option 1, Option 2, Option 3) prepared by specialist consultant Hill Thalis Architecture and Urban Projects. Council resolved:

A. That it be noted that this report only concerns the dual occupancy provisions of the Low and Mid-Rise Housing SEPP and excludes provisions relating to other housing types such as townhouses, terraces, two storey apartment blocks and mid-rise apartment blocks which the NSW Government has not yet commenced.

B. That Council present the three minimum lot size Options within this report to the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure to progress the next steps, including community consultation.

C. That the following steps be taken by Council staff following Council’s Resolution:

i. meet with DPHI to discuss the proposed Options;

ii. conduct a public exhibition of the Options, or variations of the Options, that are supported by DPHI.

D. That the public exhibition results be reported to Council to seek Council’s endorsement of a final minimum lot size.

E. The adopted minimum lot sizes for dual occupancy include a provision for the requirement of an 18 metre minimum lot width.

F. That the Director Strategy and Environment be given delegation to correct errors and improve clarification upon advice of the consultant Hill Thalis, that do not alter the direction of the Options.

Meeting with the NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure (DPHI)

Following the Council meeting, Council officers met with DPHI on 19 December 2024 to discuss the three options (Option 1, Option 2, Option 3) endorsed by Council.

Only two of the options (Option 2 and Option 3) were supported by DPHI and were confirmed to progress to public exhibition.

DPHI did not support Option 1 which sought to amend the 450 sqm minimum lot size that the NSW Government had allocated to their draft Local Housing Areas. The local Housing Areas are located around Local Centres at Roseville, Lindfield, Killara, Gordon, Pymble, Turramurra, Wahroonga and St Ives as illustrated below.

The two options were exhibited from 22 January to 20 February 2025, inviting community feedback. The naming of the two options was altered for the public exhibition as follows, noting that no other details were changed in any way to those included in the reporting to Council on 17 December 2024:

· Option 2 in Council’s 17 December 2024 report = Option A on exhibition

· Option 3 in Council’s 17 December 2024 report = Option B on exhibition

At the same meeting with DPHI, Council officers requested an extension to the DPHI 14 February 2025 date for Ku-ring-gai’s minimum lot size nomination. The extension would enable Council to conduct community consultation on the proposed minimum lot size and report back to Council with a proposed final minimum lot size. Council’s request was granted.

Council is now required to forward their minimum lot size, and the Hill Thalis evidence supporting the proposed lot size, shortly after this 18 March 2025 Council meeting.

Options agreed by the NSW Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure (DPHI)

The public exhibition presented the two options agreed by DPHI. Each option presents the minimum lot size that will be required to develop dual occupancy on land zoned R2 (Low Density Residential) within the Ku-ring-gai local government area, except for land that has bushfire risk, is a heritage item or within a Transport Orientated Development area.

Option A

Option A has one minimum lot size that applies across the whole Ku-ring-gai local government area.

OPTION A proposed minimum lot size
LOCATION	MINIMUM LOT SIZE
All Ku-ring-gai Council Local Govt. Area	1015 sqm
Note: Minimum lot width: 18m

Council’s minimum lot size will apply to:

· complying development across the whole local government area; and

· development applications across the whole local government area except inside the NSW government’s allocated Local Housing Areas.

The NSW government have set a 450 sqm minimum lot size for all development applications within the Local Housing Areas.

Option B

Option B has two minimum lot sizes depending on the location of the property.

OPTION B proposed minimum lot sizes
LOCATION	MINIMUM LOT SIZE
In R2 zones in the Ku-ring-gai Council Local Govt. Area, except in the Neighbourhood Centres	1075 sqm
Five Neighbourhood Centre Areas (within 400m walking distance) 1.Hampden Ave, Nth Wahroonga 2.Eastern Road, Turramurra 3.Princess Street. Turramurra 4.Kendal Street, West Pymble 5.Wellington Road, East Lindfield	700 sqm
Note: Minimum lot width: 18m

Council’s location based minimum lot sizes will apply to:

· complying development across the whole local government area; and

· development applications across the whole local government area except inside the NSW government’s allocated Local Housing Areas (LHAs);

The NSW government have set a 450 sqm minimum lot size for all development applications within the Local Housing Areas.

Public Consultation

In line with Council’s 17 December 2024 resolution, a public exhibition was held for a 30 day period from 22 January 2025 to 20 February 2025. The exhibition presented the two options that were agreed by DPHI.

Notification of the exhibition included:

· Notification letters:

o 24,452 letters sent to residents within and adjacent to the eligible R2 (Low Density Residential) land

· Advertisements placed in:

o North Shore Times - 30 January 2025

o The Post - February 2025 edition

o Sydney Observer - February 2025 edition

· Notices included in Council e-newsletters:

o 23 January 2025

o 7 February 2025

· Social media posts on Council’s Facebook platform:

o 23 January 2025

o 13 February 2025

During the exhibition period, the community were given access to exhibition and supporting information on Council’s website. The website also provided the following to assist the public in their understanding of the proposed minimum lot size options:

· maps and explanations of Option A, Option B and the NSW Local Housing Areas;

· supporting information including Frequently Asked Questions;

· access to the 4 February 2025 online public Forum presentation by staff, including a question and answer session;

· access to an online Survey to select a preferred lot size option, and the opportunity to include written comment;

· contact details allowing the community to ask planning staff questions via telephone or face to face at Council’s customer services; and

· instructions on how to send a written submission to Council.

Comments

Public exhibition

The exhibition attracted considerable interest from the community. In total, 1,310 interactions and receipts of opinions have been taken by Council staff.

Whilst the focus of the public exhibition was the choice between Option A and Option B, both known to meet DPHI’s criteria plus include consideration of retention of Ku-ring-gai’s highly valued environmental, heritage and urban character, the commentary from the community extended beyond the choice between Option A and Option B.

Many residents wanted to know if their lot was in the catchment area and whether they qualified to be in a Local Housing Area or Neighbourhood Centre area. These enquiries could not be answered as site specific planning advice is not provided by Council staff due to potential liability issues. Council’s on-line map viewer provided the information required for residents to gain an indicative idea of whether dual occupancy would be permissible on their property. It was recommended that residents seek their own professional advice to verify their locations, particularly if they are investigating making financial decisions based on changes occurring in the planning system.

A number of submissions requested smaller lot sizes so that their property could be captured for dual occupancy development. These submissions generally did not give consideration to the need to balance the 50% delivery required by the NSW Government with the retention of Ku-ring-gai’s valued assets (trees, heritage, streetscapes), and the need to consider the area’s topography and negative impacts of intensified built form on downslope creek, river and biodiversity lands which feed into the surrounding National Parks.

They also did not acknowledge the importance of the key character traits of the Ku-ring-gai area that are reliant on lot size, and on the issues of cumulative development – there is a difference between the impact of developing only their small lot size and developing the same small lot size across the whole local government area which would result in the removal of the established character of entire streets.

Smaller lot sizes to that proposed in the tested exhibited options have the potential to irreversibly alter Ku-ring-gai’s established character, and result in not only urban impacts, but also long-term environmental and consequently economic impacts.

Council has an obligation to deliver the required housing to accommodate the NSW Government’s increased population targets as well as to protect the area’s legacy assets for future generations, and ensure development is delivered in a manner that satisfies the social, economic and environmental outcomes of the local government area.

Online Forum and enquiries from the community

A total of 114 people attended the online forum held on 4 February 2025. Council staff presented the exhibition material and answered 101 questions from the public. The forum presentation, including questions, was placed on Council’s website so that the community could access the explanatory presentation and responses to questions. This presentation remains available on Council’s website.

A total of 81 telephone calls, emails, and in person enquiries were received by planning staff. Planning staff were available to answer calls and assist people for the entirety of the exhibition period.

The questions raised during the forum and in phone calls are similar to those submitted in the written submissions and online surveys and the below discussion covers those enquiries.

Written submissions and survey responses

A total of 122 written submissions were received. The submissions have been summarised and are included at Attachment A1.

A total of 998 online surveys were completed. The survey report is included at Attachment A2.

Both the submissions and the surveys made similar comments. The key comments relevant to this exhibition and the selection of a minimum lot size to forward to DPHI centred around the following:

· option preference and support for Option A or Option B;

· requests for smaller lot sizes;

· requests for smaller or no lot widths;

· battleaxe lots and subdivision; and

· local character, heritage, environment, tree retention.

These are summarised below with recommendations.

Other comments that do not directly apply to this exhibition, that are beyond the scope of this exhibition, or include issues that required the NSW government’s consideration prior to mandating their housing reforms, are noted and addressed in the two attachments at Attachment A1 and Attachment A2.

These comments relate to:

· dual occupancy development;

· NSW Government housing policy;

· infrastructure and traffic;

· environment and ecology; and

· bushfire and flooding.

OPTION PREFERENCE

As indicated in the below table, the community response to the exhibition showed a clear preference for the Option A - 1015 sqm minimum lot size.

	Written Submissions	Online Survey
Option A	25%	42%
Option B	13%	31%

Preference of options from the community

Recommendation

Ø That Council endorse a minimum lot size of 1015 sqm to apply to dual occupancy development across the Ku-ring-gai local government area in alignment with the majority preference from the community.

SUPPORT FOR OPTION A

Key community comment

· uniform consistent minimum lot size and frontage is crucial for preserving the environment, heritage and ensuring retention of trees;

· promotes consistency and therefore easier planning procedures;

· current infrastructure is under strain and cannot handle the additional pressure of housing volume that would result from smaller lot sizes;

· development on a 1015 sqm lot would benefit home owners;

· there is little difference between the two options, the 700 sqm block proposed in Option B is too small, will set a poor precedent and result in more tree loss, loss of visual amenity and environmental value; and

· select Option A to prevent the State Government 400 sqm minimum lot size applying, but do not believe Council’s options would be able to satisfy the long-term objectives of sustainability.

Response

In Ku-ring-gai, larger minimum lot sizes will assist in assimilating dual occupancy into the R2 (Low Density Residential) zones. The larger lots will facilitate the preservation of tree canopy, biodiversity and heritage settings which all contribute to existing local character.

It is agreed that a consistent single minimum lot size across the local government area will simplify the application and understanding of lot size planning controls for dual occupancy development in Ku-ring-gai.

It is also acknowledged that the 700 sqm lot size would result in greater loss of canopy and character around the 5 nominated Neighbourhood Centres, and this appears to be of more concern than the 1075 sqm lot size it would enable across the remainder of Ku-ring-gai.

In February 2024, Council made a submission opposing the reforms proposed in the NSW Government’s “Explanation of Intended Effects Changes to create low and mid-rise housing”. Council’s concerns included impacts on the area’s key values and delivery of appropriate infrastructure through considered strategic planning and master planning. The NSW Government has not responded to many issues raised in Council’s submission.

It is acknowledged that if Council does not adopt one of the minimum lot options placed on exhibition (Option A or B), on 1 July 2025 the NSW Government’s minimum lot size of 400 sqm for the parent lot will apply to complying development in Ku-ring-gai. This will result in houses on lots of 200 sqm and is considered incompatible with the existing character of Ku-ring-gai’s low density residential zones.

Having no minimum lot size would also mean that applications for dual occupancy, under a development application approval pathway, would require individual merit assessment to determine the suitability of a site for dual occupancy. This would result in an unnecessary lack of clarity, add undue complexity to the assessment process and most likely result in expensive court disputes to argue on the merits.

Recommendation

Ø That Option A with minimum lot size of 1015 sqm is supported to reflect community preference and provide a simpler, consistent planning approach across Ku-ring-gai.

SUPPORT FOR OPTION B

Key community comment

· consolidating housing around the Neighbourhood Centres is a viable option provided Council provides open space and public parking for existing and new public and commercial facilities;

· delivers more dwellings and provides more housing diversity, it is better adapted to the needs of older residents;

· 700 sqm is a more realistic size and will not impact the loss of tree canopy to any meaningful extent;

· the 1075 sqm outside the Neighbourhood Centres is too large and excludes properties;

· addresses social and economic effects, affordable housing and housing diversity; and

· achieves State Government requirements and is consistent with previously endorsed strategic planning and State planning policies whilst also considering environmental and public infrastructure issues.

Response

The recommendation that additional open space and public parking needs to be provided around the Neighbourhood Centres is acknowledged. However, Council would need to access significant funds to acquire land for open space at these locations.

Option B does not deliver more dwellings than Option A. In both Options dual occupancy is facilitated on 50% of the eligible R2 zoned lots. In Option B, around five Neighbourhood Centres, a minimum lot size of 700 sqm is proposed with a minimum lot size of 1075 sqm proposed for the remainder of the R2 areas across Ku-ring-gai.

Increased density does not necessarily equate to housing affordability. Unless development is tied to an affordable housing mechanism, such as a Community Housing Provider where subsidised rents are guaranteed, properties in Ku-ring-gai are unlikely to sell/rent at rates below market prices.

Increased numbers of housing will not reduce the cost of housing in Ku-ring-gai as the demand will remain high due to its location and attractive assets, plus the involvement of investors will continue to inflate property prices.

The recommendations for different housing typologies to increase housing choice for different age groups is noted. However, at this point Council is only seeking response to the exhibited minimum lot sizes for dual occupancies. Smaller housing typologies such as terrace housing are part of Stage 2 of the State Government’s housing reforms.

Recommendation

Ø That Option B with minimum lot sizes of 1075 sqm and 700 sqm is not adopted in line with community preference, and due to the impacts of the 700 sqm minimum lot size (350 sqm per dwelling) around the five Neighbourhood Centres.

REQUEST FOR LOT SIZES SMALLER THAN THOSE PROPOSED BY COUNCIL:

Key Comments

· reduce lot sizes to increase numbers of dual occupancies and address social, economic, affordable housing and housing diversity issues;

· submissions seek smaller lot sizes to include their properties;

· submissions seek smaller lot widths to enable their lots to be eligible for dual occupancy development; and

· surrounding councils have smaller minimum lot sizes, Parramatta 600 sqm and Hills Shire 700 sqm, and Ku-ring-gai should follow their lead in order to provide housing for population growth.

Response

Council only sought feedback on the minimum lot sizes presented during the exhibition period. The two options, Option A and Option B, provide a balance between retaining the character of Ku-ring-gai (biodiversity, tree canopy, garden setting and heritage conservation areas) while also achieving the NSW Government target of 50% of R2 zoned lots being eligible for dual occupancy.

A further reduction of the proposed lot sizes will result in more than 50% of lots being able to accommodate dual occupancy. The cumulative impact of this would have extended, widespread and irreversible impact and would increase impacts on the area’s valued assets: loss of tree canopy, threat to Blue Gum High Forest and Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest, loss of biodiversity flora and fauna, loss of street tree planting, loss of garden settings, loss of heritage conservation areas etc.

The resulting intensified development on smaller lot sizes would present an urban form similar to inner city locations. In addition, the smaller the lot size, the more unlikely the resulting dwellings will be able to assimilate into the established streetscape with setbacks and garden settings. Dual occupancy developments need to, as much as possible, blend into the existing single dwelling streetscapes, not overtake nor remove the current homogeneity of Ku-ring-gai’s streetscapes.

The implications of such cumulative development would be greater than in those urban areas as the stormwater, soil denudation, and pollutant increase have a direct downslope impact on the river/creek systems and biodiversity of the National Parks that surround Ku-ring-gai. These impacts then gradually see the loss of flora and fauna, including threatened species.

In proposing the exhibited minimum Option A and Option B lot sizes, the responsibility around the legacy impacts have been fully considered.

With regards to the various requests for reduced lot sizes to capture the individual properties of the submission writers, it is unclear on what strategic policy or urban design basis the suggested lower figure minimum lot sizes have been founded, given the context of the spatial mapping and testing carried out for the Hill Thalis Urban Design Dual Occupancy Lot Size Study.

Ku-ring-gai’s block and subdivision context are different to many metropolitan local government areas and the principles adopted by those councils cannot be compared nor applied in Ku-ring-gai. Other LGAs may see historical 19th century subdivisions comprising expanses of smaller lot subdivisions supported by tight urban blocks with networks of finer grain laneways. In contrast, Ku-ring-gai’s largely 20th century subdivisions comprise mostly larger lots, often within large urban street blocks, steep topography, and little or no network of laneways other than localised within the commercial/retail/business areas of local and neighbourhood centres. Submissions suggesting a comparative approach to other Council areas provide no justifying comparative analysis.

Understandably, many residents are focused only on their land and their opportunity to maximise their site potential. Many that support smaller lot sizes fail to understand the consequences of reducing the proposed lot size options on a whole of local government area basis. The current options deliver the requisite 50% of dual occupancy development across R2 zoned land. To reduce the lot size will mean more lots will be redeveloped and therefore more than 50% of the R2 lands in Ku-ring-gai will lose its inherent qualities and character.

Widespread take-up of a small minimum lot size would significantly limit the provision of deep soil that can sustain soil structures through water infiltration, limit tall canopy tree retention and provision, limit landscaped gardens, and increase demand for on-street parking with little opportunity for visitor parking.

It is inevitable that dual occupancy development, particularly when achieved through the complying development pathway, will dramatically change the character of Ku-ring-gai. By sticking to the NSW 50% provision requirement, the exhibited lot size options limit the immediate and long term negative impacts across the local government area.

Recommendation

Ø No change due to the detrimental cumulative and irreversible impacts across Ku-ring-gai that smaller lots sizes would result in.

REQUEST FOR DIFFERENT LOT WIDTHS TO THOSE PROPOSED BY COUNCIL

Key Comments

· increase lot width to 20m frontage for better outcomes in terms of streetscape and local character outcomes;

· reduce minimum lot width to 12m, 15m, 17m;

· land parcels meet the 1015 sqm lot size but not the lot width and prevents site development;

· exclusion of cul-de-sac and tapered lots despite meeting minimum lot size;

· flexibility for frontage is requested as 50% delivery will be difficult with lot width of 18m and lot size 1015 sqm; and

· DPHI’s requirement for Council to establish a minimum lot size did not request that Council establish a minimum lot width.

Response

The scope of the Hill Thalis study considered the only mechanism DPHI made available to councils, that is, setting a minimum lot size via a local environmental plan. There were not provisions for alternative development controls. In discussion with DPHI, it was agreed to include a minimum lot width requirement.

In carrying out their study, a nuanced approach was taken by Hill Thalis to include consideration of a minimum lot width that would better facilitate protection of existing canopy, opportunities for canopy replacement where lost, deep soil landscape character in the context of also achieving the Urban Forest Strategy targets, achieving Ku-ring-gai’s streetscape character across the LGA, and consideration of heritage conservation areas.

Hill Thalis conducted sampling of large lots across Ku-ring-gai and surmised that most large lots had frontages of 18-20m. The study put forward a minimum lot width of 18m to ensure dual occupancy development will assimilate into the established streetscapes with at least a 9 metre frontage for each dwelling. A wider frontage would reduce the anomalous effects of smaller lots within streets of established large subdivision patterns, including in heritage conservation areas, and be able to better deliver deep soil, landscaped gardens, and canopy trees able to contribute to a reduction of heat island effects.

Concerns raised in submissions regarding the 18m minimum lot width and inability to develop dual occupancy despite having the proposed minimum lot size is acknowledged.

It is also understood that dual occupancy carried out as complying development will have a minimum lot width requirement of 12m to 15m, and that for dual occupancy development within the Local Housing Areas, the minimum lot width will be 12m. Any proposed minimum lot width that is set by Council will only apply to development applications on sites outside Local Housing Areas.

These issues have been considered and there is merit in removing the 18m minimum lot width requirement from the minimum lot size submission to DPHI to be dealt with as a development control plan consideration. This will enable more opportunity and increased flexibility on dual occupancy development.

Since Council’s minimum lot width will be tied only to those dual occupancy proposals (outside the Local Housing Areas) made through a development application, there is opportunity to consider lot width requirements in controls to be included in the Ku-ring-gai Development Control Plan. Lot width considerations could, for example, enable dwelling layouts that are not permitted under complying development.

Recommendation

Ø That a proposed minimum 18m lot width be excluded from Council’s minimum lot size submission to DPHI.

Ø That lot width be considered as part of the required Ku-ring-gai Development Control Plan standards to guide development applications on lots outside the Local Housing Areas.

BATTLEAXE LOTS

Key Comments

· no battle-axe dual occupancy development should be allowed across the local government area; and

· not addressing battle-axe lots as part of this policy would be inconsistent with Council’s aim of increasing housing density.

Response

The NSW Government requires all dual occupancy development to face a public street. Council will remain consistent with the State’s approach. Dual occupancy is not proposed to be permitted on battle-axe blocks.

Smaller lot sizes in battleaxe configurations are challenged on minimising the impacts of increased vehicles within the site, issues of increased vehicle movements on neighbouring boundaries, difficulty in provision of landscaping along the battle-axe driveway, bin storage and collection issues, and impacts for increased dwellings relying on one driveway.

Multi-unit housing typologies that require long driveways into battle-axe configurations result in poor outcomes, including excessive areas of hard-stand due to limited/no direct exposure to a public road. They require larger lot size and lot width controls to mitigate their inherent undesirable urban and spatially inefficient outcomes caused by long driveways and vehicle turning circles that extend deep into a parent lot.

Recommendation

Ø No change due to the issues of increased development on land locked sites.

SUBDIVISION

Key Comments

· supportive of dual occupancy and subdivision;

· permissibility of Torrens title subdivision for dual occupancies; and

· question on whether the minimum lot size is before or after subdivision.

Response

Under complying development, Torrens title subdivision is permitted as part of a dual occupancy development application.

Once the minimum lot size is established, Council will have to make additional amendment to the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 to include sub-division permissibility, including for strata and Torrens subdivision. This will then apply to development applications for dual occupancies outside the Local housing Areas.

Recommendation

Ø That subdivision standards be prepared to include as amendment to the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 once a minimum lot size is endorsed.

CHARACTER, HERITAGE, ENVIRONMENT, TREES, AMENITY

Key Comments

· dual occupancy will negatively impact the environment and garden character of Ku-ring-gai;

· there are lots of trees in Ku-ring-gai so there is no need to worry about the garden character;

· dual occupancy proximity to shops in Option B is irrelevant as occupants will use their vehicles anyway, so sacrificing trees for this is not acceptable;

· why is Council wanting to protect all Heritage Conservation Areas from TOD but not from dual occupancy;

· the State’s housing policy undermines the principle of good strategic planning and will cause significant impacts on heritage, environment, streetscape and infrastructure;

· dual occupancy will destroy tree lines, the unique beautiful character and result in lack of open spaces;

· the Council and Mayor are responsible for protecting the valuable leafy area and prevent it being destroyed.

Response

The minimum lot sizes (Option A & B) exhibited by Council were based on evidence-based research undertaken by the consultancy Hill Thalis Architecture + Urban Projects. Their proposed lot sizes provide a balance between retaining tree canopy, heritage and local character, while also achieving the State Government’s requirement that 50% of all R2 (Low Density Residential) zoned lots be eligible for dual occupancy.

The complying development assessment path introduced by the State Government allows for dwelling houses to be built without merit assessment. Council is already seeing the impacts of complying development single houses impacting the existing garden character in Ku-ring-gai, removing established plantings and trees, and delivering poor quality buildings with little to no streetscape contribution.

Council will need to prepare development plan controls to guide development applications outside the Local Housing Areas. These controls will need to address character including development within heritage conservation areas, parking, amenity, landscape and tree planting, setbacks and lot widths.

Recommendation

Ø That controls be prepared for inclusion in the Ku-ring-gai Development Control Plan to guide dual occupancy development outcomes.

Notification to the NSW Government

Should Council support the recommendation of this report, the following instructions to amend the KLEP 2015 will be forwarded to DPHI:

1. Dual occupancy development be permitted on land within the R2 (Low Density Residential) zone except for land that has bushfire risk, or is a heritage item, or is within a Transport Oriented Development area.

2. Dual occupancy development be permitted on land with a minimum lot size of 1015 sqm.

3. The following clauses be included within the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan (2015):

· Minimum Lot Size

Development consent must not be granted to development for the purposes of a dual occupancy unless the lot is at least 1015 sqm.

The Hill Thalis investigation (Attachment A3) will accompany the instruction to validate Council’s lot size position.

integrated planning and reporting

Theme 1 – Community, People and Culture

Theme 3 – Places, Spaces and Infrastructure

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

C6.1 Housing diversity, adaptability and affordability is increased to support the needs of a changing community

C6.1.1 Councils planning approach to the provision of housing across Ku-ring-gai is responsive and addresses the supply, choice and affordability needs of the community and the changing population

C6.1.1.1 Implement the Ku-ring-gai Housing Strategy to 2036

C6.1.1.3 Identify opportunities to provide a range of housing choices and part of the implementation of the Ku-ring-gai Housing Strategy to 2036.

P2.1 A robust planning framework is in place to deliver quality design outcomes and maintain the identity and character of Ku-ring-gai

P2.1.1 Land use strategies, plans and processes are in place to effectively manage the impact of new development

P2.1.1.1 Prepare plans and strategies as required by the Local Strategic Planning Statement (LSPS)

Governance Matters

On 15 December 2023 the NSW Government exhibited the Explanation of Intended Effect; Changes to create Low and Mid Rise Housing (EIE). The Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure (DPHI) has given some Councils, including Ku-ring-gai, an opportunity to consider an appropriate minimum lot size for dual occupancy dwellings within the R2 (Low Density Residential) zone, excluding land with bushfire risk, heritage items, or within a Transport Oriented Development area.

Following Council’s 17 December 2024 meeting and endorsement of three lot size options, Council officers met with DPHI and received confirmation for the exhibition of only two out of the three options. The two options (Option A and Option B) were publicly exhibited to seek community feedback.

This report proposes a final minimum lot size of 1015 sqm be endorsed by Council and forwarded to DPHI to be legally drafted and to take effect on 1 July 2025.

It is understood that DPHI will prepare an amending SEPP to amend the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 to permit additional housing and controls within the nominated zonings.

Risk Implication statement

Council’s reputation could be at risk if it does not nominate an appropriate minimum lot size for dual occupancies as State Environmental Planning Policy (Exempt and Complying Development) 2008 will automatically apply with a minimum parent lot size of 400 sqm for all complying development, which will result in each lot having an area of 200 sqm. This will make it very challenging to provide deep soil, protect biodiversity, tree canopy and ensure appropriate setbacks and retention of the garden settings that contribute to the local character of Ku-ring-gai.

Financial Considerations

The cost of preparing this report is covered by the Urban Planning and Heritage budget.

Social Considerations

Updated planning provisions for dual occupancy development in Ku-ring-gai will assist in increasing housing supply and diversity to support the needs of the changing community and changing population.

Environmental Considerations

Council’s approach to planning for dual occupancy provisions have taken into account the protection of biodiversity, reducing threat from bushfire, minimising and mitigating heat island effects, maintain the character of buildings within a garden setting that includes tall canopy trees as much as is possible.

Community Consultation

Council’s Community Engagement Policy states that Council exhibitions should not begin until the third week of January and run for a minimum of 28 days, with extensions considered for school holiday periods. In line with this policy, public exhibition was held for a 30 day period from 22 January 2025 to 20 February 2025.

The public consultation included:

· a total of 24,452 notification letters sent to residents within and adjacent to the eligible R2(Low Density Residential) land;

· advertisements placed in North Shore Times, The Post and The Sydney Observer;

· notices in Council e-newsletters and social media;

· exhibition materials and supporting information placed on Council’s website;

· online forum presentation by staff with a question and answer session held on 4 February 2025;

· opportunity to send written submissions via email/mail;

· online Survey with options to include written comment; and

· telephone and face to face access to planning staff for the duration of the 30 day exhibition period.

Following Council’s nomination of a minimum lot size, further work will be undertaken to develop associated standards within the Ku-ring-gai Development Control Plan. The draft standards to be included in the Ku-ring-gai Development Control Plan will need to be publicly exhibited.

Internal Consultation

Where relevant, other sections of Council have been consulted in the preparation of this report.

In October 2024, Councillors were provided with an overview of the housing reforms including on the need to prepare dual occupancy provisions.

On 10 December 2024, a Councillor briefing was held to provide the background to the NSW Government’s dual occupancy requirements, and to present the findings of the Hill Thalis report with its proposed options.

Summary

In July 2024 the NSW Government permitted dual occupancy housing across all land zoned R2 (Low Density Residential) within Ku-rig-gai, except for land with bushfire risk, heritage items, or within a Transport Oriented Development area.

The NSW Government has asked Council to nominate a minimum lot size able to deliver dual occupancies on 50% of eligible land. Failure to nominate a minimum lot size will result in the SEPP (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008 minimum lot size of 400 sqm automatically applying to complying development applications from 1 July 2025.

On 17 December 2024, Council supported three minimum lot size options prepared by specialist consultant Hill Thalis. These options were presented to the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure (DPHI) on 19 December 2024. Only two of the options were agreed by DPHI.

The two options (Option A and Option B) were exhibited from 22 January to 20 February 2025, inviting community feedback.

In total, 1,310 interactions and receipts of opinions have been taken by Council’s planning staff.

The community response to the exhibition showed a clear preference for the Option A - 1015 sqm minimum lot size. It is recommended that this lot size option be endorsed for finalisation with DPHI.

	Written Submissions	Online Survey
Option A	25%	42%
Option B	13%	31%

Preference of options from the community

The community disputed the inclusion of an 18m minimum lot width as it excludes properties that meet the minimum lot size, particularly on tapered lots and in cul-de-sac locations. The concerns are acknowledged and it is recommended that no statutory minimum lot width should be sought to apply along with the recommended 1015 sqm minimum lot size.

Some members of the community sought smaller minimum lot sizes to capture their properties. Implications for lowering the lot size significantly reduces the ability to deliver Ku-ring-gai’s community expectations of deep soil canopy landscape, canopy connectivity to the surrounding national parks and reserves, achieving Ku-ring-gai’s current Urban Forest Strategy targets and for long-term mitigation against increasing urban heat resulting from cumulative losses of canopy for shading hardstand areas and buildings.

Reducing the minimum lot size would capture greater than 50% of the local government area for dual occupancy. It can be assumed the NSW Government’s requirement of 50% of R2 lots being made available for dual occupancy recognises established local government areas that are introducing a new policy will have existing urban characteristics that require consideration within the local strategic policies. Capturing greater numbers of lots would represent a significant exceedance of the NSW Government’s requirement.

Once the minimum lot size has been endorsed by Council, planning standards will have to be prepared to support and guide dual occupancy development submitted via a development application outside the Local Housing Areas, noting that complying development is permitted across the whole local government area and has its standards stated in the SEPP (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008.

These development application planning standards will involve amendment to:

· the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 to include standards such as floor space ratio and subdivision; and

· the Ku-ring-gai Development Control Plan stating guidelines including on lot width, setbacks and parking.

The next steps to progress this matter include:

· forward Council’s endorsed minimum lot size of 1015 sqm to the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure for inclusion in their State Environmental Planning Policy; and

· to prepare planning standards to support and guide future dual occupancy, to be included in the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 and the Ku-ring-gai Development Control Plan.

Recommendation:

A. That Council endorse a minimum lot size of 1015 sqm for dual occupancy development within the Ku-ring-gai local government area R2 (Low Density Residential) zones, excluding bushfire prone land, heritage items and land within a TOD area, and forward it to the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure for finalisation as indicated in this report.

B. That Council prepare planning controls and development standards based on the 1015 sqm minimum lot size, for inclusion into the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 and the Ku-ring-gai Development Control Plan, and report these back to Council.

C. That the Director Strategy and Environment be given delegation to correct errors and improve clarification, provided it does not alter the direction of the minimum lot size and minimum lot width.

Rathna Rana

Executive Urban Planner

Antony Fabbro

Manager Urban & Heritage Planning

Craige Wyse

Team Leader Urban Planning

Andrew Watson

Director Strategy & Environment

Attachments:	A1⇩	Written Submissions Summary Table	2025/049763
	A2⇩	Online Survey Results	2025/057580
	A3⇩	Hill Thalis - Dual Occupancy Lot Size Study - December 2024	2025/064573

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 18 March 2025	GB.13 / 1

Item GB.13	S06198

Receipt of Letter of Offer to enter into a Planning Agreement with a Planning Proposal - 345 Pacific Highway Lindfield

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

purpose of report:	To advise of the receipt of a letter of offer to enter into a Planning Agreement associated with a Planning Proposal to alter the planning controls at 345 Pacific Highway, Lindfield.

background:	The report discusses the offer made by the proponent and recommends that the matter proceed to formal negotiation subject to some additional specifications.

comments:	A letter of offer has been received from the consultants acting for the proponents.

recommendation: (Refer to the full Recommendation at the end of this report)	That the letter of offer be noted, that authority be delegated to the General Manager and his staff to liaise with the proponents and their solicitors to progress the matter before reporting back to Council.

Purpose of Report To advise of the receipt of a letter of offer to enter into a Planning Agreement associated with a Planning Proposal to alter the planning controls at 345 Pacific Highway, Lindfield.

Background

A letter of offer (Attachment A1) has been received from the proponents for the Planning Proposal for the site at 345 Pacific Highway, Lindfield.

Comments

A Planning Proposal has been submitted for the property at 345 Pacific Highway Lindfield which is also bounded by Havilah Road, Wolseley Road and the railway line. The Planning Proposal seeks to increase the height and floor space ratio over and above the present controls, including the controls contained within Chapter 5 of the Housing SEPP (Transport Oriented Development). The Planning Proposal was subject to a Rezoning Review and consideration by the Sydney North Planning Panel (SNPP) on 14 June 2024. The SNPP recommended that the Planning Proposal proceed to Gateway Determination subject to revised documentation. The SNPP has appointed itself as the Planning Proposal Authority (PPA) for this Planning Proposal. The Planning Proposal is currently with the Department of Planning, Housing and Infrastructure for assessment for Gateway Determination.

The proponents in respect of the Planning Proposal have also submitted a Letter of Offer to enter into a Planning Agreement associated with the Planning Proposal.

The draft Letter of Offer provides for the delivery of local infrastructure and the delivery of affordable housing. Commentary on each of these offers follows.

Public Domain upgrades

The Letter of Offer proposes public domain works in the public way immediately adjacent to the subject site in accordance with the Public Domain Plan and the s7.11 contributions plan. The carrying out of works to the public domain immediately adjoining a development site are common types of works-in-kind and can be a better outcome for both the developer and the community through Council when the delivery is linked to the adjoining development. As such, they are standard types of inclusions in a Planning Agreement or Works-in-Kind agreement. The Planning Agreement will manage the procedures for the detailed design, include an agreement in principle that the works can be offset up to their inflated value in the contributions plan and a mechanism for managing any additions to that cost.

Affordable Housing

Council is in a position to lawfully enter into negotiations concerning the delivery of affordable housing in kind and associated with a site-specific planning proposal (as distinct from the development application) at this point in time, notwithstanding some aspects of Council’s affordable housing approach remains in draft form.

The Letter of Offer proposes affordable housing of 5% of the floorspace for 15 years, to be managed by a Community Housing Provider. In the long term this is less than the 2% in perpetuity rate which applies to land within the TOD planning area.

This issue will be addressed when the draft Planning Agreement is reported to Council.

Infrastructure deleted from the Letter of Offer

The letter of offer attached also references two other matters that appeared in the initial offer but are no longer in effect. One is a dedication of land that appears in a tiny irregular point protruding into Havilah Road and the other being works to Ibbitson Park on Wolseley Road.

Council is currently progressing design and documentation of the Ibbitson Park works. A concept design plan for Ibbitson Park has already been completed and has been out on public consultation in February 2025. It is anticipated that the works could be tendered and commenced before the end of the calendar year. As such, it is not appropriate to delay this delivery to an unknown point in the future linked to a development whose commencement date is uncertain. The initial letter of offer only sought to do this work as an offset to other contributions. Consequently there is not disbenefit to Council.

In relation to the proposed Havilah Road dedication, while Ku-ring-gai Council owns and maintains the asset that is Havilah Road, the land itself remains in the ownership of the successor to the Minister for Railways, being TAHE (Transport Asset Holding Entity). Any agreement for dedication of this land must therefore be made directly with the NSW State Government.

Other matters – Costs Agreement

Council’s Planning Agreement Policy states that Council’s costs relating to the establishment of a Planning Agreement must be borne by the applicant. A costs agreement is the first order of business after an in-principle agreement to formally commence negotiation. Until that discussion takes place, the likely costs are not known with any clarity. The Letter of Offer proposes to limit the costs to $5000. It is considered likely that this cost is underestimated and unlikely to be a reasonable estimate of the costs involved and is not pre-emptively accepted.

Other matters – Miscellaneous

The future draft Planning Agreement will not exclude the application of s7.11 or s7.12 and the Housing and Productivity Contributions to the subject development site in the future which is appropriate. The draft Planning Agreement will also contain provisions for dispute resolution and for its enforcement including a suitable security to be determined and registration on title. These are standard inclusions in accordance with the Planning Agreement Policy 2024.

integrated planning and reporting

Theme Six: Leadership

Community Strategic Plan

Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

L4.1 The organisation provides ethical and transparent decision making, efficient management and quality customer service.

L4.1.2 Council’s Governance framework is developed to ensure probity and transparency.

L4.1.2.4 Review policies to support good decision making and compliance with hanging legislation and guidelines.

Theme Three: Places, Spaces and Infrastructure

Community Strategic Plan

Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

P8.1 An improved standard of infrastructure that meets the community’s service level standards and Council’s obligations as the custodian of our community’s assets.

P8.1.1 Our public infrastructure and assets are planned, managed and funded to meet community expectations, defined levels of service and address inter-generational equity

C6.1.2.1.2; C4.1.2.1.3

New public infrastructure is planned to support new development and ensure that everyone who lives and works in Ku-ring-gai continues to enjoy access to public facilities.

Governance Matters

The negotiation of Planning Agreements is guided by Controlled Document 75 – Planning Agreement Policy 2024.

Risk Management

As for any other planning agreement, an external specialist legal team will be engaged by Council. It may also be necessary to employ planning consultants to take carriage of the matter as a result of the involvement of council staff in the TOD alternatives.

Financial Considerations

The planning agreement, should it proceed (following negotiation, reporting and public exhibition) intends to make provision for the delivery of public domain works by the future developer. This would mean such works would no longer form part of council’s works programme but there would be a consequential offset from the monetary contributions in the future, as there would have been a partial settlement in kind.

Social Considerations

Delivery of in-kind works to the public domain concurrent with the development are a good outcome for the community ensuring that works are undertaken as part of a development and surrounding footpaths are fully upgraded. Care must be taken to ensure that the affordable housing delivered is not less than could have been achieved by other mechanisms.

Environmental Considerations

There are no direct environmental considerations arising from the decision to proceed with the negotiation process of a planning agreement. Environmental impacts of the delivery of any works will be considered as part of the agreement and/or the future Development Application as best applicable.

Community Consultation

When a draft Planning Agreement is reported to Council and recommended to be placed on public exhibition, the community will be invited to have their say before the matter proceeds further as part of a statutory exhibition requirement.

Internal Consultation

Staff of Strategy, Property (in respect of the matter of Havilah Road) and the Corporate Lawyer (in the matter of on-going legal advice) have been involved in discussions on this matter.

Summary

A letter of offer has been received from the proponents of a planning proposal to amend the height and floor space controls of 345 Pacific Highway Lindfield. The proposed planning agreement is associated with a planning proposal to amend the planning controls applying to the subject site. This letter of offer (Attachment A1) is reported to Council for authority to commence formal negotiations.

Recommendation:

That Council note that following both a costs agreement and subsequent negotiations, a draft Planning Agreement be presented to Council with a progress report as to whether the matter should proceed to public exhibition.

Kate Paterson

Infrastructure Coordinator

Antony Fabbro

Manager Urban & Heritage Planning

Andrew Watson

Director Strategy & Environment

Attachments:

A1⇩

Letter of Offer for a Planning Agreement - 345 Pacific Highway Lindfield

2024/317704

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 18 March 2025	MM.1 / 1

Item MM.1	CY00455/13

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 18 March 2025	GB.2 / 1

Item GB.2	S04141

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 18 March 2025	GB.3 / 1

Item GB.3	S04141

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 18 March 2025	GB.4 / 1

Item GB.4	S04141

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 18 March 2025	GB.5 / 1

Item GB.5	S04141

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 18 March 2025	GB.6 / 1

Item GB.6	CY00022/17

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 18 March 2025	GB.8 / 1

Item GB.8	S13191

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 18 March 2025	GB.10 / 1

Item GB.10	S02811

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 18 March 2025	NM.1 / 1

Item NM.1	S14726

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 18 March 2025	QN.1 / 1

Item QN.1	EM00046/2