Ordinary Meeting of Council
TO BE HELD ON Tuesday, 14 July 2015 AT 7.00pm
Level 3 Council Chamber
Agenda
** ** ** ** ** **
NOTE: For Full Details, See Council’s Website –
www.kmc.nsw.gov.au under the link to business papers
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
Confirmation of Reports to be Considered in Closed Meeting
NOTE:
A. 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 the following Confidential Report and its respective attachments:
C.1 General Manager's Performance Review
B. 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:
GB.5 Licence to Rotary Clubs of Turramurra and Ku-ring-gai to Conduct Markets in Wade Lane Car Park at Gordon
Attachment A1: BEM Valuation Report
Attachment A2: Representations from Rotary
Attachment A3: Licence Fee Comparisons
GB.6 Tender RFT5-2015 - Cameron Park Extension
Attachment A1: . List of Tenders received, comments and financial considerations
Attachment A2: . Tender Evaluation Panel's score and recommendation
Attachment A3: . Corporate Scorecard - Tenderer A - Financial and Performance Assessment
Address the Council
NOTE: Persons who address the Council should be aware that their address will be tape recorded.
Documents Circulated to Councillors
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTEs
Minutes of Ordinary Meeting of Council 7
File: S02131
Meeting held 23 June 2015
Minutes numbered 166 to 181
minutes from the Mayor
MM.1 Queen's Birthday Honours 2015 22
File: S02767
I am pleased to inform you that 7 Ku-ring-gai citizens, through their outstanding achievements and services to the community, have been awarded 2015 Queen’s Birthday 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 special Ku-ring-gai citizens and, on behalf of Council, congratulate them on their excellent contributions to Australian society.
Samuel Stuart CLARK AM of Killara, for significant services to the law, through senior roles with professional legal bodies, to strategic reform, and to the rural fire service.
Geoffrey James FOGARTY PSM of St Ives, for outstanding public service to roads and maritime services in New South Wales.
Charles William FREW OAM of Pymble, for service to community health organisations through fundraising roles.
Richard Reynolds MILES OAM of Wahroonga, for service to the community, particularly through roles with education organisations.
Thomas Gordon REID OAM of North Turramurra, for service to the community, and to people with disability.
His Honour Judge Stephen Hugh SCARLETT RFD OAM, resident of Ku-ring-gai, for service to the judiciary, to the law, and to professional organisations.
Stephen James SIMPSON AC of Wahroonga, for eminent service to biological and biomedical science as an educator, researcher and author, particularly in the areas of human nutrition, obesity and metabolic disease, to higher education, and through roles with a range of professional scientific organisations.
On behalf of Council, I congratulate all these award winners on their outstanding achievements.
Ku-ring-gai should be proud that it has so many citizens being recognised at the highest levels for their selfless dedication, commitment and contribution to local, national and international communities.
Petitions
PT.1 Petition regarding Traffic Congestion and Parking Issues in Kanoona Avenue, Collins and Cowan Roads St Ives - (Thirty-two [32] Signatures) 24
File: TM9/07
“We, the undersigned residents of Kanoona Avenue and Cowan Road St Ives, petition Ku-ring-gai Council to review parking and traffic management in our area to address the issues that over the past 2 years, the amount of traffic in our streets have increased to well past its design limitations. The issues we now experience on weekends and many weekdays are:
• Illegal parking too close to corners. This creates difficulty and risk leaving and entering the street;
• Illegal parking partially blocking driveways. Difficult to enter or leave property;
• Amount of traffic. Difficult to enter or leave property and street;
• Road reduced to single lane. Difficult to enter or leave property or street. No street parking for visitors;
• Abandoned shopping trolleys.
These issues appear to be caused by inadequate parking for the St Ives Village Shopping Centre and Village Green.”
Recommendations from Committee
RC.1 Minutes of Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee 25
File: CY00022/7
Meeting held 18 June 2015
Minutes numbered KTC.6 to KTC.10.
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 Ku-ring-gai Art Society - Annual Awards Exhibition and Purchase of Art Works 31
File: S02173
To respond to the resolution of Council on 7 October 2014 requesting a report to Council about the annual purchase of art works from the Ku-ring-gai Art Society (KAS).
Recommendation:
That Council continues the practice of purchasing art works from the Ku-ring-gai Art Society in conjunction with the annual Awards Exhibition.
GB.2 107 Junction Road, Wahroonga - Demolish Existing Structures and Construct 8 Self-Contained Dwellings over Basement Parking - SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 46
File: DA0294/14
Ward: Wahroonga
Applicant: Mr Z Deng C/- Boston Blyth Fleming
Owner: Mr Z Deng
To determine Development Application No. 0294/14 for the demolition of existing structures and construction of eight self-contained dwellings pursuant to SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004.
Recommendation:
Approval
GB.3 1185 Pacific Highway Turramurra - Demolition of Existing Structures and Construction of Four Townhouses including, Garages and Landscaping Works 121
File: DA0264/14
Ward: Comenarra
Applicant: Natalie Richter Planning
Owner: Charles Hon-Yuen Lee and Christie Ping-Lui Lee
To determine Development Application DA0264/14 which proposes demolition of existing structures and construction of four town houses, including garages and landscaping works
Recommendation:
Deferred Commencement Consent
GB.4 Consideration of Submissions on the Planning Proposal to Heritage List 5 Properties in Turramurra, Wahroonga, Pymble and Killara 185
File: S10453
For Council to consider the submissions received during the public exhibition of the planning proposal to heritage list 5 properties in Turramurra, Wahroonga, Pymble and Killara.
Recommendation:
That Council proceed with the heritage listing for 12 Bobbin Head Road Pymble and 88 Fox Valley Road Wahroonga. That Council take no further action on the heritage listing for 6 Caithness Street Killara, 4-6 Neringah Avenue South, Wahroonga and 51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra.
GB.5 Licence to Rotary Clubs of Turramurra and Ku-ring-gai to Conduct Markets in Wade Lane Car Park at Gordon 475
File: S02618/2
To seek approval to review the terms of Council’s resolution of 28 October 2014 in respect of the proposed licence fee for the Rotary Clubs of Turramurra and Ku-ring-gai’s use of the mid-level of the Wade Lane Car Park.
Recommendation:
That Council resolve to review the licence fee for the new 5 year licence to the Rotary Clubs of Turramurra and Ku-ring-gai as set out in this report.
GB.6 Tender RFT5-2015 - Cameron Park Extension 481
File: S10025
To consider the tenders received for the rebuild and extension of Cameron Park, Turramurra, and appoint the preferred tenderer.
Recommendation:
In accordance with Section 55 of the Local Government Act and Tender Regulations, it is recommended Council accept the tender submitted by Tenderer ‘A’ as identified in the Confidential Summary (Attachment 1).
Extra Reports Circulated to Meeting
BUSINESS WITHOUT NOTICE – SUBJECT TO CLAUSE 241 OF GENERAL REGULATIONS
Questions Without Notice
Inspections Committee – SETTING OF TIME, DATE AND RENDEZVOUS
Confidential Business to be dealt with in Closed Meeting
C.1 General Manager's Performance Review
File: CY00254/7
In accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 and the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, in the opinion of the General Manager, the following business is of a kind as referred to in section 10A(2)(a), of the Act, and should be dealt with in a part of the meeting closed to the public.
Section 10A(2)(a) of the Act permits the meeting to be closed to the public for business relating to personnel matters concerning particular individuals (other than Councillors).
Confidential Mayoral Minute by the Mayor, Councillor Jennifer Anderson dated 25 June 2015
John McKee
General Manager
** ** ** ** ** **
MINUTES OF Ordinary Meeting of Council
HELD ON Tuesday, 23 June 2015
Present: |
The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson (Chairperson) (Roseville Ward) Councillors E Malicki & J Pettett (Comenarra Ward) Councillors D Citer & C Szatow (Gordon Ward) Councillor D Ossip (St Ives Ward) Councillors C Fornari-Orsmond & D McDonald (Wahroonga Ward) |
|
|
Staff Present: |
General Manager (John McKee) Director Corporate (David Marshall) Director Development & Regulation (Michael Miocic) Director Operations (Greg Piconi) Director Strategy & Environment (Andrew Watson) Director Community (Janice Bevan) Manager Corporate Communications (Virginia Leafe) Manager Records & Governance (Matt Ryan) Minutes Secretary (Sigrid Banzer) |
The Meeting commenced at 7.00pm
The Mayor offered the Prayer
166 |
File: S02194
Councillor David Armstrong tendered an apology for non-attendance [overseas] and requested leave of absence.
Councillor Christiane Berlioz tendered an apology for non-attendance [illness] and requested leave of absence.
|
|
(Moved: Councillors Ossip/McDonald)
A. That the apology from Councillor Armstrong be accepted and leave of absence granted.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
[Moved: Councillors Malicki /Pettett
B. That the apologies from Councillor Berlioz be accepted and leave of absence granted.
CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
|
The Mayor adverted to the necessity for Councillors and staff to declare a Pecuniary Interest/Conflict of Interest in any item on the Business Paper.
No Interest was declared.
The following members of the public addressed Council on items not on the Agenda:
C Lewis – Heritage Listing
S Lewis – Heritage Listing
DOCUMENTS CIRCULATED TO COUNCILLORS
The Mayor adverted 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:
Memorandums: |
Refer Council Minute Number 160 of 9 June 2015 – Minutes of Heritage Reference Committee held 13 April 2015 – Memorandum from Manager Records and Governance dated 23 June 2015 advising Councillors of a typographical error in Part B of the Minute. |
Councillors Information: |
Car Parking on St Ives Village Green - Memorandum from Director Operations dated 17 June 2015 in answer to a Question Without Notice raised by Councillor Christiane Berlioz at the Ordinary Meeting of Council held 9 June 2015.
Eastern Road Turramurra and Wahroonga – Shifting of Water Board Metal Plates and Potholes – Memorandum from Director Operations dated 10 June 2015 in answer to a Question Without Notice raised by Councillor Duncan McDonald at the Ordinary Meeting of Council held 24 February 2015.
|
Councillor Ossip withdrew
Councillor Ossip returned
One minute silence was observed.
Standing Orders
were suspended to deal with items
where there are speakers first after a
Motion moved by Councillors Szatow and McDonald
was CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY
The Meeting closed at 9.16pm
The Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 23 June 2015 (Pages 1 - 15) were confirmed as a full and accurate record of proceedings on 14 July 2015.
__________________________ __________________________
General Manager Mayor / Chairperson
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 July 2015 |
MM.1 / 21 |
|
|
Item MM.1 |
S02767 |
|
15 June 2015 |
Mayoral Minute
Queen's Birthday Honours 2015
I am pleased to inform you that 7 Ku-ring-gai citizens, through their outstanding achievements and services to the community, have been awarded 2015 Queen’s Birthday 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 special Ku-ring-gai citizens and, on behalf of Council, congratulate them on their excellent contributions to Australian society.
Samuel Stuart CLARK AM of Killara, for significant services to the law, through senior roles with professional legal bodies, to strategic reform, and to the rural fire service.
Geoffrey James FOGARTY PSM of St Ives, for outstanding public service to roads and maritime services in New South Wales.
Charles William FREW OAM of Pymble, for service to community health organisations through fundraising roles.
Richard Reynolds MILES OAM of Wahroonga, for service to the community, particularly through roles with education organisations.
Thomas Gordon REID OAM of North Turramurra, for service to the community, and to people with disability.
His Honour Judge Stephen Hugh SCARLETT RFD OAM, resident of Ku-ring-gai, for service to the judiciary, to the law, and to professional organisations.
Stephen James SIMPSON AC of Wahroonga, for eminent service to biological and biomedical science as an educator, researcher and author, particularly in the areas of human nutrition, obesity and metabolic disease, to higher education, and through roles with a range of professional scientific organisations.
On behalf of Council, I congratulate all these award winners on their outstanding achievements.
Ku-ring-gai should be proud that it has so many citizens being recognised at the highest levels for their selfless dedication, commitment and contribution to local, national and international communities.
A. That Council acknowledge the outstanding contribution made by these recipients of 2015 Queen’s Birthday Honours to the Ku-ring-gai community and to the well-being of our society.
B. That the Mayor, on behalf of Council, write to the recipients to congratulate them.
|
Jennifer Anderson Mayor |
|
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 July 2015 |
PT.1 / 23 |
|
|
Item PT.1 |
TM9/07 |
|
26 June 2015 |
Petition
Petition regarding Traffic Congestion and Parking Issues in Kanoona Avenue, Collins and Cowan Roads St Ives - (Thirty-two [32] Signatures)
“We, the undersigned residents of Kanoona Avenue and Cowan Road St Ives, petition Ku-ring-gai Council to review parking and traffic management in our area to address the issues that over the past 2 years, the amount of traffic in our streets have increased to well past its design limitations. The issues we now experience on weekends and many weekdays are:
• Illegal parking too close to corners. This creates difficulty and risk leaving and entering the street;
• Illegal parking partially blocking driveways. Difficult to enter or leave property;
• Amount of traffic. Difficult to enter or leave property and street;
• Road reduced to single lane. Difficult to enter or leave property or street. No street parking for visitors;
• Abandoned shopping trolleys.
These issues appear to be caused by inadequate parking for the St Ives Village Shopping Centre and Village Green.”
That the petition be received and referred to the appropriate Officer of Council for attention.
|
MINUTES OF Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee
HELD ON Thursday, 18 June 2015
Present: |
Ku-ring-gai Council (Councillor Christiane Berlioz, Chairperson) Director Operations (Mr Greg Piconi) Roads & Maritime Services (Ms Kathryn Hawkins) State Member for Ku-ring-gai (Mr Alister Henskens) Items 1 and 2 only Representing Police Local Area Command Kuring-gai (Snr Const Narelle Tomich) Representing Police Local Area Command North Shore (Snr Const Samantha Sholkie) Representing Member for Ku-ring-gai (Mr David Ross) |
|
|
Others Present: |
Two Residents – Representing 165-167 Rosedale Road, St Ives – Item 3 |
|
|
Apologies: |
Representing Member for Davidson (Mr Michael Lane) Manager Traffic and Transport (Mr George Koolik) Traffic Team Leader (Mr Deva Thevaraja) Strategic Transport Engineer (Mr Joseph Piccoli) Representing Bike North (Ms Lyness Beavis) |
The Meeting commenced at 9.05am
DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST
No interest was declared.
CONFIRMATION OF MINUTEs
|
Minutes of Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee
File: CY00022/7
|
|
Meeting held 19 February 2015 Minutes numbered KTC01 to KTC05
|
|
The Committee Recommends:
That Minutes numbered KTC01 to KTC05 were received and confirmed as an accurate record of the proceedings of the meeting. |
GENERAL BUSINESS
KTC09 |
File: TM6/07 Vide: GB.4
|
|
To consider a request by Aqualand Projects Pty Ltd for the temporary closure of Kochia Lane, Lindfield between Lindfield Avenue and Chapman Lane during construction of a multi-storey mixed use development at 23-37 Lindfield Avenue.
|
|
The Committee’s Comments:
The Representative of the Roads & Maritime Services advised that the Traffic Management Plan has not yet been received.
|
|
That Council approve the temporary closure of Kochia Lane, Lindfield, between Lindfield Avenue and Chapman Lane for approximately 27 weeks from July 2015, subject to:
A. The Roads and Maritime Services approving the Traffic Management Plan submitted by Aqualand Project Pty Ltd.
B. No substantial objection being received from adjacent business operators and residents.
C. Aqualand Project Pty Ltd implementing the Traffic Management Plan approved by the Roads and Maritime Services in accordance with Australian Standards. Appropriate detour arrangements as detailed in the Traffic Management Plan be implemented during the entire closure period.
D. That the closure being advertised by Council as required by Section 116 of the Roads Act 1993 and no substantial objection to the proposal which cannot be addressed, being received by the closing date of the advertising.
E. That Aqualand Project Pty Ltd provide and maintain all necessary signs, barricades and all other safety equipment at its expense to properly effect the changed traffic conditions.
F. That Aqualand Projects Ltd submitting a copy of the 20 million dollar Public Liability insurance cover, naming Ku-ring-gai Council as an interested party.
G. That Aqualand Projects Pty Ltd respond in writing to Council, regarding the acceptance of Council’s conditions for the temporary closure of Kochia Lane Lindfield between Lindfield Avenue and Chapman Lane.
|
general discussion
1, Pentecost Avenue, Pymble
The Representative for the Roads & Maritime Services tabled correspondence between the Minister for Roads, Maritime & Freight and the State Member for Ku-ring-gai on speed enforcement and pedestrian crossing issues in Pentecost Avenue, Pymble. The Director Operations advised that he will respond to the Member for Ku-ring-gai on Council’s position on these matters.
2. Warringah Road/Babbage Road, Roseville Chase
The Representative for the Roads & Maritime Services tabled correspondence from the office of the Minister for Roads, Maritime & Freight regarding a bus shelter damaged in recent storms. The Director Operations advised that options will be investigated for replacement of the damaged bus shelter.
The Meeting closed at 9.40am
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 July 2015 |
GB.1 / 30 |
|
|
Item GB.1 |
S02173 |
|
10 February 2015 |
Ku-ring-gai Art Society - Annual Awards Exhibition and Purchase of Art Works
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Purpose of Report
To respond to the resolution of Council on 7 October 2014 requesting a report to Council about the annual purchase of art works from the Ku-ring-gai Art Society (KAS).
Background
At the OMC of 7 October 2014, GB Item 4, Delegation of Authority – Mayor and Deputy Mayor, (amended and moved Crs Malicki/Armstrong), Council resolved as follows:
A: That the Delegations of Authority as outlined in Attachment 1 be granted to the Mayor as amended
B That the Delegations of Authority as outlined in Attachment 1 be granted to the Deputy Mayor as amended
C: That a report (with a copy of Council’s art register) come to Council on the informal practice of the yearly purchase of an artwork by the Mayor, given that many of these artworks have been stored and never displayed. In the meantime, no further artwork be purchased.
Comments
The Ku-ring-gai Art Society (KAS) is celebrating its 50th anniversary on 24 July this year. For at least the past 10 years, the Mayor has been invited to select the winning art work for the Silver Jubilee Trophy from the annual awards exhibition, and also to select an art work from the exhibition for Council to purchase.
The KAS is a non-profit organisation, run by artists for the benefit of local artists and those interested in the arts. Founded in 1965, the KAS has established and maintained a reputation for excellence, attracting artists from a wide spectrum of disciplines, covering both traditional and contemporary two dimensional works in all media.
The principle objectives of the KAS are to foster all branches of the visual arts and to enhance the status of art and artists in the community by providing innovative and up to date activities for artists to advance their talents.
The current practice for the purchase of art works from the KAS by the Mayor is as follows:
1. Council receives an annual invitation from KAS in June about the annual exhibition which is held in July each year
2. Prior to the exhibition period the Mayor is invited to:
- select a prize winning art work for the Silver Jubilee Trophy
- select an art work to be purchased by Council
3. The Mayor attends the awards evening and presents the Silver Jubilee Trophy to the winner of the award
4. The purchased art work becomes the property of Council and is included in Council’s Art Works Register (Attachment A)
The art works that have been purchased from the KAS over the past 10 -15 years are currently on display in the level 3 foyer and throughout the Council administration building in both public and staff areas. Council has a sizeable collection of art works and photographs that have either been purchased or donated to Council over a number of years. This collection is stored in a secure store room on level 3.
integrated planning and reporting
Community, People and Culture
Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective |
Delivery Program Term Achievement |
Operational Plan Task |
A healthy, safe and diverse community that respects our history and celebrates our differences in a vibrant culture of learning
|
Council’s policies, programs and advocacy address the social and health needs of all age groups, reduce disadvantage and address gaps in service provision
|
Proactively collaborate with other organisations to facilitate and host educational, cultural and information programs
|
Governance Matters
There is no policy requiring Council to participate in the Ku-ring-gai Art Society Silver Jubilee Trophy or the annual purchase of art works from the Ku-ring-gai Arts Society.
Risk Management
There are no immediate risks associated with the writing of this report, however, given the long standing association with the Ku-ring-gai Arts Society, there is potential for reputational risk should Council decide to cease the current practice.
Financial Considerations
Council provides a goblet as the prize for the Silver Jubilee Trophy and spends approximately $800.00 annually on the purchase of art works. The funding for the art works comes from the Civic budget which currently has adequate funding for the purchase of art works this financial year.
Social Considerations
Council’s association with the KAS was established over 20 years ago, and has developed to the current practice where Council judges the Silver Jubilee Trophy, provides a goblet as a prize, and purchases an art work with an average value of approximately $800.00 annually.
Council receives recognition through acknowledgement and the use of Council’s logo on all graphic and publicity material associated with the Annual Awards event.
Artists, whose works are purchased by Council, can acknowledge they have an art work in the Ku-ring-gai Council’s corporate art collection, on their CVs.
Environmental Considerations
There are no environmental considerations associated with the writing of this report.
Community Consultation
There has been no community consultation associated with the writing of this report.
Internal Consultation
Staff from Council’s Civic department provided information for inclusion in this report.
Summary
The KAS holds an annual Awards Exhibition of member’s art works each year and Council is the sponsor of one of the awards - the Silver Jubilee Trophy. The Mayor judges this award and also selects an art work from the exhibition to be purchased by Council. The Ku-ring-gai Art Society is celebrating its 50th anniversary in July this year.
Council resolved, in October 2014, to cease the purchase of art works from the KAS and requested a report come to Council about the practice of purchasing art works each year, following a motion from Councillors Malicki and Armstrong.
Council spends approximately $800 each year on art works from local artists through the KAS Annual Awards exhibition. The art works are recorded in Council’s Art Works Register and are on display throughout Council in both public and staff areas.
This report recommends that Council continues the annual purchase art work from the KAS.
A. That Council continues the annual practice of purchasing art work from the Ku-ring-gai Art Society.
|
Janice Bevan Director Community |
|
A1View |
Copy of Public Arts Register as of 06 July 2015 |
|
2015/173005 |
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 July 2015 |
GB.2 / 45 |
|
|
Item GB.2 |
DA0294/14 |
|
1 April 2015 |
development application
Summary Sheet
Report title: |
107 Junction Road, Wahroonga - Demolish Existing Structures and Construct 8 Self-Contained Dwellings over Basement Parking - SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 |
ITEM/AGENDA NO: |
GB.2 |
Application No: |
DA0294/14 |
Property Details: |
107 Junction Road, Wahroonga Lot & DP No: Lot 1 DP 232052 Site area (m2): 2175m2 Zoning: R2 – Low Density Residential |
Ward: |
|
Proposal/Purpose: |
To determine Development Application No. 0294/14 for the demolition of existing structures and construction of eight self-contained dwellings pursuant to SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004.
|
Type of Consent: |
Local |
Applicant: |
Mr Z Deng C/- Boston Blyth Fleming |
Owner: |
Mr Z Deng |
Date Lodged: |
5 August 2014 |
Recommendation: |
Approval
|
Purpose of Report
To determine Development Application No. 0294/14 for the demolition of existing structures and construction of eight self-contained dwellings pursuant of SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004.
integrated planning and reporting
PLACES, SPACES & 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
|
Applications are assessed in accordance with State and local plans |
Assessments are of a high quality, accurate and consider all relevant legislative requirements
|
Executive Summary
Issues |
Floor Space Ratio (Draft Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2013)
|
Submissions |
10 submissions
|
Land & Environment Court |
N/A
|
Recommendation |
Approval
|
|
|
LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS: |
|
|
|
Zoning |
Residential 2(c) |
Permissible under |
SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 |
Relevant legislation |
SEPP 55 SEPP (BASIX) 2004 SREP 20 – Hawkesbury Nepean River KPSO Draft KLEP 2013 Section 94 – Development Contribution Plan SEPP Seniors Living DCP 55 Notification |
Integrated Development
|
No |
History
Pre-DA
20 January 2014 |
PRE0154/13 A Pre-DA consultation took place for a proposal to demolish existing dwelling and construct 8 x 3 bedroom dwellings with basement car park pursuant to with SEPP (Housing for seniors or persons with disability) 2004.
Issues raised included: building footprint, tree removal, parking, waste collection, internal pathways, setbacks, solar access. |
DA History
5 August 2014 |
The Development Application was lodged. |
|
|
15 August 2014 |
The Development Application was notified to owners of surrounding properties for 30 days. |
|
|
12 September 2014 |
A letter was sent to the applicant advising of outstanding issues relating to: - fence details - plant equipment - car parking and traffic management - disabled access - stormwater management - impact assessment - vegetation map - tree removal - landscape planting |
|
|
15 September 2014 |
Notification period ended. |
|
|
7 November 2014 |
Amended plans and additional information was received from the applicant. |
|
|
5 December 2014 |
A letter was sent to the applicant requesting additional information regarding: Engineering - car parking and traffic management - stormwater management Landscaping - tree impacts - landscape plan/tree replenishment - BASIX
|
18 December 2014 |
The Applicant requested additional time to submit requested information. |
|
|
12 March 2015 |
Amended plans and additional information was submitted by the applicant. |
The Site
Site history
The site has historically been used for residential purposes. The site was previously zoned “Residential 2(c)” under the provisions of the Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance (KPSO). On 2 April 2015, Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 was gazetted, rezoning the site to “R2 – Low Density Residential”.
Site description
Visual character study category: |
1920-1945 |
Easements/rights of way: |
Yes - drainage |
Heritage item: |
No |
Heritage conservation area: |
No |
In the vicinity of a heritage item: |
Yes, 158 Eastern Road, Wahroonga |
Bush fire prone land: |
No |
Endangered species: |
Yes – Blue Gum High Forest and Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest |
Urban bushland: |
No |
Contaminated land: |
No |
The site is identified as Lot 1 within Deposited Plan 232052 and is referred to as No. 107 Junction Road, Wahroonga. The site is located on the southern side of the street, slightly west of its intersection with Eastern Road. It is irregular (just off rectangular) in shape and has a total area of 2175m2, with a frontage of 28.87m to Junction Road and a depth of 69 to 70m. The site has a gentle slope of approximately 7% down to Junction Road with the front portion of the site being some 5 metres lower than the rear.
The site currently contains a part single and part two storey dwelling house erected towards the rear of the site, located approximately 37m from the front boundary. There is a swimming pool located between the house and Junction Road.
The site contains a considerable amount of significant vegetation, principally around the boundaries of the property and adjacent to the swimming pool. The site is dominated by numerous trees including species composition characteristic of the Blue Gum High Forest (BGHF) and Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest (STIF) plant communities.
Surrounding development
Development on adjoining properties primarily consists of one and two storey, detached dwelling houses; however, the adjoining property to the west contains an 8 dwelling seniors living development (over two storeys) approved by Council pursuant to SEPP No. 5 in November 2002. At the rear, the site abuts a tennis court ancillary to No. 76 Kintore Street. Two local neighbourhood shopping centres in Hampden Ave and Edgeworth David Ave lie within 600 metres and 2 kilometres radii of the site, respectively.
The Proposal
The proposal, as amended, involves the demolition of the existing dwelling and in-ground swimming pool and construction of eight self-contained dwellings, with basement parking pursuant to SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004.
The self-contained dwellings are configured as follows:
Level 1 Dwelling - 1
Entry, bedroom 1 with ensuite and walk-in wardrobe (WIR), living and dining room, kitchen, laundry cupboard, linen cupboard, bathroom, bedrooms 2 and 3 and balcony.
Level 1 Dwelling - 2
Entry, bedrooms 1, 2 and 3, living and dining room, kitchen, laundry cupboard, linen cupboard, bathroom and balcony.
Level 1 Dwellings – 3 & 4
Entry, bedroom 1 with ensuite and WIR, living and dining room, kitchen, laundry cupboard, linen cupboard, bathroom, bedrooms 2 and 3 and courtyard.
Level 2 Dwelling – 5
Entry, bedroom 1 with ensuite and WIR, living and dining room, kitchen, laundry cupboard, linen cupboard, bathroom, bedrooms 2 and 3 and balcony.
Level 2 Dwelling - 6
Entry, bedrooms 1, 2 and 3, living and dining room, kitchen, laundry cupboard, linen cupboard, bathroom and balcony.
Level 2 Dwellings – 7 & 8
Entry, bedroom 1 with ensuite, living and dining room, kitchen, laundry cupboard, linen cupboard, bathroom, bedrooms 2 and 3 and balcony.
Layout and access
The dwellings are proposed in a single two storey multi-unit flat building with four dwellings on each level separated by a central access corridor. Vehicular access is proposed at the eastern corner of the frontage, utilising the existing cross over and entry leading to the basement car park. A lift accessing the upper floors is provided from the basement. Pedestrian access to the development is provided along the eastern boundary to the foyer. The existing front fence is to be modified to accommodate the new access and located behind the property boundary.
Consultation
Community
In accordance with the notification requirements of Ku-ring-gai Council’s Notification Development Control Plan 55, owners of surrounding properties were given notice of the application. In response, Council received submissions from the following:
1. Ms J F Doyle – 4/105 Junction Road, Wahroonga
2. Mrs H J McLenaghan – 158 Eastern Road, Wahroonga
3. Mr J M Yemma – 103 Junction Road, Wahroonga
4. Mr M W & Mrs E L Gillian – 6/105 Junction Road, Wahroonga
5. Mr H G & Mrs D A Storey – 1/105 Junction Road, Wahroonga
6. Mr A C Peattie – 5/105 Junction Road, Wahroonga
7. Mr I R Hordern – 76 Kintore Street, Wahroonga
8. Mr D W Kingston & Ms B J Greene – 74 Kintore Street, Wahroonga
9. Mrs K A Garcia – 109 Junction Road, Wahroonga
10. Design Collaborative Planning Consultants on behalf of Mr G Cusack and Mrs K Garcia of 109 Junction Road, Wahroonga
The submissions raised the following issues:
Insufficient visitor parking
According to SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004, visitor parking is not required. Notwithstanding, the development proposes 3 visitor spaces. No further parking requirements may be imposed.
Noise, dust, access and safety concerns during construction
Standard construction management conditions are recommended to mitigate any adverse impacts generated during construction (Conditions 9, 10, 42, 46, 50, 55).
Traffic, car parking, basement ventilation and construction detail, driveway and stormwater.
Council’s Development Engineer raised no objection to the proposal, subject to conditions and this is discussed later in the report. Additionally, conditions of consent address these issues (Conditions 32, 33, 34, 79, 80, 90).
The proposal is out of character with area and an overdevelopment of site
The site has an area of 2175m2. The front setback of 26m (minimum) will be similar to that of the existing and adjoining properties and is much greater than the 12m setback required for dwellings on this site under the provisions of Development Control Plan 38. The development has a FSR of 0.5:1 which complies with SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 and also complies with the relevant height controls. The bulk and scale of the development is considered acceptable.
Loss of privacy and amenity
The setback to the rear boundary is 12.5m to Level 1 and 8.7m to Level 2. Windows located in the rear elevation serve bedrooms, which are used less frequently than living areas. The side setbacks to the proposed development are 5.4m to the west and 6.7m to the east. Despite this, a condition of consent requires that privacy screens be fixed to the entire length of the western elevation of the balcony to Unit 7 and to the entire length of the eastern elevation of the balcony to Unit 8 to prevent direct overlooking of neighbouring properties and maintain neighbour amenity (Condition 37).
Waste management and amenity impacts
The garbage storage area is located within the basement. Council’s Development Engineer is satisfied with the method of waste management and that the proposal will not result in unreasonable amenity impacts in this regard.
Inadequate plans with a non-complying development
The proposal is compliant with every applicable planning control. The DA is accompanied by adequate plans and supporting documentation in relation to the site and the specifics of the proposed development.
Threat to existing vegetation
Council’s Landscape Assessment Officer and Ecological Assessment Officer have not raised any objection to the proposal, subject to conditions and this aspect is discussed later in the report. Additionally, conditions of consent will address any potential issues (Conditions 13 and 26).
Decrease in surrounding property values
Impact on property values is not a matter for consideration under Section 79(c) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act.
Difficulty for residents to access public transport
Traffic lights are located at the intersection of Junction Rd and Eastern Rd to enable safe access to the two nearest bus stops. From the subject site the footpaths have complying gradients to these bus stops. The application satisfies the requirements of SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 in this regard.
Overshadowing and solar access
Shadow diagrams provided by the applicant show that overshadowing impact on the adjoining areas of private open space are minimised due to the predominantly north-south orientation of the subject site. The application is satisfactory in this regard.
Impacts on the heritage item at 158 Eastern Rd
Council’s Heritage Advisor has reviewed the proposal and concludes that the development does not result in any unreasonable impacts on the heritage item at 158 Eastern Rd.
Accessibility of the units for disabled persons
Accessible units are provided in accordance with the controls of SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004. An access report by a access consultant was also provided. In addition, Condition 75 requires that the development be constructed in accordance with the relevant Australian Standards for disabled access.
Occupancy of the development by seniors
Occupancy of the development is restricted to seniors or people with a disability by a condition of consent (Condition 87).
Building in rear 25% setback
Single storey development is permitted in the rear 25% of the site by SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004. The proposal is satisfactory in this regard.
Within Council
Engineering
Council’s Development Engineer commented on the proposal as follows:
“Stormwater disposal
The design shows the collection and discharge of all roof water to a combined belowground on-site detention tank (OSD) and retention tank (OSR) of 24m3 and 9,000L, respectively ,located beneath the front eastern side landscaped area. The stormwater runoff from the OSD/OSR facility is to be directed to the existing kerb inlet pit in Junction Road via a 225mm pipe.
A revised BASIX Certificate has been submitted, with the water commitments not requiring rainwater retention. Since a BASIX water score of 40 was achieved, no further retention requirements can be imposed. The maximum volume reduction for rainwater reuse of 25% as per Section 6.7.2c)(iii) of Council’s Water Management Development Control Plan No.47 has been provided. The reuse will be plumbed to toilets, laundry use and outdoor irrigation purposes as noted by the stormwater plans.
A pump-out system with storage capacity of 6.5m3 has been provided within the basement carpark to drain the basement subsoil drainage. It has been designed to have the rising main discharge to a stormwater pit at the front boundary containing an ‘Enviropod’ filter basket, which is acceptable. The pump-out tank has been sized in accordance with Section 5.7.9 of the Water Management Development Control Plan No. 47.
Water quality measures have been implemented into the design and demonstrate that stormwater can be managed efficiently on-site and the runoff controlled to assist in the maintenance of stream flow and the reduction in gross pollutants.
A water balance model was developed to reflect the water transportation process. The analysis also included a water quality model (MUSIC Modelling) to investigate stormwater runoff quality from the subject site. The results of the post-development nutrient control measures have been achieved when compared to the stormwater treatment standards / targets outlined in Section 8.3.1 of the Water Management DCP No. 47
The applicant in this instance has provided a proprietary pollution chamber Stormwater360 ‘StormFilter’ located within a stormwater pit under the front entry path prior to connection into Council’s street drainage system. The stormwater filtering system is acceptable.
The site is affected by a drainage easement across the front corner. The proposed building is sufficiently set back from the easement and the levels of the property at the front are low enough that the building is unlikely to be within any overland flowpath.
The design engineer has provided a stormwater pit, with a 900mm wide grass swale, along the rear boundary of the site presumably to capture the surface flow from the upstream catchment as well the tennis court from the neighbouring site. The overland flow is controlled in a satisfactory manner without impacting the proposed development.
Stormwater Management Plans Drawing No’s. C142434 C1C-& C2C dated 28 January 2015 prepared by ADC Design Group Pty Ltd and accompanying documentation including specification and plans prepared by Stormwater360 Australia and has been referenced as part of Condition 1.
Traffic generation
According to the traffic generation rates nominated by the RMS ‘Guide to Traffic Generating Development – Technical Direction (May 2013)’ the development would generate 3 peak hour vehicle trips (AM and PM). If compared to the existing dwelling on the site being 1 vtph and discounted from the proposed traffic generation this would result in 2 additional vtph during peak periods which is considered to be a very low traffic generation. The projected increase in traffic activity is minimal and would not have any unacceptable traffic implications in terms of road network capacity.
Vehicle access and accommodation arrangements
According to the SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004, Schedule 3, Clause 50 (h) and 38(b), the parking requirements to the 8 seniors living dwelling houses (8 x 3 bedrooms) are as follows:
Parking for self-contained dwellings |
Compliance (Y /N) |
0.5 car spaces for each bedroom where the development application is made by a person other than a social housing provider, or 1 car space for each 5 dwellings where the development application is made by, or is made by a person jointly with, a social housing provider. |
Yes |
8x 3 bedrooms = 24 x 0.5 = 12 spaces
According to the SEPP requirements above, the proposal needs 12 resident spaces and 0 visitors. The SEPP does not require any visitor parking.
The development seeks to provide 15 off-street parking spaces including 1 tandem parking space and 3 visitor parking spaces.
Private Car Accommodation |
Compliance (Y /N) |
Car parking spaces must comply with the requirements for parking for persons with a disability set out in AS 2890 , and 5% of the total number of car parking spaces (or at least one space if there are fewer than 20 spaces) must be designed to enable the width of the spaces to be increased to 3.8 metres. |
Yes |
SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 requires the parking spaces to be designed to AS 2890.1:1993 and Schedule 3, Clause 5(a) of the Housing for Seniors Policy. The parking space is compliant with 6 dwellings being allocated with at least one accessible car parking space with a minimum width of 3.8m wide. This is well in excess of the minimum requirements.
Vehicle access to the car parking facility is to be provided via a new 4.1m wide entry / exit driveway from Junction Road with the widening of the internal driveway acting as a passing area to allow cars entering and exiting simultaneously. The proposed location of the new driveway being in the vicinity of the existing driveway provides satisfactory sight distance as per the requirements of AS2890.1. The sightline is also assisted with the front columns and front fence being set back. It will be conditioned that the footings of the front wall is not to impact on Council’s drainage pipeline within the easement. The survey plan does not accurately show the exact location of the pipe.
The access ramp, driveway widths, driveway gradients and manoeuvring into and out of the parking bays comply with Australian Standard 2890.1 (2004) “Off-Street car parking” and Council’s driveway criteria.
The design is endorsed by the access consultant and confirms compliance with AS1428.1, DDA Transport Standards and Clause 26 of SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004.
Waste collection
The development allows a garbage truck to enter and depart the garbage/room recycle storage area located within the basement. The swept paths to access the waste collection area have been provided within the Appendix of the report using Council’s Waste Collection Vehicle (6.3m Mitsubishi Canter) which is compliant. A longitudinal section has also been submitted demonstrating that a clear head height of 2.6m has been provided on the access ramp and also throughout the basement carpark. The turning manoeuvrability and driveway grade of 20% for the small waste collection vehicle complies with Council’s DCP No.40.
The sizing of the garbage collection room is adequate to provide 8x240L bins for waste, paper and recycling to satisfy the minimum bin requirements.
Construction management
Given the site constraints of the riparian corridor and tree protection measures, swept paths have been depicted on an Environmental site management plan. The plan shows a medium rigid vehicle (MRV) entering and exiting the site in a forward direction with the site access to be widened temporarily to 5m for truck access during the construction period. The ESMP will however need to be amended to show construction vehicles accessing the site access with a left in and left out in a forward direction.
It will be conditioned that a detailed construction traffic management plan (CTMP) and including a traffic control plan (TCP) for the demolition, excavation and construction stages must be submitted for review by Council Engineers prior to the commencement of any works on site.
Impacts on Council infrastructure
The existing footpath along the site frontage is in a satisfactory condition and complies with Clause 26(1) and (2) of SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 for the accessible footpath to the bus stop. A bus stop is located along the site frontage (eastern side) and approximately 200 metres on the opposite side of Junction Road. The bus route travels from Hornsby to Turramurra and Macquarie Shopping Centres and the railway stations.
A survey plan of the accessible path of travel to the bus stop in both directions is not required given that a there is an existing Seniors Living development to the east of the site (No. 105 Junction Road) which is utilising this accessible path.
The applicant’s access consultant confirms that the development is compliant with Clause 26 and 38 of SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004.
Geotechnical investigation
A geotechnical report has been submitted to assess the subsurface conditions and provide preliminary recommendations for the excavation of the basement.
The proposed development comprises one level of basement car parking that will require excavation approximately 4m in depth. As part of the investigation procedure, three boreholes were drilled to depths of 2.6m to 4.8m. The boreholes indicated that the underlying clay appeared to be residual in origin at depths of 2.2m to 4m to completely weathered sandstone. No groundwater was encountered.
The geotechnical recommendations regarding excavation support, vibration monitoring, dilapidation reporting and foundation design shall be carried out during construction as specified within the report.
Recommendation
From an engineering perspective, there are no objections to this application, subject to conditions”.
Landscaping
Council’s Landscape and Tree Assessment Officer commented on the proposal as follows:
“Tree impacts
Previous concerns regarding tree impacts have been satisfactorily resolved with the amended stormwater management plans and arboricultural impact assessment report.
Landscape plan/tree replenishment
Satisfactory. Any amendments have been conditioned. (Condition 60)
Stormwater plan
Satisfactory on landscape grounds.
BASIX
The following landscape areas have been identified within BASIX certificate 537335M_03 submitted with the application:
Common area lawn: 526m2
Common area garden: 621m2
Unit 3 Area of garden and lawn: 30m2
Unit 4 Area of garden and lawn: 11.6m2
The assessing landscape officer is in agreement that the proposed landscape areas are consistent with the BASIX certificate.
SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004
Deep soil
SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 defines deep soil zones as ‘to that part of the site that is not built upon, paved or otherwise sealed…….on an area of not less than 15% of the area of the site. Two thirds of the deep soil zone should preferably be located at the rear of the site and each area forming part of the zone should have a minimum dimension of 3m’.
By the applicant’s calculations the development will result in a deep soil zone of 1080sqm/49.7% of site area with 477sqm/22% located at the rear, exceeding SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 requirements. The assessing Landscape Officer is satisfied that the application is in compliance with SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004.
Conclusion
The application is acceptable from a landscape and tree assessment perspective, subject to conditions”.
Ecology
Council’s Ecological Assessment Officer commented on the proposal as follows:
“The site contains Blue Gum High Forest (BGHF) and Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest (STIF), which are Endangered ecological communities listed under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995.
The BGHF is comprised of a canopy dominated by Eucalyptus saligna (Sydney Blue Gum) & Syncarpia glomulifera (Sydney Turpentine). One sub-canopy tree species Pittosporum undulatum (Sweet Pittosporum) was also identified. No detailed flora survey investigation was undertaken at the time of the site inspection, however, it was noted that residual native grasses and herbs species occurred within the canopy spread of some of the native canopy trees.
The native vegetation within the site which occurs primarily within the frontage and along the western boundary of the site has been mapped as an area of ‘biodiversity significance’ under the KLEP 218 (2013). The site is mapped as containing a category 3a watercourse under the KLEP 218 (2013).
Ecological assessment
The development proposes the removal of T28 Pittosporum undulatum a characteristic trees species of the onsite BGHF community; the proposal will also affect other trees species characteristic of the onsite BGHF community.
Landscape services has provided comment in regard to impacts upon trees which have not been considered in the arborist report.
Ecological assessment
An impact assessment (7-part test) has been prepared to assess the ecological impacts of the development upon the endangered onsite STIF & BGHF communities in accordance with section 5a of the Environmental Planning Assessment Act 1979.
The impact assessments for STIF & BGHF have been prepared in accordance with the Threatened species assessment guidelines. The following conclusion of the impact assessments below is supported:
“Taking into account the modified nature of the habitats on the site and the very simplified composition of the community, it is considered that the proposed development will not have a significant impact on the Endangered Ecological Communities - Sydney Turpentine lronbark Forest & Blue Gum High Forest”.
Conclusion
The development application is therefore acceptable on ecological grounds”.
Heritage
Council’s Heritage Advisor commented on the proposal as follows:
Heritage status
The site is located adjacent, to the rear, of a heritage item, No 158 Eastern Road, listed on the Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance.
Compliance with Council’s Development Controls
Clause 61D(5) allows Council to consider the impacts of new development in the vicinity of a heritage item.
Heritage significance
No. 158 Eastern Road was identified in the Moore, Pike & Others, Municipality of Ku-ring-gai Heritage Study, 1987.
Background
The nearby area is characterised by other similar developments and there is no basic heritage objection to the proposed development. It is noted that the rear of the proposed development is set back a minimum of 12.6m from the boundary with the heritage item and is set down into the site. The first floor component is further set back and achieves a minimum setback of 16.4m. The bulk of trees in this area will be retained. Retention of existing trees will assist in mitigating any heritage impacts the proposed development may have on the adjoining item. The part of the item that adjoins the subject site contains a pool and cabana building. It is unlikely that any trees on the draft item would be affected by the proposed development. Visual impacts are likely to be minimised.
Heritage Impact Statement
The applicant has included a Heritage Impact Statement (HIS) prepared by JCIS Consultants with the application. The HIS provides the following statements.
“…there is, in fact, no historical evidence that the site (No. 107 Junction Road)
was used for anything other than a garden/kitchen garden/market garden and later, a residence. The 1943 aerial shows that the study area was at that time simply an orchard, with cultivation on the upper levels of the site but, significantly, no buildings are visible on the site. It would seem likely that, if the area had been used as a farm for any length of time, the farm buildings were located off site and possibly near Wendover (No. 158 Eastern Road) (as it was then) or Valenside (No. 160 Eastern Road).
…The distance from the rear fence of No. 107 Junction Road, in straight line, to the nearest corner of the house at No.158 Eastern Road is approximately 50m; and mature trees in the garden of Wendover also screen the house from the view of No. 107 Junction Road. The distance from the rear of the proposed building at 107 Junction Road will be approximately 12.5m.
The current proposal will not impact on the heritage significance of the physical fabric of the building Wendover. No. 107 Junction Road is not adjacent to Wendover other than the shared section of rear boundary. The distance from the rear fence of No. 107 Junction Road to the nearest corner of the house at Wendover is approximately 50m. The existing rear fence of 107 Junction Road, which is quite high, currently screens the swimming pool and the paved area around it at Wendover from view.
It should be noted that neither the swimming pool or tennis court at Wendover relate to the reasons for heritage listing and are certainly reasonably recent additions to the garden- or at least have been installed since 1943, as the aerial of the study area shows that the site of the current tennis court and swimming pool were areas of lawn fringed with trees and shrubs. As a result, there will be no impact by the current proposal on the heritage status the Wendover”.
Overall, JCIS Consultants has assessed the proposed works at 107 Junction Road, Wahroonga as having no impact on the heritage significance of Wendover, 158 Eastern Road.
In regard to the significance of any potential archaeological remains, the HIS provides the following statement.
It should be noted that items such as ‘wells, remnants of former buildings or structures, farm, equipment, burials, rubbish deposits’ may in any case be considered ‘works’ rather than ‘relics’ under the Heritage Act 1977 and, therefore, not require a Permit under Section 140 of that Act to be applied for.
Comments
The proposal is for a common contemporary residential form, which is generally compatible with surrounding development in terms of scale, external form and materials/finishes. The upper floor would be set back from the rear elevation adjacent to the common boundary with the heritage item. The impacts on the setting of the heritage item would be small and acceptable.
The development application documentation includes a reference to the replacement of the front (brick) fence along Junction Road with a new fence but no details to provide an assessment. The Statement of Environmental Effects states that ‘the front boundary fence is to be retained modified to remove any encroachment onto the public road reserve as indicated on the site plan.’ As the site is not in a HCA and the adjacent heritage item is located at the rear (in a battleaxe allotment) there are no heritage concerns. The new fence should be compatible with established front fencing in the street and consistent with the aims and objectives for the residential zones in the KPSO.
Conclusion
The development application is acceptable on heritage grounds.
Building
Council’s Building Services Officer commented on the proposal as follows:
Class 2 building and Class 7a basement carpark
The proposed building design in general complies with the Building code of Australia (BCA) requirements. A detailed BCA assessment will be undertaken by the Principal Certifying Authority at the construction certificate stage. The application is supported on Building grounds subject to conditions (Conditions 41 and 86).
Outside Council
The application did not require any external referrals.
Statutory Provisions
Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act)
The proposal is “Local Development” under Part 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 (EP&A Act) and requires development consent pursuant to SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004.
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land (SEPP 55)
The provisions of SEPP 55 require Council to consider the potential for a site to be contaminated. The subject site has a history of residential use and, as such, it is unlikely to contain any contamination and further investigation is not warranted in this case.
Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 – Hawkesbury-Nepean River (SREP 20)
SREP 20 applies to land within the catchment of the Hawkesbury Nepean River. The general aim of the plan is to ensure that development and future land uses within the catchment are considered in a regional context. The plan includes strategies for the assessment of development in relation to water quality and quantity, scenic quality, aquaculture, recreation and tourism. The proposed development is considered to achieve the relevant aims under this policy.
State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004 (BASIX)
A valid BASIX certificate has been submitted with the amended application. The application documentation is consistent with the commitments identified in the BASIX certificate.
State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 (SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004)
The Aims of the policy are contained within Clause 2 as follows:
(1) This policy aims to encourage the provision of housing (including residential care facilities) that will:
(a) Increase the supply and diversity of residences that meet the needs of seniors or people with a disability, and
(b) Make efficient use of existing infrastructure and services, and
(c) Be of good design.
(2) These aims will be achieved by:
(a) Setting aside local planning controls that would prevent the development of housing for seniors or people with a disability that meets the development criteria and standards specified in this policy, and
(b) Setting out design principles that should be followed to achieve built from that responds to the characteristics of its site and form, and
(c) Ensuring that applicants provide support services for seniors or people with a disability for developments on land zoned primarily for urban purposes.
Clause 5 (3) of SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 stipulates that, where inconsistencies occur with another Environmental Planning Instrument (EPI), SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 prevails to the extent of the inconsistency. It is noted that the subject development type would otherwise be a prohibited use within the Residential 2(c) zoning of the Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance and within the R2 – Low Density Residential zoning of Draft Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2013, but, is permitted by virtue of Clause 4 “Land to which this policy applies” of SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004.
State Environmental Planning Policy (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 Compliance Table.
CLAUSE |
PROPOSED |
COMPLIES |
4 - Land to which Policy applies
|
Residential 2(c) |
YES |
13 - Seniors housing Definitions and categories: In-fill self-care housing |
Proposal meets the definition of in-fill self-care housing |
YES |
18 - Restrictions on occupation of seniors housing Development only to be used for the accommodation of seniors or people who have a disability or people that live with and staff that assist the above mentioned occupants. |
Yes -subject to condition of consent and covenant on title deed (Conditions 75 and 87). |
YES |
21 - Subdivision |
No subdivision proposed |
NA |
26 - Location and access to facilities Requires that Council must not consent to a development application made pursuant to this chapter unless satisfied by written evidence of certain site related requirements have been met. |
Bus stop located directly out front of site and another located within 100m of the site at the corner of Junction Rd and Eastern Rd. 1:14 gradients achievable on public domain.
Access to shops, banks, other retail and commercial services, community services and the practice of a general medical practitioner. |
YES |
27 - Bush fire prone land |
The site is not bushfire prone |
N/A |
28 - Water and sewer Council must not consent to a development application unless satisfied by written evidence that the housing will be connected to a reticulated water system and have adequate facilities for the removal or disposal of sewerage. |
The site has access to both mains water and sewer (Condition 82). |
YES |
29 – Site compatibility criteria The consent authority, must consider the proposed development against Clauses 25(5)(b)(i), (iii) & (v) of the SEPP. |
The proposed application does not result in unacceptable environmental and amenity impacts. |
YES |
30 - Site analysis
|
A site analysis plan has been submitted in accordance with the SEPP. |
YES
|
31 - Urban design guidelines |
A review of the plans confirms that the proposal complies with the Urban Design Guidelines. |
YES |
32 – Design of residential development Consent must not be granted unless Council is satisfied that adequate regard has been given to the principles set out in Division 2. |
The application complies with the design principals of neighbourhood amenity and streetscape, visual and acoustic privacy, solar access and design for climate, stormwater, crime prevention, accessibility and waste management. |
YES |
33 - Neighbourhood amenity and streetscape
Maintain reasonable neighbourhood amenity and appropriate residential character. Retain, complement and sensitively harmonise with any heritage conservation areas in the vicinity and any relevant heritage items that are identified in a local environmental plan. Retain, wherever reasonable, major existing trees. Be designed so that the front building of the development is set back in sympathy, but not necessarily the same as, the existing building line. |
The proposal will have setbacks characteristic of the area and retains significant vegetation at the site frontage. The proposal will result in satisfactory impacts on adjoining properties and is not located within a heritage conservation area (Condition 91). |
YES |
34 - Visual and acoustic privacy |
The siting of the dwellings, setbacks and screening ensures adequate privacy between dwellings and adjoining properties. Bedrooms have been removed from the driveway location as far as possible and have minimised windows overlooking the driveway area. Noise levels resulting from vehicles within habitable rooms can be conditioned to comply with Australian Standards (Conditions 28, 37 and 89). |
YES |
35 - Solar access and design for climate |
The development provides for all dwellings that will achieve the specified requirements.
|
YES |
36 - Stormwater |
Council’s Engineer has determined stormwater disposal as satisfactory (Conditions 33 and 79). |
YES |
37 - Crime prevention |
Observation from dwelling entries to the approaches is achieved through the use of windows without the need to open the door. |
YES |
38 -Accessibility |
An access report has been submitted confirming compliance (Condition 24). |
YES |
39 - Waste management |
Council’s Engineer has determined waste collection is satisfactory (Condition 27). |
YES |
40 - Development standards A consent authority must not consent to a development application made pursuant to this chapter unless the proposed development complies with the standards specified in this clause. |
|
|
Site size – minimum 1000m² |
2175m² |
YES |
Site frontage – minimum 20m when measured at the building line |
33.915m |
YES |
Height - Maximum 8 metres (ground to ceiling) |
7m |
YES |
Maximum 2 storeys |
The proposal is a maximum of 2 storeys |
YES |
Maximum 1 storey in rear 25% of site |
Maximum of 1 storey located within rear 25% area of the site |
YES |
Part 7
|
|
|
50 - Standards that cannot be used to refuse development consent for self-contained dwellings. |
|
|
50(a) (building height) Height to be less than 8m |
7m
|
YES |
50(b) (density and scale) Max FSR of 0.5:1
|
0.5:1
|
YES |
50(c) (landscaped area) Minimum 30% of the site to be landscape area
|
1176.3m² or 54% |
YES |
50(d) (deep soil zones) 15% site area with minimum dimension of 3m. |
901.2m² or 41.4%
416m2 or 19% in rear setback |
YES |
50(e) (solar access) Min 70% receives minimum 3 hours direct sunlight between 9am-3pm in mid-winter. |
All dwellings will receive at least 3 hours on June 21 achieve compliance |
YES |
50(f) (private open space) Ground floor dwelling – not less than 15m² (with one 3m x 3m area) Any other dwelling – not less than 10m² (or 6m² for 1 bed), not less than 2m x 2m and access from living area
|
All dwellings private open space meet/exceed the requirements of the SEPP. |
YES |
50(h) (parking) 0.5 spaces per bedroom (24 bedrooms proposed, requires 12 spaces |
12 resident spaces proposed 3 visitor spaces proposed (Condition 90). |
YES |
Schedule 3 (standards concerning accessibility and useability for hostels and self-contained dwellings)
Clause 41 states that Council must not consent to a development application for self-care dwellings unless it complies with the standards listed in Schedule 3. The following assessment is provided against Schedule 3: |
|
|
Part 1 2. Siting standards: 100% of dwellings to have wheelchair access to public road or internal road if site gradient is less than 1:10. |
YES |
YES |
Wheelchair access to be available to all common areas and facilities. |
YES (Condition 24) |
YES |
3. Security: Pathway lighting must be designed and located to avoid glare. |
YES (Condition 21) |
YES
|
4. Letterboxes: Must be lockable and situated on a hard standing area and be wheelchair accessible. |
Wheelchair accessible letter boxes proposed at the access (adjacent to the pedestrian access gate from Junction Rd). |
YES |
5. Private car accommodation: Car parking spaces to comply with: (a) disability requirements of AS2890 (b) 5% of spaces capable of being widened to 3.8m (c) Garage to have power operated doors. |
On-site car parking arrangements satisfactory, refer comments by Council’s Development Engineer (Condition 32). |
YES |
6. Accessible entry: Every entry must: · not have a slope that exceeds 1:40 · comply with clauses 4.3.1 & 4.3.2 of AS 4299 · have entry hardware which complies with AS 1428. |
YES |
YES
|
7. Interior general: · internal doors must have a clearance of 800mm · internal corridors must have a width of at least 1000mm · the width at internal door approaches must be at least 1200mm. |
YES (Condition 70) |
YES
|
8. Bedroom: At least one bedroom within the dwelling must have: · an area sufficient to accommodate a wardrobe and a queen sized bed, with an area at least 1200mm wide at the foot of the bed 2 double general power outlets adjacent to the head of the bed · 1 general power outlet on the wall opposite the bed · a telephone outlet and power outlet next to the bed on the side closest to the door · a potential illumination of 300 lux. |
YES (Condition 70) |
YES
|
9. Bathroom: A bathroom must have: • an area that complies with AS 1428 • a slip resistant floor • a that complies with AS 1428. the recess shall incorporate the following: - the ability to provide a grab rail - can accommodate a hand held shower on a slider rail - can accommodate a folding seat • a double power outlet beside the mirror. |
YES (Condition 70) |
YES
|
10. Toilet: A dwelling must have a toilet: • that is a visitable toilet in accordance with AS4299.
|
YES |
YES
|
11. Surface finishes: Balconies and external paved areas must have slip-resistant surfaces. |
YES (Condition 70) |
YES
|
12. Doors: Door hardware provided for opening doors must be provided in accordance with AS4299. |
YES |
YES
|
13. Ancillary items: Switches and power points must be provided in accordance with AS4299. |
YES |
YES
|
Part 2 15. Living/dining room: A living room in a self-contained dwelling must have: · a circulation space of at least 2250mm in diameter and as set out in clause 4.7 of AS 4299 · a telephone adjacent to a general power outlet · a potential illumination level of 300 lux. |
YES (Condition 70) |
YES
|
16. Kitchen: A kitchen in a self-contained dwelling must have: · a circulation space in accordance with AS4299 · a width at door approaches of 1200mm · a tap set that is located within 300mm of the front of the sink and comprises of a lever type mixing tap · a thermostatic mixing valve for the hot water outlet · a cook top with either front or side controls which have a raised cross bar. The stove is also to be provided with an isolating switch · a work surface adjacent to the cook top which is at the same height and at least 800mm in length · an oven that is located adjacent to a work surface the height of which can be adjusted · “D” pull cupboard handles · General power outlets at least one is a double outlet within 300mm of the front of a work surface and one which is for a refrigerator which can be readily accessed once installed. |
YES (Condition 70) |
YES
|
18. Lifts in multi storey buildings: Lift must comply with clause E3.6 of the Building Code of Australia |
YES (Condition 75) |
YES |
19. Laundry: A self-contained dwelling must have a laundry which: • a door width of 1300mm • has provision for a washing machine • has the provision for the installation of a clothes dryer • has a clear space in front of appliances of 1300mm • has a slip resistant floor surface • has an accessible path of travel to any external clothes line. |
YES (Condition 70) |
YES
|
20. Storage: A self-contained dwelling must be provided with a linen cupboard: • that is at least 600mm wide • has adjustable shelving. |
YES (Condition 70) |
YES
|
21. Garbage: A garbage storage area must be provided in an accessible location. |
YES (Condition 70) |
YES |
The proposal is fully compliant with the provisions of the SEPP.
Local Content (LEP, KPSO, etc)
Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance (KPSO)
The KPSO is a planning scheme ordinance originally made under the Local Government 1919 (LG Act) and transferred from the LG Act under Schedule 6 of the EP&A Act as transitional arrangements that continue to be in force.
Like an Environmental Planning Instrument (EPI) made under Part 3 of the EP&A Act, the KPSO also performs the purpose of environmental planning within each LGA. This report has considered the following provisions of the KPSO:
Zoning and permissibility:
The site is zoned Residential 2(c) in the KPSO. As noted previously within this report, the proposal is a permitted land use by virtue of Clause 5 (3) of SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004.
The following clauses are deemed relevant to the proposal:
Schedule 9 aims and objectives for residential zones:
The development: (i) provides satisfactory levels of solar access & privacy to surrounding properties; (ii) is of a bulk, scale and design, characteristic of the area; (iii) maintains adequate levels of soft landscaping; (iv) provides suitable egress/ingress for vehicles; and (v) maintains the landscape quality of the municipality. Consequently, the aims and objectives for residential development as outlined by Schedule 9 have been satisfied.
The proposed development meets the zone objectives as it is facilitating a community need to provide housing for seniors or people with a disability and as the built form is considered to be characteristic of surrounding development within Junction Road and Wahroonga generally.
Clause 38B – Services
Clause 38B states that consent must not be issued to the carrying out of development on land unless access to a water supply, drainage and a sewerage system will be available. The site is connected to the sewer system and reticulated water is provided.
Draft Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2013
The Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 was gazetted by the Minister for Planning on 5 March 2015, coming into operation on 2 April 2015. The purpose of the LEP is to replace the KPSO with in LEP version consistent with the Department of Planning’s standard template.
The effect of the LEP on this application is somewhat limited as a consequence of Clause 1.8 which states:
1.8A Savings provision relating to development applications
If a development application has been made before the commencement of this Plan in relation to land which this Plan applies and the application has not been finally determined before that commencement, the application must be determined as if this Plan has not commenced.
Note: However, under Division 4B of Part 2 of the Act, a development application may be made for consent to carry out development that may only be carried out if the environmental planning instrument applying to the relevant development is appropriately amended or if a new instrument, including an appropriate principal environmental planning instrument, is made, and the consent authority may consider the application. The Division requires public notice of the development application and the draft environmental planning instrument allowing the development at the same time, or as closely together as is practicable.
The effect of this is that, as the application was made prior to the gazettal of the LEP, it is to be determined as if the LEP had not commenced, thus deferring assessment of the application to the KPSO.
However, the Court of Appeal has ruled that despite Clause 1.8A, it is necessary to consider the development against draft instruments as at the time the application was lodged, it was a prescribed matter for consideration.
When exhibited, the draft Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2013 essentially sought to convert the controls of the KPSO into a format and structure consistent with the Department of Planning and Infrastructure’s Standard Instrument template.
Zoning and permissibility:
The site is proposed to be zoned R2 – Low Density Residential in the draft LEP. As noted previously within this report, the proposal is a permitted land use by virtue of Clause 5 (3) of SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004.
Residential zone objectives:
· to provide for the housing needs of the community within a low density residential environment.
· to enable other land uses that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents.
· to provide housing that is compatible with the existing environmental and built character of Ku-ring-gai.
The proposed development meets the zone objectives within the draft LEP as it is facilitating a community need in providing housing for seniors or people with a disability and as the built form is considered to be characteristic of surrounding development within Junction Road and Wahroonga generally.
The following development standards are deemed relevant to the proposal:
Development standards:
Development standard |
Proposed |
Complies |
Building height: 9.5m |
6.7m |
YES |
Floor space ratio: 0.3:1 |
0.5:1 |
N/A |
Clause 4.4 – Floor space ratio
The proposal exceeds the maximum specified floor space ratio for the R2 – Low Density Residential zoning. Clause 5(3) of SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 stipulates that where any inconsistencies occur between Environmental Planning Instruments, the SEPP will prevail. SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 further indicates that a proposal cannot be refused in relation to floor space should the development not exceed 0.5:1. The FSR standard within the KPSO therefore does not apply and the proposal meets the FSR provisions of SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004.
Clause 5.9 – Preservation of trees or vegetation
Council’s Landscape and Tree Assessment Officer and Council’s Ecological Assessment Officer are satisfied with the proposal in terms of landscaping. It is noted that the proposed tree removal, deep soil and tree replenishment are satisfactory, subject to conditions.
Clause 6.9 – Earthworks
The proposed development will not restrict the existing or future use of the site, adversely impact neighbouring amenity, nor the quality of the water table or disturb any known relics. The proposal is considered to be satisfactory in this respect.
Clause 6.10 - Stormwater and water sensitive urban design
Council’s Development Engineer is satisfied that the proposed development has been designed to control stormwater run-off as per Council’s requirements, subject to conditions.
Policy Provisions (DCPs, Council policies, strategies and management plans)
Development Control Plan No. 31 Access
The aim of DCP 31 is to ensure access for all to public buildings, community facilities and new developments, excluding dwelling houses and dual occupancies but including all buildings and facilities owned or leased by Council and to ensure that people with a disability have equal access to employment opportunities by way of affording access to facilities, services and opportunities to meet their specific needs.
The provisions of SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 override Council’s controls with regard to accessibility. The proposed development complies with the requirements of the SEPP and is acceptable in this regard.
Development Control Plan No. 40 - Construction and Demolition Waste Management
The key objectives of this DCP are to encourage building design and construction techniques which will minimise waste generation, implement the principles of the waste hierarchy of avoiding, reusing and recycling building and construction materials, and commercial waste, minimise the environmental impacts of waste, promote the principles of ecologically sustainable development, meet Council's responsibilities in relation to the Northern Sydney Regional Waste Plan and assist in achieving the Federal and State Government's waste minimisation targets.
A waste management plan, demonstrating compliance with the requirements of the DCP, has been submitted and is acceptable.
Development Control Plan No.47 - Water Management
The proposed development has been assessed against DCP47 and complies with all relevant provisions.
Section 94 Development Contributions Plan 2010
The development attracts a section 94 contribution of $69,742.21 which is required to be paid prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate (Condition 39).
Likely Impacts
The likely impacts of the development have been considered within this report are deemed to be acceptable, subject to conditions.
Suitability of the Site
The site is suitable for the proposed development.
Public Interest
The proposal is considered to be in the public interest.
Conclusion
Having regard to the provisions of section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the proposed development is considered to be satisfactory.
That Council, as the consent authority, grant development consent to DA0294/14 for the demolition of existing structures and construction of eight self-contained dwellings pursuant to SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004 on land at 107 Junction Road, Wahroonga for a period of two (2) years from the date of the Notice of Determination, subject to the following conditions:
Conditions that identify approved plans:
1. Approved architectural plans and documentation (new development)
The development must be carried out in accordance with the following plans and documentation listed below and endorsed with Council’s stamp, except where amended by other conditions of this consent:
Reason: To ensure that the development is in accordance with the determination.
2. Inconsistency between documents
In the event of any inconsistency between conditions of this consent and the drawings/documents referred to above, the conditions of this consent prevail.
Reason: To ensure that the development is in accordance with the determination.
3. Approved landscape plans
Landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the following landscape plan(s), listed below and endorsed with Council’s stamp, except where amended by other conditions of this consent:
Reason: To ensure that the development is in accordance with the determination.
Conditions to be satisfied prior to demolition, excavation or construction:
4. Asbestos works
All work involving asbestos products and materials, including asbestos-cement-sheeting (ie. Fibro), must be carried out in accordance with the guidelines for asbestos work published by WorkCover Authority of NSW.
Reason: To ensure public safety.
5. Notice of commencement
At least 48 hours prior to the commencement of any development (including demolition, excavation, shoring or underpinning works), a notice of commencement of building or subdivision work form and appointment of the principal certifying authority form shall be submitted to Council.
Reason: Statutory requirement.
6. Notification of builder’s details
Prior to the commencement of any development or excavation works, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be notified in writing of the name and contractor licence number of the owner/builder intending to carry out the approved works.
Reason: Statutory requirement.
7. Dilapidation survey and report (public infrastructure)
Prior to the commencement of any development or excavation works on site, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that a dilapidation report on the visible and structural condition of all structures of the following public infrastructure, has been completed and submitted to Council:
Public infrastructure
· Full road pavement width, including kerb and gutter, of Junction Road over the site frontage. · All driveway crossings and laybacks opposite the subject site.
The report must be completed by a consulting structural/civil engineer. Particular attention must be paid to accurately recording (both written and photographic) existing damaged areas on the aforementioned infrastructure so that Council is fully informed when assessing any damage to public infrastructure caused as a result of the development.
The developer may be held liable to any recent damage to public infrastructure in the vicinity of the site, where such damage is not accurately recorded by the requirements of this condition prior to the commencement of works.
Note: A written acknowledgment from Council must be obtained (attesting to this condition being appropriately satisfied) and submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the commencement of any excavation works.
Reason: To record the structural condition of public infrastructure before works commence.
8. Dilapidation survey and report (private property)
Prior to the commencement of any demolition or excavation works on site, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that a dilapidation report on the visible and structural condition of all structures upon the following lands, has been completed and submitted to Council:
The dilapidation report must include a photographic survey of adjoining properties detailing their physical condition, both internally and externally, including such items as walls ceilings, roof and structural members. The report must be completed by a consulting structural/geotechnical engineer as determined necessary by that professional based on the excavations for the proposal and the recommendations of the submitted geotechnical report.
In the event that access for undertaking the dilapidation survey is denied by a property owner, the applicant must demonstrate in writing to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority that all reasonable steps have been taken to obtain access and advise the affected property owner of the reason for the survey and that these steps have failed.
Note: A copy of the dilapidation report is to be provided to Council prior to any excavation works been undertaken. The dilapidation report is for record keeping purposes only and may be used by an applicant or affected property owner to assist in any civil action required to resolve any dispute over damage to adjoining properties arising from works.
Reason: To record the structural condition of likely affected properties before works commence.
9. Construction and traffic management plan
The applicant must submit to Council a Construction Traffic Management Plan (TMP), which is to be approved prior to the commencement of any works on site.
The plan is to consist of a report with Traffic Control Plans attached.
The report is to contain commitments which must be followed by the demolition and excavation contractor, builder, owner and subcontractors. The TMP applies to all persons associated with demolition, excavation and construction of the development.
The report is to contain construction vehicle routes for approach and departure to and from all directions.
The report is to contain a site plan showing entry and exit points. Swept paths are to be shown on the site plan showing access and egress for an 11 metre long heavy rigid vehicle.
The Traffic Control Plans are to be prepared by a qualified person (red card holder). One must be provided for each of the following stages of the works:
· Demolition · Excavation · Concrete pour · Construction of vehicular crossing and reinstatement of footpath · Traffic control for vehicles reversing into or out of the site.
Traffic controllers must be in place at the site entry and exit points to control heavy vehicle movements in order to maintain the safety of pedestrians and other road users.
When a satisfactory TMP is received, a letter of approval will be issued with conditions attached. Traffic management at the site must comply with the approved TMP as well as any conditions in the letter issued by Council. Council’s Rangers will be patrolling the site regularly and fines will be issued for any non-compliance with this condition.
Reason: To ensure that appropriate measures have been considered during all phases of the construction process in a manner that maintains the environmental amenity and ensures the ongoing safety and protection of people.
10. Temporary construction exit
A temporary construction exit, together with necessary associated temporary fencing, shall be provided prior to commencement of any work on the site and shall be maintained throughout the duration and progress of construction.
Reason: To reduce or eliminate the transport of sediment from the construction site onto public roads.
11. Sediment controls
Prior to any work commencing on site, sediment and erosion control measures shall be installed along the contour immediately downslope of any future disturbed areas.
The form of the sediment controls to be installed on the site shall be determined by reference to the ‘NSW Department of Housing manual ‘Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction’. The erosion controls shall be maintained in an operational condition until the development activities have been completed and the site fully stabilised. Sediment shall be removed from the sediment controls following each heavy or prolonged rainfall period.
Reason: To preserve and enhance the natural environment.
12. Erosion and drainage management
Earthworks and/or demolition of any existing buildings shall not commence until an erosion and sediment control plan is submitted to and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority. The plan shall comply with the guidelines set out in the NSW Department of Housing manual "Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction" certificate. Erosion and sediment control works shall be implemented in accordance with the erosion and sediment control plan.
Reason: To preserve and enhance the natural environment.
13. Tree protection fencing
To preserve the following tree/s, no work shall commence until the area beneath their canopy is fenced off at the specified radius from the trunk/s to prevent any activities, storage or the disposal of materials within the fenced area. The fence/s shall be maintained intact until the completion of all demolition/building work on site.
Reason: To protect existing trees during the construction phase.
14. Tree protective fencing type galvanised mesh
The tree protection fencing shall be constructed of galvanised pipe at 2.4 metres spacing and connected by securely attached chain mesh fencing to a minimum height of 1.8 metres in height prior to work commencing.
Reason: To protect existing trees during construction phase.
15. Tree protection signage
Prior to works commencing, tree protection signage is to be attached to each tree protection zone, displayed in a prominent position and the sign repeated at 10 metres intervals or closer where the fence changes direction. Each sign shall contain in a clearly legible form, the following information:
Tree protection zone.
· This fence has been installed to prevent damage to the trees and their growing environment both above and below ground and access is restricted. · Any encroachment not previously approved within the tree protection zone shall be the subject of an arborist's report. · The arborist's report shall provide proof that no other alternative is available. · The Arborist's report shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority for further consultation with Council. · The name, address, and telephone number of the developer.
Reason: To protect existing trees during the construction phase.
16. Tree protection mulching
Prior to works commencing and throughout construction, the area of the tree protection zone is to be mulched to a depth of 100mm with composted organic material being 75% Eucalyptus leaf litter and 25% wood.
Reason: To protect existing trees during the construction phase.
17. Tree protection - avoiding soil compaction
To preserve the following tree/s and avoid soil compaction, no work shall commence until temporary measures to avoid soil compaction (eg rumble boards) beneath the canopy of the following tree/s is/are installed between the required tree protection fencing and the development works:
Reason: To protect existing trees during the construction phase.
18. Tree fencing inspection
Upon installation of the required tree protection measures, an inspection of the site by the Principal Certifying Authority is required to verify that tree protection measures comply with all relevant conditions.
Reason: To protect existing trees during the construction phase.
Conditions to be satisfied prior to the issue of the construction certificate:
19. Long service levy
In accordance with Section 109F(i) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act a Construction Certificate shall not be issued until any long service levy payable under Section 34 of the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986 (or where such levy is payable by instalments, the first instalment of the levy) has been paid. Council is authorised to accept payment. Where payment has been made elsewhere, proof of payment is to be provided to Council.
Reason: Statutory requirement.
20. Builder’s indemnity insurance
The applicant, builder, developer or person who does the work on this development, must arrange builder’s indemnity insurance and submit the certificate of insurance in accordance with the requirements of Part 6 of the Home Building Act 1989 to the Certifying Authority for endorsement of the plans accompanying the Construction Certificate.
It is the responsibility of the applicant, builder or developer to arrange the builder's indemnity insurance for residential building work over the value of $20,000. The builder's indemnity insurance does not apply to commercial or industrial building work or to residential work valued at less than $20,000, nor to work undertaken by persons holding an owner/builder's permit issued by the Department of Fair Trading (unless the owner/builder's property is sold within 7 years of the commencement of the work).
Reason: Statutory requirement.
21. Outdoor lighting
Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate, the Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that all outdoor lighting will comply with AS/NZ1158.3: 1999 Pedestrian Area (Category P) Lighting and AS4282: 1997 Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting.
Note: Details demonstrating compliance with these requirements are to be submitted prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.
Reason: To provide high quality external lighting for security without adverse affects on public amenity from excessive illumination levels.
22. Air drying facilities
Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that a common open space area dedicated for open air drying of clothes is provided. This area is to be located at ground level behind the building line and in a position not visible from the public domain.
In lieu of the above, written confirmation that all units will be provided with internal clothes drying facilities prior to the Occupation Certificate is to be submitted to the Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.
Reason: Amenity & energy efficiency.
23. External service pipes and the like prohibited
Proposed water pipes, waste pipes, stack work, duct work, mechanical ventilation plant and the like must be located within the building. Details confirming compliance with this condition must be shown on construction certificate plans and detailed with construction certificate specifications. Required external vents or vent pipes on the roof or above the eaves must be shown on construction certificate plans and detailed with construction certificate specifications. External vents or roof vent pipes must not be visible from any place unless detailed upon development consent plans. Where there is any proposal to fit external service pipes or the like this must be detailed in an amended development (S96) application and submitted to Council for determination.
Vent pipes required by Sydney Water must not be placed on the front elevation of the building or front roof elevation. The applicant, owner and builder must protect the appearance of the building from the public place and the appearance of the streetscape by elimination of all external services excluding vent pipes required by Sydney Water and those detailed upon development consent plans.
Reason: To protect the streetscape and the integrity of the approved development.
24. Access for people with disabilities (residential)
Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that access for people with disabilities to and from and between the public domain, residential units and all common open space areas is provided. Consideration must be given to the means of dignified and equitable access.
Compliant access provisions for people with disabilities shall be clearly shown on the plans submitted with the Construction Certificate. All details shall be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. All details shall be prepared in consideration of the Disability Discrimination Act, and the relevant provisions of AS1428.1, AS1428.2, AS1428.4 and AS 1735.12.
Reason: To ensure the provision of equitable and dignified access for all people in accordance with disability discrimination legislation and relevant Australian Standards.
25. Excavation for services
Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that no proposed underground services (ie: water, sewerage, drainage, gas or other service) unless previously approved by conditions of consent, are located beneath the canopy of any tree protected under Council’s Tree Preservation Order, located on the subject allotment and adjoining allotments.
Note: A plan detailing the routes of these services and trees protected under the Tree Preservation Order shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority.
Reason: To ensure the protection of trees.
26. Pier and beam footings near trees
Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the footings of the approved front fence/masonry wall will be isolated pier or pier and beam construction within the specified radius of the trunk/s of the following tree:
The piers shall be located such that no roots of a diameter greater than 30mm will be severed or injured during the construction period. The beam/s shall be of reinforced concrete or galvanised steel sections and placed in positions with the base of the beam being a minimum of 50mm above existing soil levels.
Note: Structural details of the pier or pier and beam construction shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority.
Reason: To protect existing trees.
27. Recycling and waste management
Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the development provides a common garbage collection/separation area sufficient in size to store all wheelie garbage bins and recycling bins provided by Council for the number of units in the development in accordance with DCP 40. The garbage collection point is to be accessible by Council’s Waste Collection Services.
The responsibility for:
· the cleaning of waste rooms and waste service compartments; and · the transfer of bins within the property, and to the collection point once the development is in use;
shall be determined when designing the system and clearly stated in the Waste Management Plan.
Note: The architectural plans are to be amended and provided to the Certifying Authority.
Reason: Environmental protection.
28. Noise from plant in residential zone
Where any form of mechanical ventilation equipment or other noise generating plant is proposed as part of the development, prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate the Certifying Authority, shall be satisfied that the operation of an individual piece of equipment or operation of equipment in combination will not exceed more than 5dB(A) above the background level during the day when measured at the site’s boundaries and shall not exceed the background level at night (10.00pm -6.00 am) when measured at the boundary of the site.
C1. Note: A certificate from an appropriately qualified acoustic engineer is to be submitted with the Construction Certificate, certifying that all mechanical ventilation equipment or other noise generating plant in isolation or in combination with other plant will comply with the above requirements.
Reason: To comply with best practice standards for residential acoustic amenity.
29. Location of plant
Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that all plant and equipment (including but not limited to air conditioning equipment) is located within the basement.
C1. Note: Architectural plans identifying the location of all plant and equipment shall be provided to the Certifying Authority.
Reason: To minimise impact on surrounding properties, improved visual appearance and amenity for locality.
30. Driveway crossing levels
Prior to issue of the Construction Certificate, driveway and associated footpath levels for any new, reconstructed or extended sections of driveway crossings between the property boundary and road alignment must be obtained from Ku-ring-gai Council. Such levels are only able to be issued by Council under the Roads Act 1993. All footpath crossings, laybacks and driveways are to be constructed according to Council's specifications "Construction of Gutter Crossings and Footpath Crossings".
Specifications are issued with alignment levels after completing the necessary application form at Customer Services and payment of the assessment fee. When completing the request for driveway levels application from Council, the applicant must attach a copy of the relevant development application drawing which indicates the position and proposed level of the proposed driveway at the boundary alignment.
This development consent is for works wholly within the property. Development consent does not imply approval of footpath or driveway levels, materials or location within the road reserve, regardless of whether this information is shown on the development application plans. The grading of such footpaths or driveways outside the property shall comply with Council's standard requirements. The suitability of the grade of such paths or driveways inside the property is the sole responsibility of the applicant and the required alignment levels fixed by Council may impact upon these levels.
The construction of footpaths and driveways outside the property in materials other than those approved by Council is not permitted.
Reason: To provide suitable vehicular access without disruption to pedestrian and vehicular traffic.
31. Driveway grades - basement carparks
Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, longitudinal driveway sections are to be prepared by a qualified civil/traffic engineer and be submitted for to and approved by the Certifying Authority. These profiles are to be at 1:100 scale along both edges of the proposed driveway, starting from the centreline of the frontage street carriageway to the proposed basement floor level. The traffic engineer shall provide specific written certification on the plans that:
· vehicular access can be obtained using grades of 20% (1 in 5) maximum and · all changes in grade (transitions) comply with Australian Standard 2890.1 -“Off-street car parking” (refer clause 2.5.3) to prevent the scraping of the underside of vehicles.
If a new driveway crossing is proposed, the longitudinal sections must incorporate the driveway crossing levels as issued by Council upon prior application.
Reason: To provide suitable vehicular access without disruption to pedestrian and vehicular traffic.
32. Basement car parking details
Prior to issue of the Construction Certificate, certified parking layout plan(s) to scale showing all aspects of the vehicle access and accommodation arrangements must be submitted to and approved by the Certifying Authority. A qualified civil/traffic engineer must review the proposed vehicle access and accommodation layout and provide written certification on the plans that:
· all parking space dimensions, driveway and aisle widths, driveway grades, transitions, circulation ramps, blind aisle situations and other trafficked areas comply with Australian Standard 2890.1 – 2004 “Off-street car parking” · a clear height clearance of 2.6 metres (required under DCP40 for waste collection trucks) is provided over the designated garbage collection truck manoeuvring areas within the basement · no doors or gates are provided in the access driveways to the basement carpark which would prevent unrestricted access for internal garbage collection at any time from the basement garbage storage and collection area · the dimensions of all parking spaces, including lengths and widths, comply with the State Environmental Planning Policy for Senior Living relating to height clearances and space dimensions · the vehicle access and accommodation arrangements are to be constructed and marked in accordance with the certified plans
Reason: To ensure that parking spaces are in accordance with the approved development.
33. Drainage of paved areas
All new exposed impervious areas graded towards adjacent property and/or habitable areas are to be drained via the main drainage system. This may require the installation of suitable inlets pits, cut-off structures (e.g. kerb), and/or barriers that direct such runoff to the formal drainage system. Details of such measures shall be shown on the Construction Certificate drawings, to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority.
Reason: To control surface run off and protect the environment.
34. Vehicular access and garaging
Driveways and vehicular access ramps must be designed not to scrape the underside of cars. In all respects, the proposed vehicle access and accommodation arrangements must be designed and constructed to comply with Australian Standard 2890.1 - 2004 “Off-Street car parking”. Details are to be provided to and approved by the Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.
Reason: To ensure that parking spaces are in accordance with the approved development.
35. Utility provider requirements
Prior to issue of the Construction Certificate, the applicant must make contact with all relevant utility providers whose services will be impacted upon by the development. A written copy of the requirements of each provider, as determined necessary by the Certifying Authority, must be obtained. All utility services or appropriate conduits for the same must be provided by the developer in accordance with the specifications of the utility providers.
Reason: To ensure compliance with the requirements of relevant utility providers.
36. Underground services
All electrical services (existing and proposed) shall be undergrounded from the proposed building on the site to the appropriate power pole(s) or other connection point. Undergrounding of services must not disturb the root system of existing trees and shall be undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the relevant service provided. Documentary evidence that the relevant service provider has been consulted and that their requirements have been met are to be provided to the Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. All electrical and telephone services to the subject property must be placed underground and any redundant poles are to be removed at the expense of the applicant.
Reason: To provide infrastructure that facilitates the future improvement of the streetscape by relocation of overhead lines below ground.
37. Privacy
To mitigate privacy impacts on adjoining properties, the following measures shall be implemented:
· A fixed privacy screen shall be installed along the entire length of the western elevation of the balcony to Unit 7. The privacy screen shall have a height of 1.6 metres above the finished floor level. The privacy screen shall be constructed of a durable material, appropriately integrated and shall be designed so as to prevent direct overlooking of neighbouring properties.
· A fixed privacy screen shall be installed along the entire length of the eastern elevation of the balcony to Unit 8. The privacy screen shall have a height of 1.6 metres above the finished floor level. The privacy screen shall be constructed of a durable material, appropriately integrated and shall be designed so as to prevent direct overlooking of neighbouring properties.
Reason: To maintain neighbour amenity.
Conditions to be satisfied prior to the issue of the construction certificate or prior to demolition, excavation or construction (whichever comes first):
38. Infrastructure restorations fee
To ensure that damage to Council Property as a result of construction activity is rectified in a timely matter:
a) All work or activity taken in furtherance of the development the subject of this approval must be undertaken in a manner to avoid damage to Council Property and must not jeopardise the safety of any person using or occupying the adjacent public areas.
b) The applicant, builder, developer or any person acting in reliance on this approval shall be responsible for making good any damage to Council Property, and for the removal from Council Property of any waste bin, building materials, sediment, silt, or any other material or article.
c) The Infrastructure Restoration Fee must be paid to the Council by the applicant prior to both the issue of the Construction Certificate and the commencement of any earthworks or construction.
d) In consideration of payment of the Infrastructure Restorations Fee, Council will undertake such inspections of Council Property as Council considers necessary and also undertake, on behalf of the applicant, such restoration work to Council Property, if any, that Council considers necessary as a consequence of the development. The provision of such restoration work by the Council does not absolve any person of the responsibilities contained in (a) to (b) above. Restoration work to be undertaken by the Council referred to in this condition is limited to work that can be undertaken by Council at a cost of not more than the Infrastructure Restorations Fee payable pursuant to this condition.
e) In this condition:
“Council Property” includes any road, footway, footpath paving, kerbing, guttering, crossings, street furniture, seats, letter bins, trees, shrubs, lawns, mounds, bushland, and similar structures or features on any road or public road within the meaning of the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) or any public place; and
“Infrastructure Restoration Fee” means the Infrastructure Restorations Fee calculated in accordance with the Schedule of Fees & Charges adopted by Council as at the date of payment and the cost of any inspections required by the Council of Council Property associated with this condition.
Reason: To maintain public infrastructure.
39. Section 94 development contributions - other than identified centres (For DAs determined on or after 19 December 2010).
Reason: To ensure the provision, extension or augmentation of the Key Community Infrastructure identified in Ku-ring-gai Contributions Plan 2010 that will, or is likely to be, required as a consequence of the development.
Conditions to be satisfied during the demolition, excavation and construction phases:
40. Road opening permit
The opening of any footway, roadway, road shoulder or any part of the road reserve shall not be carried out without a road opening permit being obtained from Council (upon payment of the required fee) beforehand.
Reason: Statutory requirement (Roads Act 1993 Section 138) and to maintain the integrity of Council’s infrastructure.
41. Prescribed conditions
The applicant shall comply with any relevant prescribed conditions of development consent under clause 98 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation. For the purposes of section 80A (11) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, the following conditions are prescribed in relation to a development consent for development that involves any building work:
· The work must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Building Code of Australia · In the case of residential building work for which the Home Building Act 1989 requires there to be a contract of insurance in force in accordance with Part 6 of that Act, that such a contract of insurance is in force before any works commence.
Reason: Statutory requirement.
42. Hours of work
Demolition, excavation, construction work and deliveries of building material and equipment must not take place outside the hours of 7.00am to 5.00pm Monday to Friday and 8.00am to 12 noon Saturday. No work and no deliveries are to take place on Sundays and public holidays.
Excavation or removal of any materials using machinery of any kind, including compressors and jack hammers, must be limited to between 7.30am and 5.00pm Monday to Friday, with a respite break of 45 minutes between 12 noon 1.00pm.
Where it is necessary for works to occur outside of these hours (ie) placement of concrete for large floor areas on large residential/commercial developments or where building processes require the use of oversized trucks and/or cranes that are restricted by the RTA from travelling during daylight hours to deliver, erect or remove machinery, tower cranes, pre-cast panels, beams, tanks or service equipment to or from the site, approval for such activities will be subject to the issue of an "outside of hours works permit" from Council as well as notification of the surrounding properties likely to be affected by the proposed works.
Note: Failure to obtain a permit to work outside of the approved hours will result in on the spot fines being issued.
Reason: To ensure reasonable standards of amenity for occupants of neighbouring properties.
43. Approved plans to be on site
A copy of all approved and certified plans, specifications and documents incorporating conditions of consent and certification (including the Construction Certificate if required for the work) shall be kept on site at all times during the demolition, excavation and construction phases and must be readily available to any officer of Council or the Principal Certifying Authority.
Reason: To ensure that the development is in accordance with the determination.
44. Statement of compliance with Australian Standards
The demolition work shall comply with the provisions of Australian Standard AS2601: 2001 The Demolition of Structures. The work plans required by AS2601: 2001 shall be accompanied by a written statement from a suitably qualified person that the proposal contained in the work plan comply with the safety requirements of the Standard. The work plan and the statement of compliance shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the commencement of any works.
Reason: To ensure compliance with the Australian Standards.
45. Site notice
A site notice shall be erected on the site prior to any work commencing and shall be displayed throughout the works period.
The site notice must:
· be prominently displayed at the boundaries of the site for the purposes of informing the public that unauthorised entry to the site is not permitted · display project details including, but not limited to the details of the builder, Principal Certifying Authority and structural engineer · be durable and weatherproof · display the approved hours of work, the name of the site/project manager, the responsible managing company (if any), its address and 24 hour contact phone number for any inquiries, including construction/noise complaint are to be displayed on the site notice · be mounted at eye level on the perimeter hoardings/fencing and is to state that unauthorised entry to the site is not permitted
Reason: To ensure public safety and public information.
46. Dust control
During excavation, demolition and construction, adequate measures shall be taken to prevent dust from affecting the amenity of the neighbourhood. The following measures must be adopted:
· physical barriers shall be erected at right angles to the prevailing wind direction or shall be placed around or over dust sources to prevent wind or activity from generating dust · earthworks and scheduling activities shall be managed to coincide with the next stage of development to minimise the amount of time the site is left cut or exposed · all materials shall be stored or stockpiled at the best locations · the ground surface should be dampened slightly to prevent dust from becoming airborne but should not be wet to the extent that run-off occurs · all vehicles carrying spoil or rubble to or from the site shall at all times be covered to prevent the escape of dust · all equipment wheels shall be washed before exiting the site using manual or automated sprayers and drive-through washing bays · gates shall be closed between vehicle movements and shall be fitted with shade cloth · cleaning of footpaths and roadways shall be carried out daily
Reason: To protect the environment and amenity of surrounding properties.
47. Post-construction dilapidation report
The applicant shall engage a suitably qualified person to prepare a post construction dilapidation report at the completion of the construction works. This report is to ascertain whether the construction works created any structural damage to adjoining buildings, infrastructure and roads. The report is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority. In ascertaining whether adverse structural damage has occurred to adjoining buildings, infrastructure and roads, the Principal Certifying Authority must:
· compare the post-construction dilapidation report with the pre-construction dilapidation report · have written confirmation from the relevant authority that there is no adverse structural damage to their infrastructure and roads.
A copy of this report is to be forwarded to Council at the completion of the construction works.
Reason: Management of records.
48. Compliance with submitted geotechnical report
A contractor with specialist excavation experience must undertake the excavations for the development and a suitably qualified and consulting geotechnical engineer must oversee excavation.
Geotechnical aspects of the development work, namely:
· appropriate excavation method and vibration control · support and retention of excavated faces · hydro-geological considerations
must be undertaken in accordance with the recommendations of the Geotechnical Investigation Ref: 14/03631 dated 31 March 2013 prepared by Michael Adler & Associates. Approval must be obtained from all affected property owners, including Ku-ring-gai Council, where rock anchors (both temporary and permanent) are proposed below adjoining property(ies).
Reason: To ensure the safety and protection of property.
49. Use of road or footpath
During excavation, demolition and construction phases, no building materials, plant or the like are to be stored on the road or footpath without written approval being obtained from Council beforehand. The pathway shall be kept in a clean, tidy and safe condition during building operations. Council reserves the right, without notice, to rectify any such breach and to charge the cost against the applicant/owner/builder, as the case may be.
Reason: To ensure safety and amenity of the area.
50. Guarding excavations
All excavation, demolition and construction works shall be properly guarded and protected with hoardings or fencing to prevent them from being dangerous to life and property.
Reason: To ensure public safety.
51. Toilet facilities
During excavation, demolition and construction phases, toilet facilities are to be provided, on the work site, at the rate of one toilet for every 20 persons or part of 20 persons employed at the site.
Reason: Statutory requirement.
52. Protection of public places
If the work involved in the erection, demolition or construction of the development is likely to cause pedestrian or vehicular traffic in a public place to be obstructed or rendered inconvenient, or building involves the enclosure of a public place, a hoarding or fence must be erected between the work site and the public place.
If necessary, a hoarding is to be erected, sufficient to prevent any substance from, or in connection with, the work falling into the public place.
The work site must be kept lit between sunset and sunrise if it is likely to be hazardous to persons in the public place.
Any hoarding, fence or awning is to be removed when the work has been completed.
Reason: To protect public places.
53. Recycling of building material (general)
During demolition and construction, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that building materials suitable for recycling have been forwarded to an appropriate registered business dealing in recycling of materials. Materials to be recycled must be kept in good order.
Reason: To facilitate recycling of materials.
54. Construction signage
All construction signs must comply with the following requirements:
· are not to cover any mechanical ventilation inlet or outlet vent · are not illuminated, self-illuminated or flashing at any time · are located wholly within a property where construction is being undertaken · refer only to the business(es) undertaking the construction and/or the site at which the construction is being undertaken · are restricted to one such sign per property · do not exceed 2.5m2 · are removed within 14 days of the completion of all construction works
Reason: To ensure compliance with Council's controls regarding signage.
55. Road reserve safety
All public footways and roadways fronting and adjacent to the site must be maintained in a safe condition at all times during the course of the development works. Construction materials must not be stored in the road reserve. A safe pedestrian circulation route and a pavement/route free of trip hazards must be maintained at all times on or adjacent to any public access ways fronting the construction site. Where public infrastructure is damaged, repair works must be carried out when and as directed by Council officers. Where pedestrian circulation is diverted on to the roadway or verge areas, clear directional signage and protective barricades must be installed in accordance with AS1742-3 (1996) “Traffic Control Devices for Work on Roads”. If pedestrian circulation is not satisfactorily maintained across the site frontage, and action is not taken promptly to rectify the defects, Council may undertake proceedings to stop work.
Reason: To ensure safe public footways and roadways during construction.
56. Services
Where required, the adjustment or inclusion of any new utility service facilities must be carried out by the applicant and in accordance with the requirements of the relevant utility authority. These works shall be at no cost to Council. It is the applicants’ full responsibility to make contact with the relevant utility authorities to ascertain the impacts of the proposal upon utility services (including water, phone, gas and the like). Council accepts no responsibility for any matter arising from its approval to this application involving any influence upon utility services provided by another authority.
Reason: Provision of utility services.
57. Structures to be clear of drainage easements
During all phases of demolition, excavation and construction, it is the full responsibility of the applicant and their contractors to:
· ascertain the exact location of the Council drainage pipe traversing the site in the vicinity of the works · take full measures to protect the in-ground Council drainage system · ensure dedicated overland flow paths are satisfactorily maintained through the site
Drainage pipes can be damaged through applying excessive loading (such as construction machinery, material storage and the like). All proposed structures and construction activities are to be sited fully clear of Council drainage pipes, drainage easements, watercourses and trunk overland flow paths on the site. Trunk or dedicated overland flow paths must not be impeded or diverted by fill or structures unless otherwise approved.
If a Council drainage pipeline is uncovered during construction, all work is to cease and the Principal Certifying Authority and Council must be contacted immediately for advice. Any damage caused to a Council drainage system must be immediately repaired in full as directed and at no cost to Council.
Reason: To protect existing Council infrastructure and maintain over land flow paths.
58. Erosion control
Temporary sediment and erosion control and measures are to be installed prior to the commencement of any works on the site. These measures must be maintained in working order during construction works up to completion. All sediment traps must be cleared on a regular basis and after each major storm and/or as directed by the Principal Certifying Authority and Council officers.
Reason: To protect the environment from erosion and sedimentation.
59. Sydney Water Section 73 Compliance Certificate
The applicant must obtain a Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994. An application must be made through an authorised Water Servicing CoOrdinator. The applicant is to refer to “Your Business” section of Sydney Water’s web site at www.sydneywater.com.au <http://www.sydneywater.com.au> then the “e-develop” icon or telephone 13 20 92. Following application a “Notice of Requirements” will detail water and sewer extensions to be built and charges to be paid. Please make early contact with the CoOrdinator, since building of water/sewer extensions can be time consuming and may impact on other services and building, driveway or landscape design.
Reason: Statutory requirement.
60. Arborist’s report
The tree/s to be retained shall be inspected, monitored and treated by a qualified Arborist during and after completion of development works to ensure their long term survival. Regular inspections and documentation from the Arborist to the Principal Certifying Authority are required at the following times or phases of work:
Reason: To ensure protection of existing trees.
61. Treatment of tree roots
If tree roots are severed for the purposes of constructing the approved works, they shall be cut cleanly by hand, by an experienced AQF3 Arborist/Horticulturist. All pruning works shall be undertaken as specified in Australian Standard 4373-2007 - Pruning of Amenity Trees.
Reason: To protect existing trees.
62. Cutting of tree roots
No tree roots of 30mm or greater in diameter located within the specified radius of the trunk/s of the following tree/s shall be severed or injured in the process of any works during the construction period. All pruning works shall be undertaken as specified in Australian Standard 4373-2007 - Pruning of Amenity Trees:
Reason: To protect existing trees.
63. Approved tree works
Approval is given for the following works to be undertaken to trees on the site. ALL trees shall be clearly tagged and identified consistent with the Arboricultural Impact Assessment Report by Landscape Matrix dated 11/04/2014, prior to ANY tree works being undertaken.
Removal or pruning of any other tree on the site is not approved, excluding species exempt under Council’s Tree Preservation Order.
Reason: To ensure that the development is in accordance with the determination.
64. Excavation near trees
No mechanical excavation shall be undertaken within the specified radius of the trunk/s of the following tree/s until root pruning by hand by an AQF3 Arborist along the perimeter line of such works is completed:
Reason: To protect existing trees.
65. Hand excavation
All excavation within the specified radius of the trunk/s of the following tree/s shall be hand dug:
Reason: To protect existing trees.
66. No storage of materials beneath trees
No activities, storage or disposal of materials shall take place beneath the canopy of any tree protected under Council's Tree Preservation Order at any time.
Reason: To protect existing trees.
67. Removal of refuse
All builders' refuse, spoil and/or material unsuitable for use in landscape areas shall be removed from the site on completion of the building works.
Reason: To protect the environment.
68. On site retention of waste dockets
All demolition, excavation and construction waste dockets are to be retained on site, or at suitable location, in order to confirm which facility received materials generated from the site for recycling or disposal.
· Each docket is to be an official receipt from a facility authorised to accept the material type, for disposal or processing. · This information is to be made available at the request of an Authorised Officer of Council.
Reason: To protect the environment.
Conditions to be satisfied prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate:
69. Easement for waste collection
Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, an easement for waste collection is to be created under Section 88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919. This is to permit legal access for Council, Council’s contractors and their vehicles over the subject property for the purpose of collecting waste from the property. The terms of the easement are to be generally in accordance with Council’s draft terms for an easement for waste collection and shall be to the satisfaction of Council’s Development Engineer.
Reason: To permit legal access for Council, Council’s contractors and their vehicles over the subject site for waste collection.
70. Construction Standards - Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability
Prior to the issue of an occupation certificate or occupation of the development (whichever comes first), certification shall be provided from an accredited access consultant to the certifying authority which demonstrates that the fit out and construction of the development satisfies the design criteria of SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004.
Reason: To ensure compliance with SEPP (Housing for Seniors or People with a Disability) 2004.
71. Compliance with BASIX Certificate
Prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that all commitments listed in BASIX Certificate No. 537335M_03 have been complied with.
Reason: Statutory requirement.
72. Clotheslines and clothes dryers
Prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the units either have access to an external clothes line located in common open space or have a mechanical clothes dryer installed.
Reason: To provide access to clothes drying facilities.
73. Mechanical ventilation
Following completion, installation and testing of all the mechanical ventilation systems, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied of the following prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate:
1. The installation and performance of the mechanical systems complies with:
· The Building Code of Australia · Australian Standard AS1668 · Australian Standard AS3666 where applicable
2. The mechanical ventilation system in isolation and in association with other mechanical ventilation equipment, when in operation will not be audible within a habitable room in any other residential premises before 7am and after 10pm Monday to Friday and before 8am and after 10pm Saturday, Sunday and public holidays. The operation of the unit outside these restricted hours shall emit a noise level of not greater than 5dbA above the background when measured at the nearest adjoining boundary.
Note: Written confirmation from an acoustic engineer that the development achieves the above requirements is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.
Reason: To protect the amenity of surrounding properties.
74. Completion of landscape works
Prior to the release of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority is to be satisfied that all landscape works, including the removal of all noxious and/or environmental weed species, have been undertaken in accordance with the approved plan(s) and conditions of consent.
Reason: To ensure that the landscape works are consistent with the development consent.
75. Accessibility
Prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that:
· the lift design and associated functions are compliant with AS 1735.12 & AS 1428.2 · the level and direction of travel, both in lifts and lift lobbies, is audible and visible · the controls for lifts are accessible to all persons and control buttons and lettering are raised · international symbols have been used with specifications relating to signs, symbols and size of lettering complying with AS 1428.2 · the height of lettering on signage is in accordance with AS 1428.1 - 1993 · the signs and other information indicating access and services incorporate tactile communication methods in addition to the visual methods
Reason: Disabled access & services.
76. Retention and re-use positive covenant
Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the applicant must create a positive covenant and restriction on the use of land under Section 88E of the Conveyancing Act 1919, burdening the property with the requirement to maintain the site stormwater retention and re-use facilities on the property.
The terms of the instruments are to be generally in accordance with the Council's "draft terms of Section 88B instruments for protection of retention and re-use facilities" and to the satisfaction of Council (refer to appendices of Ku-ring-gai Water Management Development Control Plan No. 47). For existing titles, the positive covenant and the restriction on the use of land is to be created through an application to the Land Titles Office in the form of a request using forms 13PC and 13RPA. The relative location of the reuse and retention facility, in relation to the building footprint, must be shown on a scale sketch, attached as an annexure to the request forms.
Registered title documents showing the covenants and restrictions must be submitted to and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issue of an Occupation Certificate.
Reason: To protect the environment.
77. Provision of copy of OSD designs if Council is not the PCA
Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the following must be provided to Council’s Development Engineer:
· A copy of the approved Construction Certificate stormwater detention/retention design for the site · A copy of any works-as-executed drawings required by this consent · The Engineer’s certification of the as-built system.
Reason: For Council to maintain its database of as-constructed on-site stormwater detention systems.
78. Certification of drainage works
Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority is to be satisfied that:
· the stormwater drainage works have been satisfactorily completed in accordance with the approved Construction Certificate drainage plans · the minimum retention and on-site detention storage volume requirements of BASIX and Ku-ring-gai Water Management Development Control Plan No. 47 respectively, have been achieved · retained water is connected and available for use · basement and subsoil areas are able to drain via a pump/sump system installed in accordance with AS3500.3 and Appendix 7.1.1 of Ku-ring-gai Water Management Development Control Plan No. 47 · all grates potentially accessible by children are secured · components of the new drainage system have been installed by a licensed plumbing contractor in accordance with the Plumbing and Drainage Code AS3500.3 2003 and the Building Code of Australia · all enclosed floor areas, including habitable and garage floor levels, are safeguarded from outside stormwater runoff ingress by suitable differences in finished levels, gradings and provision of stormwater collection devices
The rainwater certification sheet contained in Appendix 13 of the Ku-ring-gai Water Management Development Control Plan No. 47, must be completed and attached to the certification. Where an on-site detention system has been constructed, the on-site detention certification sheet contained in Appendix 4 of DCP 47 must also be completed and attached to the certification.
Note: Evidence from a qualified and experienced consulting civil/hydraulic engineer documenting compliance with the above is to be provided to Council prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.
Reason: To protect the environment.
79. WAE plans for stormwater management and disposal
Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, a registered surveyor must provide a works as executed survey of the completed stormwater drainage and management systems. The survey must be submitted to and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate. The survey must indicate:
· as built (reduced) surface and invert levels for all drainage pits · gradients of drainage lines, materials and dimensions · as built (reduced) level(s) at the approved point of discharge to the public drainage system · as built location and internal dimensions of all detention and retention structures on the property (in plan view) and horizontal distances to nearest adjacent boundaries and structures on site · the achieved storage volumes of the installed retention and detention storages and derivative calculations · as built locations of all access pits and grates in the detention and retention system(s), including dimensions · the size of the orifice or control fitted to any on-site detention system · dimensions of the discharge control pit and access grates · the maximum depth of storage possible over the outlet control · top water levels of storage areas and indicative RL’s through the overland flow path in the event of blockage of the on-site detention system
The works as executed plan(s) must show the as built details above in comparison to those shown on the drainage plans approved with the Construction Certificate prior to commencement of works. All relevant levels and details indicated must be marked in red on a copy of the Principal Certifying Authority stamped construction certificate stormwater plans.
Reason: To protect the environment.
80. Basement pump-out maintenance
Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that a maintenance regime has been prepared for the basement stormwater pump-out system.
Note: A maintenance regime specifying that the system is to be regularly inspected and checked by qualified practitioners is to be prepared by a suitable qualified professional and provided to the Principal Certifying Authority.
Reason: To protect the environment.
81. OSD positive covenant/restriction
Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the applicant must create a positive covenant and restriction on the use of land under Section 88E of the Conveyancing Act 1919, burdening the owner with the requirement to maintain the on-site stormwater detention facilities on the lot.
The terms of the instruments are to be generally in accordance with the Council's "draft terms of Section 88B instrument for protection of on-site detention facilities" and to the satisfaction of Council (refer to appendices of Ku-ring-gai Council Water Management DCP 47). For existing titles, the positive covenant and the restriction on the use of land is to be created through an application to the Land Titles Office in the form of a request using forms 13PC and 13RPA. The relative location of the on-site detention facility, in relation to the building footprint, must be shown on a scale sketch, attached as an annexure to the request forms.
Registered title documents, showing the covenants and restrictions, must be submitted and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issue of an Occupation Certificate.
Reason: To protect the environment.
82. Sydney Water Section 73 Compliance Certificate
Prior to issue of an Occupation Certificate the Section 73 Sydney water Compliance Certificate must be obtained and submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority
Reason: Statutory requirement.
83. Reinstatement of redundant crossings and completion of infrastructure works
Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority must be satisfied that he or she has received a signed inspection form from Council which states that the following works in the road reserve have been completed:
· new concrete driveway crossing in accordance with levels and specifications issued by Council · removal of all redundant driveway crossings and kerb laybacks (or sections thereof) and reinstatement of these areas to footpath, turfed verge and upright kerb and gutter (reinstatement works to match surrounding adjacent infrastructure with respect to integration of levels and materials) · full repair and resealing of any road surface damaged during construction · full replacement of damaged sections of grass verge to match existing
This inspection may not be carried out by the Private Certifier because restoration of Council property outside the boundary of the site is not a matter listed in Clause 161 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.
All works must be completed in accordance with the General Specification for the Construction of Road and Drainage Works in Ku-ring-gai Council, dated November 2004. The Occupation Certificate must not be issued until all damaged public infrastructure caused as a result of construction works on the subject site (including damage caused by, but not limited to, delivery vehicles, waste collection, contractors, sub-contractors, concrete vehicles) is fully repaired to the satisfaction of Council. Repair works shall be at no cost to Council.
Reason: To protect the streetscape.
84. Construction of works in public road - approved plans
Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority must be satisfied that all approved road, footpath and/or drainage works have been completed in the road reserve in accordance with the Council Roads Act approval and accompanying drawings, conditions and specifications.
The works must be supervised by the applicant’s designing engineer and completed and approved to the satisfaction of Ku-ring-gai Council.
The supervising consulting engineer is to provide certification upon completion that the works were constructed in accordance with the Council approved stamped drawings. The works must be subject to inspections by Council at the hold points noted on the Roads Act approval. All conditions attached to the approved drawings for these works must be met prior to the Occupation Certificate being issued.
Reason: To ensure that works undertaken in the road reserve are to the satisfaction of Council.
85. Infrastructure repair
Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority must be satisfied that any damaged public infrastructure caused as a result of construction works (including damage caused by, but not limited to, delivery vehicles, waste collection, contractors, sub-contractors, concrete vehicles) is fully repaired to the satisfaction of Council Development Engineer and at no cost to Council.
Reason: To protect public infrastructure.
86. Fire safety certificate
Prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that a Fire Safety Certificate for all the essential fire or other safety measures forming part of this consent has been completed and provided to Council.
Note: A copy of the Fire Safety Certificate must be submitted to Council.
Reason: To ensure suitable fire safety measures are in place.
87. Restriction on land title - seniors living development
Prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority is to be satisfied that restriction as to use of land under Section 88E of the Conveyancing Act 1919, has been created restricting the occupation of the premises to:
· people 55 or over or people who have a disability · people who live with people 55 or over or people who have a disability · staff employed to assist in the administration of and provision of services to housing provided in this development
Reason: To ensure that the development meets the provisions of the Seniors Living SEPP.
Conditions to be satisfied at all times:
88. Outdoor lighting
At all times for the life of the approved development, all outdoor lighting shall not detrimentally impact upon the amenity of other premises and adjacent dwellings and shall comply with, where relevant, AS/NZ1158.3: 2005 Pedestrian Area (Category P) Lighting and AS4282: 1997 Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting.
Reason: To protect the amenity of surrounding properties.
89. Noise control - plant and machinery
All noise generating equipment associated with any proposed mechanical ventilation system/s shall be located and/or soundproofed so the equipment is not audible within a habitable room in any other residential premises before 7am and after 10pm Monday to Friday and before 8am and after 10pm Saturday, Sunday and public holidays. The operation of the unit outside these restricted hours shall emit a noise level of not greater than 5dbA above the background when measured at the nearest boundary.
Reason: To protect the amenity of surrounding residents.
90. Car parking
At all times, the visitor car parking spaces are to be clearly identified and are to be for the exclusive use of visitors to the site. On site permanent car parking spaces are not to be used by those other than an occupant or tenant of the subject building. Any occupant, tenant, lessee or registered proprietor of the development site or part thereof shall not enter into an agreement to lease, license or transfer ownership of any car parking spaces to those other than an occupant, tenant or lessee of the building. These requirements are to be enforced through the following:
· restrictive covenant placed on title pursuant to Section 88B of the Conveyancing Act, 1919 · restriction on use under Section 68 of the Strata Schemes (Leasehold Development) Act, 1986 to all lots comprising in part or whole car parking spaces
Reason: To ensure adequate provision of visitor parking spaces.
91. Height of fences, walls and screens
The overall height of any and all proposed fences, walls and courtyard or balcony screens shall not exceed 1800mm above the existing ground level.
Reason: To maintain the established streetscape and ensure consistency of fencing to the development and area. |
Amy Bentley Senior Assessment Officer |
Selwyn Segall Team Leader - Development Assessment North |
Corrie Swanepoel Manager Development Assessment Services |
Michael Miocic Director Development & Regulation |
A1View |
Location sketch |
|
2015/131186 |
|
|
A2View |
Zoning extract |
|
2015/131360 |
|
A3View |
Site plan |
|
2014/282519 |
|
A4View |
Basement plan |
|
2014/282523 |
|
A5View |
Level 1 plan |
|
2014/282530 |
|
A6View |
Level 2 plan |
|
2014/193727 |
|
A7View |
Section |
|
2014/193734 |
|
A8View |
North and west elevations |
|
2014/193729 |
|
A9View |
South and east elevations |
|
2014/193732 |
|
A10View |
External finishes |
|
2014/193704 |
|
A11View |
Landscape plans |
|
2015/131584 |
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 July 2015 |
GB.3 / 115 |
|
|
Item GB.3 |
DA0264/14 |
|
23 June 2015 |
development application
Summary Sheet
Report title: |
1185 Pacific Highway Turramurra - Demolition of Existing Structures and Construction of Four Townhouses including, Garages and Landscaping Works |
ITEM/AGENDA NO: |
GB.3 |
Application No: |
DA0264/14 |
Property Details: |
1185 Pacific Highway, Turramurra Lot & DP No: Lot 2 within DP 233452 Site area (1246m2): Zoning: Residential 2(d3) |
Ward: |
Comenarra
|
Proposal/Purpose: |
To determine Development Application DA0264/14 which proposes demolition of existing structures and construction of four town houses, including garages and landscaping works
|
Type of Consent: |
Integrated - Bushfire |
Applicant: |
Natalie Richter Planning |
Owner: |
Charles Hon-Yuen Lee and Christie Ping-Lui Lee |
Date Lodged: |
18 July 2014 |
Recommendation: |
Deferred Commencement Consent
|
Purpose of Report
To determine Development Application No. 0264/14 for the demolition of the existing structures and construction of four (4) townhouses, including garages and landscaping works.
integrated planning and reporting
PLACES, SPACES & 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 |
Applications are assessed in accordance with State and local plans |
Assessments are of high quality, accurate and consider all relevant legislative requirements |
Executive Summary
Issues: |
setbacks visual privacy site isolation of 1183 Pacific Highway |
Submissions: |
1 |
Land and Environment Court: |
No |
Recommendation: |
Approval |
History
Site
There is no relevant application history.
Pre-DA
There was no Pre DA for this application.
DA History
18 July 2014 The application was lodged.
25 July 2014 A letter was sent to the applicant requesting owner’s consent and details for a drainage easement.
1 August – 1 September 2014 The application was advertised.
1 August 2014 The applicant submits owner’s consent and requests a deferred commencement condition for a drainage easement.
15 August 2014 A letter was sent to the applicant advising, a deferred commencement condition is not appropriate.
29 August 2014 Council wrote to the applicant advising of the following issues:
- non compliance with BASIX Certificate
- non compliant deep soil landscape area
- non compliant site coverage
- tree impacts
- concerns with landscape plan and tree replenishment
- request for easement to be surveyed including located of all trees and vegetation within 7m of proposed easement
- concerns regarding levels and location of rainwater tanks
- location of the access ramp
- site isolation of 1183 Pacific Highway and request for assessment against Part 6 of DCP 55, relevant planning principles and details of how isolated site could be development independently
- drainage concerns as noted in previous correspondence dated 25 July and 15 August 2014
25 September 2014 A meeting was held with Council officers and the applicant and their draftsman and arborist.
22 October 2014 The applicant requested an extension of time.
13 November 2014 The assessment officer emailed applicant requesting time frame for submission of information. The applicant advises by 13 December 2014. Council requests information to be submitted by 27 November 2014.
18 November 2014 The applicant submits a letter detailing update of preparation of amended information and requests a further extension of time to submit information.
24 November 2014 An extension to 15 December 2014 was given to submit the required information.
15 December 2014 The amended information and plans are submitted to Council.
12 February 2015 Application considered at collegiate review.
12 February 2015 Letter sent to applicant advising information submitted on 15 December does not adequately address water management, tree impacts and site isolation issues. The concept design for 1183 Pacific Highway is a prohibited form of development. Council requested withdrawal of the application.
19 February 2015 Council agrees to a further 4 week extension to submit information with information due on the 19 March 2015.
20 March 2015 Additional information submitted to Council.
1 April 2015 Council advised the applicant that the information remained unsatisfactory as Council had not been provided with a finalised drainage pipe design, a finalised aboricultural report and an adequate response to the site isolation issue. Council requested information to be submitted by 8 April 2015.
8 April 2015 Further information is submitted by the applicant.
30 April 2015 Council advised the applicant that in principle Council is satisfied with the proposed inter-allotment drainage system through 10 Warrangi Street. The issue of site isolation remained unresolved.
6 May 2015 Council wrote to the applicant and advised:
- drainage easement and design to be formally submitted
- information has not adequate addressed the tree impacts. The arboricultural assessment report is preliminary and fails to assess or discuss degrees of impact.
- Council provided recommendations to assist in resolving the tree impact issues outstanding and site isolation
Council also invited the applicant in for a meeting to discuss the outstanding matters.
19 May 2015 Council staff met with applicant, arborist, draftsman and owner to discuss outstanding matters.
12 June 2015 The applicant submits amended plans and information.
24 June 2015 Council requests submission of missing internal elevations of proposed dwellings.
30 June 2015 The applicant submits further information.
The Site
Site description
The site is legally described as Lot 2 within DP 233452 and is known as 1185 Pacific Highway, Turramurra. The site is irregular in shape with an area of 1246m². The site has a frontage of 36.92 metres to Pacific Highway, an irregular western side boundary, 12.58 metres and 32.355 metres in length. The site has a rear boundary of 21.3 metres and an eastern (side) boundary of 63.095 metres. The site falls gently from the street towards the rear of the site.
The site contains a single storey brick dwelling with vehicular access from Pacific Highway via a curved driveway. Other existing site works include an in ground swimming pool at the rear, pathways and retaining structures.
The site is characterised by an established landscape setting, with plantings of mature trees and shrubs within the front garden beds and grassed areas. There is a large Camphor laurel located adjacent to the eastern side boundary which is the largest tree on site.
Surrounding development
Surrounding the site of the proposed development are properties zoned for residential purposes. Properties immediately adjoining the site, with the exception of the heritage item which is zoned Residential 2(c2), are zoned Residential 2d(3). The site is located to the north of the intersection with Warrangi Street.
To the west of the site is a detached, two storey dwelling (1187 Pacific Highway). This site is listed as an item of local heritage significance in Schedule 7 of the KPSO.
The rear boundary is shared with 1189 Pacific Highway, an irregular shaped allotment with a right of way access from Pacific Highway. This site is proposed to be amalgamated with 1 and 1a Womerah Avenue as part of a current development application (DA0173/14).
The locality is in transition with existing single dwellings gradually replaced with recent construction of multi unit housing.
The Proposal
The applicant seeks consent to demolish the existing dwelling and construct four (4) townhouses, including garages and landscaping works at 1185 Pacific Highway, Turramurra. The proposed works include:
· demolition of existing dwelling, driveway, swimming pool and other structures on the site.
· landscaping works including retaining structures along the boundaries.
· construction of four (4) 1 x 1 bedroom and 3 x 2 bedroom 2 storey townhouses
A driveway is proposed adjacent to the eastern side boundary, with individual access provided to each townhouse from the driveway. There is a visitor parking provided located adjacent to Dwelling 1. Separate pedestrian access is provided via a ramp adjacent to the western side boundary.
Amended plans 15 December 2014:
· an amended BASIX Certificate 557840M_02
· a survey plan updated to show trees and canopy heights and proposed easement
· architectural plans updated to comply with deep soil landscape area, modify driveway and access ramp
· revised landscape plan including a new pedestrian path from the access ramp to dwelling 1, paved courtyards to dwellings, lily pily hedge along the driveway, Trees 11, 13, 14 and 16 shown to be retained
· amended tree assessment report
· stormwater plans showing the proposed easement
· rainwater tanks relocated under driveway
· architectural sketch of 1183 Pacific Highway in response to site isolation
· an updated quantity surveyors report
Amended plans and information received on12 June 2015:
· a drainage design and proposed easement
· an amended arborist report
· amended architectural and landscape plans showing relocated detention tank
· architectural concept plans for 1183 Pacific Highway
· a valuation report prepared by JLL for the for isolated site being 1183 Pacific Highway
· advice relating to the isolated site
Further information received 30 June 2015:
· internal elevations of dwellings
Consultation
Community
In accordance with Development Control Plan No. 56, adjoining owners were given notice of the application between 1 August to 1 September 2014. One (1) submission was received from the following:
1. Mrs Mary C Beasley
1183 Pacific Highway, Turramurra
The submission raised the following issues:
Location of air conditioning units
The submitted plans do not nominate air conditioning units. However, the submitted BASIX Certificate nominates air conditioning units within each townhouse and the location and details to be shown on construction certificate plans. Condition 64 and 79 are recommended to control noise levels.
Location of the waste disposal bins away from eastern boundary
It is considered unlikely the bins would be provided adjacent to the eastern boundary given that this is where the driveway access is. Bins in this location would prevent access to the site.
There is only one (1) visitor space
The proposal complies with the minimum required parking spaces.
Traffic impact on Pacific Highway
The proposal is not considered to have an unacceptable traffic impact upon Pacific Highway. Council’s Development Engineer has not raised any issue with the proposed development in this regard.
Relocation of driveway access is dangerous
The proposed driveway location is adjacent to the eastern boundary. Concern is raised regarding the driveway being adjacent to the driveway access of 1183 Pacific Highway and being separated by a power pole. Council’s Development Engineer has not raised any issue with the proposed location of the driveway or safety with access arrangements.
Existing swimming pool needs to be backfilled, will there be a waiting period for it to subside?
The existing swimming pool will be removed from site and will be filled to enable the proposed development. The construction will be subject to a construction management plan (Condition 9) which deals with timing of works and safe construction methods.
Clarification of whether the retaining wall will not impact the existing fence line
The proposed retaining walls are shown to be set back from the rear boundary and do not require the removal of the existing fencing.
Within Council
Heritage
Council's Heritage Adviser has commented on the revised proposal as follows:
“Heritage status
The site is not a heritage item and is not located in a Heritage Conservation Area within the KPSO or the draft KLEP 2013. The site adjoins a Heritage Item at 1187 pacific Highway, Turramurra and is within the vicinity of a draft item at 14 Warrangi Street, Turramurra.
The site has been identified as being in the Urban Conservation Area 20- Ku-ring-gai Avenue, Turramurra. This precinct is one of the early National Trust Conservation Areas and was classified before the Interwar UCA study commenced.
Conclusions and recommendations
· the ground floor level is to be face brickwork and the first floor level is to be rendered.
· the roof tiles are to be a combination of two lighter grey coloured tiles – Boral terracotta shingles, Scoria 30% and Asphalt 70%.
· windows are to be timber framed.
The proposed development will have minimal impact on the adjoining heritage item subject to the above measures (Conditions 7 and 17).
Landscaping
Council's Landscape and Tree Assessment Officer has commented on the revised proposal as follows:
“Tree impacts
· There is no objection to the removal of the following trees; T1, T3, T6, T7, T8, T9, T10, T12, T15 and T19.
· T19 Cinnamomum camphora (Camphor laurel) located adjacent to the eastern site boundary is the largest tree on site and the most prominent when viewed from a broader landscape setting (neighbouring properties). A band of trees which would include T19, is evident in the 1943 aerial photographs. The subject site was the original tennis court for the heritage item at 1187 Pacific Hwy and the species is consistent with cultural plantings associated with the heritage item. T19 is proposed to be removed and T18 is proposed to be retained. Both trees are exempt from requiring approval for removal.
Other aspects of the development are acceptable on landscape grounds.
Landscape plan/tree replenishment
· minor changes to the proposed planting are recommended to provide a layered landscape setting with intermediate screening which will improve landscape amenity, this is conditioned.
· canopy tree replenishment requirements have been satisfied.
Stormwater plan
The proposed drainage works on site are acceptable.
BASIX
The landscape areas are consistent with the submitted BASIX certificate #557840M_02 dated 09/12/2014.
Deep soil
The proposed deep soil landscape area and calculations as shown by the applicant are correct and compliant.
Conclusion
The application is acceptable on landscape grounds, subject to Conditions 3, 11-16, 21, 30, 31, 55 – 61 and 65.”
Engineering
Council’s Development Engineer commented on the revised proposal as follows:
“The application is supported subject to conditions.
The details include a design for an inter-allotment drainage pipe through 1183 and 1189 Pacific Highway and 12 Warrangi Street Turramurra. This design is satisfactory. A length of 375mm diameter pipe is also required in Warrangi Street to connect to the downstream drainage pit. Roads Act plans for this work can be assessed and approved by Council’s Operations Department prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. A deferred commencement condition is recommended, requiring the registration of the easements prior to the operation of the consent.
The detention tank has been relocated clear of the tree protection zone and the water management proposals for the development are now satisfactory.
Drawing D2 contains a note on the right hand side - “This plan manages stormwater runoff derived from roof and driveway surfaces only as shown on architectural drawings. All other surface runoff water to be managed by separate system by owner in accordance with AS3500.3 and BCA Part 3.1.2”. This note should be deleted, as the plan also shows grated pits for surface runoff, and for tree protection reasons, additional pits not shown would not be approved. ” Conditions Schedule A 1 and Schedule B 8 - 10, 19 – 23,29, 33 – 35, 38, 52, 53, 68-74 relate to engineering.
Outside Council
Rural Fire Service
The site is classified as Bush Fire Prone Vegetation Buffer. Section 91 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act, 1979 identifies certain development that is deemed to be “Integrated Development” within the meaning provided under Part 3A of the Act. Section 100B of the Rural Fires Act, 1997 requires that a Bush Fire Safety Authority (BFSA) be obtained before bush fire prone land which includes subdivision. The proposal results in an increase in dwellings on site and it is anticipated will be subdivided in future.
Pursuant to Section 100B of the Rural Fires Act, 1997, the application, has been referred to the RFS for consideration as to whether a BFSA may be issued to the proposed development. In response, the RFS issued a BFSA, subject to Conditions 37, 75, 76 and 77 relating to the following:
· provision of adequate asset protection zones
· the provision of water, electricity and gas consistent with the requirements of ‘Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006’
Statutory Provisions
State Environmental Planning Policies
State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land
The provisions of SEPP 55 require Council to consider the potential for a site to be contaminated. The subject site has a history of residential use and as such, it is unlikely to contain any contamination and further investigation is not warranted in this case.
State Environmental Planning Policy Infrastructure 2007 (SEPPI 2007)
Pursuant to Clause 101 in SEPPI 2007, the consent authority is required to consider the impact of development on traffic flows along classified roads. The proposed development provides for vehicle access from the Pacific Highway (a classified road) which is inconsistent with Clause 101(2)(a) of the SEPP. It is not possible for vehicle access to be provided elsewhere as the subject site has only one street frontage, which is to the Pacific Highway.
The provision of vehicular access to the site is not considered to adversely affect the safety, efficiency or on going operation of the Pacific Highway. The proposal provides for four townhouses and does not result in a significant increase in traffic generation to the Pacific Highway.
One of the proposed townhouses has a frontage to the Pacific Highway and Condition 32 is recommended to ensure the acoustic amenity of occupants is acceptable and the potential traffic noise arising from the Pacific Highway does not adversely affect occupants in accordance with Clause 101(2)(c) and Clause 102 of State Environmental Planning Policy Infrastructure 2007.
State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004
A BASIX certificate has been submitted with the application (Certificate No. 557840M_02, dated 9 December 2014). The proposal satisfies the SEPP requirements (Condition 63)
Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 – Hawkesbury-Nepean River
SREP 20 applies to land within the catchment of the Hawkesbury Nepean River. The general aim of the plan is to ensure that development and future land uses within the catchment are considered in a regional context. The Plan includes strategies for the assessment of development in relation to water quality and quantity, scenic quality, aquaculture, recreation and tourism.
The proposed development is considered to achieve the relevant aims under this policy.
Local Content
Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015
The draft LEP was on exhibition from the 25 March 2013 to 6 May 2013. The LEP was adopted by Council on 26 November 2013. The KLEP 2015 was gazetted on 27 March 2015 and took effect on 2 April 2015. The subject development application was lodged on 18 July 2014 and is subject to the savings provisions of the Ku-ring-gai LEP and the application is considered under the KPSO.
The site is zoned R4 High Density Residential under the KLEP and is subject to a height limit of 11.5m and a maximum floor space ratio (FSR) of 0.8:1 (GFA). The proposal complies with the height and FSR development standards.
Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance
Clause 23: Permissibility
Townhouses are permissible within the Residential 2(d3) zoning.
Clause 25C Aims and objectives of Part 3A and Clause 25D: and consideration of residential zone objectives and impact on heritage
The proposed development has an acceptable relationship with the adjoining heritage item. The proposal provides for an increased housing choice, particularly in the immediate area which consists of residential flat development and single residential dwellings. The building design achieves a high level of residential amenity in relation to solar access, privacy, acoustic control, natural ventilation, passive security design, outdoor living, landscape design and indoor amenity. The proposal is therefore consistent with the aims and objectives of Clause 25C and D of the KPSO.
Development standard |
Proposed |
Complies |
|
Site area (min): 1200m2 |
1246m2 |
YES |
|
Deep landscaping (min): 40% (498m²) |
40% |
YES |
|
Street frontage (min): 23m |
36.92m |
YES |
|
Number of storeys (max): 3 |
2 storeys |
YES |
|
Maximum site coverage (max): 40% (498m²) |
28.85% |
YES |
|
Storeys and ceiling height (max): 3 storeys and 10.3 metres |
2 storeys and 5.675 metres
|
YES
|
|
Car parking spaces (min): 1 (visitors) 4 (residents) 5 (total) |
1 4 5 |
YES YES YES |
|
Manageable housing (min): 10% |
25% |
YES |
|
Clause 25I – heads of consideration for consent authority
The proposal provides for a high level of deep soil landscaping which is compliant with the development standard. The proposal does not result in any significant adverse impacts upon adjoining properties in relation to overshadowing, loss of visual privacy, or loss of outlook. The proposal achieves an appropriate separation between buildings and site boundaries. The landscaping proposed is adequate and effective to screen the built form so that it does not dominate the landscape. The proposal is therefore consistent with the heads of consideration in Clause 25I of KPSO.
Clause 38B – services
Clause 38B states that consent must not be issued to the carrying out of development on land unless access to a water supply, drainage and a sewerage system will be available. The site is connected to the sewer system and reticulated water is provided.
Clause 61D and 61E – Development of and within the vicinity of heritage items
The site is in the vicinity of a heritage item (No. 1187 Pacific Highway) of local significance. The proposal is not considered to result in any significant adverse impacts upon the heritage item. The proposed works will not interfere with view lines to or from the heritage item. The proposal is an appropriate form of development within the streetscape. The proposal is considered to be consistent with the objectives of Clause 61D(1) the KPSO.
Policy Provisions
Development Control Plan No. 55 – Railway / Pacific Highway Corridor and St Ives Centre
Part A: General aims
The proposed development provides for townhouses which contribute to the additional housing types this is consistent with the desired future character of Ku-ring-gai under the zone. The proposal provides for an appropriate landscape setting and character which achieves a high level of aesthetic quality and amenity for future occupants and the public domain. The proposal is an appropriate form of development which is sympathetic to the adjoining heritage item and its setting. The proposal will achieve a high level of residential amenity and is a building type which is compatible for all age groups. The proposal is consistent with the general aims of DCP 55.
Part B: Development controls
Development control |
Proposed |
Complies |
|
Part 3 Local context: |
|||
Development within vicinity of a heritage item: |
|
|
|
10m setback (1st & 2nd storeys) |
18.5m |
YES |
|
Front setback greater than the adjoining heritage item |
9m further setback than heritage item |
YES |
|
Screening plant to height of 4m |
Camellia sasanqua – small leaf camellia which has a height of 4m proposed |
YES |
|
Colours and materials complementary |
The proposed colours materials are to be appropriate. |
YES
Condition 17 |
|
Part 4.1 Landscape design: |
|||
Deep soil landscaping (min) |
|
|
|
150m2 per 1000m2 of site area = 186.9m2 |
319m² |
YES |
|
No. of tall trees required (min): 4 trees |
>4 trees |
YES |
|
Part 4.2 Density: |
|||
Building footprint (max): |
|
|
|
40% of total site area |
28.85% |
YES |
|
Floor space ratio (max): |
|
|
|
0.8:1 (996.8m²) |
0.45:1 (561.47m²) |
YES |
|
Part 4.3 Setbacks: |
|||
Street boundary setback (min): |
|
|
|
10-12 metres (<40% of the zone occupied by building footprint) |
9m 26% |
NO YES |
|
Rear boundary setback (min): |
|
|
|
6m |
6.2m |
YES |
|
Side boundary setback (min): |
|
|
|
3m 6m to habitable rooms |
Min. 5.085m western kitchen (Dwg 4) Min. 4.74m eastern living room (Dwg 1) |
NO
NO |
|
Setback of ground floor courtyards to street boundary (min): |
|
|
|
8m |
9m |
YES |
|
% of total area of front setback occupied by private courtyards (max): |
|
|
|
15% |
<15% |
YES |
|
Part 4.4 Built form and articulation: |
|||
Façade articulation: |
|
|
|
Wall plane depth >600mm |
>600mm |
YES |
|
Wall plane area <81m2 |
<81m2 |
YES |
|
Built form: |
|
|
|
Building width < 36m |
<36m |
YES |
|
Balcony projection < 1.2m |
<1.2m |
YES |
|
Part 4.5 Residential amenity |
|||
Solar access: |
|
|
|
>70% of units receive 3+ hours direct sunlight in winter solstice |
100% |
YES |
|
>50% of the principle common open space of the development receives 3+ hours direct sunlight in the winter solstice |
>50% |
YES |
|
Development shall allow the retention of at least 3hrs sunlight between 9am – 3pm on June 21 to habitable rooms and the principal portion of outdoor living area of adjoining houses in single house zones (2(c1) and 2(c2) zones). Note: where existing overshadowing by buildings is greater than this, sunlight is not to be reduced by more than 20%. |
>3 hours sunlight to neighbouring habitable rooms and principal outdoor living areas |
YES |
|
Visual privacy: |
|
|
|
Separation b/w windows and balconies of a building and any neighbouring building on site or adjoining site: |
|||
Storeys 1 to 4 · 12m between habitable rooms · 9m between habitable and non habitable · 6m between non habitable
|
3.66m between Dwg 1 and Dwg 2 2.23m between Dwg 3 and Dwg 4
Dwg 1 – 5.46m from eastern boundary
|
NO NO
NO
|
|
Acoustic privacy: |
|
|
|
Dwelling to comply with BCA |
Subject to conditions |
YES |
|
Bedrooms and POS located away from noise sources |
POS adjacent to western boundary and bedrooms on first floor |
YES |
|
Mechanical equipment located away from bedrooms and living rooms of adjoining properties |
Submission has been received regarding noise impact from air conditioning units. |
YES
Conditions 32, 64 and 70 |
|
Internal amenity: |
|
|
|
Habitable rooms have a minimum floor to ceiling height of 2.7m |
2.95m |
YES |
|
1-2 bedroom units have a minimum plan dimension of 3m in all bedroom |
3m minimum |
YES |
|
Single corridors: - serve a maximum of 8 dwellings - >1.5m wide |
<8 townhouses No hallways |
YES YES |
|
Storage - Min 8m³ for 2 bedroom units at least 50% within unit |
>8m³ |
YES |
|
Outdoor living: |
|
|
|
ground floor apartments have a terrace or private courtyard greater than 25m2 in area |
>25m2 |
YES |
|
primary outdoor space has a minimum dimension of 2.4m |
>2.4m |
YES |
|
POS located facing north, east or west for solar access |
POS faces west and north |
YES |
|
Part 4.6 Safety and security |
|||
Out look to common open space |
Windows in both east and west elevation to overlook common areas |
YES |
|
Lighting to pathways |
Lighting to be provided along driveway |
YES Condition 25 |
|
Entries to buildings are to be clearly visible from street or internal driveway |
Entries visible from driveway |
YES |
|
Part 4.7 Social dimensions: |
|||
Disabled access to be provided |
Ramp provided adjacent to western boundary from street |
YES |
|
Adaptable dwelling provided |
Dwg 1 |
YES |
|
Visit-able units (min): |
|
|
|
70% |
75% |
YES Condition 18 |
|
Part 5 Parking and vehicular access: |
|||
Car parking (min): |
|
|
|
4 resident spaces 1 visitor spaces 5 total spaces |
4 x resident 1 x visitor |
YES Condition 19 |
|
Part 5.2:Development adjoining arterial roads |
|||
6m max driveway width |
5.5m |
YES |
|
Part 6: Consideration of isolated sites |
|||
Consolidation of sites to avoid single detached dwellings zoning 2(d3) with areas less than 1200m² or street frontage 23m |
1183 Pacific Highway- single dwelling <1200m² <23m |
NO |
|
Applicant to demonstrate adjoining allotment can be developed in accordance with LEP 194 and DCP 55 |
Refer to discussion below. |
YES |
|
Part 3.5 Development within the Vicinity of a Heritage Item
The proposal adjoins the heritage item at 1187 Pacific Highway, Turramurra and is within vicinity of the draft item at 14 Warrangi Street, Turramurra. The control C-4 requires colours and building materials to be complementary to the heritage item. Concern has been raised by Council’s Heritage Advisor regarding the proposed materials and finishes. As such, Condition 17 is recommended which requires the ground floor to be face brick, the roofing material to be lighter shade and the windows to be timber framed. Subject to compliance with this condition of consent, the proposal is considered satisfactory with respect of materials and finishes and impacts to the nearby heritage items.
Part 4.3 Setbacks
The control requires a 3.0 metres side setback between non habitable rooms, a 6.0 metres side setback to habitable rooms and a front setback between 10 – 12 metres from the boundary and that no more than 40% of the front setback be occupied by building footprint.
The proposal provides for a minimum front setback of 9 metres and does not comply with the control requirement. The proposal provides for a 5.085 metres setback from the western boundary from the kitchen of Dwelling 4 and a 4.74 metres setback from the eastern side boundary from the living room of Dwelling 1 and therefore does not comply with the control requirements.
Notwithstanding, the proposed front setback is acceptable on merit for the following reasons:
(i) the site has a splayed frontage on an irregular shaped block
(ii) the proposal provides a minimum setback of 9 metres at the south-western corner of the building closest to adjoining heritage item
(iii) the south-eastern corner of the building is setback 13.5 metres from the front boundary
(iv) the heritage item is located forward of the proposed building line
(v) the site is adjoined to the east by a single residential dwelling at 1183 Pacific Highway which is set back 9 metres from the front boundary, with an increased setback as it approaches the eastern side boundary
(vi) the corner property at 2 – 6 Warrangi Street which is a residential flat building with a frontage to the Pacific Highway has a set back of 10 metres at the south-western corner and 24 metres at the intersected frontage to Warrangi Street
(vii) the proposed front setback responds to the splayed frontage and is consistent with the siting of building within vicinity of the site, providing for a consistent urban form
(viii) the setback permits landscaping within the front setbacks and achieves a high level of residential amenity
(ix) the proposal is consistent with the objectives of the control which is to provide building separation and the setbacks to achieve a landscape setting to soften built form
The purpose of the side setback control is to provide separation between built form and neighbouring development to permit landscaping which enables privacy and solar access to properties. The purpose of landscaping is also to soften the built form. The proposed side setbacks are considered acceptable on merit for the following reasons:
(i) Dwelling 4 adjoins the heritage item which is set back 14.4 metres from the shared boundary. Adequate separation is achieved. The setback is sufficient to provide for landscaping and maintain visual privacy and solar access to the subject property and heritage item
(ii) Dwelling 1 is set back 4.74 metres from the eastern boundary. The dwelling is separated by the vehicular driveway which runs parallel to the eastern boundary. A 700mm wide planter bed is provided for the entire length of the driveway which accommodates Lilli Pillis with a height of 3 – 5 metres
(iii) The living room of Dwelling 1 does not align with any existing openings within the western elevation of 1183 Pacific Highway.
(iv) The proposal achieves the desired separation between properties and provides for landscaping which achieves the intended purposes of softening the built form
(v) The proposal maintains reasonable visual privacy and solar access to the adjoining property
(vi) The proposal is consistent with the purpose of the control which is to provide separation between built form and neighbouring development to permit landscaping which enables privacy and solar access to properties
Part 4.5.2 Visual Privacy
The control requires separation between windows and balconies of a building and any neigbouring building on site or adjoining the site. The proposal is a two storey development and is required to achieve the following separation:
· 12 metres between habitable rooms
· 9 metres between habitable and non habitable rooms
· 6 metres between habitable rooms
The proposal results in a separation of 3.66 metres between Dwelling 1 and Dwelling 2 and a 2.23 metres separation between Dwelling 3 and Dwelling 4 and does not satisfy the control requirements. However, the proposed separation is acceptable for the following reasons:
(i) The northern elevation of Dwelling 1 at first floor does not contain any openings
(ii) The southern elevation of Dwelling 2 contains an opening to the bathroom which is a highlight window
(iii) There is only a single window between these dwellings which does not result in any loss of visual privacy to Dwelling 1 or Dwelling 2
(iv) The northern elevation of Dwelling 3 and the southern elevation of Dwelling 4 both contain windows at first floor associated with bathrooms. These windows align with each other, however the windows have a sill height of 1.55 metres and achieve a reasonable privacy between the dwellings.
The proposed separation is acceptable.
Dwelling 1 is set back 5.4 metres from the eastern side boundary which is shared with 1183 Pacific Highway. The dwelling contains four openings at the first floor. The windows are associated with the master bedroom, ensuite and bathroom.
The windows associated with the ensuite and bathroom is acceptable, given the separation distance. The proposed bedroom windows do not align with any windows in the adjoining property and would not likely result in any loss of visual privacy.
Part 4.5.3 Acoustic Privacy
Concern has been raised by the owners of the adjoining property at 1183 Pacific Highway in relation to noise impact from air conditioning units. The submitted architectural plans do not nominate the location of air conditioning units. However, the submitted BASIX Certificate has nominated the use of air conditioning units which are to be shown on the construction certificate plans. Conditions 32, 64 and 79 require that noise from mechanical equipment not exceed 5dBA above the background noise from the adjoining property. The proposal is considered satisfactory with respect of noise impacts, subject to these conditions.
Part 6 Consideration of isolated sites
Clause 6 of the DCP provides a series of controls relating to developments proposing site amalgamations that will leave isolated undersized sites.
C-1 Consolidation or amalgamation of sites are to avoid single detached dwellings on lots in a 2(d3) zone smaller than 1200m2 or with street frontages less than 23m being left underdeveloped as a result of any development proposal.
C-2 Where a development proposal results in an adjoining single allotment or allotments in a 2(d3) zone with an area of less than 1200m2 or a street frontage of less than 23m, the applicant is to demonstrate that the adjoining allotment(s) can be developed in accordance with the provisions of LEP 194 and this DCP, including but not limited to the standards and controls relating to:
i. deep soil landscaping
ii. site coverage
iii. building setback
iv. solar access, and
v. visual privacy
Submitted material should include details and diagrams that demonstrate that such development is economically viable and that it will not detract from the character of the neighbourhood and can contribute positively to the streetscape.
The proposed development would result in the isolation of 1183 Pacific Highway, as it results in a single dwelling on a single allotment of land less than 1200m² with a frontage less than 23 metres. The site has an area of 1126m² and a frontage of 18.29 metres. The site is constrained to the east by the residential flat development of 2 – 6 Warrangi Street and the proposed residential flat building at 1189 Pacific Highway (currently being considered under DA0173/14) to the east.
In response to Council’s isolation controls, the applicant has prepared a scheme demonstrating how 1183 Pacific Highway could nevertheless be developed in accordance with the terms of the KPSO and DCP 55. It is, however noted, that since the lodgement of this development application Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 has come into effect, which means any future development of 1183 Pacific Highway would be subject to the provisions of the KLEP 2015 and KDCP 2015. An assessment is provided below in relation to both LEP 194 and KLEP 2015.
The concept design (Attachments 9 and 10) provides for three multi-unit dwellings, two storeys in scale with driveway access along the eastern side boundary, consisting of 1 x 3 bedroom and 2 x 2 bedroom dwellings.
In accordance with Control C-2 of Part 6 in DCP 55, it is necessary for the applicant to demonstrate that the isolated site can be developed in accordance with the provisions of LEP 194 and DCP 55. The submitted concept design demonstrates that:
Deep soil landscape
Based on the site area of 1126m² medium density development on 1183 Pacific Highway would required 40% deep soil landscape area or 450.4m². The submitted concept provides for deep soil of 44.41% complying with the KPSO and DCP.
Site coverage
The site coverage is shown to be 32.4% and complies with the 35% standard.
Building setback
The site would be subject to a 10 metres front setback, a 6.0 metres rear setback and minimum side setbacks of between 3 – 6 metres. The concept plan complies, with a 10 metres front setback and a 7.5 metres rear setback.
The design provides a minimum setback of 2.0 metres ranging to 3.0 metres from the western side boundary and 2.0 metres ranging to 7.0 metres from the eastern side boundary and would be non-compliant. The rooms which are non-compliant with the setbacks are habitable rooms which necessitate the 6.0 metres separation distance.
The proposed development, which has a complaint site area and minimum frontage results in a non-compliance with the required setbacks. Therefore, it is not unexpected that the concept design on a smaller site, with one less dwelling and smaller frontage results in a technical non-compliance with the side setbacks. The purpose of the setback control is to provide separation between built form to permit landscaping which enables privacy and solar access to properties. The landscaping is to soften the built form. The concept design is capable of meeting the objectives of the control and is considered reasonable.
Solar access
The orientation of 1183 Pacific Highway is such that the rear of the property faces north. The development proposed on 1185 Pacific Highway does not cast shadow until 3pm upon the adjoining property. The property would be affected by shadow at 9am from 1179 Pacific Highway. It is however considered, with appropriate design the site would be capable of meeting the 70% solar access requirement.
Visual privacy
The concept has been prepared locating the family/living rooms of Dwellings 1 and 3 towards the front and rear boundaries, respectively and Dwelling 2 family room has been designed to face the internal courtyard and not the side boundary in order to maintain visual privacy and reducing the opportunity for overlooking. This design is acceptable with regard to the privacy considerations of the DCP.
Floor space ratio
The concept proposes a FSR of 0.475:1 which is less than that maximum of 0.7:1 permitted by the DCP.
Height and storeys
The concept is 2 storeys and complies with the maximum of 3 storey control which is below the maximum perimeter ceiling height control of 10.3 metres stipulated in the KPSO.
Clause 25I(4) of the KPSO relates to multi-unit housing on smaller sites. The control states that multi-unit housing may be carried out within the 2(d3) zone on a site that is less than 1200m² or a street frontage of less than 23 metres, if the proposed development complies with all other requirements of this Ordinance. The concept design demonstrates compliance with deep soil landscape area, site coverage and the maximum height and number of storeys.
Pursuant to the provisions of Control C-2, as the concept provided to Council demonstrates that a compliant development with respect to Council’s controls could be undertaken on 1183 Pacific Highway, Council may consider a DA that could have the effect of isolating that allotment.
Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015
The site is zoned R4 High Density Residential under the KLEP. The minimum allotment size is 1200m² and 24 metre frontage. The future development of this site for the purposes of multi dwelling housing would be non compliant with the development standard of Clause 6.6 (2)(a) Requirements for multi dwelling housing and residential flat buildings. The application would need to be supported by a Clause 4.6 Exceptions to development standards variation. The merits of the variation would be considered at the time an application is lodged.
The site is subject to a maximum height of 11.5 metres and a maximum FSR of 0.8:1 (GFA). The concept design provided proposes a FSR of 0.475:1, is two storeys in scale which is less than the permitted 11.5 metres.
Ku-ring-gai Development Control Plan 2015
Part 3B Land consolidation
The controls require land consolidation to increase the width of the street frontage and avoid irregular lot configurations. The controls deal with development proposals which result in an isolated lot. In this circumstance, the site would be the isolated allotment that does not satisfy the minimum street frontage and allotment size.
Part 6 Multi Dwelling Housing
This Part of the DCP is divided into sections which relate to site design, access and parking and building sustainability. The table below outlines the key controls relevant for consideration of the concept design:
CONTROL |
PROPOSED |
COMPIANCE |
PART 6A SITE DESIGN |
||
6A.2 Building Setbacks |
||
Front – 10m |
10m |
YES |
Side – min. 3m where orientated to side 6m
|
The design provides a minimum setback of 2.0 metres ranging to 3.0 metres from the western side boundary and 2.0 metres ranging to 7.0 metres from the eastern side boundary. |
NO
The objectives of the setback control are to soften the built form by enabling landscaping within adequate separation of built form and to alleviate impacts on amenity.
The concept design is capable of meeting the objectives of the control and is considered reasonable.
|
Rear - 6m |
7.5m |
YES |
6A.3 Building Separation |
||
3m between non habitable 6m between habitable and non habitable |
3m between non habitable and 6m between habitable |
YES |
6A.4 Site coverage |
||
35% |
32.4% |
YES |
6A.5 Deep Soil Landscaping |
||
40% |
44.41% |
YES |
Part 6B Parking and Access |
||
Driveways setback 3m from side boundary |
<3m from eastern boundary |
NO
The purpose of this control is to ensure driveways do no dominate the streetscape. The driveway width is kept to a minimum and does not dominate the streetscape. The site is capable of achieving a well designed landscape frontage to soften the built form. |
Car parking 3 spaces |
3 spaces provided. |
YES |
Part 6C Building Design and Sustainability |
||
Part 6C.2 Private Open Space |
|
|
Private Open space 25m², 4m width and directly accessible from living area |
25m² |
YES |
Part 6 C.3 Solar Access |
|
|
Each dwelling solar access for 3 hours to living area between 9 – 3pm |
The orientation of 1183 Pacific Highway is such that the rear of the property faces north. With appropriate design the site would be capable of meeting the solar access requirement.
|
YES |
Part C6.11 Visual Privacy |
|
|
Designed to ensure privacy |
The concept has been prepared locating the family/living rooms of dwelling 1 and 3 towards the front and rear boundaries.
Dwelling 2 family room faces the internal courtyard and not the side boundary.
This design is acceptable with regards to the privacy considerations of the DCP.
|
YES |
Consideration of site isolation extends beyond the concept diagrams that detail how an isolated allotment maybe developed. The circumstance in which the potentially isolated allotment has come about also requires consideration.
The Land & Environment Court has dealt with numerous developments involving a potentially isolated allotment being created and, as a consequence developed three planning principles that can be used to help determine the acceptability or otherwise of a potentially isolated allotment.
The first and most relevant of the planning principles of the Land & Environment Court was established in Melissa Grech V Auburn Council [2004] NSWLEC 40.
In that matter, the Court established 3 principles that should apply to any assessment involving a potentially isolated allotment as follows:
….Firstly, where a property will be isolated by a proposed development and that property cannot satisfy the minimum lot requirements then negotiations between the owners of the properties should commence at an early stage and prior to the lodgement of the development application.
Secondly, and where no satisfactory result is achieved from the negotiations, the development application should include details of the negotiations between the owners of the properties. These details should include offers to the owner of the isolated property. A reasonable offer, for the purposes of determining the development application and addressing the planning implications of an isolated lot, is to be based on at least one recent independent valuation and may include other reasonable expenses likely to be incurred by the owner of the isolated property in the sale of the property.
Thirdly, the level of negotiation and any offers made for the isolated site are matters that can be given weight in the consideration of the development application. The amount of weight will depend on the level of negotiation and whether offers are deemed reasonable or unreasonable, and relevant planning requirements and the provisions of S79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979……
In the case of the subject application:
(i) The applicant has provided evidence that negotiations with the owner of 1183 Pacific Highway to acquire that property commenced at the beginning of June 2014. Whilst this was not well in advance of the lodgement date of the DA (18 July 2014), it is noted within the responses provided to Council from the affected owner, that she had received numerous offers over the years and declined all of them. The house is located close to her friends and all amenities and services she requires. The house was originally built by her and her husband in the 1960s and it has been her family home since then. The applicant had also provided revised offers with increased monetary value.
It is considered that with regard to the first planning principle mentioned above that negotiation to acquire 1183 Pacific Highway did not technically occur early on and well before the lodgement of the subject Development Application. However, it is evident that the owner of 1183 Pacific Highway had consistently rejected other offers over the years for the reasons stated in her letter.
(ii) The applicant has submitted a valuation report by JLL, dated 18 March 2015. The offers made are consistent with the valuation provided in the valuation report. It is considered, with regard to the second of the planning principles, a reasonable and acceptable offer has been made to acquire 1183 Pacific Highway.
(iii) The documentation provided by the applicant demonstrates that negotiations for the purchase of 1183 Pacific Highway took place and that a reasonable and acceptable offer had been made. This is evident with regard to the purchase prices offered and the explanation of the owner as to why she did not wish to sell. The purchase prices offered were consistent with the valuation.
Nothing within the planning principle or Council’s planning controls demands that an agreement as to acquire a potentially isolated allotment be reached. Importantly, such a position would confer a distinct commercial advantage to the owners of 1183 Pacific Highway or any other land owner that has land which allows for a higher density of development, subject to amalgamation. It would also prevent the owners of 1185 Pacific Highway undertaking development which is permitted within the zone at a higher density use.
The second of the Land & Environment Court cases that established a planning principle concerning isolated allotments was Cornerstone Property Group V Warringah Council 2004 NSWLEC 189. That case considered the instance of a potentially isolated allotment and expanded on the principle established in the Grech case. Importantly, that principle established considerations where site isolation would result as a consequence of development and that no planning controls or mechanisms for dealing with potentially isolated sites existed within the relevant consent authority’s planning controls. Both the KPSO and DCP 55 include controls for dealing with potentially isolated allotments as well as undersized allotments for multi-unit housing. The applicant has demonstrated with concept designs that an appropriate form of development could be carried out upon 1183 Pacific Highway.
The third Land & Environment Court case which dealt with the issue of an isolated allotment was Karavellas V Sutherland Shire Council 2004 NSWLEC 251. As is the case with the second planning principle, the circumstances of that case were different to that proposed in this instance, as the subject Council’s applicable planning controls compelled amalgamation, through an amalgamation strategy / plan. Such a strategy does not exist in this instance, other than minimum lot and frontage size for medium density development.
It is acknowledged that in that case the Court considered the matter as to what extent of any the carrying of the development on the development site would compromise the ability of the potentially isolated allotment to be developed in a manner consistent with the otherwise prevailing development controls and standards. This has been considered and demonstrated within the submitted concept for 1183 Pacific Highway.
If this development application were to be approved by Council, it will result in the isolation of the adjoining property at 1183 Pacific Highway, Turramurra. The applicant has made reasonable offers to acquire this site which has been rejected. The site is zoned for the purpose of permitting multi-unit development. The applicant has demonstrated, through a concept design for the adjoining property, that development can still occur, despite the site isolation.
Development Control Plan No. 31 – Access
The accessibility of the proposed development has been considered within the assessment of the proposal against the KPSO and DCP55 and is deemed to be acceptable in this regard (Conditions 20, 27, 28 and 66).
Development Control Plan No. 40 – Waste Management
The key objectives of this DCP are to encourage building design and construction techniques which will minimise waste generation, implement the principles of the waste hierarchy of avoiding, reusing and recycling building and construction materials, and commercial waste, minimise the environmental impacts of waste, promote the principles of ecologically sustainable development, meet Council's responsibilities in relation to the Northern Sydney Regional Waste Plan and assist in achieving the Federal and State Government's waste minimisation targets.
A waste management plan demonstrating compliance with the requirements of the DCP has been submitted and is acceptable (Conditions 4, 10, 46, 50, 60 and 62)
Development Control Plan No. 43 – Car Parking
Council’s Development Engineer has considered the car parking aspects of the proposal against the requirements of the KPSO and DCP43 and found the proposal to be acceptable in this regard.
Development Control Plan No. 47 – Water Management
As outlined above, Council’s Development Engineer is satisfied with the proposed development in relation to stormwater management. The application proposes an inter-allotment drainage easement through 10 Warrangi Street. The application is recommended for a deferred commencement consent, reliant the registration of the easement as outlined in Condition Schedule A Condition 1 of the recommended consent.
Section 94 Plan
The proposal would be subject to a Section 94 Contribution of $46,149.03 under Council’s current plan (Condition 36).
Australian Standard for Demolition - Clause 92(1)(b)
Clause 92(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulations 2000 requires the consent authority to consider the provisions of Australian Standard AS 2601-1991: The demolition of structures. The demolition of the existing structures will be carried out in accordance with a construction/demolition management plan, and this will be required to be submitted prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. Conditions to this effect are included in the recommendation section of this report.
Likely Impacts
The above assessment demonstrates that, subject to the recommended conditions, the proposal will not have any adverse impacts upon any adjoining properties or the environment in general due to the nature of the development.
Suitability of the Site
The site is zoned Residential 2(d3) and the proposed townhouses are a permissible form of development which is not inconsistent with the streetscape character. The proposal does not result in any significant adverse impacts upon the adjoining heritage item or dwelling at 1183 Pacific Highway. The site is considered suitable to accommodate the proposed townhouses as has been demonstrated in the above assessment.
Public Interest
The public interest is best served by the consistent application of the requirements of the relevant Environmental Planning Instruments, and by Council ensuring that any adverse effects on the surrounding area and the environment are minimised. The proposal has been assessed against the relevant environmental planning instruments and is deemed to be acceptable. On this basis, the proposal is not considered to raise any issues that are contrary to the public interest.
Conclusion
This application has been assessed under the heads of consideration of Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and all relevant instruments and policies.
The proposal is considered to be generally consistent with the relevant Council statutory and policy controls. Where strict compliance has not been achieved, the proposal has been considered with respect of the control outcomes and supported on merit. Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval.
A. THAT Council, as the consent authority, grant consent to Development Application No. 0264/14 for demolition of existing structures and construction of four townhouses with garages and landscaping works on land at 1185 Pacific Highway, Turramurra.
SCHEDULE A - Deferred commencement condition
Evidence required to satisfy the following condition must be submitted to Council within twelve (12) months of the date of this consent.
This consent does not operate until the following deferred commencement condition has been satisfied:
1. Drainage easement (deferred commencement)
The applicant shall submit documentary evidence that the property benefits from a drainage easement over the downstream properties as far as the public drainage system (1183 and 1189 Pacific Highway and 10 Warrangi Street). This consent will not operate until the documentary evidence has been submitted to and approved by Council’s Development Engineer.
Reason: To ensure that provision is made for stormwater drainage from the site in a proper manner that protects adjoining properties.
Upon receipt of written notification from Council that the abovementioned condition has been satisfied, the following conditions will apply:
SCHEDULE B - The standard conditions of consent are set out as follows:
Conditions that identify approved plans:
1. Approved architectural plans and documentation (new development)
The development must be carried out in accordance with the following plans and documentation listed below and endorsed with Council’s stamp, except where amended by other conditions of this consent:
Reason: To ensure that the development is in accordance with the determination.
2. Inconsistency between documents
In the event of any inconsistency between conditions of this consent and the drawings/documents referred to above, the conditions of this consent prevail.
Reason: To ensure that the development is in accordance with the determination.
3. Approved landscape plans
Landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the following landscape plan(s), listed below and endorsed with Council’s stamp, except where amended by other conditions of this consent:
Reason: To ensure that the development is in accordance with the determination.
Conditions to be satisfied prior to demolition, excavation or construction:
4. Asbestos works
All work involving asbestos products and materials, including asbestos-cement-sheeting (ie. Fibro), must be carried out in accordance with the guidelines for asbestos work published by WorkCover Authority of NSW.
Reason: To ensure public safety.
5. Notice of commencement
At least 48 hours prior to the commencement of any development (including demolition, excavation, shoring or underpinning works), a notice of commencement of building or subdivision work form and appointment of the principal certifying authority form shall be submitted to Council.
Reason: Statutory requirement.
6. Notification of builder’s details
Prior to the commencement of any development or excavation works, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be notified in writing of the name and contractor licence number of the owner/builder intending to carry out the approved works.
Reason: Statutory requirement.
7. Archival recording of buildings
Prior to the commencement of any development or excavation works on site, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that an archival report has been submitted to Council’s Heritage Advisor.
The report must consist of an archival standard photographic record of the building (internally and externally), its garden and views of it from the street illustrating its relationship to neighbouring properties and the streetscape. Recording shall be undertaken in accordance with the guidelines for “Photographic Recording of Heritage Items Using Film or Digital Capture (2006)” prepared by the New South Wales Heritage Office.
Information shall be bound in an A4 report format. It shall include copies of photographs, referenced to plans of the site. Two (2) copies (one (1) copy to include negatives or CD of images shall be submitted to Council's Heritage Advisor. The recording document will be held in the local studies collection of Ku-ring-gai Library, the local historical society and Council’s files.
Note: A written acknowledgment from Council must be obtained (attesting to this condition being appropriately satisfied) and submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the commencement of any works.
Reason: To ensure the proper management of historical artefacts and to ensure their preservation.
8. Dilapidation photos (public infrastructure)
Prior to the commencement of any works on site the applicant must submit to Ku-ring-gai Council and the Principal Certifying Authority a photographic record on the visible condition of the existing public infrastructure over the full site frontage (in colour - preferably saved to cd-rom in ‘jpg’ format). The photos must include detail of: · The existing footpath · The existing kerb and gutter · The existing full road surface between kerbs · The existing verge area · The existing driveway and layback where to be retained · Any existing drainage infrastructure including pits, lintels, grates. Particular attention must be paid to accurately recording any pre-developed damaged areas on the aforementioned infrastructure so that Council is fully informed when assessing damage to public infrastructure caused as a result of the development (which is not to be repaired by the Applicant as part of the development). The developer may be held liable to all damage to public infrastructure in the vicinity of the site, where such damage is not accurately recorded and demonstrated under the requirements of this condition prior to the commencement of any works.
Reason: To protect public infrastructure.
9. Construction and traffic management plan
The applicant must submit to Council a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP), which is to be approved by Council and Roads and Maritime Services prior to the commencement of any works on site.
The plan is to consist of a report with Traffic Control Plans attached.
The report is to contain commitments which must be followed by the demolition and excavation contractor, builder, owner and subcontractors. The CTMP applies to all persons associated with demolition, excavation and construction of the development.
The report is to contain construction vehicle routes for approach and departure to and from all directions.
The report is to contain a site plan showing entry and exit points. Swept paths are to be shown on the site plan showing access and egress for an 11 metre long heavy rigid vehicle.
The Traffic Control Plans are to be prepared by a qualified person (red card holder). One must be provided for each of the following stages of the works:
· Demolition · Concrete pour · Construction of vehicular crossing and reinstatement of footpath · Traffic control for vehicles reversing into or out of the site.
Traffic controllers must be in place at the site entry and exit points to control heavy vehicle movements in order to maintain the safety of pedestrians and other road users.
When a satisfactory CTMP is received, a letter of approval will be issued with conditions attached. Traffic management at the site must comply with the approved CTMP as well as any conditions in the letter issued by Council, including Roads and Maritime Services conditions. Council’s Rangers will be patrolling the site regularly and fines may be issued for any non-compliance with this condition.
Reason: To ensure that appropriate measures have been considered during all phases of the construction process in a manner that maintains the environmental amenity and ensures the ongoing safety and protection of people.
10. Erosion and drainage management
Earthworks and/or demolition of any existing buildings shall not commence until an erosion and sediment control plan is submitted to and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority. The plan shall comply with the guidelines set out in the NSW Department of Housing manual "Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction" certificate. Erosion and sediment control works shall be implemented in accordance with the erosion and sediment control plan.
Reason: To preserve and enhance the natural environment.
11. Tree protection fencing
To preserve the following tree/s, no work shall commence until the area beneath their canopy is fenced off at the specified radius from the trunk/s to prevent any activities, storage or the disposal of materials within the fenced area. The fence/s shall be maintained intact until the completion of all demolition/building work on site.
Reason: To protect existing trees during the construction phase.
12. Tree protective fencing type galvanised mesh
The tree protection fencing shall be constructed of galvanised pipe at 2.4 metres spacing and connected by securely attached chain mesh fencing to a minimum height of 1.8 metres in height prior to work commencing.
Reason: To protect existing trees during construction phase.
13. Tree protection signage
Prior to works commencing, tree protection signage is to be attached to each tree protection zone, displayed in a prominent position and the sign repeated at 10 metres intervals or closer where the fence changes direction. Each sign shall contain in a clearly legible form, the following information:
Tree protection zone.
· This fence has been installed to prevent damage to the trees and their growing environment both above and below ground and access is restricted. · Any encroachment not previously approved within the tree protection zone shall be the subject of an arborist's report. · The arborist's report shall provide proof that no other alternative is available. · The Arborist's report shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority for further consultation with Council. · The name, address, and telephone number of the developer.
Reason: To protect existing trees during the construction phase.
14. Tree protection mulching
Prior to works commencing and throughout construction, the area of the tree protection zone is to be mulched to a depth of 100mm with composted organic material being 75% Eucalyptus leaf litter and 25% wood.
Reason: To protect existing trees during the construction phase.
15. Tree protection - avoiding soil compaction
To preserve the following tree/s and avoid soil compaction, no work shall commence until temporary measures to avoid soil compaction as per AS4970-2009 (eg rumble boards) within the specified radius of the following tree/s is/are installed if ANY vehicular or mechanical equipment is required to pass through the specified radius.
Reason: To protect existing trees during the construction phase.
16. Tree fencing inspection
Upon installation of the required tree protection measures, an inspection of the site by the Principal Certifying Authority is required to verify that tree protection measures comply with all relevant conditions.
Reason: To protect existing trees during the construction phase.
Conditions to be satisfied prior to the issue of the construction certificate:
17. Materials and finishes
An amended schedule of materials and finishes shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. The schedule shall include the following demonstrating:
· the ground floor level to be constructed of face brick. The first floor level can be rendered in accordance with the approved materials and finishes board referenced in Condition 1. · the roof tiles are to be a combination of two lighter grey coloured tiles which are Boral terracotta shingles, Scoria 30% and Asphalt 70%. The roofing is not to be Boral 'Eclipse'. · windows are to be timber framed.
Reason: To ensure appropriate materials and finishes are used which are complementary to the streetscape and adjoining heritage item.
18. Visitable apartments
Amended plans and specifications are required to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate which demonstrate (3 of the 4 townhouses) are visitable in accordance with AS4299. The plans should demonstrate there is a wheel chair accessible entry and path of travel to the living room and a toilet that is either accessible (complying with the floor space requirements in AS1428.1) or visitbale (a toilet which is 1250mm in front of the toilet and is either accessible or visitable).
Reason: To ensure 70% of the apartments are visitable in accordance with AS4299.
19. Visitor parking space
The visitor parking space is to be constructed of permeable pavers. Amended plans and specifications are required to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.
Reason: To achieve an appropriate form of development.
20. Pedestrian entry path
Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority is to be satisfied that the architectural plans have been amended so that the level of the pedestrian entry path at the boundary is higher than the driveway level at the boundary.
Reason: To prevent footpath runoff from entering the site via the pedestrian entry.
21. Amendments to approved landscape plan
Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the approved landscape plans, listed below and endorsed with Council’s stamp, have been amended in accordance with the requirements of this condition as well as other conditions of this consent:
The above landscape plan(s) shall be amended as follows:
· The planting identified as ‘Dm’ shall be deleted and replaced with a small ornamental tree species eg Lagerstroemia indica (Crepe Myrtle)with a minimum pot size of 45 litres at planting.
Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the landscape plan has been amended as required by this condition.
Note: An amended plan, prepared by a landscape architect or qualified landscape designer shall be submitted to the Certifying Authority.
Reason: To ensure adequate landscaping of the site.
22. Amendments to approved engineering plans
Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate, the Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the approved engineering plan(s), listed below and endorsed with Council’s stamp, have been amended in accordance with the requirements of this condition as well as other conditions of this consent:
The above engineering plan(s) shall be amended as follows:
The note “This plan manages stormwater runoff derived from roof and driveway surfaces only as shown on architectural drawings. All other surface runoff water to be managed by separate system by owner in accordance with AS3500.3 and BCA Part 3.1.2”. is to be deleted. This is because the plan shows grated pits for surface runoff, and for tree protection reasons, additional pits not shown would not be approved
Note: An amended engineering plan, prepared by a qualified engineer shall be submitted to the Certifying Authority.
Reason: To ensure that the development is in accordance with the determination.
23. Long service levy
In accordance with Section 109F(i) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act a Construction Certificate shall not be issued until any long service levy payable under Section 34 of the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986 (or where such levy is payable by instalments, the first instalment of the levy) has been paid. Council is authorised to accept payment. Where payment has been made elsewhere, proof of payment is to be provided to Council.
Reason: Statutory requirement.
24. Builder’s indemnity insurance
The applicant, builder, developer or person who does the work on this development, must arrange builder’s indemnity insurance and submit the certificate of insurance in accordance with the requirements of Part 6 of the Home Building Act 1989 to the Certifying Authority for endorsement of the plans accompanying the Construction Certificate.
It is the responsibility of the applicant, builder or developer to arrange the builder's indemnity insurance for residential building work over the value of $20,000. The builder's indemnity insurance does not apply to commercial or industrial building work or to residential work valued at less than $20,000, nor to work undertaken by persons holding an owner/builder's permit issued by the Department of Fair Trading (unless the owner/builder's property is sold within 7 years of the commencement of the work).
Reason: Statutory requirement.
25. Outdoor lighting
Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate, the Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that all outdoor lighting will comply with AS/NZ1158.3: 1999 Pedestrian Area (Category P) Lighting and AS4282: 1997 Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting.
Note: Details demonstrating compliance with these requirements are to be submitted prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.
Reason: To provide high quality external lighting for security without adverse affects on public amenity from excessive illumination levels.
26. External service pipes and the like prohibited
Proposed water pipes, waste pipes, stack work, duct work, mechanical ventilation plant and the like must be located within the building. Details confirming compliance with this condition must be shown on construction certificate plans and detailed with construction certificate specifications. Required external vents or vent pipes on the roof or above the eaves must be shown on construction certificate plans and detailed with construction certificate specifications. External vents or roof vent pipes must not be visible from any place unless detailed upon development consent plans. Where there is any proposal to fit external service pipes or the like this must be detailed in an amended development (S96) application and submitted to Council for determination.
Vent pipes required by Sydney Water must not be placed on the front elevation of the building or front roof elevation. The applicant, owner and builder must protect the appearance of the building from the public place and the appearance of the streetscape by elimination of all external services excluding vent pipes required by Sydney Water and those detailed upon development consent plans.
Reason: To protect the streetscape and the integrity of the approved development.
27. Access for people with disabilities (residential)
Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that access for people with disabilities to and from and between the public domain, residential units and all common open space areas is provided. Consideration must be given to the means of dignified and equitable access.
Compliant access provisions for people with disabilities shall be clearly shown on the plans submitted with the Construction Certificate. All details shall be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. All details shall be prepared in consideration of the Disability Discrimination Act, and the relevant provisions of AS1428.1, AS1428.2, AS1428.4 and AS 1735.12.
Reason: To ensure the provision of equitable and dignified access for all people in accordance with disability discrimination legislation and relevant Australian Standards.
28. Adaptable units
Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the nominated adaptable units within the development application, [dwelling 1], are designed as adaptable housing in accordance with the provisions of Australian Standard AS4299-1995: Adaptable Housing.
Note: Evidence from an appropriately qualified professional demonstrating compliance with this control is to be submitted to and approved by the Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.
Reason: Disabled access & amenity.
29. Interallotment drainage design
Prior to issue of the Construction Certificate, the applicant must submit, for approval by the Principal Certifying Authority, full hydraulic design documentation for the required interallotment drainage system from the subject property to the approved point of discharge to the public drainage system. Plans are to be prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced consulting civil/hydraulic engineer in accordance with Ku-ring-gai Water Management Development Control Plan No. 47 and AS3500.3 (2003) Plumbing Code. New pipes within the downstream easement drainage system must be sized to have adequate capacity to carry uncontrolled runoff from the contributing catchment and an associated overland flow path is to be provided in the event of blockage of the interallotment line.
The following engineering details must be included:
· plan view of interallotment system to scale showing dimensions, location and reduced levels of all pits, grates, pipe inverts, flushing facilities and exact point of discharge · the contributing catchment calculations and supporting pipe sizing information · longitudinal section, showing existing ground levels and proposed pipe invert levels, grades and flow capacities · surrounding survey detail, including all trees within 7 metres of the proposed interallotment drainage system · means to preserve the root systems of trees within 7 metres of the drainage system
Reason: To ensure that satisfactory design of the interallotment drainage in accordance with relevant codes and Australian Standards.
30. Paving near trees
Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that paving works within the specified radius of the trunk/s of the following tree/s will be of a type and construction to ensure that existing water infiltration and gaseous exchange to the tree/s root system is maintained:
Note: Details of the paving prepared by a suitably qualified professional shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority.
Reason: To protect existing trees.
31. Pier and beam footings near trees
Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the footings of the approved retaining wall will be isolated pier or pier and beam construction within the specified radius of the trunk/s of the following tree/s:
The piers shall be located such that no roots of a diameter greater than 30mm will be severed or injured during the construction period. The beam/s shall be of reinforced concrete or galvanised steel sections and placed in positions with the base of the beam being a minimum of 50mm above existing soil levels.
Note: Structural details of the pier or pier and beam construction shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority.
Reason: To protect existing trees.
32. Noise from road and rail (residential only)
Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Certifying Authority shall submit evidence to Council demonstrating that the development will be acoustically designed and constructed to ensure that the following LAeq levels are not exceeded:
(a) in any bedroom in the building-35 dB(A) at any time between 10 pm and 7 am, (b) anywhere else in the building (other than a garage, kitchen, bathroom or hallway)-40 dB(A) at any time.
Plans and specifications of the required acoustic design shall be prepared by a practicing acoustic engineer and shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority.
Reason: To minimise the impact of noise from the adjoining road or rail corridor on the occupants of the development.
33. Driveway crossing levels
Prior to issue of the Construction Certificate, driveway and associated footpath levels for any new, reconstructed or extended sections of driveway crossings between the property boundary and road alignment must be obtained from Ku-ring-gai Council. Such levels are only able to be issued by Council under the Roads Act 1993. All footpath crossings, laybacks and driveways are to be constructed according to Council's specifications "Construction of Gutter Crossings and Footpath Crossings".
Specifications are issued with alignment levels after completing the necessary application form at Customer Services and payment of the assessment fee. When completing the request for driveway levels application from Council, the applicant must attach a copy of the relevant development application drawing which indicates the position and proposed level of the proposed driveway at the boundary alignment.
This development consent is for works wholly within the property. Development consent does not imply approval of footpath or driveway levels, materials or location within the road reserve, regardless of whether this information is shown on the development application plans. The grading of such footpaths or driveways outside the property shall comply with Council's standard requirements. The suitability of the grade of such paths or driveways inside the property is the sole responsibility of the applicant and the required alignment levels fixed by Council may impact upon these levels.
The construction of footpaths and driveways outside the property in materials other than those approved by Council is not permitted.
Reason: To provide suitable vehicular access without disruption to pedestrian and vehicular traffic.
34. Design of works in public road (Roads Act approval)
Prior to issue of the Construction Certificate, the Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that engineering plans and specifications prepared by a qualified consulting engineer have been approved by Council’s Development Engineer. The plans to be assessed must be to a detail suitable for construction issue purposes and must detail the following infrastructure works required in Warrangi Street:
· 375mm diameter concrete pipe to connect the interallotment drainage pipe to the street drainage pit outside 14 Warrangi Street.
Development consent does not give approval to these works in the road reserve. The applicant must obtain a separate approval under sections 138 and 139 of The Roads Act 1993 for the works in the road reserve required as part of the development. The Construction Certificate must not be issued, and these works must not proceed until Council has issued a formal written approval under the Roads Act 1993.
The required plans and specifications are to be designed in accordance with the General Specification for the Construction of Road and Drainage Works in Ku-ring-gai Council, dated November 2004. The drawings must detail existing utility services and trees affected by the works, erosion control requirements and traffic management requirements during the course of works. Survey must be undertaken as required. Traffic management is to be certified on the drawings as being in accordance with the documents SAA HB81.1 - 1996 - Field Guide for Traffic Control at Works on Roads - Part 1 and RTA Traffic Control at Work Sites (1998). Construction of the works must proceed only in accordance with any conditions attached to the Roads Act approval issued by Council.
A minimum of three (3) weeks will be required for Council to assess the Roads Act application. Early submission of the Roads Act application is recommended to avoid delays in obtaining a Construction Certificate. An engineering assessment and inspection fee (set out in Council’s adopted fees and charges) is payable and Council will withhold any consent and approved plans until full payment of the correct fees. Plans and specifications must be marked to the attention of Council’s Development Engineers. In addition, a copy of this condition must be provided, together with a covering letter stating the full address of the property and the accompanying DA number.
Reason: To ensure that the plans are suitable for construction purposes.
Conditions to be satisfied prior to the issue of the construction certificate or prior to demolition, excavation or construction (whichever comes first):
35. Infrastructure restorations fee
To ensure that damage to Council Property as a result of construction activity is rectified in a timely matter:
a) All work or activity taken in furtherance of the development the subject of this approval must be undertaken in a manner to avoid damage to Council Property and must not jeopardise the safety of any person using or occupying the adjacent public areas.
b) The applicant, builder, developer or any person acting in reliance on this approval shall be responsible for making good any damage to Council Property, and for the removal from Council Property of any waste bin, building materials, sediment, silt, or any other material or article.
c) The Infrastructure Restoration Fee must be paid to the Council by the applicant prior to both the issue of the Construction Certificate and the commencement of any earthworks or construction.
d) In consideration of payment of the Infrastructure Restorations Fee, Council will undertake such inspections of Council Property as Council considers necessary and also undertake, on behalf of the applicant, such restoration work to Council Property, if any, that Council considers necessary as a consequence of the development. The provision of such restoration work by the Council does not absolve any person of the responsibilities contained in (a) to (b) above. Restoration work to be undertaken by the Council referred to in this condition is limited to work that can be undertaken by Council at a cost of not more than the Infrastructure Restorations Fee payable pursuant to this condition.
e) In this condition:
“Council Property” includes any road, footway, footpath paving, kerbing, guttering, crossings, street furniture, seats, letter bins, trees, shrubs, lawns, mounds, bushland, and similar structures or features on any road or public road within the meaning of the Local Government Act 1993 (NSW) or any public place; and
“Infrastructure Restoration Fee” means the Infrastructure Restorations Fee calculated in accordance with the Schedule of Fees & Charges adopted by Council as at the date of payment and the cost of any inspections required by the Council of Council Property associated with this condition.
Reason: To maintain public infrastructure.
36. Section 94 development contributions - other than identified centres (For DAs determined on or after 19 December 2010).
This development is subject to a development contribution calculated in accordance with Ku-ring-gai Contributions Plan 2010, being a s94 Contributions Plan in effect under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, as follows:
The contribution shall be paid to Council prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate, Linen Plan, Certificate of Subdivision or Occupation Certificate whichever comes first in accordance with Ku-ring-gai Contributions Plan 2010.
The contributions specified above are subject to indexation and may vary at the time of payment in accordance with Ku-ring-gai Contributions Plan 2010 to reflect changes in the consumer price index and housing price index. Prior to payment, please contact Council directly to verify the current payable contributions.
Copies of Council’s Contribution Plans can be viewed at Council Chambers, 818 Pacific Hwy Gordon or on Council’s website at www.kmc.nsw.gov.au.
Notwithstanding the total above, in accordance with the s94E Direction issued by the Minister for Planning dated 3 March 2011, for so long as it remains legally in force, the maximum amount payable for the subject development application shall be $20,000 x 4= $80,000.
Reason: To ensure the provision, extension or augmentation of the Key Community Infrastructure identified in Ku-ring-gai Contributions Plan 2010 that will, or is likely to be, required as a consequence of the development.
37. Bush fire risk certification
Bush fire protection measures shall be carried out in accordance with the following bush fire risk assessment, report and certificate, listed below and endorsed with Council’s stamp, except where amended by other conditions of this consent:
Prior to the issue of the construction certificate, the principal certifying authority must be satisfied that the construction certificate is in accordance with the recommendations of the report and certificate as listed above.
Reason: To ensure that the development is in accordance with the determination.
Conditions to be satisfied during the demolition, excavation and construction phases:
38. Road opening permit
The opening of any footway, roadway, road shoulder or any part of the road reserve shall not be carried out without a road opening permit being obtained from Council (upon payment of the required fee) beforehand.
Reason: Statutory requirement (Roads Act 1993 Section 138) and to maintain the integrity of Council’s infrastructure.
39. Prescribed conditions
The applicant shall comply with any relevant prescribed conditions of development consent under clause 98 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation. For the purposes of section 80A (11) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, the following conditions are prescribed in relation to a development consent for development that involves any building work:
· The work must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Building Code of Australia · In the case of residential building work for which the Home Building Act 1989 requires there to be a contract of insurance in force in accordance with Part 6 of that Act, that such a contract of insurance is in force before any works commence.
Reason: Statutory requirement.
40. Hours of work
Demolition, excavation, construction work and deliveries of building material and equipment must not take place outside the hours of 7.00am to 5.00pm Monday to Friday and 8.00am to 12 noon Saturday. No work and no deliveries are to take place on Sundays and public holidays.
Excavation or removal of any materials using machinery of any kind, including compressors and jack hammers, must be limited to between 7.30am and 5.00pm Monday to Friday, with a respite break of 45 minutes between 12 noon 1.00pm.
Where it is necessary for works to occur outside of these hours (ie) placement of concrete for large floor areas on large residential/commercial developments or where building processes require the use of oversized trucks and/or cranes that are restricted by the RTA from travelling during daylight hours to deliver, erect or remove machinery, tower cranes, pre-cast panels, beams, tanks or service equipment to or from the site, approval for such activities will be subject to the issue of an "outside of hours works permit" from Council as well as notification of the surrounding properties likely to be affected by the proposed works.
Note: Failure to obtain a permit to work outside of the approved hours will result in on the spot fines being issued.
Reason: To ensure reasonable standards of amenity for occupants of neighbouring properties.
41. Approved plans to be on site
A copy of all approved and certified plans, specifications and documents incorporating conditions of consent and certification (including the Construction Certificate if required for the work) shall be kept on site at all times during the demolition, excavation and construction phases and must be readily available to any officer of Council or the Principal Certifying Authority.
Reason: To ensure that the development is in accordance with the determination.
42. Engineering fees
For the purpose of any development related inspections by Ku-ring-gai Council engineers, the corresponding fees set out in Councils adopted Schedule of Fees and Charges are payable to Council. A re-inspection fee per visit may be charged where work is unprepared at the requested time of inspection, or where remedial work is unsatisfactory and a further inspection is required. Engineering fees must be paid in full prior to any final consent from Council.
Reason: To protect public infrastructure.
43. Statement of compliance with Australian Standards
The demolition work shall comply with the provisions of Australian Standard AS2601: 2001 The Demolition of Structures. The work plans required by AS2601: 2001 shall be accompanied by a written statement from a suitably qualified person that the proposal contained in the work plan comply with the safety requirements of the Standard. The work plan and the statement of compliance shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the commencement of any works.
Reason: To ensure compliance with the Australian Standards.
44. Construction noise
During excavation, demolition and construction phases, noise generated from the site shall be controlled in accordance with the recommendations of the approved noise and vibration management plan.
Reason: To ensure reasonable standards of amenity to neighbouring properties.
45. Site notice
A site notice shall be erected on the site prior to any work commencing and shall be displayed throughout the works period.
The site notice must:
· be prominently displayed at the boundaries of the site for the purposes of informing the public that unauthorised entry to the site is not permitted · display project details including, but not limited to the details of the builder, Principal Certifying Authority and structural engineer · be durable and weatherproof · display the approved hours of work, the name of the site/project manager, the responsible managing company (if any), its address and 24 hour contact phone number for any inquiries, including construction/noise complaint are to be displayed on the site notice · be mounted at eye level on the perimeter hoardings/fencing and is to state that unauthorised entry to the site is not permitted
Reason: To ensure public safety and public information.
46. Dust control
During excavation, demolition and construction, adequate measures shall be taken to prevent dust from affecting the amenity of the neighbourhood. The following measures must be adopted:
· physical barriers shall be erected at right angles to the prevailing wind direction or shall be placed around or over dust sources to prevent wind or activity from generating dust · earthworks and scheduling activities shall be managed to coincide with the next stage of development to minimise the amount of time the site is left cut or exposed · all materials shall be stored or stockpiled at the best locations · the ground surface should be dampened slightly to prevent dust from becoming airborne but should not be wet to the extent that run-off occurs · all vehicles carrying spoil or rubble to or from the site shall at all times be covered to prevent the escape of dust · all equipment wheels shall be washed before exiting the site using manual or automated sprayers and drive-through washing bays · gates shall be closed between vehicle movements and shall be fitted with shade cloth · cleaning of footpaths and roadways shall be carried out daily
Reason: To protect the environment and amenity of surrounding properties.
47. Use of road or footpath
During excavation, demolition and construction phases, no building materials, plant or the like are to be stored on the road or footpath without written approval being obtained from Council beforehand. The pathway shall be kept in a clean, tidy and safe condition during building operations. Council reserves the right, without notice, to rectify any such breach and to charge the cost against the applicant/owner/builder, as the case may be.
Reason: To ensure safety and amenity of the area.
48. Guarding excavations
All excavation, demolition and construction works shall be properly guarded and protected with hoardings or fencing to prevent them from being dangerous to life and property.
Reason: To ensure public safety.
49. Toilet facilities
During excavation, demolition and construction phases, toilet facilities are to be provided, on the work site, at the rate of one toilet for every 20 persons or part of 20 persons employed at the site.
Reason: Statutory requirement.
50. Recycling of building material (general)
During demolition and construction, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that building materials suitable for recycling have been forwarded to an appropriate registered business dealing in recycling of materials. Materials to be recycled must be kept in good order.
Reason: To facilitate recycling of materials.
51. Construction signage
All construction signs must comply with the following requirements:
· are not to cover any mechanical ventilation inlet or outlet vent · are not illuminated, self-illuminated or flashing at any time · are located wholly within a property where construction is being undertaken · refer only to the business(es) undertaking the construction and/or the site at which the construction is being undertaken · are restricted to one such sign per property · do not exceed 2.5m2 · are removed within 14 days of the completion of all construction works
Reason: To ensure compliance with Council's controls regarding signage.
52. Road reserve safety
All public footways and roadways fronting and adjacent to the site must be maintained in a safe condition at all times during the course of the development works. Construction materials must not be stored in the road reserve. A safe pedestrian circulation route and a pavement/route free of trip hazards must be maintained at all times on or adjacent to any public access ways fronting the construction site. Where public infrastructure is damaged, repair works must be carried out when and as directed by Council officers. Where pedestrian circulation is diverted on to the roadway or verge areas, clear directional signage and protective barricades must be installed in accordance with AS1742-3 (1996) “Traffic Control Devices for Work on Roads”. If pedestrian circulation is not satisfactorily maintained across the site frontage, and action is not taken promptly to rectify the defects, Council may undertake proceedings to stop work.
Reason: To ensure safe public footways and roadways during construction.
53. Services
Where required, the adjustment or inclusion of any new utility service facilities must be carried out by the applicant and in accordance with the requirements of the relevant utility authority. These works shall be at no cost to Council. It is the applicants’ full responsibility to make contact with the relevant utility authorities to ascertain the impacts of the proposal upon utility services (including water, phone, gas and the like). Council accepts no responsibility for any matter arising from its approval to this application involving any influence upon utility services provided by another authority.
Reason: Provision of utility services.
54. Sydney Water Section 73 Compliance Certificate
The applicant must obtain a Section 73 Compliance Certificate under the Sydney Water Act 1994. An application must be made through an authorised Water Servicing CoOrdinator. The applicant is to refer to “Your Business” section of Sydney Water’s web site at www.sydneywater.com.au <http://www.sydneywater.com.au> then the “e-develop” icon or telephone 13 20 92. Following application a “Notice of Requirements” will detail water and sewer extensions to be built and charges to be paid. Please make early contact with the Co-ordinator, since building of water/sewer extensions can be time consuming and may impact on other services and building, driveway or landscape design.
Reason: Statutory requirement.
55. Treatment of tree roots
If tree roots are severed for the purposes of constructing the approved works, they shall be cut cleanly by hand, by an experienced AQF3 Arborist/Horticulturist. All pruning works shall be undertaken as specified in Australian Standard 4373-2007 - Pruning of Amenity Trees.
Reason: To protect existing trees.
56. Cutting of tree roots
No tree roots of 30mm or greater in diameter located within the specified radius of the trunk/s of the following tree/s shall be severed or injured in the process of any works during the construction period. All pruning works shall be undertaken as specified in Australian Standard 4373-2007 - Pruning of Amenity Trees:
Reason: To protect existing trees.
57. Approved tree works
Approval is given for the following works to be undertaken to trees on the site:
Removal or pruning of any other tree on the site is not approved, excluding species exempt under Council’s Tree Preservation Order.
Reason: To ensure that the development is in accordance with the determination.
58. Hand excavation
All excavation within the specified radius of the trunk/s of the following tree/s shall be hand dug:
Reason: To protect existing trees.
59. No storage of materials beneath trees
No activities, storage or disposal of materials shall take place beneath the canopy of any tree protected under Council's Tree Preservation Order at any time.
Reason: To protect existing trees.
60. Removal of refuse
All builders' refuse, spoil and/or material unsuitable for use in landscape areas shall be removed from the site on completion of the building works.
Reason: To protect the environment.
61. Canopy replenishment trees to be planted
The canopy replenishment trees to be planted shall be maintained in a healthy and vigorous condition until they attain a height of 5.0 metres whereby they will be protected by Council’s Tree Preservation Order. Any of the trees found faulty, damaged, dying or dead shall be replaced with the same species.
Reason: To maintain the treed character of the area.
62. On site retention of waste dockets
All demolition, excavation and construction waste dockets are to be retained on site, or at suitable location, in order to confirm which facility received materials generated from the site for recycling or disposal.
· Each docket is to be an official receipt from a facility authorised to accept the material type, for disposal or processing. · This information is to be made available at the request of an Authorised Officer of Council.
Reason: To protect the environment.
Conditions to be satisfied prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate:
63. Compliance with BASIX Certificate
Prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that all commitments listed in BASIX Certificate No. 557840M_02 and dated 9 December 2014 have been complied with.
Reason: Statutory requirement.
64. Mechanical ventilation
Following completion, installation and testing of all the mechanical ventilation systems, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied of the following prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate:
1. The installation and performance of the mechanical systems complies with:
· The Building Code of Australia · Australian Standard AS1668 · Australian Standard AS3666 where applicable
2. The mechanical ventilation system in isolation and in association with other mechanical ventilation equipment, when in operation will not be audible within a habitable room in any other residential premises before 7am and after 10pm Monday to Friday and before 8am and after 10pm Saturday, Sunday and public holidays. The operation of the unit outside these restricted hours shall emit a noise level of not greater than 5dbA above the background when measured at the nearest adjoining boundary.
Note: Written confirmation from an acoustic engineer that the development achieves the above requirements is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.
Reason: To protect the amenity of surrounding properties.
65. Completion of landscape works
Prior to the release of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority is to be satisfied that all landscape works, including the removal of all noxious and/or environmental weed species, have been undertaken in accordance with the approved plan(s) and conditions of consent.
Reason: To ensure that the landscape works are consistent with the development consent.
66. Accessibility
Prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that:
· the lift design and associated functions are compliant with AS 1735.12 & AS 1428.2 · the level and direction of travel, both in lifts and lift lobbies, is audible and visible · the controls for lifts are accessible to all persons and control buttons and lettering are raised · international symbols have been used with specifications relating to signs, symbols and size of lettering complying with AS 1428.2 · the height of lettering on signage is in accordance with AS 1428.1 - 1993 · the signs and other information indicating access and services incorporate tactile communication methods in addition to the visual methods
Reason: Disabled access & services.
67. Retention and re-use positive covenant
Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the applicant must create a positive covenant and restriction on the use of land under Section 88E of the Conveyancing Act 1919, burdening the property with the requirement to maintain the site stormwater retention and re-use facilities on the property.
The terms of the instruments are to be generally in accordance with the Council's "draft terms of Section 88B instruments for protection of retention and re-use facilities" and to the satisfaction of Council (refer to appendices of Ku-ring-gai Water Management Development Control Plan No. 47). For existing titles, the positive covenant and the restriction on the use of land is to be created through an application to the Land Titles Office in the form of a request using forms 13PC and 13RPA. The relative location of the reuse and retention facility, in relation to the building footprint, must be shown on a scale sketch, attached as an annexure to the request forms.
Registered title documents showing the covenants and restrictions must be submitted to and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issue of an Occupation Certificate.
Reason: To protect the environment.
68. Certification of drainage works
Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority is to be satisfied that:
· the stormwater drainage works have been satisfactorily completed in accordance with the approved Construction Certificate drainage plans · the minimum retention and on-site detention storage volume requirements of BASIX and Ku-ring-gai Water Management Development Control Plan No. 47 respectively, have been achieved · retained water is connected and available for use · all grates potentially accessible by children are secured · components of the new drainage system have been installed by a licensed plumbing contractor in accordance with the Plumbing and Drainage Code AS3500.3 2003 and the Building Code of Australia · all enclosed floor areas, including habitable and garage floor levels, are safeguarded from outside stormwater runoff ingress by suitable differences in finished levels, gradings and provision of stormwater collection devices
The rainwater certification sheet contained in Appendix 13 of the Ku-ring-gai Water Management Development Control Plan No. 47, must be completed and attached to the certification. Where an on-site detention system has been constructed, the on-site detention certification sheet contained in Appendix 4 of DCP 47 must also be completed and attached to the certification.
Note: Evidence from a qualified and experienced consulting civil/hydraulic engineer documenting compliance with the above is to be provided to Council prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.
Reason: To protect the environment.
69. WAE plans for stormwater management and disposal (dual occupancy and above)
Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, a registered surveyor must provide a works as executed survey of the completed stormwater drainage and management systems. The survey must be submitted to and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate. The survey must indicate:
· as built (reduced) surface and invert levels for all drainage pits · gradients of drainage lines, materials and dimensions · as built (reduced) level(s) at the approved point of discharge to the public drainage system · as built location and internal dimensions of all detention and retention structures on the property (in plan view) and horizontal distances to nearest adjacent boundaries and structures on site · the achieved storage volumes of the installed retention and detention storages and derivative calculations · as built locations of all access pits and grates in the detention and retention system(s), including dimensions · the size of the orifice or control fitted to any on-site detention system · dimensions of the discharge control pit and access grates · the maximum depth of storage possible over the outlet control · top water levels of storage areas and indicative RL’s through the overland flow path in the event of blockage of the on-site detention system
The works as executed plan(s) must show the as built details above in comparison to those shown on the drainage plans approved with the Construction Certificate prior to commencement of works. All relevant levels and details indicated must be marked in red on a copy of the Principal Certifying Authority stamped construction certificate stormwater plans.
Reason: To protect the environment.
70. OSD positive covenant/restriction
Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the applicant must create a positive covenant and restriction on the use of land under Section 88E of the Conveyancing Act 1919, burdening the owner with the requirement to maintain the on-site stormwater detention facilities on the lot.
The terms of the instruments are to be generally in accordance with the Council's "draft terms of Section 88B instrument for protection of on-site detention facilities" and to the satisfaction of Council (refer to appendices of Ku-ring-gai Council Water Management DCP 47). For existing titles, the positive covenant and the restriction on the use of land is to be created through an application to the Land Titles Office in the form of a request using forms 13PC and 13RPA. The relative location of the on-site detention facility, in relation to the building footprint, must be shown on a scale sketch, attached as an annexure to the request forms.
Registered title documents, showing the covenants and restrictions, must be submitted and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issue of an Occupation Certificate.
Reason: To protect the environment.
71. Easement drainage line construction
Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the required interallotment drainage system has been installed and surveyed under the supervision of a designing engineer or equivalent professional.
Note: At the completion of the interallotment works, the following must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority for approval:
· details from the supervising engineer that that the as-constructed works comply with the approved interallotment design documentation · a full works as executed drawing of the as built interallotment drainage line (dimensions, grades, materials, invert levels) prepared by a registered surveyor, and details from the surveyor that all drainage structures are wholly contained within existing drainage easement(s)
Reason: To protect the environment.
72. Sydney Water Section 73 Compliance Certificate
Prior to issue of an Occupation Certificate the Section 73 Sydney water Compliance Certificate must be obtained and submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority
Reason: Statutory requirement.
73. Reinstatement of redundant crossings and completion of infrastructure works
Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority must be satisfied that he or she has received a signed inspection form from Council which states that the following works in the road reserve have been completed:
· new concrete driveway crossing in accordance with levels and specifications issued by Council · removal of all redundant driveway crossings and kerb laybacks (or sections thereof) and reinstatement of these areas to footpath, turfed verge and upright kerb and gutter (reinstatement works to match surrounding adjacent infrastructure with respect to integration of levels and materials) · full repair and resealing of any road surface damaged during construction · full replacement of damaged sections of grass verge to match existing
This inspection may not be carried out by the Private Certifier because restoration of Council property outside the boundary of the site is not a matter listed in Clause 161 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.
All works must be completed in accordance with the General Specification for the Construction of Road and Drainage Works in Ku-ring-gai Council, dated November 2004. The Occupation Certificate must not be issued until all damaged public infrastructure caused as a result of construction works on the subject site (including damage caused by, but not limited to, delivery vehicles, waste collection, contractors, sub-contractors, concrete vehicles) is fully repaired to the satisfaction of Council. Repair works shall be at no cost to Council.
Reason: To protect the streetscape.
74. Construction of works in public road - approved plans
Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority must be satisfied that all approved road, footpath and/or drainage works have been completed in the road reserve in accordance with the Council Roads Act approval and accompanying drawings, conditions and specifications.
The works must be supervised by the applicant’s designing engineer and completed and approved to the satisfaction of Ku-ring-gai Council.
The supervising consulting engineer is to provide certification upon completion that the works were constructed in accordance with the Council approved stamped drawings. The works must be subject to inspections by Council at the hold points noted on the Roads Act approval. All conditions attached to the approved drawings for these works must be met prior to the Occupation Certificate being issued.
Reason: To ensure that works undertaken in the road reserve are to the satisfaction of Council.
75. Fire safety certificate
Prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that a Fire Safety Certificate for all the essential fire or other safety measures forming part of this consent has been completed and provided to Council.
Note: A copy of the Fire Safety Certificate must be submitted to Council.
Reason: To ensure suitable fire safety measures are in place.
76. Compliance with bush fire assessment, report and certificate
Prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that all recommendations listed in the bush fire risk assessment and report below have been complied with:
Reason: Statutory requirement.
Conditions to be satisfied at all times:
77. Compliance with bush fire assessment, report and certificate
In accordance with the recommendations listed in the bush fire risk assessment and report below, all on going recommendations must be complied with at all times.
Reason: To protect against bush fire.
78. Outdoor lighting
At all times for the life of the approved development, all outdoor lighting shall not detrimentally impact upon the amenity of other premises and adjacent dwellings and shall comply with, where relevant, AS/NZ1158.3: 2005 Pedestrian Area (Category P) Lighting and AS4282: 1997 Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting.
Reason: To protect the amenity of surrounding properties.
79. Noise control - plant and machinery
All noise generating equipment associated with any proposed mechanical ventilation system/s shall be located and/or soundproofed so the equipment is not audible within a habitable room in any other residential premises before 7am and after 10pm Monday to Friday and before 8am and after 10pm Saturday, Sunday and public holidays. The operation of the unit outside these restricted hours shall emit a noise level of not greater than 5dbA above the background when measured at the nearest boundary.
Reason: To protect the amenity of surrounding residents.
|
Kimberley Kavwenje Executive Assessment Officer |
Shaun Garland Team Leader Development Assessment South |
Corrie Swanepoel Manager Development Assessment Services |
Michael Miocic Director Development & Regulation |
A1View |
Location Sketch |
|
2015/164170 |
|
|
A2View |
Zoning Extract |
|
2015/164168 |
|
A3View |
Survey |
|
2014/178585 |
|
A4View |
Site Analysis Plan |
|
2015/149606 |
|
A5View |
Ground Floor Plan |
|
2014/319645 |
|
A6View |
First Floor Plan |
|
2014/319644 |
|
A7View |
Elevations and Sections |
|
2014/319642 |
|
A8View |
Landscape Plan |
|
2015/149605 |
|
A9View |
Concept Ground Floor Plan - 1183 Pacific Highway Turramurra |
|
2015/149604 |
|
A10View |
Concept First Floor Plan - 1183 Pacific Highway Turramurra |
|
2015/149603 |
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 July 2015 |
GB.4 / 175 |
|
|
Item GB.4 |
S10453 |
|
19 May 2015 |
Consideration of Submissions on the Planning Proposal to Heritage List 5 Properties in Turramurra, Wahroonga, Pymble and Killara
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
purpose of report: |
For Council to consider the submissions received during the public exhibition of the planning proposal to heritage list 5 properties in Turramurra, Wahroonga, Pymble and Killara.
|
|
|
background: |
On 25 November 2014 Council resolved to proceed with a planning proposal to amend the then draft Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2013 (draft KLEP 2013) to include the following properties as heritage items of local significance: · 51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra · 4-6 Neringah Avenue South, Wahroonga · 88 Fox Valley Road, Wahroonga · 12 Bobbin Head Road, Pymble · 6 Caithness Street, Killara The planning proposal was placed on public exhibition between 24 April 2015 and 22 May 2015. This report provides an overview of the outcomes of the public exhibition. |
|
|
comments: |
A total of 16 submissions were received during the public exhibition of the planning proposal. |
|
|
recommendation: |
That Council proceed with the heritage listing for 12 Bobbin Head Road Pymble and 88 Fox Valley Road Wahroonga. That Council take no further action on the heritage listing for 6 Caithness Street Killara, 4-6 Neringah Avenue South, Wahroonga and 51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra. |
Purpose of Report
For Council to consider the submissions received during the public exhibition of the planning proposal to heritage list 5 properties in Turramurra, Wahroonga, Pymble and Killara.
Background
Council at its meeting held on 26 November 2013 resolved to remove a number of potential heritage items from the Heritage Map and Schedule 5 of the then draft KLEP 2013, and defer them for further investigation and re-exhibition.
Council engaged the services of a Heritage Consultant, Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners Pty Ltd, to conduct an independent detailed assessment of the heritage significance of 14 of the deferred properties. The heritage report is included at Attachment A2. The report by Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners Pty Ltd recommended the following 5 properties for local heritage listing:
· 6 Caithness Street, Killara
· 12 Bobbin Head Road, Pymble
· 51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra
· 88 Fox Valley Road, Wahroonga
· 4-6 Neringah Avenue South, Wahroonga
Council at its meeting held on 25 November 2014 considered a report on the heritage assessment by Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners on 14 of the deferred properties and resolved the following:
A. That a planning proposal be prepared , in accordance with Section 55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to amend the Draft Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2014 to include the following properties on Schedule 5 and on the Heritage Map as heritage items of local significance:
i. 51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra (Lot 1 DP580008)
ii. 4-6 Neringah Avenue South, Wahroonga (Lot 55 and 56 DP2666)
iii. 88 Fox Valley Road, Wahroonga (Lot 15 DP568694)
iv. 12 Bobbin Head Road, Pymble (Lot 1 DP200728)
v. 6 Caithness Street, Killara (Lot 6 DP14824)
B. That the planning proposal be submitted to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure for a Gateway Determination in accordance with Section 56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
C. That in order to facilitate a more timely Gateway Determination, the NSW Heritage Office be consulted prior to submitting the planning proposal to the Department of Planning and Environment. Should comments not be received within 21 days, the planning proposal is to be submitted regardless.
D. That Council request the plan-making delegation under Section 23 of the EP&A Act for this planning proposal.
E. That upon receipt of a Gateway Determination, the exhibition and consultation process is carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and with the Gateway Determination requirements.
F. That a report be brought back to Council at the conclusion of the exhibition period.
G. That Council take no further action on the heritage listing for the following properties:
i. 59 Warrangi Street, Turramurra (Lot 1 DP215730)
ii. 6 Munderah Street, Wahroonga (Lot 2 DP552850)
iii. 10 Munderah Street, Wahroonga (Lot 1 DP216542)
iv. 66 Pentecost Avenue, Pymble (Lot B DP103589)
v. 60-62 Pentecost Avenue, Pymble (Lot 1 and 2 Sec DP13451)
vi. 33 Grandview Street, Pymble (Lot 2 DP228015)
vii. 8 Braeside, Wahroonga (Lot 2 DP52186)
viii. 8-10 Neringah Avenue South, Wahroonga (Lot 54 DP2666 and Lot 2 DP585805)
ix. 35 Springdale Road, East Killara
Council at its meeting of 2 February 2015 resolved to place an Interim Heritage Order under Section 25 of the NSW Heritage Act 1977 on 6 Caithness Street, Killara. The Interim Heritage Order was published in the NSW Government Gazette on 6 February 2015.
On 3 February 2015, the planning proposal was referred to the Heritage Division of the NSW Office and Environment and Heritage (OEH) for comment prior to submitting to the NSW Department of Planning and Environment for a Gateway Determination. The OEH submission outlined that there were no objections to the listing of the proposed 5 items. A copy of the planning proposal and appendices is included as Attachments A1 – A7.
The NSW Department of Planning and Environment issued a Gateway Determination under Section 56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 on 10 April 2015 (Attachment A8).
The planning proposal was placed on public exhibition in accordance with the requirements of the Gateway Determination from Friday 24 April 2015 to Friday 22 May 2015.
Comments
A heritage item is a place, which may include built structures, landscapes, moveable objects and relics, that has recognised cultural significance. In NSW, heritage items of local significance are assessed against 7 criteria:
a) Historical significance – an item is important in the course, or pattern, of the cultural or natural history of the local area;
b) Historical association significance – an item has strong or special association with the life or works of a person, or group of persons, of importance to the local area’s cultural or natural history;
c) Aesthetic significance – an item is important in demonstrating aesthetic characteristics and/or a high degree of creative or technical achievement in the local area;
d) Social significance – an item has a strong or special association with a particular community or cultural group in the local area, for social, cultural or spiritual reasons;
e) Technical/research significance – an item has potential to yield information that will contribute to an understanding of the local area scientific, cultural or natural history;
f) Rarity – an item possesses uncommon, rare or endangered aspects of the local area’s cultural or natural history; and
g) Representativeness - an item is important in demonstrating the principal characteristics of a class of the local area’s cultural or natural places; or cultural or natural environments.
Items are not excluded from the heritage schedule solely because they share similar characteristics to items already represented. Items do not need to be significant in all of these criteria, many have significance in only 1 or 2 of the criteria.
As a result of the public exhibition of the planning proposal, a total of 16 submissions were received:
Property |
Submissions received in support of heritage listing |
Submissions received not in support of heritage listing |
6 Caithness Street, Killara |
5 |
2 |
12 Bobbin Head Road, Pymble |
0 |
0 |
51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra |
0 |
1 |
4-6 Neringah Avenue South, Wahroonga |
0 |
5 |
88 Fox Valley Road, Wahroonga |
0 |
2 |
Not Specified |
0 |
1 |
A submission was also received in support of listing 33 Grandview Street, Pymble, however this Planning proposal does not apply to this property.
A summary of the public submissions along with a detailed comment and assessment is included at Attachment A9.
The key findings of the analysis of the submissions is provided below:
6 Caithness Street, Killara
The Inter-war bungalow at 6 Caithness Street, Killara was assessed at having significance for its aesthetic contribution and its historical association with the architect Donald Esplin and a former president of the Killara Golf Club, T.K. Smith.
The Architect Esplin designed some 400 buildings. 3 of his buildings are recognized as heritage items under Ku-ring-gai Council’s LEPs:
· 9 Yarabah Avenue, Gordon
· 22 Hastings Road, Warrawee and
· 26 Billyard Avenue Warrawee.
Submissions were received both in support and against the heritage listing. Those in support of the listing commented on the aesthetic value and historical association significance. Those against the listing highlighted the loss of aesthetic significance and the unsympathetic changes that occurred to the property. This was supported by an independent heritage assessment by NBRS + Partners which challenged the assessment of aesthetic significance.
The proposed listing and submissions have been further reviewed and it is recommended the listing not proceed for the following reasons:
· while Esplin was a significant architect this is not a remarkable example of his work nor is it a particularly remarkable example of the Inter-war bungalow style;
· while T.K. Smith was a valued member of Killara Golf Club his short mid-term presidency was unremarkable with no significant events or changes occurring at the club at this time. An adequate comparison with the six earlier presidents has not been provided; The historical association with T.K. Smith is not considered significant and
· the dramatic and significant change in setting from single dwellings to 5 storey apartments has resulted in a loss of amenity to the residents of 2, 4 and 6 Caithness Street.
It is recommended that 6 Caithness Street, Killara not proceed as a heritage item.
12 Bobbin Head Road, Pymble
The house at 12 Bobbin Head Road, Pymble is a fine and mostly intact example of a transitional Arts and Crafts bungalow. It still retains a substantial garden setting, including a circular gravel drive and a mature feature palm in the front garden.
There were no submissions received for this property. It should be noted the owner is aware of the listing process. It is recommended that 12 Bobbin Head Road, Pymble proceed as a heritage item.
51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra
The house at 51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra was recommended for listing as a representative example of the Georgian Revival style designed by prominent architect William Rae Laurie.
The one submission for this property argued against the listing based upon the unsubstantiated evidence that the house was designed by William Rae Laurie. This argument is not supported as historical evidence supports Laurie’s association with the design project. The independent heritage assessment argued the house has undergone both significant and unsympathetic change.
It is recommended the listing not proceed due to the considerable and unsympathetic development that has occurred to the building since its original design and construction. The simple and restrained architecture that characterises the Inter-war Georgian Revival style seems absent following the accretion of unsympathetic extensions that has occurred over the years. The original form is still legible with practiced interpretation but is not obvious.
Under the NSW Guidelines, a reason for exclusion under Criterion C is the loss of “design or technical integrity”.
It is recommended that 51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra not proceed as a heritage item.
88 Fox Valley Road, Wahroonga
The house at 88 Fox Valley Road, Wahroonga is an interesting and unique example of a Federation transitional bungalow influenced by the American Craftsman style. It is a rare building for Ku-ring-gai and as such has high local significance.
The one submission for the property argued against the listing based upon the confused definition of architectural style, long-term maintenance issues and desire to subdivide the property. None of these reasons were considered to negate the heritage significance of this property. These issues have been addressed further in the summary of submissions table (Attachment A9).
It is recommended that 88 Fox Valley Road, Wahroonga proceed as a heritage item.
4-6 Neringah Avenue South, Wahroonga
The Federation Arts and Craft house at 4-6 Neringah Avenue South, Wahroonga is a highly significant building as it was constructed as a showcase of fibre asbestos, built for a leading industrialist of fibre asbestos, Andrew Reid (owner and director of James Hardie Industries), in Australia. The criteria for significance which are met by Hardie House include historical association, technical/research and rarity. Based on heritage significance alone Hardie House should be listed.
The circumstances of Hardie House and the use of the larger site for hospital purposes complicate this listing. Hardie House is mostly constructed of asbestos. The predominant form of asbestos in the house is chrysotile (white asbestos) and a small isolated deposit in the garden of amosite (brown or grey asbestos). Asbestos containing dust was found in the ceiling cavity and subfloor area. The dust and the asbestos in the garden would require removal. The other intact sheets within the house would require stabilisation. In addition, the fibre cement sheets have been painted in lead paint. Further stabilising work of these surfaces is also required, which could involve overpainting or covering with an encapsulant.
Based on HammondCare’s WH&S practices, they have vacated this building and it is no longer in use. They have stated the cost of remediation is excessive and that any such works would pose unacceptable risks to their patients, staff and neighbours. They did not provide comparative costings between stabilisation and renovation versus demolition and redevelopment.
Their argument in support of not listing is net social benefit. The demolition of the building and redevelopment of the site would facilitate HammondCare in their commitment to provide extensive charitable and health services to people in need within the Ku-ring-gai community. In addition, they argue that the risk from any asbestos is too high and that as a healthcare provider they should not be forced into conserving a building material responsible for serious illness and death.
It is agreed that the retention of this building represents an opportunity cost and that the best and highest use for the site is one that optimises community benefits and the provision of health care services. For these reasons it is recommended that Hardie House not be listed as heritage item.
In their submission HammondCare have committed to undertaking an archival recording and interpretive display of Hardie House if it is demolished. The following is a draft condition of consent for demolition for 4-6 Neringah Avenue South, Wahroonga:
1. Interpretation Plan (Special Condition CNDD001)
Prior to any demolition works commencing on the site, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that an Interpretation Plan has been submitted to and endorsed by Council.
An Interpretation Plan is a document that provides policies and details advice for interpreting the heritage significance of the building and includes detail about the interpretation media. Media can include signs, installations, displays, films, brochures or other means of communication. The Interpretation Plan shall be prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced person.
The media chosen is to clearly help the public understand and convey the significance of the building and shall be approved prior to any works occurring on site. The Media is to be installed within 14 days of demolition being completed.
Reason: To ensure the identified heritage significance of the building is interpreted via appropriate media for future generations.
The following is a summary of recommended listings to proceed:
Property |
Recommendation to proceed to listing |
6 Caithness Street, Killara |
No |
12 Bobbin Head Road, Pymble |
Yes |
51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra |
No |
88 Fox Valley Road, Wahroonga |
Yes |
4-6 Neringah Avenue South, Wahroonga |
No |
integrated planning and reporting
Theme 3: Places, Spaces and Infrastructure
Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective |
Delivery Program Term Achievement |
Operational Plan Task |
P5.1 Ku-ring-gai’s heritage is protected, promoted and responsibly managed
|
P5.1.1 Strategies, plans and processes are in place to effectively protect and preserve Ku-ring-gai’s heritage assets |
Identify gaps in existing strategies and plans.
|
Governance Matters
The process for the preparation and implementation of planning proposals is set out in provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the Local Government Act 1993 (where relevant).
Council sought the plan-making delegation under Section 23 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to finalise the planning proposal in its letter to the Department of Planning and Environment seeking a Gateway Determination dated 5 March 2015. The Gateway Determination, issued on 10 April 2015, authorised Council to exercise the functions of the Minister for Planning and Environment under Section 59 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to finalise the planning proposal.
Risk Management
There is a community expectation that places of heritage significance within Ku-ring-gai Council local government area will be identified and protected. There is a strategic risk of damaging the reputation of Council if these culturally significant places are not identified and considered for protection.
Financial Considerations
The costs associated with this matter are covered by the Strategy and Environment Department, Urban Planning and Heritage Planning budget.
Social Considerations
The identification and protection of Ku-ring-gai’s heritage places contributes to the ongoing conservation of Ku-ring-gai’s community valued historic landscape and garden suburbs.
Environmental Considerations
Council is responsible for the identification and management of Ku-ring-gai’s local environmental heritage. Consideration of this matter will assist Council in meeting this requirement.
Community Consultation
Community consultation for the planning proposal is consistent with the prescribed consultation guidelines in the NSW Department of Planning and Environment’s document “A guide to preparing Local Environmental Plans” (April 2013).
Community consultation was conducted as per the requirements outlined in the Gateway Determination issued by the Department of Planning and Environment.
The public exhibition of the planning proposal included the following:
· Notification in the North Shore Times
· Notification on Council’s website
· Notification in writing to the affected and adjoining land owners
During the exhibition period, the following material was available for inspection:
· Planning proposal
· Gateway Determination
· Heritage report by Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners
· Council resolution of 25 November 2014
· Proposed heritage maps
· Heritage inventory sheets
· Submission from Heritage Division, Office of Environment and Heritage
· Interim Heritage Order 6 Caithness Street, Killara
Internal Consultation
As part of the assessment of submissions the relevant internal sections of Council have been consulted, including Urban Planning and Heritage and Development and Regulation. The Reference Committee also discussed the report and viewed a presentation from HammondCare and their representatives. The Committee made the following comments regarding 4-6 Neringah Avenue South:
After the presentation the Heritage Reference Committee formed the opinion that given the demonstrated technical, historical association and rarity significance of Hardie House an argument for demolition would need to demonstrate substantial evidence that it needs to be demolished for the viability of the site as a health facility. That is, if Hardie House were built of brick instead of fibro, would it be compatible with the delivery systems. Are they removing the building for the more intense development of the site or are they removing the building because the asbestos material is an unsurpassable impediment to the adaptive reuse of the building for hospital purposes.
Summary
On 10 April 2015 the Department of Planning and Environment issued a Gateway Determination under Section 56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 for the planning proposal to heritage list 5 properties in Turramurra, Wahroonga, Pymble and Killara.
The planning proposal was placed on public exhibition between 24 April 2015 and 22 May 2015. 16 submissions were received during the public exhibition of the planning proposal.
It is recommended that Council proceed with the heritage listing of 12 Bobbin Head Road Pymble, and 88 Fox Valley Road Wahroonga.
A. That Council endorse the Planning proposal to list additional properties in Schedule 5 and the Heritage Map of the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015; subject to the proposal being varied to only apply to 12 Bobbin Head Road, Pymble and 88 Fox Valley Road, Wahroonga.
B. That Council proceed to make the Plan under delegated authority under Section 59 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.
C. That those who made a submission be notified of Council’s resolution.
D. That a condition of consent for any application to demolish 4-6 Neringah Avenue South, Wahroonga be as follows:
Interpretation Plan (Special Condition CNDD001)
Prior to any demolition works commencing on the site, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that an Interpretation Plan has been submitted to and endorsed by Council.
An Interpretation Plan is a document that provides policies and details advice for interpreting the heritage significance of the building and includes detail about the interpretation media. Media can include signs, installations, displays, films, brochures or other means of communication. The Interpretation Plan shall be prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced person.
The media chosen is to clearly help the public understand and convey the significance of the building and shall be approved prior to any works occurring on site. The Media is to be installed within 14 days of demolition being completed.
Reason: To ensure the identified heritage significance of the building is interpreted via appropriate media for future generations.
|
Alexandra Plumb Urban Planner |
Craige Wyse Team Leader Urban Planning |
Antony Fabbro Manager Urban & Heritage Planning |
Andrew Watson Director Strategy & Environment |
A1View |
Planning Proposal - Amend KLEP2015 to include 5 heritage items in Turramurra, Wahroonga, Pymble and Killara |
|
2015/090449 |
|
|
A2View |
Planning Proposal - Appendix A - Review of 14 Draft and Potential Heritage Items by Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners 2014 |
|
2014/319496 |
|
A3View |
Planning Proposal - Appendix B - Council Resolution 25 November 2014 |
|
2014/319433 |
|
A4View |
Planning Proposal - Appendix C- Heritage Map Sheets |
|
2015/098351 |
|
A5View |
Planning Proposal - Appendix D - Heritage Inventory Sheets |
|
2014/313507 |
|
A6View |
Planning Proposal - Appendix E - Office of Environment and Heritage comments regarding planning proposal to amend KLEP 2015 to include additional heritage items |
|
2015/053548 |
|
A7View |
Planning Proposal - Appendix F - Interim Heritage Order 6 Caithness Street Killara |
|
2015/042719 |
|
A8View |
Gateway Determination - Planning Proposal to Heritage List 5 Properties |
|
2015/088817 |
|
A9View |
Planning Proposal - Summary of submissions |
|
2015/165670 |
APPENDIX No: 1 - Planning Proposal - Amend KLEP2015 to include 5 heritage items in Turramurra, Wahroonga, Pymble and Killara |
|
Item No: GB.4 |
APPENDIX No: 2 - Planning Proposal - Appendix A - Review of 14 Draft and Potential Heritage Items by Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners 2014 |
|
Item No: GB.4 |
APPENDIX No: 6 - Planning Proposal - Appendix E - Office of Environment and Heritage comments regarding planning proposal to amend KLEP 2015 to include additional heritage items |
|
Item No: GB.4 |
APPENDIX No: 7 - Planning Proposal - Appendix F - Interim Heritage Order 6 Caithness Street Killara |
|
Item No: GB.4 |
APPENDIX No: 8 - Gateway Determination - Planning Proposal to Heritage List 5 Properties |
|
Item No: GB.4 |
|
Item No: GB.4 |
Summary of Submissions
Planning Proposal to amend the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 to heritage list 5 properties in Turramurra, Wahroonga, Pymble and Killara
|
Item No: GB.4 |
No |
Property |
Issue/Concern |
Comment |
1 |
No specific property given |
Funding · Places should not be listed as heritage items unless Council is prepared to make funding available to maintain the heritage values · Heritage listing is overrated |
Currently Council does not have a Heritage Assistance Fund. This has been discussed by the Heritage Reference Committee who recommends Council investigate starting a heritage fund to provide small grants for conservation works to heritage items.
Heritage listing provides formal recognition that a place is worthy of protection on historical, scientific, cultural, social, archeological, architectural, natural or aesthetic grounds and therefore should be handed down to future generations.
|
2, 3, 4, 5, 15
15
2, 4, 5
3,15
2,3,4
2,3,4,5, 15
2,3,4,5,15
2, 3, 4, 15
3, 5
3
15
2, 15
2
|
4-6 Neringah Avenue South:
|
Heritage significance criteria · The heritage assessment by Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners concludes the building is “not particularly significant” from an architectural perspective. · The building does not have sufficient aesthetic values that should be retained given its hazardous building materials · application of criteria’ and ‘statement of significance’ are overstated within Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners report. · Building only meets the relevant criteria for listing in 3 out of the 7 required matters. Those criteria all related to the former occupant of the dwelling, Andrew Reid, his relationship to Hardie Industries and the use of Hardie’s products containing asbestos. All parties agree that there is no aesthetic or architectural significance associated with the building. A more appropriate outcome would be the archival recording of the existing building, together with an on-site interpretive display including sealed samples and information boards. · The building does not have sufficient cultural heritage value to sustain its retention as a usable, vacant building. · The building does not represent a research opportunity because the writer is unclear of where this research evidence would be required and who would bother undertaking and paying for the research. In addition, this research could be undertaken off-site not insitu
Historical association to Andrew Reid · Hardie House is historically linked to Mr Andrew Reid but due to the extensive renovations which occurred after the house was left to the Australian Red Cross Society in 1939, this link has been effectively destroyed
Setting · Heritage report by NBRS + Partners found the building has lost original garden setting, architectural detailing and internal configuration and is in poor conditions – which are good reasons for not listing the property as a heritage item.
Retention of asbestos fabric · The deterioration of the asbestos and lead paint means that the house cannot be preserved other than HammondCare expending a large and unknown amount of money to restore it (estimates in excess of $1million) and such drastic renovation would effectively mean that any ‘uniqueness’ would be removed by the removal of the cladding on the house. · The removal of the asbestos from the building would leave little building fabric left. · Agree that the building is rare as “a house purpose built for the owner of the company that imported and (later) manufactured the very product the house is made from and for which the company became internationally renowned for” however the dangerous and deteriorating nature of the asbestos products throughout the house prevent the very material that gives significance to the house from being kept in any long-term safe use of the building. · In any other circumstance, Hardie House would be appropriate to list as a heritage item for its significance as a showcase of fibre asbestos, built for a leading industrialist of fibre asbestos in Australia. However, the pernicious nature of the significant material, asbestos, and its deteriorating condition make the building unsafe as a community building in the long term.
Archival recording and interpretative plan · The dangerous nature of the asbestos throughout the building means that it is not a property that “can be appreciated and enjoyed by future generations”. The historical association can be conserved on site and in the community through interpretation of the buildings materials and detailing with the biographical information about Reid’s business and philanthropic achievements · The technical research value of the site can be recorded and interpreted for conceivable research purposes. · In any future development of the site HammondCare would acknowledge the heritage significance of Hardie House include a photographic exhibition and record of the building for public viewing and appropriate signage. . HammondCare is prepared to complete a detailed historical record prior to the demolition of the house
Asbestos · The house is potentially hazardous in its present state, and the hazardous materials will only further deteriorate over time, causing a risk to staff, clients, patients, neighbours. HammondCare cannot responsibly be required to retain a property that is a health risk. This must outweigh any historical value.
· The building was deemed not to be suitable for occupation and is now vacant due to OH&S risks.
· HammondCare is committed to the National Code of Practice for the Management and Control of Asbestos in Workplaces, which identified the elimination/removal of asbestos containing materials as the preferred control method.
Safety concerns · Major concern regarding the potential health risks associated with the retention of the building. · property contains significant levels of asbestos and lead paint which make the building unsafe for occupation. WH&S requirements have resulted in HammondCare moving staff from the building. The retention and remediation presents potential risks to surrounding neighbours. · HammondCare is committed to the National Code of Practice for the Management and Control of Asbestos in Workplaces, which identified the elimination/removal of asbestos containing materials as the preferred control method.
Economic and social impact of remediation · Cost to remediate building in excess of $1million – would involve the removal and replacement of majority of asbestos sheeting, eroding the significance of the building and expenditure would have impacts on the ability of HammondCare to provide health care and further planned development on the site. · Cost of remediation for the property estimated at more than $1million. The retention of the house will also impact on the planned, future development of the overall site, which is to include additional aged care beds, palliative care and sub-acute care. The re-development will assist in the care of residents in the Council area and in meeting growing community needs to aged care. · The additional cost will impact HammondCare’s ability to proceed with the full range of services intended in the Neringah Hospital redevelopment.
Community backlash · James Hardie Industries has attracted widespread public criticism for its management of asbestos related compensation. It is unlikely to escape the community and media that the Council is seeking to retain a house that is laden with asbestos, associated with James Hardie Industries and located on the site of a palliative care hospital. HammondCare is not prepared to accept the potential future risk or responsibility for any subsequent health damage to individuals or the community as a result of leaving Hardie House intact, even with remediation work. · The legacy and heritage value of the building is tainted by the devastating health effects of asbestos
Social benefits of redevelopment · Given the commitment of HammondCare to provide extensive charitable services to people in need within the local community, this can only be properly achieved by a redevelopment, including the demolition of Hardie House.
Hazardous Material Management Plan by Noel Arnold & Associates April 2013: · The hazardous materials managed by this plan include Asbestos-Containing Materials (ACM), Synthetic Mineral Fibre (SMF) containing materials, Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) containing capacitors located within florescent light fittings and lead-containing paint. · Plan identified 32 asbestos items with a low risk rating and 1 asbestos item with a medium risk rating. · A low risk describes asbestos containing materials that pose a lose exposure risk to personnel, employees and the general public providing they stay in a stable condition. · A medium risk rating applies to asbestos containing materials that pose an increased exposure risk to people in the area. · Plan recommends that an appropriately licensed asbestos removal contractor undertake remedial/removal works of all P2 items within 3months. Items identified as P2 include debris fibre cement sheeting within the roof space and garden bedding area (in soil). · Plan recommends that an independent asbestos consultant undertake asbestos fibre air monitoring during and after the remedial/removal works and to provide clearance certification once works have been satisfactorily completed. · Plan recommends that periodic re-assessment of the asbestos containing materials remaining in-situ to monitor their condition in accordance with Code of Practice. · Plan recommends that where lead paint was observed in a fair condition the peeling paint should be removed by an appropriate contractor and over painted with lead-free coat as part of on-going maintenance.
Hazardous Materials Survey and Register by DLA Environmental August 2013: · Survey conducted through the building detected asbestos containing material to be present within the building. · Laboratory analysis confirmed presence of asbestos in the following locations – fibrous cement sheet panel eaves and vinyl floor tiles in “The Hut”, fibrous cement material in the Telstra Pit in the front garden, fibrous cement sheeting in the roof, bituminous sheet material in the roofing and dust throughout the roof space ceiling cabinet. · Asbestos containing materials were observed in the front garden bed, front and rear entry foyers, eaves on all sides of the main building, exterior cladding, throughout the subfloor area beneath the main building, on various roof locations, including both corrugated sheeting and shingles, interior wall and ceiling panelling/cement sheeting and throughout the roof space. · Asbestos also likely to be present in areas not accessible during the survey, including sealed fire places and chimney shafts, behind ceramic floor tiles, behind plasterboard walls, ceiling cavities, electrical switchboards and hot water pipe insulation. · Large number of asbestos containing materials were observed in poor, deteriorating condition, particularly in areas beneath the main building and inside the roofing and extensive asbestos contaminated dust inside roof space/ceiling cavity. Considerable removal of asbestos contaminated materials will need to be undertaken. · Asbestos should be removed in accordance with the National Occupation Health and Safety Commissions Code of Practice and Guideline Notes · Lead contaminated paints were confirmed and observed to be in deteriorating condition in both internal and external areas, and should be removed by an appropriate contractor or painted over with a lead free coat.
Insufficient Justification · The planning proposal is not consistent with the previous actions of the State Government and Council which zoned the site Residential 2(d3) which permitted hospitals and residential flat buildings. The planning proposal has failed to identify or address the impact that the proposed heritage listing would have on the outcomes sought by the 2(d3) controls. The planning proposal is not consistent with the requirements of SEPP No.55 – Remediation of Land due to the presence of asbestos. No recognition has been given to the fact that the building forms part of the Neringah Hospital site and the impact on the on-going operation of the hospital.
Inconsistent with the Objects of the Act · The planning proposal is inconsistent with the Objects of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979; does not provide for the proper management and development of towns and villages for the purpose of promoting the social and economic welfare of the community (Section 5(a)(i)); it does not provide for the promotion and co-ordination of the orderly and economic use and development of land (Section 5(a)(ii); it does not provide for the provision and co-ordination of community facilities (Section 5(a)(v); it does not provide for ecologically sustainable development (Section 5(a)(vii).
Insufficient Community Benefit · The planning proposal fails to recognize the role the Neringah Hospital currently plays in the provision of health services to the residents of Hornsby/Ku-ring-gai, together with future plans for the site and the expansion of health and support services.
|
The building retains high heritage significance as noted in the NBRS + Partners Report for HammondCare the building has significance as a showcase of fibre asbestos, built for a leading industrialist of fibre asbestos in Australia. The criteria for this significance are historical association, technical and rarity not aesthetic. For the most part, the asbestos can be stabilised and the majority of fabric retained. As per the Heritage Office’s publication assessing heritage significance a heritage property is only required to meet one criterion to be considered culturally significant.
The choice to not use the building does not impact on its significance. Numerous owners make choices that degrade buildings. Intentionally vacating a building is not a reason for delisting.
The building is of technical significance as required by NSW Heritage Office publication Assessing Heritage Significance as it:
• shows or is associated with, creative or technical innovation or achievement.
An owners inability or unwillingness to undertake research does not preclude interest from others or future owners.
The property has been assessed as retaining enough fabric to provide evidence of this association. Many heritage places are adaptively reused for a purpose that is different to the original use. This is not a reason for delisiting.
The setting has been compromised but not completely lost. Regardless, the key to the significance of Hardie House is the technical/research significance, rarity and historical association. The loss of setting is not a reason to discount these criteria.
Certain types of asbestos can be stabilised and houses constructed from asbestos reused. It has been Council’s advice that most of the interior asbestos can be stabilised and the asbestos fibres in the subfloor and the ceiling space removed. The asbestos roof tiles should also be removed. The choice to not stabilise the interior asbestos and use the property is that of the owner due to the cost and the incompatibility of retaining a building that represents a real health risk.
Archival A detailed historical record (archival recording) would be a condition of approval for any significant change to a heritage property in Ku-ring-gai.
It is agreed that if the building were not listed and demolition permitted an interpretation strategy should be a condition of consent. This is not a simple archival recording but as outlined in this submission the retention of fabric and the use of interpretation boards to explain the history of the site and its association with Andrew Reid and James Hardie Industries. In addition to the standard archival recording requirements a video record is also required.
The following is the draft condition of consent: 1. Interpretation Plan (Special Condition CNDD001)
Prior to any demolition works commencing on the site, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that an Interpretation Plan has been submitted to and endorsed by Council. An Interpretation Plan is a document that provides policies and details advice for interpreting the heritage significance of the building and includes detail about the interpretation media. Media can include signs, installations, displays, films, brochures or other means of communication. The Interpretation Plan shall be prepared by a suitably qualified and experienced person. The media chosen is to clearly help the public understand and convey the significance of the building and shall be approved prior to any works occurring on site. The Media is to be installed within 14 days of demolition being completed. Reason: To ensure the identified heritage significance of the building is interpreted via appropriate media for future generations.
It is acknowledged that some removal and some stabilization of asbestos materials is required.
HammondCare’s concern for WH&S is acknowledged.
The Safe Work Australia – National Code of Practice 2005 states the management and control of in situ asbestos and asbestos-containing materials (ACM) in workplaces, in compliance with the national prohibition, should be based on: • identifying ACM • assessing the risks posed by the ACM identified; and • implementing control measures to eliminate the risks arising from ACM and prevent exposure to airborne asbestos fibres.
These control measures should reflect the following hierarchy of controls: 1) Elimination/removal (most preferred); 2) Isolation/enclosure/sealing; 3) Engineering controls; 4) Safe Work Practices (administrative controls); and 5) Personal Protective Equipment (PPE) (least preferred).
A combination of these techniques may be required in order to adequately manage ACM.
The safety concerns regarding the asbestos and lead paint within the building are noted.
It is agreed that for reasons other than heritage this property cannot be used for hospital purposes. For the collective benefit of the site and flow-on social benefits to the community, not listing the building and permitting its demolition with conditional archival recording is preferable to retaining an unused building whose decline would have implications to the streetscape and health implications to staff and residents in the area.
A detailed economic analysis comparing retention and reuse with demolition and redevelopment has not been provided.
It is agreed that the retention of this building represents an opportunity cost and that the best and highest use for the site is one that optimises community benefits and the provision of health care services.
.
The concern about public criticism regarding the link between James Hardie Industries and asbestos is noted.
The story of asbestos from its arrival in Australia to the devastating effects of lung disease are the history that is represented in this house. Heritage items reflect historic events, the good and the bad. It is not a sanitized and edited version of the past.
It is agreed that the retention of this building represents an opportunity cost and that the best and highest use for the site is one that optimises community benefits and the provision of health care services.
The recommendations of the Hazardous Material Management Plan and the findings of the Hazardous Materials Survey and Register are noted
The site is currently zoned R4 High Density Residential under the KLEP 2015. The permissible uses and development standards apply to all sites zoned R4, and not just this specific site. It is not uncommon to have controls over heritage items that would allow for larger scale development compared to the retention of the item.
The planning proposal is not inconsistent with SEPP 55 Remediation of Land – which sets out when consent is required and not required for remediation work, sets out considerations for rezoning of land and in assessing development applications and requires that remediation work meets certain standards. A contamination report would be required with any Development Application lodged for the site.
The planning proposal is not inconsistent with the Objects at Part 5 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The planning proposal provides for the proper management, development and conservation of Ku-ring-gai’s cultural heritage, which has a positive social effect in recognizing local cultural and environmental heritage. The retention and conservation of heritage places has an important role in protecting the environment. The environmental sustainability benefits afforded by the retention of heritage places includes the substantial reduction in building demolition and new construction waste, and the conservation of embodied energy within the existing buildings.
It is agreed that the WH&S considerations and the need to optimize health facilities on the site presents a net benefit to the community. If the building had not been asbestos and the owner was willing to adaptively reuse the house, then the building could be retained.
Recommend remove |
6 |
88 Fox Valley Road, Wahroonga
|
Incorrect information in the heritage assessment Submission does not support the heritage listing of 88 Fox Valley Road, Wahroonga for the following reasons: · Heritage assessment needs to be checked as it contains incorrect information: · house was a design produced by Peddle, before he formed the practice that was Peddle Thorpe and Walker. · The Ku-ring-gai Historic Society suggests the plans were drawn up by owner’s daughter and did not necessarily relate to any design approach in Canada.
· Cape Cod area, where craftsman style of architecture is prolific. Houses had shingled roofs. Prior to the tiling of the roof circa 1929, the Ku-ring-gai Historic Society records the roof as being slate, which is not representative of the craftsman style. · Ian Ramage’s book has described 88 Fox Valley Road as a Californian Bungalow, to a Federation Bungalow (sic Australian Federation) transitioning from Queen Anne style. There appears to be diverse interpretations on residence. · Would like to remove internal walls, and have already made some modifications, though the report states them as being original. · Part of the front garden that the owners maintain is Council property, having been resumed years ago for the proposed expressway. This land should be reverted to 88 Fox Valley Road. Without the return of this land, the report by Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners is incorrect. · Confusion amongst the various documents as to the history and styling of the property
· The report by Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners makes light of the issues of asbestos in the current construction.
· The house is structurally poor, due to the shallow surface foundations. Practically and economically impossible to resolve the foundation condition. Significant joint loss in stone foundations and piers. Walls internally cannot practically be rectified.
· Roof leaks - the cost of addressing the leaking is exorbitant. · Very little if any financial assistance available for repair and rectification costs.
· Wish to stay in house, but would like to modify it. Have contemplated re-building and re-siting house to allow for another house to be constructed on the property, but heritage listing and subdivision controls prevent development.
|
The report has the designer as unknown and the builder as N/A. The KHS reference (the Historian, 34.1 p.56) is the extract of an unpublished autobiography for Phyllis Tuson. (1905-1995) who resided at 54 Fox Valley Road. Further research is recommended to verify this anecdotal recount. A heritage inventory sheet is not a static document and it can be changed as new information is made available. This information will be added to the history of the SHI.
It is agreed that the interpretation of this site in numerous publications does vary however the fact it warrants discussion by architectural historians and in particular is cited as an example in the Apperly et al 1994 publication “A pictorial guide to identifying Australian architecture” p. 146-147 highlights the significance of this bungalow from the Federation period. Apperly et al describe the house as a “transition to the Californian Bungalow style”. As such it is an Australian expression of the style just as the American Craftsman style is a reinterpretation of the English Arts and Crafts style.
The report by Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners recognises there have been internal changes to the dwelling. Heritage listing does not prevent further change to the dwelling.
Asbestos is a dangerous material. The best way to identify asbestos is by having a licensed asbestos removalist inspect it. For guidance on Safely disposing of asbestos waste in your home refer to www.environment.nsw.gov.au website. Changes to heritage properties including the removal of asbestos should be discussed with Council’s heritage advisor and duty planner to ascertain the relevant approvals if required and to conserve the significance of the potential heritage item
The report by Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners makes reference to the physical condition of the dwelling, and acknowledges that there are some problems with the sandstone piers causing cracking to internal finishes but states “a timber structure such as this is able to accommodate some movement and generally the house appears in good order”.
All houses require maintenance and upkeep. Heritage listing does not inhibit maintenance.
Currently Council does not have a Heritage Assistance Fund. This is something that Council could potentially investigate in the future in order to provide small grants for maintenance or reinstatement works to heritage items.
Due to the siting of the dwelling house on the parcel of land, it is unlikely that subdivision could occur which retains the existing dwelling and complies with the minimum subdivision lot size requirements at Clause 4.1 of the KLEP 2015.
Heritage listing does not prevent change from occurring to properties. Heritage listing ensures that any changes respect and retain those qualities and characteristics which make the heritage place special. |
7, 9, 10, 11, 14
10, 14
7
10, 11, 14 |
6 Caithness Street, Killara
|
Support for heritage listing 6 Caithness Street
Historical association with Donald Esplin · Examples of Donald Esplin’s works have largely disappeared or been altered beyond recognition · Donald Thomas Epslin was the architect – credited with over 500 projects in Sydney’s CBD and suburbs. He designed the state listed Astor Flats in Macquarie Street. · The house has been described in a great many reports an in the book “Donald Thomas Epslin, Sydney Architect: His Life and Work” by Robert Irving. · Epslin’s particular contributions relate to the development of Australian architectural styles in the Federation and Inter-War periods. He was a pioneer of the Inter-War Arts and Crafts style. · Significantly large number of Esplin’s and Mould’s houses in the Sydney region have been demolished or defaced.
Historical association with T.K. Smith · The original owner TK Smith a founding member and early president of Killara Golf Club bought 6 Caithness Street – it was the first home built in the cul-de-sac. · Historic connections with Killara Golf Club via the architect and original owner
Preservation of architecture and historic character of Killara and provision of housing diversity The submission supports the planning proposal, particularly in relation to the heritage listing of 6 Caithness Street, Killara for the following reasons: · Having regard to the recent development surrounding Caithness Street, there is a responsibility to preserve the architecture of the suburbs formative years and to also temper the advance of development by maintain some degree of housing variation. · Keeping larger blocks of traditional housing adds to the character of an area and maintains visual openness, tree canopy and variation in the built form. · Diversification of housing options and the structures associated with that diversification enhance the liability of an area and its environs.
Aesthetic significance · Fortuitous that this 1920s single storey home (except for some recent attempts to deface the façade) remains intact · Heritage significance with façade of dual bay windows and Tuscan columns · 6 Caithness Street Killara is a fine example of old Killara and well worth being preserved · Essential to retain this well-designed example of a bungalow which by its nature also demonstrates part of the residential development of Killara. · Should be retained because of the unobtrusive gentle scale and traditional form, originality and intactness’ both internally and externally and the historical associations with important architects, Killara Golf Club and original owner of property.
Unapproved changes · Columns have been painted and glass balustrade installed. These changes combined with denying internal access for heritage assessment appear to be a deliberate attempt to avoid heritage listing |
The support for the planning proposal and in particular the heritage listing of 6 Caithness Street is noted.
Esplin designed some 400 buildings. 3 of his buildings are recognized in schedule 5 of the KLEP 2015 and the Local Centres LEP 2012 those being: · 9 Yarabah Avenue Gordon · 22 Hastings Road Warrawee and · 26 Billyard Avenue Warrawee. There is no disputing that Esplin is a significant architect. There are 3 houses designed by Esplin that are designated under the KLEP 2015 and a further 7 Esplin designed buildings protected under other local government area LEPs. The building while not being common is not rare. Numerous buildings attributed to Esplin are cited in the Robert Irving and Noel Irving book “Donald Thomas Esplin, Sydney architect: his life and work” as location unidentified. The book identifies 22 houses constructed in Ku-ring-gai. While it is known that 2B Killara Avenue has been demolished, it is unknown which of these other ‘location unidentified’ buildings are still in existence.
The historical association with T.K. Smith is not considered significant. T.K. Smith was not a founding member of the club having been born in Manly in 1899 the same year the club was constituted in its first incarnation as Linfield Golf and Recreation Club. His presidency of the club (1946-47) was an unremarkable time for the club with no significant change or development. His period of presidency was also short with the average term for the previous 6 presidents being 7 years. This is not to say he was not a valued member of the Killara Golf Course community only that it is not standout and adequate comparisons with other presidents have not been established.
Housing diversity is an objective of Ku-ring-gai’s Community Strategic Plan 2030. Retaining our valued historic streetscapes and identified heritage places contributes to housing diversity but claiming heritage significance to prevent development is not supported. Ku-ring-gai’s heritage places must have acknowledged and defensible heritage significance. Listing places with dubious heritage significance poses a risk to Council through court appeals and undermining the other robust heritage assessments.
Aesthetically, 6 Caithness is an unremarkable bungalow for the Ku-ring-gai area. As a contributory house within a conservation area it may still have significance but not as an individual item. The loss of setting and compromised amenity has detrimentally impacted upon the sensory appeal of 6 Caithness and this change has more than temporarily degraded the place, a reason for exclusion.
While it is agreed the property does still retain its form and layout with some reversible changes, the significant changes to its setting cannot be reversed. Houses to the rear of the property have been demolished and replaced by 5 storey apartments. Similarly, to the north of 2 Caithness there is another 5 storey apartment building. This increased residential density has had a massive impact on the amenity of the houses at 2, 4 and 6 Caithness as their private open space to the rear of their properties is now overlooked.
These changes and their reversibility have been noted.
Recommend remove |
8, 13 |
6 Caithness Street, Killara |
Does not support heritage listing of 6 Caithness Street
Appearance of the house changed since assessment · The houses current appearance is different to the photos shown in the exhibition. The house now has different coloured columns and modern window panes at the front door. The house has lost its original style · The assessment is faulty and unfair and questionable in law
Heritage Evaluation and Comparative Assessment by Robert Staas, NBRS+Partners February 2015: · Report provides an overview of aboriginal history, early European history, history of Killara, history of the subject site, the original owners of the property, the architect. · The property is identified as Inter-War Georgian Revival Design. While 6 Caithness Street represents some of the characteristics, the level and representative values and the quality of the design are not outstanding or significant. · There are numerous examples of the style located throughout the Ku-ring-gai local government area.
|
The heritage assessment by Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners was undertaken in 2014. The photos contained in the report are dated 2014. The modifications to 6 Caithness Street occurred early 2015, well after the assessment was undertaken, and in this regard the assessment is not faulty or unfair.
On 3 February 2015, Council resolved to place an interim heritage order on 6 Caithness Street. On 6 February 2015, the interim heritage order was published in the NSW government gazette.
The changes that occurred to the property which it is claimed degrade the significance are reversible. The changes to the windows occurred after the IHO was gazetted and is potentially unapproved development.
Everything that has been done can be reversed, consistent with the requirements of the Burra Charter. Given the extensive knowledge of the property prior to the change replacement with replicas is appropriate. New replica wooden windows could replace the unsympathetic aluminum windows, the columns can be repainted and the balustrade replaced with a replica.
Not all bungalows fit easily in the standard categories espoused in the publication “A Pictorial Guide to Identifying Australian Architecture”. Some bungalows are hybrids of the influencing styles. This property has elements of Arts and Crafts, Interwar Classical and Colonial Revival. Ku-ring-gai does have numerous Interwar bungalows however these styles are quite variable. As pointed out by the consultant, this building is not a pure Inter-war Georgian Revival bungalow of which there are many identified in schedule 5 but a hybrid expressing the architect’s expression of the style. It is agreed, however, that it is not a remarkable example and on aesthetic grounds does not meet the threshold for listing. Recommend remove |
12 |
51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra
|
The submission does not support the heritage listing of 51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra, for the following reasons:
· Architect - The architect who designed 51 Warrangi Street Turramurra is Eric Fergus Heath and not William Rae Laurie. Identity of architect established by the surviving plan in the possession of the owner. Plan was drawn by Eric Fergus Heath and was checked by William Rae Laurie.
· No Aesthetic Characteristics – Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners opinion that the house meets criteria for heritage listing as the architect who designed the house was William Rae Laurie. The house does not meet this criterion as it was designed by Eric Fergus Heath, who is not a notable architect in the Ku-ring-gai area. · Misidentified as having inter-war Mediterranean style character –The building….was designed in an English inspired “cottage” style with no distinctive idioms apart from a recessed entry porch, a tall paired chimney and some “Georgian” inspired windows.
· The building has substantial alterations and additions – over 50% of the original house, including; addition of double garage and removal of driveway; large skillion addition; modification to ground floor loggia with enclosed verandah addition; enclosure of first floor loggia and division into separate rooms; internal modifications to rooms including new kitchen, bathrooms and ensuites; removal of windows; painting of face brickwork; original roofing replaced with concrete roof tiles. · Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners conclusion that the building could be restored to its original configuration could not be achieved without substantial demolition and rebuilding. · The garden does not contain any evidence of the original landscaping for the house constructed in 1936 as a result of a re-subdivision in 1975, construction of the garage, pool, cabana and additional living area. Topography also substantially altered by excavation for garage. All current sandstone and paving constructed 1980s.
· Legal Objections - Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners report relies on a wrong assumption that William Rae Laurie designed the house. Once it is accepted that it was not Mr Laurie, but Eric Fergus Heath, all of Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners conclusions in support of the heritage listing are flawed and cannot as a matter of law provide a proper basis or justification for including 51 Warrangi Street as a heritage item. · The Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners report relied on ‘precautionary principle’ to justify recommendation for heritage listing. No statutory basis for the ‘precautionary principle’ in relation to proposed heritage items in a LEP, and reliance on it would therefore take into account an irrelevant consideration and decision would be unlawful. · Council asked Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners to respond to the issues raised concerning reliance on ‘precautionary principle’. Clive Lucas Stapleton responded in writing that reliance on the ‘precautionary principle’ was not necessary. This document from Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners abandoning the ‘precautionary principle’ was not contained in business papers, provided to Councillors or the owner, not referred to in the minutes, does not form part of the planning proposal documents and directly contradicts the Heritage Data Form.
The submission also enclosed a copy of a letter from Robert Staas from NBRS+Partners to the Minister of Planning.
Letter from Robert Staas, NBRS+Partners: · Concern regarding heritage assessment – no inspection of property except from front gate, inventory sheet contains errors. · Misidentification of house as “inter-war Mediterranean style architecture” – building has no characteristics of inter-war Mediterranean and was designed in an English inspired “cottage” style with no distinctive idioms apart from recessed entry porch, tall paired chimney and some “Georgian” inspired windows. · Property falls within the guidelines for exclusion and does not meet the guidelines for inclusion as set out by Heritage Office. · Extensive changes made to original building which mean that is no longer a good representative example of any heritage significance and should not be listed. |
The architectural plan is from the firm Laurie. and Heath. It is confirmed that the architectural plan lists E.F.H. (Eric Fergus Heath) as the one who drew the plans, and W.R.L.(William Rae Heath) as the architect who checked the plans. This does not convincingly discredit Laurie’s contribution to the design of 51 Warrangi Street nor does it conclusively establish that Eric Heath was the senior architect on the project.
Heath joined Laurie’s namesake firm in 1933, only becoming a partner in late 1935. In the 1930s and still in many architectural firms today the design process is a collaborative one with more than one contributor. Often, concept designs and early floorplans may be drawn by a senior architect and the finer details and drafting completing by a more junior member. The Sydney Morning Herald Projected Works reference from 1935 would seem to confirm Laurie as the senior on the project where it states the plans for the residence are the works of “Laurie in conjunction with Eric F Heath”. While Laurie is sometimes referenced alone in the projected works, Heath never was the sole practitioner. The evidence is conclusive that this is the work of the architectural firm Laurie and Heath and convincing that Laurie collaborated in the design process having checked the design. The builder on this project was Earnest Ede who was the builder of 744 Pacific Highway Gordon, another building attributed to W.R. Laurie.
To meet the NSW Heritage Office criteria for aesthetic significance a building is required to be “aesthetically distinctive”. As a representative example of Georgian Revival architecture Andover meets this requirement. Laurie’s collaboration in this project meets the criteria.
Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners assessment acknowledges that change has occurred. See comments below with regards to heritage assessment of 51 Warrangi
It is agreed that further assessment of the landscaping and setting is recommended to understand its contribution to the significance of the heritage place, however, it still presents as garden setting for a suburban house and any change has been contextual not unsympathetic.
This is incorrect. The letter from Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners to the Manger – Urban and Heritage Planning does not abandon the ‘precautionary principle’. The letter provides an explanation of the assessment (which was based on street views, photos, correspondence by NBRS+Partners and historical documents) and advises that requests to access the property for a site inspection were refused. The letter states “The use of the term ‘precautionary principle’ in this context refers to the fact that given an inspection of the interior of the house was not possible, there is an unlikely chance that on seeing the interior we might change out minds about the integrity and level of significance of the place”.
It is agreed that the changes to the heritage property are extensive and unsympathetic. The simple and restrained architecture that characterizes the Inter-war Georgian Revival style seems absent following the accretion of unsympathetic extensions that has occurred over the years. The original form is still legible with practiced interpretation but is not obvious.
Under the NSW Guidelines, a reason for exclusion under Criterion C the loss of “design or technical integrity”.
Recommend remove |
16 |
33 Grandview Street, Pymble
|
Supports the listing of 33 Grandview Street Pymble The council report of 25 November 2014 on the Deferred Draft Heritage Items – Draft KLEP 2013 contains the following errors and omissions with regard to the heritage assessment of 33 Grandview Street, Pymble known as Wairuna now Rostrevor: · The property is described as an “example of a late Victorian cottage”, however the property is a Federation House built c.1914. The property is described as one in a set of 6 Victorian houses, including Aldboro, Eblana, Charlgrave, Cumbroqueba, Broughlea. However all the set of houses are Federation Style, not Victorian. 39 Grandview Street is an example of Victorian style.
· Historical association significance – the heritage data form overlooks the properties association Thomas family, particularly the association with Barbara Mortimer Thomas.
· Social significance – the heritage data form overlooks that the property is held in esteem by groups, particularly the Ku-ring-gai Historical Society who have previously researched the property, and Friends of Pymble who have supported the establishment of a HCA in the area in which the property is located.
· The identification of these errors and omissions should be further considered for supporting a recommendation for heritage listing 33 Grandview Street, Pymble.
· The Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners report was not placed on public exhibition for public comment.
|
It is agreed that 33 Grandview Street does not present as a house from the Victorian period. “Rostrevor” at 33 Grandview Street, was described by Paul Davies Pty Ltd as a mostly single storey Federation house with: “painted brick, slate roof, one hipped dormer to the roof, timber framed double hung windows with timber shutters, has an attic addition, two rendered brick chimneys, verandah along the front, sandstone front fence.”
It is agreed that the history of Barbara Mortimer Thomas has not been addressed in this assessment. Historical association significance is not considered in isolation but should also consider: 1. Does the analysis clearly illustrate how the item relates to a significant aspect of a person’s thematic contribution; 2. Does the analysis compare the item with other items associated with the person to demonstrate that this particular item is a good illustration of the thematic contribution; and 3. Does the item retain enough integrity to convey its significant associations?
In terms of social significance the KHS research numerous properties throughout Ku-ring-gai. Council in consultation with the KHS reviews this information and utilize it as one source of identifying potential heritage items, which is one of the reason’s 33 Grandview was investigated.
The Friends of Pymble support for the HCA is noted and 33 Grandview is a contributory building within the Fernwalk HCA.
The house which was originally facebrick has been painted and dormer windows clearly visible from the street added to the roof. The unsympathetic additions and changes to the house mean it is no longer an outstanding example of a house from the Federation period but it is still recognizable and makes a positive contribution to the Federation streetscape. As such, it is recognized as a contributory building in the Fernwalk Heritage Conservation Area. It is not recommended to pursue the heritage listing of this building.
The report was considered by Council at its Ordinary Meeting of 25 November 2014. The Council adopted a recommendation to proceed to Gateway for the listing of the recommended places. |
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 July 2015 |
GB.5 / 464 |
|
|
Item GB.5 |
S02618/2 |
|
15 June 2015 |
Licence to Rotary Clubs of Turramurra and Ku-ring-gai to Conduct Markets in Wade Lane Car Park at Gordon
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
purpose of report: |
To seek approval to review the terms of Council’s resolution of 28 October 2014 in respect of the proposed licence fee for the Rotary Clubs of Turramurra and Ku-ring-gai’s use of the mid-level of the Wade Lane Car Park.
|
|
|
background: |
On 28 October 2014 Council resolved to grant the Rotary Clubs of Turramurra and Ku-ring-gai a new 5 year licence. In setting the licence fee, Council resolved to apply a 70% rebate of the market rate assessed by independent valuation in accordance with Council’s Policy for the Management of Community and Recreational Land and Facilities. |
|
|
comments: |
Council has received representations from the Rotary Clubs seeking a review of the quantum of the licence fee. Under Council’s policy, Category Three service groups such as Rotary qualify for a rebate in a range of 50% to 80% of the market rate. |
|
|
recommendation: |
That Council resolve to review the licence fee for the new 5 year licence to the Rotary Clubs of Turramurra and Ku-ring-gai as set out in this report.
|
Purpose of Report
To seek approval to review the terms of Council’s resolution of 28 October 2014 in respect of the proposed licence fee for the Rotary Clubs of Turramurra and Ku-ring-gai’s use of the mid-level of the Wade Lane Car Park.
Background
On 28 October 2014, Council considered a report on the renewal of the licence for the Rotary Clubs of Turramurra and Ku-ring-gai (Rotary Clubs) to conduct monthly community markets in the mid-level of the Wade Lane Car Park. Council subsequently resolved:-
A. That Council grant the renewal of a 5 year licence to the Turramurra Rotary Club Incorporated and the Ku-ring-gai Rotary Club Incorporated.
B. That Council authorise the issue of a Public Notice as prescribed by Sections 47 and 47A of the Local Government Act 1993.
C. That Council endorse the licence fee being established in accordance with Council’s Policy for the Management of Community and Recreational Land and Facilities and that a 70% rebate apply to the market rate assessed by independent valuation.
D. That Council authorise the Mayor and General Manager to sign licence documentation.
E. That Council authorise the Common Seal of Council to be affixed to licence documentation.
In accordance with the foregoing resolution, Council staff progressed licence negotiations with Rotary and undertook the required statutory public notification of Council’s intent to grant the licence pursuant to s. 47 and s.47A of the Local Government Act 1993.
The opportunity for public submissions was between 16 November 2014 to 12 December 2014 and, at close, no comments were received.
Comments
In applying for a new licence, the Clubs were informed of Council’s methodology for determining licence fees for community groups based on Council’s adopted Policy for the Management of Community and Recreational Land and Facilities (Policy).
The Policy provides for the assessment of fees and rentals on a market value basis with the application of a rebate reflecting the nature of the community group and the activity carried out on Council land and facilities.
The Clubs were determined to be a Category Three community service group and thus eligible for a rebate in the range of 50% to 80% of the market rate. Acting on advice from Council staff, Council resolved, at its meeting of 28 October 2014, to apply a 70% rebate.
The Clubs have since made representations to Council seeking a review of the licence fee (Attachment A2). The Clubs contend that the quantum of the increase in the licence fee and the insufficient lead time to pass the increase onto the stall holders would impact on their fund raising activities.
The Clubs have proposed that Council approve of the increase in the level of rebate from 70% to 80% and that the new licence fee commences from January 2016 to allow for sufficient time for transition to take effect.
integrated planning and reporting
Theme: Places, Spaces and Infrastructure
Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective |
Delivery Program Term Achievement |
Operational Plan Task |
P7.1 Multipurpose community buildings and facilities are available to meet the community’s diverse and changing needs. |
Usage of existing community buildings and facilities is optimised. |
P7.1.1.1.3 Develop service levels for Council’s buildings in line with community requirements and available resources. |
Governance Matters
Pursuant to Council’s Policy for the Management of Community and Recreational Land and Facilities, Rotary is determined to be a Category Three community service group and thus eligible for a rebate in the range of 50% to 80% of the market rate.
Council has discretion and would be acting within the framework of the policy to apply a further 10% discount of the market fee bringing the level of the rebate to 80%.
Risk Management
The Clubs have a history of complying with the terms of previous licences dating back to 1994 and development consent conditions.
Council’s solicitors will prepare the licence to ensure Council’s interests are protected.
Financial Considerations
In terms of the licence renewal process, Council staff commissioned an independent valuation (Attachment A1) and applied a 70% rebate of the market licence fee assessed.
If Council is agreeable to revising the level of rebate then it is proposed that the Clubs will continue to pay the current licence fee until 31 December 2015 with the new rate to take effect from 1 January 2016.
A table which provides a comparison and the variance in the new licence fee to that payable under the former licence is enclosed for Council’s information (Attachment A3).
Social Considerations
The Clubs has been conducting community markets in the mid-level of the Wade Lane car parking station on the second Sunday of the month since December 1994.
The community markets have been well received by residents and visitors and the proceeds from the sale of items are exclusively used by Rotary for charitable activities predominately in the Ku-ring-gai area.
Environmental Considerations
The community markets are conducted monthly on the mid-level of the Wade Lane Car Park and DA and licence conditions limit the minimal level of environmental impact the activity has in the area.
Community Consultation
The required public notification of the proposed licence to the Clubs has been carried out in accordance with s.47 and s.47A Local Government Act 1993. No public submissions were received.
There is no requirement to publicly disclose the commercial aspects of the licence.
Internal Consultation
There has been consultation with staff from Council’s Community & Recreational Property section. Applying an 80% rebate of the market rate remains consistent with Council’s Policy for the Management of Community and Recreational Land and Facilities given Rotary’s status, the community nature of the markets and the fact that proceeds generated are utilised for charitable purposes.
Summary
The Rotary Clubs of Turramurra and Ku-ring-gai have been offered a licence for a term of five (5) years for the use of the mid-level of the Wade Lane Car Park on the terms set out in Council’s resolution of 28 October 2014 including the licence fee being assessed at 70% of the market rate determined by Council’s independent valuer.
The Clubs have made representations seeking Council’s consideration to increase the level of rebate applied to the market rent from 70% to 80%.
Pursuant to Council’s Policy for the Management of Community and Recreational Land and Facilities, Rotary is determined to be a Category Three community service group and thus eligible for a rebate in the range of 50% to 80% of the market rate.
Council has discretion within the framework of the policy to apply a maximum rebate of 80% of the market fee. Increasing the rebate has nominal impact on Council’s potential revenue.
The car park is on Community classified land and is covered under the Generic Plan of Management (PoM) adopted the 24 February 2009, and the proposed licence is permissible under the PoM.
Council’s intent to renew the agreement has been publicly advertised in accordance with sections 47 and 47A of the Local Government Act 1993. No submissions were received.
The licence is proposed to commence from 1 January 2015, with the revised licence fee to commence in January 2016.
Subject to Council’s endorsement of this report, Council’s solicitor in the matter will finalise the drafting of the licence so it can be executed between the parties.
A. That Council grant the renewal of a 5 year licence to the Turramurra Rotary Club Incorporated and the Ku-ring-gai Rotary Club Incorporated.
B. That Council endorse the licence fee being established in accordance with Council’s Policy for the Management of Community and Recreational Land and Facilities and that an 80% rebate be applied to the market rate assessed by independent valuation as set out in the report.
C. That Council notes that public advertising of the intent to grant the licence as prescribed by Sections 47 and 47A of the Local Government Act 1993 has been carried out and no public submissions were received.
D. That Council confirms the Mayor and General Manager are authorised to execute all documentation associated with the licence agreement.
E. That Council authorise the Common Seal of Council to be affixed to licence documentation.
|
Vince Rago Property Program Co-ordinator |
Deborah Silva Manager Integrated Planning, Property & Assets |
Andrew Watson Director Strategy & Environment |
|
BEM Valuation Report |
|
Confidential |
||
|
Representations from Rotary |
|
Confidential |
|
|
Licence Fee Comparisons |
|
Confidential |
Ordinary Meeting of Council - 14 July 2015 |
GB.6 / 469 |
|
|
Item GB.6 |
S10025 |
|
30 June 2015 |
Tender RFT5-2015 - Cameron Park Extension
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
purpose of report: |
To consider the tenders received for the rebuild and extension of Cameron Park, Turramurra, and appoint the preferred tenderer. |
|
|
background: |
Council, as part of the Open Space Capital Works
Program, approved funding for the rebuild and extension of Cameron Park,
Turramurra, including the increase in the park size, improved children’s play
area, BBQ facilities, shelter, outdoor table tennis facility, increased lawn
areas and improved landscaping works. Tender documents were released through Tenderlink
on |
|
|
comments: |
Tender documents were produced with four (4) submissions received. The submissions were assessed using agreed criteria which identified the best value to Council. |
|
|
recommendation: |
In accordance with Section 55 of the Local Government Act and Tender Regulations, it is recommended Council accept the tender submitted by Tenderer ‘A’ as identified in the Confidential Summary (Attachment 1).
|
Purpose of Report
To consider the tenders received for the rebuild and extension of Cameron Park, Turramurra, and appoint the preferred tenderer.
Background
Council, as part of the Open Space Capital Works Program, approved funding for the rebuild and extension of Cameron Park, Turramurra, including the increase in the park size, improved children’s play area, BBQ facilities, shelter, outdoor table tennis facility, increased lawn areas and improved landscaping works.
Following this approval, staff undertook consultation and preparation of tender documents which were released through Tenderlink on 10 March 2015 with a closing date of 7 April 2015.
As the estimated cost of the rebuild and extension works is over $150,000, Tenders were called using Tenderlink in accordance with the tender requirements of the Local Government Act and Tender Regulation.
Comments
Four (4) tenders were received and recorded in accordance with Council’s tendering policy. Tenders were received from the following companies:
North Shore Paving Co Pty Ltd
Hargraves Urban Pty Ltd
Ceecorp Pty Ltd
CA & I Pty Ltd
It should be noted the order above does not correspond to the order of the list of tenderers named from ‘A’ to ‘D’ in the confidential attachment. A Tender Evaluation Panel consisting of staff from the Operations Department, and Strategy & Environment Department was formed to assess the four (4) tenders received. The evaluation took into account:
· Conformity of submission,
· lump sum fee,
· company and staff experience,
· ability to provide the full range of services required,
· work program and availability,
· previous performance in relation to similar type work, and
· risk management.
Confidential attachments to this report include:
· List of tenders received and additional financial information (Attachment 1)
· Tender Evaluation Panel’s score and recommendation (Attachment 2)
· Corporate Scorecard – Financial and Performance Assessment – Tendered A (Attachment 3)
From the four (4) submissions received and the available information taken into account during the evaluation and scoring of each element of the tender submission, Tenderer ‘A’ was identified as providing the best value to Council. In order that Council is not exposed to financial risk and ensure that Tenderer ‘A’ is trading in a sound and profitable manner an independent ‘Detailed Financial and Performance Assessment’ was carried out by Corporate Scorecard Pty Ltd (Attachment 3). Tenderer ‘A’ was identified as trading in a sound manner and therefore of low financial risk to Council. Tender ‘A’ is therefore identified as providing the ‘best value’ to Council.
integrated planning and reporting
Enhance Recreation, Sporting and Leisure Facilities.
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.
|
A program is being implemented to improve existing recreational, sporting and leisure facilities and facilitate the establishment of new facilities. |
Deliver park asset refurbishment program at priority locations.
|
Governance Matters
Tender documents were prepared and released through Tenderlink on 10 March 2015 with a closing date of 7 April 2015. At the close of tender, four (4) tenders were received. All submissions were recorded in accordance with Council’s tendering policy. A Tender Evaluation Panel consisting of staff from the Operations Department and Strategy & Environment Department was formed to assess the four (4) tenders received. The evaluation took into account:
· Conformity of submission,
· lump sum fee,
· company and staff experience,
· ability to provide the full range of services required,
· work program and availability,
· previous performance in relation to similar type work, and
· risk management.
Confidential attachments to this report include the list of tenders received, the Tender Evaluation Panel’s comments and recommendation.
The attachments are considered to be confidential in accordance with Section 10A (2)(d)(iii) of The Local Government Act 1993 as they are considered to contain commercial in confidence information.
Risk Management
Three (3) key areas of risk were identified in relation to the proposed work:
1) That work needed to be carried out by a suitably qualified company with experience of park and children’s playground construction.
2) Availability – the company was available to commence work within a few weeks of the work being awarded and has the resources to complete the work quickly and efficiently and without major delays.
3) That Council should not be exposed to financial risk. As part of the evaluation process an independent Performance and Financial Assessment was carried out by Corporate Scorecard Pty Ltd, the tenderer assessed as providing the best value and quality to Council was Tenderer ‘A’.
As part of the independent Performance and Financial Assessment the following areas were examined:
· That Tenderer ‘A’ has the financial capacity to undertake the proposed value of work;
· That the Tenderer ‘A’ has been trading in a profitable and responsible manner during the last three (3) years; and
· That the Tenderer ‘A’ has sufficient assets/reserves to cover all possible debts during the period of work.
The financial aspect of the independent assessment shows Tenderer ‘A’ is able to satisfy all requirements and is unlikely to expose Council to financial risk if awarded the tender as detailed within Council’s tender documents.
Financial Considerations
This project is currently listed in Council’s 2014/15 Delivery Program and Operational Plan – project numbers and present available funds are detailed in Attachment 1.
In accordance with statutory obligations, at the finalisation of the project, all unspent funds will be returned to the appropriate plan.
Social Considerations
Cameron Park is, in its present form, a well utilised and much loved parkland. The proposed upgrade and extension to the park will provide for the increasing and ever growing demand for parks and recreational areas.
The proposed works to upgrade and expand the present park and facilities is in line with Council’s Community Strategic Plan 2030 and the Plan’s long term directions including the objective to have a community embrace healthier lifestyle choices and practices and to provide quality open space, community and recreational facilities to meet the needs of our changing community.
Environmental Considerations
Prior to tender, the project was subject to a Potential Environmental Impact Assessment which determined the impact on the environment by the works is minor.
Community Consultation
The Strategy & Environmental Department, as part of the design process carried out community consultation prior to finalising the present proposed design. The design aims to provide increased open space for mixed play, improved children’s play area, improved picnic facilities with a BBQ and shelter and additional and interesting landscaping.
Prior to the commencement of on-site works, local residents and businesses will be advised of the commencement of works and be provided with a time estimate for the completion of the works.
Internal Consultation
Consultation was undertaken by officers from the Strategy & Environment Department for the proposed construction and extension to the park with staff from the Operations and Community Departments being consulted.
Summary
Council, as part of the 2014/2015 Open Space Capital Works Program, approved funding for the upgrade and extension of the present Cameron Park, including improved children’s play area, BBQ facilities, shelter, outdoor table tennis facility, increased lawn areas and improved landscaping.
Following internal and community consultation, tender documentation was produced with Tenders being called on 10 March 2015 with a closing date of 7 April 2015.
A Tender Evaluation Panel was formed consisting of representatives from Operations Department and Strategy & Environment Department. At the close of tender, four (4) tenders were received and recorded in accordance with Council’s tendering policy.
Following the evaluation and independent performance and financial check, it is recommended Tenderer ‘A’ be appointed on the basis of providing the best value to Council.
A. That Council accept the tender submission from Tenderer ‘A’ to carry out the upgrade and extension works which includes improved children’s play area, BBQ facilities, shelter, outdoor table tennis facility, increased lawn areas and improved landscaping at Cameron Park, Turramurra.
B. That Council approve the balance of funds required to be transferred from Section 94 funds as detailed in Attachment 1 to the project.
C. That the Mayor and General Manager be delegated authority to execute all tender documents on Council’s behalf in relation to the contract.
D. That the Seal of Council be affixed to all necessary documents.
E. That all tenderers be advised of Councils decision in accordance with Clause 178 of the Local Government Act and Tender Regulation.
|
David Morris Manager Projects |
Greg Piconi Director Operations |
List of Tenders received, comments and financial considerations |
|
Confidential |
||
|
Tender Evaluation Panel's score and recommendation |
|
Confidential |
|
|
Corporate Scorecard - Tenderer A - Financial and Performance Assessment |
|
Confidential |