Ordinary Meeting of Council

TO BE HELD ON Tuesday, 4 February 2014 AT 7.00pm

Level 3 Council Chambers

 

Agenda

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

 

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

www.kmc.nsw.gov.au under the link to business papers

 

 

 

APOLOGIEs

 

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

 

Confirmation of Reports to be Considered in Closed Meeting

 

NOTE:

 

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

 

Refer GB.13      Wahroonga Park Playground Upgrade - Tender T11-2013

 

Attachment A1: . List of Tenders received and financial considerations

Attachment A2: . Tender Evaulation Panel's comments and recommendation

Attachment A3:   Corporate Scorecard - Tenderer A - Financial and Performance Assessment

Attachment A4: . Corporate Scorecard - Tenderer B - 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                                                                       10

File: S02131

Meeting held 10 December 2013

Minutes numbered 380 to 415

 

 

minutes from the Mayor

 

 

Petitions

 

 

GENERAL BUSINESS

 

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

 

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

 

 

GB.1        Cavalcade of History and Fashion Inc - Renewal of Occupation Licence          83

 

File: S07505

 

For Council to consider granting a 5 year licence, with 3 additional 5 year option periods, to Cavalcade of History and Fashion Inc, for occupation at 4 Babbage Road, Roseville.

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council grant a licence to Cavalcade of History and Fashion Inc for 5 years from 1 March 2014, with options for an additional 3 x 5 years.

 

 

GB.2        Lifeline Harbour to Hawkesbury Inc - Renewal of Occupation Lease                 88

 

File: S07471

 

For Council to consider granting a 2 year lease to Lifeline Harbour to Hawkesbury Inc for continued occupation at 4 Park Avenue Gordon.

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council grant a new lease to Lifeline Harbour to Hawkesbury Inc expiring on 31 January 2016.

 

 

 

GB.3        Investment Report as at 30 November 2013                                                               93

 

File: S05273

 

To present Council’s investment portfolio performance for November 2013.

 

Recommendation:

 

That the summary of investments performance for November 2013 be received and noted; and that the Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer be noted and report adopted. 

 

 

GB.4        Investment Report as at 31 December 2013                                                             103

 

File: S05273

 

To present Council’s investment portfolio performance for December 2013.

 

Recommendation:

 

That the summary of investments performance for December 2013 be received and noted; and that the Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer be noted and report adopted. 

 

 

GB.5        Amendment to Council Meeting Cycle - March 2014                                              113

 

File: CY00438/2

 

To consider amending the adopted Council meeting cycle to avoid the meeting clashing with the Local Government NSW Tourism Conference being held between the
10 – 12 March 2014 in the Hunter Valley.

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council amend its adopted meeting cycle so that the Ordinary Meeting of Council scheduled for Tuesday, 11 March 2014 be rescheduled to Tuesday, 18 March 2014 and that appropriate notice be given to members of the public.

 

 

GB.6        Australian Local Government Women's Association (NSW) 60th Annual Conference - March 2014                                                                                                                        116

 

File: S02815

 

To advise Councillors of the Australian Local Government Women’s Association (NSW) Annual Conference to be held at Broken Hill between 20 – 22 March 2014.

 

Recommendation:

 

That any Councillors interested in attending the Australian Local Government Women’s Association (NSW) Annual Conference advise the General Manager by Friday, 7 February 2014.

 

GB.7        Smart Urban Futures Conference                                                                               132

 

File: CY00076/6

 

To advise Council of the Smart Urban Futures Conference.

 

Recommendation:

 

That all interested Councillors advise the General Manager of their interest in attending the Smart Urban Futures Conference by Friday, 7 February 2014.

 

 

GB.8        17 to 25 Boundary Street, Roseville - Demolition of Existing Dwellings and Construction of Two Residential Flat Buildings containing 58 Units and Associated Works 139

 

File: DA0139/13

 

Ward:           Roseville

Applicant:     Develotek Roseville Pty Ltd

Owners:        Mrs Denise Voysey, Mr Sung Don Moon, Mrs Eun Ju Kim Moon, Doctor Teck Huah Tang, Mr Paul Ernest Jonas, Mrs Jennifer Karen Jonas, Mr Donald Pearson, Mrs H M Pearson and NSW Roads and Maritime Services (owners of land reserved for road widening)

 

To determine Development Application No. 0139/13 for the demolition of the existing dwellings and construction of two residential flat buildings containing 58 units and associated works.

 

Recommendation:

 

Approval.

 

 

GB.9        12 Wellesley Road, Pymble - Removal of Tree (Californian Redwood) in Front Setback (Heritage Conservation Area)                                                                       233

 

File: DA0376/13

 

Ward: St Ives

Applicant: Mr Anthony Everall

Owners: Mr Anthony & Mrs Philippa Everall

 

Removal of tree (Californian Redwood) in front setback (Heritage Conservation Area).

 

Recommendation:

 

Refusal.

 

 

 

 

GB.10      10 Kimo Street, Roseville - Alterations and Additions to the Existing Dwelling, Construction of a Garage and Driveway, Provision of Stormwater Infrastructure and Torrens Title Subdivision of One Lot into Two                                                        295

 

File: DA0220/13

 

Ward: Roseville

Applicant: Matthew Benson Planning Pty Ltd

Owners: Ms J Cummins & Mr M Lochtenberg

 

Alterations and additions to the existing dwelling, construction of a garage and driveway, provision of stormwater infrastructure and Torrens title subdivision of one lot into two.

 

Recommendation:

 

Approval

 

 

GB.11      Update Report on the Development Contributions System                                 347

 

File: S06785/3

 

The purpose of this report is to provide Council with an overview of key activities and highlights in the development contributions system over the past six months and anticipated highlights for the coming twelve months.

 

Recommendation:

 

That the information in the report be received and noted.

 

 

GB.12      Regional Waste Project                                                                                                  367

 

File: S02294

 

To seek Council’s consent for application to the Minister of Local Government under Section 358 of the Local Government Act, 1993, to participate in entering a Waste Alliance Agreement with other Councils associated with NSROC for waste disposal.

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council resolve to make application to the Minister for Local Government under Section 358 of the Local Government Act, 1993, with a report back to Council detailing associated roles and governance of the Waste Alliance Agreement.

 

 

GB.13      Wahroonga Park Playground Upgrade - Tender T11-2013                                  372

 

File: S09916

 

To consider the tenders received for the refurbishment and upgrade of Wahroonga Park Playground, Wahroonga, 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 A1).

  

 

Extra Reports Circulated to Meeting

 

 

Motions of which due Notice has been given

 

NM.1        Promoting Awareness of Road Safety and Parking Signs in School Zones   379

 

File: CY00020/6

 

Notice of Motion from Councillor Fornari-Orsmond dated 21 January 2014

 

There have been a number of issues with illegal parking around schools which results in safety concerns for the school children and fines for parents who illegally park.

 

Council’s Road Safety Officer, along with Road Safety Officers from other Councils, have developed a brochure that will be sent to all schools in the area advising them of the rules about parking around school sites. The schools will be asked to include the brochure in their newsletters that go out to the parents.  A copy of the brochure is attached.

 

I am proposing that Council send out a similar brochure with the last quarter rate notices in order to get the message out to all residents about the rules associated with parking signs and related traffic issues in schools zones.  The aim is to enable residents to have a better understanding of these rules to hopefully improve the safety for children around school zones.

 

I am also proposing that an advertisement be placed in the local paper incorporating some of the points in the brochure to help spread the message further.

 

It is proposed that the funding for this work be costed against Council’s Road Safety budget.

 

Therefore, I move that:

 

“A.     That a brochure on road parking signs around school zones be sent with Council’s last quarter rates notice.

 

B.      That an advertisement be placed in the local paper outlining the parking regulations regarding parking in school zones and the fines applicable for any breaches.”

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NM.2        Letter of Appreciation to Departing Superintendent Jeff Philippi of Kuring Gai Local Area Command NSW Police                                                                                         382

 

File: CY00455/2

 

Notice of Motion from Councillor Fornari-Orsmond dated 23 January 2014

 

Superintendent Jeff Philippi has been the Commander of the Kuring Gai Local Area Command (LAC) since February 2012.  In this role, he also has a number of other important community positions, one being the Local Emergency Management Controller (LEOCON) for major emergencies including bushfires.

 

Prior to Christmas I received a call from Superintendent Philippi to let me know that he has been posted to Mt Druitt LAC and would be moving on from Kuring Gai LAC in February 2014. This is certainly a case of their gain is our loss.

 

I have known Superintendent Philippi for a few years now, through the involvement of my community activities with Kuring Gai LAC.  I have found him to be very hands on, showing to be extremely committed and passionate about both his personal role in the community and that of the fine officers under his command.  Importantly, he has been readily prepared to give his time when requested to participate in community events.

 

Superintendent Philippi has served our community very well indeed during his term as Commander at Kuring Gai LAC and we owe him a debt of gratitude.

 

Therefore I move that:

 

“The Mayor write a letter of appreciation to Superintendent Jeff Philippi, on behalf of
Ku-ring- gai Council and residents, thanking him for his valuable contribution to our community and wishing him the best for the future.”

 

 

NM.3        Bike Plan                                                                                                                            383

 

File: S02777/8

 

Notice of Motion from Councillor McDonald dated 24 January 2014

 

Previously the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA), now the Roads and Maritime Services (RMS), had a 2010 Bike Plan that incorporated a bike route along the railway corridor from Hornsby to the City. This was never implemented.

 

With the growing success of the sport of road cycling there is an increasing risk of major injuries and fatalities where bikes are using main roads.

 

The proposed Bike Plan was never fully implemented and the RMS is now looking at alternatives to the original plan. There is a definite need for bikes to be provided with a safe route to the city and this could be best done by using the railway corridor.

 

The original plan was before the current Liberal Government’s time and I recommend that the Mayor write to the Premier and the Local Member requesting support for the implementation of the original bike plan corridor.

 

Therefore, I recommend:

 

“That the Mayor write to the Premier, Mr O’Farrell MP and the Local Member for Davidson, Mr Jonathan O’Dea MP requesting the State Government reinstate the original RTA Bike Plan 2010 and in particular provide an off road link from Hornsby to the City.”

  

 

 

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           Acquisition of Land in Lindfield                                                                                        1

 

File: S07457/5

 

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 sections 10A(2)(c) & 10A(2)(d)(ii), of the Act, and should be dealt with in a part of the meeting closed to the public.

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Section 10A(2)(d) of the Act permits the meeting to be closed to the public for business relating to commercial information of a confidential nature that would, if disclosed:

 

(i)             prejudice the commercial position of the person who supplied it, or

(ii)           confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of Council, or

(iii)         reveal a trade secret.

 

This matter is classified confidential under section 10A(2)(d)(ii) because it would confer a commercial advantage on a competitor of the Council.

 

Report by Director Strategy and Environment dated 21 January 2014

  

 

John McKee

General Manager

 

 

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


Minute                                           Ku-ring-gai Council                                               Page

MINUTES OF Ordinary Meeting of Council
HELD ON Tuesday, 10 December 2013

 

 

Present:

The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson (Chairperson) (Roseville Ward)

Councillors E Malicki & J Pettett (Comenarra Ward)

Councillors D Citer & C Szatow (Gordon Ward)

Councillors C Berlioz & D Ossip (St Ives Ward)

Councillor D Armstrong (Roseville 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 Urban & Heritage Planning (Antony Fabbro)

Manager Records & Governance (Matt Ryan)

Minutes Secretary (Lisa Hopkin)

 

 

The Meeting commenced at 7.00pm

 

The Mayor offered the Prayer

 

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

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.

 

Councillor Elaine Malicki declared a less than significant non-pecuniary interest in
GB.15 – Consideration of Submissions – Draft Ku-ring-gai Bushland Reserves Plan of Management (advised that she lives relatively near Sheldon Forest and doesn’t think that it is close enough to consider herself conflicted but just to make the point that she lives in the vicinity).

 

Councillor Cheryl Szatow declared a less than significant non-pecuniary interest in PT.2 - Petition to STOP Culworth Avenue Car Park being SOLD for High Rise Residential Development by Council – (One Thousand, Eight Hundred and Forty-Three [1,843] Signatures), GB.2 – Marian Street Theatre – Strategic Management Options and Building Safety Requirements and NM.1 – Heritage Conservation Areas (advised that she lives in Marian Street and has no pecuniary or non-pecuniary interest in the Marian Street Theatre nor in the Culworth Avenue Car Park).

 

The Director Strategy and Environment, Andrew Watson, declared an interest in GB.10 – Planning Proposal to include ‘Hardware and Building Supplies’ in the B7 Zone under the KPSO and GB.11 – Heritage Assessment of former 3M Building at
950 Pacific Highway, Pymble (his family’s SMSF holds shares in the ASX-listed Bunnings Warehouse Trust (BWP) but at the present time, BWP does not own the site the subject of the reports, though by its very nature, has a close relationship with Bunnings).

 

 

380

CONFIRMATION OF REPORTS TO BE CONSIDERED IN CLOSED MEETING

 

File: S02499/7

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Szatow/ Berlioz)

 

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.12      St Ives Shopping Village

 

Attachment 2:   Sparke Helmore legal advice dated 9 July 2013

 

GB.13      910 Pacific Highway, Gordon - Public Car Park

 

Attachment 3:   Corporeal Valuation - 904-914 Pacific Highway, Gordon

Attachment 4:   Lease Financials - 910 Pacific Highway

 

GB.19      Lindfield Village Green - Tryon Road - Project Update

 

Attachment 3:   Lindfield Village Green - Road Closure Process – Legal Advice

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

Address the Council

 

The following members of the public addressed Council on items not on the Agenda:

 

R Hooper

B Watson

D Nicol

K Gibbons

J Harwood

 

 

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:

 

Late Items:

Refer MM.3 – Excellence in the Environment Awards and Institute of Landscape Architects Awards

 

Refer GB.14 – 828 Pacific Highway, Gordon – Design, Refurbishment and Fit-out – Select Tender – Memorandum from Director Strategy and Environment dated 9 December 2013 advising of a correction on page 242 of Business Paper No 21/13, Book 2, in relation to a company not identified on the list because the parent company submitted the Expression of Interest on Tenderlink.

 

Refer GB.15 - Consideration of Submissions – Draft
Ku-ring-gai Bushland Reserves Plan of Management
- Memorandum from Director Strategy and Environment with two Late Submissions to Councillors and Directors ONLY.

 

Refer NM.2 – Naming of Community Centre and Sportsfield at former UTS site LindfieldMemorandum from Manager Records and Governance dated 9 December 2013 advising that due to an administrative oversight, the Notice of Rescission omitted a follow-up motion if the rescission motion was to be successful.  Attached also to the memorandum was an amended Notice of Rescission.

 

Refer NM.2 – Naming of Community Centre and Sportsfield at former UTS site LindfieldAdditional information in relation to Background Information to the Rescission Motion that was omitted from Business Paper No 21/13.

 

Memorandums:

Refer GB12 – St Ives Shopping VillageMemorandum from Manager Urban and Heritage Planning dated 10 December 2013 advising Councillors of clarification and a revised recommendation.

 

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTEs

 

 

381

Minutes of Ordinary Meeting of Council

 

File: S02131

 

 

Meeting held 26 November 2013

Minutes numbered 357 to 379

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Berlioz/McDonald)

 

That Minutes numbered 357 to 379 circulated to Councillors were taken as read and confirmed as an accurate record of the proceedings of the Meeting.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

minutes from the Mayor

 

 

382

VALE Eric Ralphs

 

File: CY00455

Vide: MM.1

 

 

On behalf of Ku-ring-gai Council I would like to pay tribute to the life of Eric Ralphs, who sadly passed away on Tuesday 24 September  2013, aged 76.

 

Eric was born at North Shore hospital in 1937 and spent his early years living in “The Gums”, Catalpa Crescent, Turramurra. His parents were both migrants from England and Eric was the eldest of six children.  He went to kindy at St Pauls Church in Wahroonga and in 1943 he attended Warrawee Public School.

 

In 1947 the family moved to Carcoar.  Eric moved back to Sydney in 1954 to work as an engineering cadet with the Metropolitan Water Board.

 

Eric started his army career with National Service in 1956 - it was through the army reserve that he met his wife Patricia and they were married in 1963. They had two children, David and Fiona.

 

Eric left the Water Board and went to work as an engineer at Mosman Council in 1960. Then, on 6 December  1976, he started his career at Ku-ring-gai Council as the Investigations Engineer. 

 

Highlights of his long and illustrious career include:

 

·        The Freedom of Entry to the 17th Battalion Royal New South Wales Regiment, to mark the Council’s golden jubilee as a municipality in 1978.

·        His appointment as liaison officer for Ku-ring-gai SES from 1983.

·        In 1988 Eric was appointed Local Emergency Management Officer which was his position during the notorious storm of 1991 – a storm so ferocious there were hail stones the size of tennis balls!

·        In 2000 he took long service leave to work as Tournament Director for  Hockey at the Sydney Olympics.

 

Eric finished at the Council on 22nd January 2001.  This was the 10th anniversary of the big storm – a memorable day to leave.

 

Eric had a long military career including National Service and he received several awards including:

 

·      the Reserve Force Decoration with two bars

·      the Australian Active Service Medal

·      the Vietnam Logistic and Support Medal.

·      the Australian Efficiency Decoration

·      the Australian Defence Medal and the Anniversary of National Service medal. He also won the Australian Sports Medal.

 

To say Eric was active in retirement is an understatement!  He spent his days travelling, playing bridge, joining several committees such as the Forestville RSL, University of NSW Regimental Association, the Sapper’s Association, Reserve Forces Day Council.

 

Eric was also a board member of Hockey NSW, volunteered as a tour guide at the National Artillery Museum at North Head, as well as being a keen cricket fan, family history researcher and a very involved grandfather to Sarah.

 

On behalf of Ku-ring-gai Council, I would like to pay tribute to Eric Ralph’s life and send our sincere condolences to his family.

 

 

Resolved:

 

A.      That the Mayoral Minute be received and noted.

 

B.      That we stand for a minute’s silence to honour Eric Ralphs.

 

C.      That the Mayor writes to Mr Ralph’s family and encloses a copy of this Mayoral Minute.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

 

383

VALE Peter Wem

 

File: CY00455

Vide: MM.2

 

 

On behalf of Ku-ring-gai Council I would like to pay tribute to the life of Peter Wem who tragically died in a horrific traffic accident on Tuesday, 1 October  2013, aged 73.

 

Formerly of Middlesbrough, England, Peter has been described as a life loving person who would do anything for his family and friends.

 

Peter was a registered bush care volunteer from Feb 2000 and was very active, looking after the bushland near his home in Hartley Close, Turramurra.

 

He was also on the Bushland Advisory Committee at Ku-ring-gai Council in the late 1990s early 2000s when he worked for DLWC. He was also very active in the local Scouts.

 

Peter left behind his wife Margaret, siblings Olga and Jim, sons Andrew, Graeme and Owen. He was also the proud grandfather of five grandchildren who must be missing him dreadfully. 

 

On behalf of Ku-ring-gai Council I would like to pay tribute to Peter Wem’s life and send our sincere condolences to his family.

 

 

 

Resolved:

 

A.       That the Mayoral Minute be received and noted.

 

B.       That we stand for a minute’s silence to honour Peter Wem.

 

C.       That the Mayor writes to Mr Wem’s family and encloses a copy of this Mayoral Minute.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

  

 

384

Excellence in the Environment Awards and Institute of Landscape Architects Awards

 

File: S09780

Vide: MM.3

 

 

Ku-ring-gai Council received a number of significant accolades this week.

 

On 3rd December Local Government NSW held its annual Excellence in the Environment Awards recognising outstanding achievements by local government in managing and protecting the environment. Council was successful in Division C – Climate Change Action Awards for its Building Climate Wise Communities project. The project then took out the Overall Winner for 2012/2013.

 

The Climate Wise Communities Program focusses on fostering shared responsibility, integrating with Council’s Emergency Management Plan and collaborating with emergency management agencies.

 

Council also developed a multi-hazard assessment tool that means residents can review their vulnerability to severe weather events at a personal, property and neighbourhood level.  This tool helps people determine what action needs to be taken in case of bush fire, storms, heat stress and drought.  

 

On 5th December the Australian Institute of Landscape Architects NSW (AILA) held its Awards in Landscape Architecture. Council took out the Research and Communication category with 'Thinking Outside The Box' Key Design Elements for Apartments in
Ku-ring-gai’ and the Planning category for the ‘Ku-ring-gai Open Space Acquisition Program’.

 

The Open Space Acquisition Program in particular builds on years of policy development, contributions planning, site identification and acquisition and ultimately design and construction involving staff from across Council as well as Council and the community.

 

OSAP provides much needed parkland to the community. Ku-ring-gai Council has been acquiring land at an unprecedented rate, spending $33.4 million on acquiring 14,700 m2 of land for new parks and civic spaces in Gordon, Killara, Turramurra, St Ives and Wahroonga since 2007.

 

Once complete, OSAP will deliver 10 new local parks and civic spaces within close proximity to high density residential areas in Ku-ring-gai.

 

The other AILA award for Research and Communication was for ‘Thinking outside the Box’: Key Design Elements for Apartments in Ku-ring-gai.

 

To improve residential apartment building design outcomes in Ku-ring-gai, Council created an impressive publication, ‘Thinking Outside The Box’, published in 2011. The booklet highlights examples of well-designed local buildings and provides advice on how good design principles can be applied.

 

Thinking Outside the Box promotes awareness of well-designed buildings in Ku-ring-gai that are responsive to community expectations and landscape character. It also aims to improve the standard of site planning and design by showcasing a range of good local examples in a landscape setting.

 

In some cases these awards reflect many years of ground breaking work by staff and are a credit to Council.

 

 

Resolved:

 

A.      That Council receive and note the Mayoral Minute.

 

B.     That the General Manager convey Council’s congratulations to staff for these outstanding achievements.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

Councillor Ossip withdrew during discussion

 

 

PETITIONS

 

 

385

Petition to Implement Effective Means to Curtail Dangerous Speeding along Park Avenue, Roseville – (One Hundred and Three [103] Signatures

 

File: TM8/05

Vide: PT.1

 

 

The following Petition was presented by Councillor David Armstrong:

 

“We, the undersigned residents, here by submit a petition to Ku-ring-gai Council for the implementation of an effective means to curtail the proven prevalence of excessive and dangerous speeding along Park Avenue, Roseville.

 

We believe that the painting of line markings will NOT resolve the current speeding issue.

 

The speeding issue is largely to do with accessing Babbage Road from Archbold Road.  The topography of Park Avenue - unlike surrounding streets - makes speeding highly dangerous.  A line down the centre of the street will only embolden drivers to speed more so in the knowing that any unsighted oncoming traffic will now be keeping to its side of the road.

 

We demand that an alternative be implemented as soon as possible and we request that you ensure that your staff continue to work toward finding a n effective means to curtail this situation which poses a danger to all residents, pedestrians and drivers.”

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Armstrong/Szatow)

 

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

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY by those present

 

 

386

Petition to STOP Culworth Avenue Car Park being SOLD for High Rise Residential Development by Council – (One Thousand, Eight Hundred and Forty-Three [1,843] Signatures)

 

File: S09768

Vide: PT.2

 

 

The following Petition was presented by Councillor David Citer:

 

“We, the undersigned, residents of Ku-ring-gai [and commuters] strongly oppose Council’s planned rezoning/reclassification of 20 to 28 Culworth Avenue.  This will result in high rise residential development within a local heritage conservation area and the loss of 204 commuter car park spaces at Killara Station within a large area of declared biologically significant open space.”

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Citer/Szatow)

 

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

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY by those present

 

Councillor Ossip returned

 

Recommendations from Committee

 

Minutes of Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee

 

File: CY00022/5

Vide: RC.1

 

Meeting held 28 November 2013

Minutes numbered KTC12 to KTC16.

 

 

387

General Matter Items under Delegated Authority

 

File: S02738

Vide Minute No  KTC12

 

 

Advice on matters considered under Delegated Authority.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Berlioz/Fornari-Orsmond)

 

That the information regarding traffic facilities approved during June to November 2013 be noted.

 

For the Resolution:                The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson, Councillors Berlioz, Citer, McDonald, Ossip, Pettett, Szatow, Malicki and Fornari-Orsmond

 

Against the Resolution:         Councillor Armstrong

 

 

 

388

Meeting Dates 2014

 

File: CY00022/5

Vide Minute No  KTC13

 

 

To determine Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee meeting dates for 2014.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Berlioz/Fornari-Orsmond)

 

That the Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee meetings in 2014 be scheduled for the dates shown below:

 

20 February

20 March

17 April

22 May

19 June

24 July

21 August

18 September

23 October

20 November

 

For the Resolution:                The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson, Councillors Berlioz, Citer, McDonald, Ossip, Pettett, Szatow, Malicki and Fornari-Orsmond

 

Against the Resolution:         Councillor Armstrong

 

 

389

Proposed Cycleway - Killara 2

 

File: S02777/7

Vide: Minute No KTC14

 

 

To consider a concept plan for the implementation of ‘Killara 2’ and part of ‘Killara 1’ cycleways.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Berlioz/Fornari-Orsmond)

 

That the Killara 2 and the short section of Killara 1 cycleway be approved.

 

For the Resolution:                The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson, Councillors Berlioz, Citer, McDonald, Ossip, Pettett, Szatow, Malicki and Fornari-Orsmond

 

Against the Resolution:         Councillor Armstrong

 

 

 

390

Greengate Road, Killara

 

File: TM5/05

Vide Minute No KTC15

 

 

To consider a request from Greengate Hotel to partially close a section of Greengate Road at Pacific Highway and to implement traffic control measures on Pacific Highway on Christmas Eve 2013.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Berlioz/Fornari-Orsmond)

 

That Council approve the temporary partial closure of Greengate Road between Pacific Highway and the eastern end of Greengate Hotel on Tuesday, 24 December 2013, subject to:

 

A.      Transport for NSW TMC granting approval for the closure of travel lanes and reduction of speed limit on Pacific Highway in the vicinity of Greengate Hotel for Christmas Eve 2013.

 

B.      The Greengate Hotel fully implementing the Roads and Maritime Services’ approved Traffic Management Plan to ensure safety of the patrons and to address the traffic impacts that may result from the proposed road closure.

 

C.      The eastbound section of Greengate Road between Pacific Highway and the eastern end of Greengate Hotel be closed from 3.00pm on 24 December to 1.00am on 25 December 2013, while the westbound traffic on Greengate Road will be controlled by traffic controllers from 9.00pm on 24 December and 1.00am 25 December 2013.

 

D.      The travel lanes on Pacific Highway be reduced and speed be limited to 40 km/h in the vicinity of Greengate Hotel from 8:00pm on Tuesday, 24 December to 1.00am on Wednesday, 25 December 2013.

 

E.      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.

 

F.      The Applicant to inform the affected residents of the proposed road closure of Greengate Road and other detour arrangements in the area on Christmas Eve 2013.

 

G.      The Applicant providing and maintaining all necessary signs, barricades and all other safety equipment at its expense to properly effect the changed traffic conditions.

 

H.      The Applicant placing appropriate advance warning signs on Pacific Highway to warn motorists about the closure of travel lanes on Pacific Highway.

 

I.        The Applicant engaging RMS-accredited traffic controllers to monitor the road closure at all times and to provide vehicular access for emergency vehicles and residents if such access is required.

 

K.      The Greengate Hotel responds in writing to Council by Friday, 13 December 2013, regarding the acceptance of Council’s conditions for the temporary partial closure of a section of Greengate Road and traffic alterations on Pacific Highway on Christmas Eve 2013.

 

For the Resolution:                The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson, Councillors Berlioz, Citer, McDonald, Ossip, Pettett, Szatow, Malicki and Fornari-Orsmond

 

Against the Resolution:         Councillor Armstrong

 

 

 

 

 

391

Park Avenue, Roseville

 

File: TM8/05

Vide Minute No  KTC16

 

 

The following member of the public addressed Council:

 

G Ioia

 

 

To consider traffic conditions in Park Avenue and Earl Street, Roseville.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Berlioz/Fornari-Orsmond)

 

A.      That in view of the excessive speeds detected in Park Avenue and Earl Street, Roseville, and the relatively low collision data for both streets, that the line marking as shown in Plan No. Park-Earl-Moore/KTC/11/13 be approved.

 

B.      That Police be requested to increase their presence in both Park Avenue and Earl Street during morning peak periods, in particular.

 

C.      That traffic speeds and road safety in Park Avenue be monitored over the next 12 months.

 

D.      That further investigations be undertaken regarding collision data in Park Avenue.

 

E.      That residents of Park Avenue who have written to Council, be informed of Council’s decision.

 

For the Resolution:                The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson, Councillors Berlioz, Citer, McDonald, Ossip, Pettett, Szatow, Malicki and Fornari-Orsmond

 

Against the Resolution:         Councillor Armstrong

  

 

PRESENTATION OF ROUND 15 ENVIRONMENTAL LEVY SMALL GRANT SCHEME AWARDS

 

The presentation of cheques for the Environmental Levy Small Grant Scheme
(Round 15) were presented during the Meeting.

 

 

A Motion was moved by Councillors Citer/Armstrong

to have a site inspection take place at the Culworth Avenue Car Park

 

For the Motion:             Councillors Armstrong, Citer, Ossip, Berlioz and Szatow

 

Against the Motion:      The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson, Councillors McDonald, Pettett, Malicki and Fornari-Orsmond

 

The voting being EQUAL,

the Mayor exercised her Casting Vote

AGAINST the Motion

 

No decision was taken in respect of the above matter as

the Motion when put to the vote was LOST

 

 

 

 

 

GENERAL BUSINESS

 

 

392

Code of Conduct - Complaint Statistics

 

File: S08447

Vide: GB.1

 

 

To report statistics in relation to complaints as required by the Procedures for the Administration of the Model Code of Conduct for Local Councils in NSW – March 2013.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Szatow/Pettett)

 

A.    That the contents of this report be received and noted; and

 

B.    That the statistics contained in this report be provided to the Division of Local Government  in accordance with clause 12.2 of the Procedures for the Administration of the Model Code of Conduct for Local Councils in NSW – March 2013.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

393

Local Government NSW Tourism Conference 2014

 

File: S09601

Vide: GB.3

 

 

To advise Council of the Local Government NSW (LGNSW) 2014 Tourism Conference.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Szatow/Pettett)

 

That any Councillors interested in attending the Local Government NSW 2014 Tourism Conference in the Hunter Valley from 10 to12 March advise the General Manager by 20 December 2013.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

394

Licence to St Ives Football Club Inc - New Warrimoo Oval Clubhouse

 

File: S07489

Vide: GB.4

 

 

For Council to approve a 5 year licence to the St Ives Football Club Inc (The Club) for the new Warrimoo clubhouse facility at Warrimoo Oval, St Ives.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Szatow/Ossip)

 

A.    That Council grant a licence to St Football Club Inc to occupy the new Warrimoo Oval Clubhouse for a period of 5 years from 1 January 2014 to 31 December 2018 under the terms of the report.

 

B.    That Council approve a 70% rental rebate of the market rental to St Ives Football Club Inc equating to $5,250 per annum plus GST, for the first year, with 5% increases for each successive year of the licence term.

 

C.    That the St Ives Football Club Inc make available the meeting room and toilet facilities for hire by Council approved community groups for a minimum of 200 hours per calendar year.

 

D.    That St Ives Football Club Inc hire the facility to approved community groups at the Council approved rates and charges under its sole management of activities.

 

E.    That St Ives Football Club Inc be permitted to keep the fees from hirers to assist with the development of the Club activities.

 

F.    That access to water, hot water and refrigeration utilities be made available to community groups in the hire of the facility.

 

G.    That the Mayor and General Manager or their delegate be authorised to execute the necessary documentation.

 

H.    That Council authorise the affixing of the Common Seal of Council to the Lease Agreement.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

 

395

Analysis of Land and Environment Court Costs - 1st Quarter 2013 to 2014

 

File: S05273

Vide: GB.6

 

 

To report legal costs in relation to development control matters in the Land and Environment Court for the quarter ended 30 September 2013.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Szatow/McDonald)

 

That the analysis of Land and Environment Court costs for the year ended 30 September 2013 be received and noted.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

 

396

Christmas/New Year Recess Delegations 2013/2014

 

File: CY00259/5

Vide: GB.7

 

 

To grant appropriate Delegations during the Christmas/New Year recess period for 2013/2014.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Szatow/Pettett)

 

A.    That the following Delegations of Authority be granted to the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and the General Manager for the Christmas/New Year recess period for 2013/2014 as follows;

 

1.      That the Mayor (Councillor Jennifer Anderson), the Deputy Mayor (Councillor Elaine Malicki), and the General Manager (John McKee), be granted authority to exercise all powers, authorities, duties and functions of Council except those set out in Section 377 of the Local Government Act 1993 during the period 11 December 2013 to 3 February 2014, subject to the following conditions:

 

a.       Such powers, authorities and functions may only be exercised by unanimous agreement between the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and General Manager.

 

b.       Any such power, authority, duty or function shall only be exercised by the Mayor, Deputy Mayor and General Manager jointly where they are of the opinion that the exercise of any such power, authority, duty or function could not be deferred until the meeting of Council on 4 February 2014.

 

B.    That consultation, subject to their availability, be held with Ward Councillors on matters where they would normally be contacted, before delegation is exercised.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

 

 

397

12 and 14 Cecil Street, Gordon. Retention and Modification of the Existing Heritage-listed Dwellings, Construction of a Five Storey Residential Flat Building containing 37 Apartments over Two Levels of Basement Car Parking

 

File: DA0094/13

Vide: GB.9

 

 

Retention and modification of the existing heritage listed dwellings and construction of a five storey residential flat building containing 37 apartments over two levels of basement car parking.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Szatow/Ossip)

 

That Council as the consent authority grant deferred commencement development consent to DA0094/13 for partial demolition and alterations to two existing dwellings and construction of a residential flat building, basement parking and associated works on land at 12 & 14 Cecil Street, Killara for a period of two (2) years from the date of the notice of determination subject to the following conditions.

 

SCHEDULE A:

 

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. 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.

 

NOTE:      The deferred commencement terms must be satisfied within 1 year of the date that development consent is granted.

 

SCHEDULE B:

 

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:

 

Plan no.

Drawn by

Dated

A-0001 Rev D, drawing list

Mackenzie Architects

30/10/2013

A-100 Rev B, site / roof plan

Mackenzie Architects

23/08/2013

A-101 Rev B, floor plan -02

Mackenzie Architects

23/08/2013

A-102 Rev B, floor plan -01

Mackenzie Architects

23/08/2013

A-103 Rev C, floor plan -LG

Mackenzie Architects

8/10/2013

A-104 Rev C, floor plan -00

Mackenzie Architects

8/10/2013

A-105 Rev C, floor plan -01

Mackenzie Architects

8/10/2013

A-106 Rev D, floor plan -02

Mackenzie Architects

30/10/2013

A-107 Rev D, floor plan -03

Mackenzie Architects

30/10/2013

A-108 Rev D, floor plan -04

Mackenzie Architects

30/10/2013

A-200 Rev C, elevations 1

Mackenzie Architects

8/10/2013

A-201 Rev C, elevations 2

Mackenzie Architects

8/10/2013

A-202 Rev C, elevations 3

Mackenzie Architects

8/10/2013

A-203 Rev C, elevations 4

Mackenzie Architects

8/10/2013

A-300 Rev C, sections 1

Mackenzie Architects

8/10/2013

A-301 Rev A, section 02

Mackenzie Architects

8/10/2013

A-600 Rev B, environmental site management plan

Mackenzie Architects

23/08/2013

A-601 Rev B, excavation plan

Mackenzie Architects

23/08/2013

LPDA 11 - 340 / 1 - Landscape Plan

Conzept Landscape Architects

16/10/2013

LPDA 11 - 340- / 3 - Landscape Details 1

Conzept Landscape Architects

14/06/2011

LPDA 11 - 340- / 4 - Landscape Details 2

Conzept Landscape Architects

14/06/2011

DA1.01 Revision 3

Northrop

27/08/2013

DA2.01 Revision 3

Northrop

27/08/2013

DA3.01 Revision 4

Northrop

27/08/2013

DA3.11 Revision 4

Northrop

27/08/2013

DA3.02 Revision 6

Northrop

27/08/2013

DA3.03 Revision 4

Northrop

27/08/2013

DA3.04 Revision 4

Northrop

27/08/2013

DA4.01 Revision 4

Northrop

27/08/2013

DA4.02 Revision 3

Northrop

27/08/2013

 

Document(s)

Dated

Colours and finishes schedule

undated

Basix certificate No. 502813M_02

16/10/2013

Waste management plan

22/03/2013

Air conditioning plant space requirements letter prepared by Northrop

16/10/2013

Geotechnical Report prepared by Jeffery and Katauskas Pty Ltd

9/06/2011

Access Report prepared by Accessibility Solutions Pty Ltd

16/06/2011

DA Acoustic Report prepared by Acoustic Logic

7/04/2011

SEPP 65 Design Verification Statement prepared by Dugald Mackenzie

25/03/2013

 

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. No demolition of extra fabric

 

Alterations to, and demolition of the existing building shall be limited to that documented on the approved plans (by way of notation). No approval is given or implied for removal and/or rebuilding of any portion of the existing building which is shown to be retained.

 

Reason:     To ensure compliance with the development consent.

 

Conditions to be satisfied prior to demolition, excavation or construction:

 

4. 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.

 

5. 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

 

6. Groundwater inflow predictions

Prior to the commencement of works on site, but after the geotechnical investigation comprising cored boreholes and groundwater monitoring:

 

1.       The predicted instantaneous inflow rate (expressed in litres per second) and the predicted total groundwater extraction volume (expressed in megalitres) for the defined period of construction (expressed in months) of the development shall be determined and advised to the NSW Office of Water. The treatment, management and disposal of the pumped groundwater will be subject to the approval of the appropriate regulatory authority.

 

2.       The predicted instantaneous inflow rate (expressed in litres per second) and the predicted total groundwater extraction volume (expressed in megalitres per year) for the long-term operation of the development shall be determined and advised to the NSW Office of Water. The treatment, management and disposal of the pumped groundwater will be subject to the approval of the appropriate regulatory authority.

 

Note:      The appropriate regulatory authority may be either council, Sydney Water, the NSW Environmental Protection Authority or the NSW Office of Water, depending on the quality or contamination status of the groundwater and the proposed method of disposal.

 

Reason:     To protect the environment.

 

 

 

 

7. Parking restrictions

 

Prior to the commencement of any works on the site, the applicant must install parking restrictions in Cecil Street opposite the site.  The restrictions are to apply for the duration of construction and are to comprise No Parking for school drop-off and pick-up times and 4 hour parking in between or as otherwise agreed by the Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee.  This is to apply to the currently unrestricted zone and not the zone which is already restricted.

 

Reason:     Neighbour amenity and to ensure traffic flow is maintained in Cecil Street.

 

8. 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.

 

9. 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.

 

10. 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 Cecil Street 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.

 

11. 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:

 

Address:

 

·     The two heritage residences on the subject site (Nos. 12 & 14 Cecil Street)

·     10 Cecil Street, 16 Cecil Street (eastern wing only), 2-8 Bruce Avenue

 

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.

 

12. Geotechnical report

 

Prior to the commencement of any bulk excavation works on site, the applicant shall submit to the Principal Certifying Authority, the results of the detailed geotechnical investigation comprising a minimum of four cored boreholes to at least 1 metre below the proposed basement level, and installation and monitoring of two piezometer standpipes. The report is to address such matters as:

 

·         appropriate excavation methods and techniques

·         vibration management and monitoring

·        dilapidation survey

·        support and retention of excavates faces

·        hydrogeological considerations

 

The recommendations of the report are to be implemented during the course of the works.

 

Reason:     To ensure the safety and protection of property.

 

13. Construction and traffic management plan

 

The applicant must submit to Council a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP), 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 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:

 

o   demolition

o   excavation

o   concrete pour

o   construction of vehicular crossing and reinstatement of footpath

o   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. 

 

For traffic and pedestrian safety, no truck movements are permitted in Cecil Street during school drop-off (7.45 to 8.30am) and pick-up (2.30 to 3.45pm) periods on school days.

 

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.  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.

 

14. Work zone

 

A Works Zone is to be provided in Cecil Street prior to the commencement of works subject to the approval of the Ku-ring-gai Local Traffic Committee. 

 

No loading or unloading must be undertaken from the public road or nature strip unless within a Works Zone which has been approved and paid for.

 

In the event that the Works Zone is required for a period beyond that initially approved by the Traffic Committee, the applicant shall make a payment to Council for the extended period in accordance with Council's Schedule of Fees and Charges for Works Zones prior to the extended period commencing.

 

Reason:     To ensure that appropriate measures have been made for the operation of the site during the construction phase.

 

15. 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.

 

16. 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.

 

Schedule

 

Tree/location

Radius from trunk

 

Tree 1/ Lophostemon confertus (Brushbox) located on Cecil Street nature strip

3m

 

Tree 8/ Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palm) located in front setback of No. 14 Cecil Street

2m

 

Tree 9/ Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palm) located in front setback of No. 14 Cecil Street

1m

 

Tree 12/ Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palm) located in front setback of No. 14 Cecil Street

2m

 

Tree 36/ Syagrus romanzoffiana (Cocos Palm) located on the eastern boundary

2m

 

Tree 61/ Magnolia grandiflora (Bull-bay Magnolia) located at the centre of the site

6m

 

The tree protection fencing shall be constructed of galvanised pipe at 2.4 metres spacings 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

 

17. Tree protection fencing excluding structure

 

To preserve the following tree/s, no work shall commence until the area beneath their canopy excluding that area of the approved (driveway to House 2, driveway to basement of flat building, flat building) shall be fenced off for the specified radius from the trunk 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:

 

Schedule

 

Tree/location

Radius from trunk

 

Tree 5/ Juniperus sp.   located within the front setback of No. 14 Cecil Street

7.8m

 

Tree 20/ Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Palm) located within the front setback of No. 12 Cecil Street

2m

 

Tree 26/ Acer buergeranum (Trident Maple) located on the eastern boundary within the adjoining property

3.3m

Tree 50/ Grevillea robusta (Silky Oak) located on the southern boundary at the rear of No. 12 Cecil Street

7.2m

 

Tree 55/ Corymbia maculata (Spotted Gum) located at the south-east corner of the site

2.5m

Tree 56/ Casuarina cunninghamiana (River Oak) located at the south-east corner of the site

4m

 

Tree 57/ Casuarina cunninghamiana (River Oak) located at the south-east corner of the site

5m

 

Tree 58/ Lophostemon confertus (Brushbox) TPZ 7.2m. The tree is located at the south-east corner of the site, within the adjoining property

5m

 

Tree 59/ Eucalyptus saligna (Sydney Blue Gum) TPZ 7.2m. The tree is located at the south-east corner of the site, within the adjoining property

5m

 

 

Reason:    To protect existing trees during the construction phase.

 

18. 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.

 

19. 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.

 

20. 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:

 

Schedule

Tree/Location

Tree 5/ Juniperus sp.   located within the front setback of No. 14 Cecil Street

Tree 20/ Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Palm) located within the front setback of No. 12 Cecil Street

Tree 50/ Grevillea robusta (Silky Oak) located on the southern boundary at the rear of No. 12 Cecil Street

Tree 55/ Corymbia maculata (Spotted Gum) located at the south-east corner of the site

Tree 56/ Casuarina cunninghamiana (River Oak) located at the south-east corner of the site

Tree 57/ Casuarina cunninghamiana (River Oak) located at the south-east corner of the site

Tree 58/ Lophostemon confertus (Brushbox) TPZ 7.2m. The tree is located at the south-east corner of the site, within the adjoining property

Tree 59/ Eucalyptus saligna (Sydney Blue Gum) TPZ 7.2m. The tree is located at the south-east corner of the site, within the adjoining property

 

Reason:     To protect existing trees during the construction phase.

 

21. Trunk protection

 

To preserve the following tree/s, no work shall commence until the trunk/s are protected by the placement of 2.0 metres lengths of 50 x 100mm hardwood timbers spaced at 150mm centres and secured by 2mm wire at 300mm wide spacing over suitable protective padding material.  The trunk protection shall be maintained intact until the completion of all work on site. 

 

Any damage to the tree/s shall be treated immediately by an experienced Horticulturist/Arborist, with minimum qualification of Horticulture Certificate or Tree Surgery Certificate and a report detailing the works carried out shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority:

 

Schedule

Tree/Location

Tree 20/ Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Palm) located within the front setback of No. 12 Cecil Street

Tree 34/ Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palm) located on the eastern boundary

Tree 35/ Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palm) located on the eastern boundary

 

Reason:     To protect existing trees during the construction phase.

 

22. 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.

 

23. Noise and vibration management plan

 

Prior to the commencement of any works, a noise and vibration management plan is to be prepared by a suitably qualified expert addressing the likely noise and vibration from demolition, excavation and construction of the proposed development and provided to the Principal Certifying Authority.  The management plan is to identify amelioration measures to achieve the best practice objectives of AS 2436-2010 and NSW Department of Environment and Climate Change Interim Construction Noise Guidelines. The report shall be prepared in consultation with any geotechnical report that itemises equipment to be used for excavation works.

 

The management plan shall address, but not be limited to, the following matters:

 

i.     identification of the specific activities that will be carried out and associated noise sources

ii.    identification of all potentially affected sensitive receivers, including residences, churches, commercial premises, schools and properties containing noise sensitive equipment

iii.   the construction noise objective specified in the conditions of this consent

iv.   the construction vibration criteria specified in the conditions of this consent

v.    determination of appropriate noise and vibration objectives for each identified sensitive receiver

vi.   noise and vibration monitoring, reporting and response procedures

vii.  assessment of potential noise and vibration from the proposed demolition, excavation and construction activities, including noise from construction vehicles and any traffic diversions

viii. description of specific mitigation treatments, management methods and procedures that will be implemented to control noise and vibration during construction

ix.   construction timetabling to minimise noise impacts including time and duration restrictions, respite periods and frequency

x.    procedures for notifying residents of construction activities that are likely to affect their amenity through noise and vibration

xi.   contingency plans to be implemented in the event of non-compliances and/or noise complaints

 

Reason:     To protect the amenity afforded to surrounding residents during the construction process.

 

Conditions to be satisfied prior to the issue of the construction certificate:

 

24. Additional water management information

 

Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority is to be satisfied that:

 

1. The MUSIC model demonstrating that the development complies with the water quality requirements of Volume C Part 4B.6 of Council's Local Centres Development Control Plan is attached to the Construction Certificate water management plans.

2.  The rainwater retention and re-use for the development, as shown on the Construction Certificate water management plans, will achieve the 50% reduction in runoff days required under Volume C Part 4B.3 of Council's Local Centres Development Control Plan.

 

Reason:     To protect the environment.

 

25. 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:

 

Plan no.

Drawn by

Date

Landscape plan LPDA11-340/1 Issue D,  Landscape Details  1 LPDA11-340/3 Issue A and Landscape Details 2 LPDA11-340/4 Issue A

Conzept Landscape Architects

16/10/2013, 14/06/2011, 14/06/2011

 

The following changes are required to the Landscape Plan:

 

1.    To provide appropriate width planting bed along the western boundary of the flat building, the proposed path is not to kink to the west as shown until the rectangular planter with the 5 camellias. The widening of the garden bed along the side boundary to minimum 2 metres wide is to optimise the viable planting area for the establishment of tall tree plantings in association with the residential flat building. Additional plantings of 5 Eucalyptus saligna (Sydney Blue Gum) along the western side setback of the flat building are to be shown.

 

2.    The proposed planting of three (3) Magnolia grandiflora (Bull-bay Magnolia) at the rear of House 2 is to be substituted with faster growing evergreen canopy tree species such as three (3) Stenocarpus sinuatus (Firewheel Tree),  or similar.

 

3.    Sufficient raised planters over the detention tank are to be provided to ensure that the proposed surface proposed planting indicated on the landscape plan is viable within the private courtyards of Units 8 and 9.

 

4.    Tree 36 and Tree 58 are to be shown to be retained.

 

Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the landscape plan has been amended are 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

 

26. 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:

 

Plan no.

Drawn by

Dated

Drawing 3.02 Revision 6

Northrop

27.08.13

 

The above engineering plan(s) shall be amended as follows:

 

The note stating "300 diameter in-ground interallotment drainage pipe..." is to be amended to reflect the approved diameter of the interallotment drianage pipe (280mm diameter HDPE).

 

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.

 

27. 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.

 

28. 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.

 

29. 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.

 

30. 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.

 

31. 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.

 

32. 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.

 

33. 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, [enter unit nos.], 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.

 

34. 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.

 

35. Noise from road and rail (residential only)

 

Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the residential flat building 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.

 

36. 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.

 

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.

 

37. Location of plant (residential flat buildings)

 

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.

 

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.

 

38. 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.

 

39. 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 and a maximum gradient of 20% (required under Volume C Part 3.4 of the Ku-ring-gai Local Centres DCP 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

·         Convex mirrors are shown where required to facilitate safe access

·         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.

 

40. Car parking allocation

 

Car parking within the development shall be allocated in the following way:

 

Resident car spaces

44

Visitor spaces

10

Total spaces

54

 

Each adaptable dwelling must be provided with car parking complying with the dimensional and location requirements of AS2890.1 - parking spaces for people with disabilities.

 

At least one visitor space shall also comply with the dimensional and location requirements of AS2890.1 - parking spaces for people with disabilities.

 

Consideration must be given to the means of access from disabled car parking spaces to other areas within the building and to footpath and roads and shall be clearly shown on the plans submitted with the Construction Certificate.

 

Reason:     To ensure equity of access and appropriate facilities are available for people with disabilities in accordance with federal legislation.

 

41. Number of bicycle spaces

 

The basement car park shall contain the number of bicycle spaces required by the Local Centres DCP. The bicycle parking spaces shall be designed in accordance with AS2890.3. Details shall be submitted to the satisfaction of the Certifying Authority prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

Reason:     To provide alternative modes of transport to and from the site.

 

42. Energy Australia requirements

 

Prior to issue of the Construction Certificate, the applicant must contact Energy Australia regarding power supply for the subject development. A written response detailing the full requirements of Energy Australia (including any need for underground cabling, substations or similar within or in the vicinity the development) shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority for approval prior to issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

Any structures or other requirements of Energy Australia shall be indicated on the plans issued with the Construction Certificate, to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority and Energy Australia. The requirements of Energy Australia must be met in full prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

Reason:     To ensure compliance with the requirements of Energy Australia.

 

43. 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.

 

44. 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.

 

Conditions to be satisfied prior to the issue of the construction certificate or prior to demolition, excavation or construction (whichever comes first):

 

45. 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.

 

46. Section 94 Contributions - Centres.

 

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:

 

Key Community Infrastructure

Amount

Local parks and local sporting facilities

$415,092.46

Local recreation and cultural facilities;  Local social facilities

$66,151.55

Local roads, local bus facilities & local drainage facilities (new roads and road modifications)

$165,803.25

Local roads, local bus facilities & local drainage facilities (townscape, transport & pedestrian facilities)

$236,414.86

Total:

$883,462.12

 

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 will continue to be indexed to reflect changes in the consumer price index and housing price index until they are paid 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.

 

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:

 

47. 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.

 

48. 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.

 

49. Temporary irrigation

 

Temporary irrigation within the tree protection fencing is to be provided.  Irrigation volumes are to be determined by the project arborist.

 

Reason:     To protect trees to be retained on site.

 

50. Reduction or elimination of groundwater impact

If, during the detailed design of the development or during construction significant quantities of groundwater are identified or encountered, the NSW Office of Water shall be consulted. Any measures as directed or agreed to by the NSW Office of Water to reduce or eliminate the inflow of groundwater to the construction site shall be incorporated into the detailed design and/or construction of the development.

 

Note: The NSW Office of Water shall determine the significance of any extraction volume and the need for an authorisation to account for the take of water so identified. Where an authorisation is deemed to be required, the applicant shall procure an entitlement from the relevant water source(s) appropriate to account for the extraction of groundwater. The authorisation shall be subject to prescribed assessment fees and administrative charges as determined from time-to-time by the Independent Pricing and Regulatory Tribunal (IPART).

Reason:     To protect the environment.

 

51. 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.

 

52. 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.

 

53. 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.

 

54. 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.

 

55. 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.

 

56. Further geotechnical input

 

The geotechnical and hydro-geological works implementation, inspection, testing and monitoring program for the excavation and construction works must be in accordance with the report by JK Geotechnics dated 9 June 2011 and the report submitted prior to commencement of works. Over the course of the works, a qualified geotechnical/hydro-geological engineer must complete the following:

 

·      further geotechnical investigations and testing recommended in the above report(s) and as determined necessary

·      further monitoring and inspection at the hold points recommended in the above report(s) and as determined necessary

·      written report(s) including certification(s) of the geotechnical inspection, testing and monitoring programs

 

Reason:     To ensure the safety and protection of property.

 

57. 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 report prepared by JK Geotechnics dated 9 June 2011 and the report submitted prior to commencement of works. 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.

 

58. 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.

 

59. 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.

 

60. 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.

 

61. 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.

 

62. 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.

 

63. Approval for rock anchors

 

Approval is to be obtained from the property owner for any anchors proposed beneath adjoining private property.  If such approval cannot be obtained, then the excavated faces are to be shored or propped in accordance with the recommendations of the geotechnical and structural engineers.

 

Reason:     To ensure the ongoing safety and protection of property.

 

64. 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.

 

65. 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.

 

66. 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
Co-ordinator. 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.

 

67. Arborist’s report

 

The trees 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:

 

Schedule

Tree/location

Time of inspection

Tree 20/ Phoenix canariensis () located within the front setback of No. 12 Cecil Street

Commencement of excavation for driveway slab

Tree 26/ Acer buergeranum (Trident Maple) located on the eastern boundary within the adjoining property

Commencement of excavation for driveway

Tree 34/ Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palm) located on the eastern boundary

Commencement of excavation for driveway

Tree 35/ Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palm) located on the eastern boundary

Commencement of excavation for driveway

Tree 61/ Magnolia grandiflora (Bull-bay Magnolia) located at the centre of the site

All excavation within tree protection zone

 

Reason:     To ensure protection of existing trees.

 

68. Canopy/root pruning

 

Canopy and/or root pruning of the following tree(s) which is necessary to accommodate the approved building works shall be undertaken by an experienced AQF level 3 arborist under the supervision of the project arborist and in accordance with the reduction pruning clause of AS4373-2007. All other branches are to be tied back and protected during construction, under the supervision of a qualified arborist.

 

Schedule

Tree/location

Tree works

 

Tree 50/ Grevillea robusta (Silky Oak) located on the southern boundary at the rear of No. 12 Cecil Street

Minor pruning for  building clearance

 

Tree 55/ Corymbia maculata (Spotted Gum) located at the south-east corner of the site

Minor pruning for  building clearance

 

Tree 56/ Casuarina cunninghamiana (River Oak) located at the south-east corner of the site

Minor pruning for  building clearance

 

 

Reason:     To protect the environment.

 

69. Treatment of tree roots

 

If tree roots are required to be severed for the purposes of constructing the approved works, they shall be cut cleanly by hand, by an experienced arborist/horticulturist with a minimum qualification of horticulture certificate or tree surgery certificate.  All pruning works shall be undertaken as specified in Australian Standard 4373-2007 - Pruning of Amenity Trees.

 

Reason:     To protect existing trees.

 

70. 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.

 

 

Schedule

 

Tree/location

Radius from trunk

 

Tree 5/ Juniperus sp.   located within the front setback of No. 14 Cecil Street

7.8m

 

Tree 20/ Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Palm) located within the front setback of No. 12 Cecil Street

2m

 

Tree 26/ Acer buergeranum (Trident Maple) located on the eastern boundary within the adjoining property

3.3m

Tree 34/ Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palm) located on the eastern boundary

2m

 

Tree 35/ Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palm) located on the eastern boundary

2m

 

Tree 50/ Grevillea robusta (Silky Oak) located on the southern boundary at the rear of No. 12 Cecil Street

7.2m

 

Tree 55/ Corymbia maculata (Spotted Gum) located at the south-east corner of the site

2.5m

Tree 56/ Casuarina cunninghamiana (River Oak) located at the south-east corner of the site

4m

 

Tree 57/ Casuarina cunninghamiana (River Oak) located at the south-east corner of the site

5m

 

Tree 58/ Lophostemon confertus (Brushbox) TPZ 7.2m. The tree is located at the south-east corner of the site, within the adjoining property

5m

 

Tree 59/ Eucalyptus saligna (Sydney Blue Gum) TPZ 7.2m. The tree is located at the south-east corner of the site, within the adjoining property

5m

 

Tree 61/ Magnolia grandiflora (Bull-bay Magnolia) located at the centre of the site

9.5m

 

Reason:     To protect existing trees.

 

71. Approved tree works

 

Approval is given for the following works to be undertaken to trees on the site. An arboricultural assessment prepared by Advanced Treescape Consulting and dated 16/06/11 has been submitted with the application. Tree numbers refer to this report.

 

Schedule

Tree location

Approved tree works

Tree 13/ Cupressus sempervirens (Italian Cypress) located on the front boundary within the nature strip

Removal

Tree 14/ Cupressus sempervirens (Italian Cypress) located on the front boundary within the nature strip

Removal

Tree 17/ Callistemon viminalis (Weeping Bottlebrush) located on the front boundary

Removal

Tree 18/ Banksia integrifolia (Coast Banksia) located on the front boundary

Removal

Tree 19/ Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda)  located on the front boundary

Removal

Tree 22/ Liquidambar styraciflua (Liquidambar) located within the eastern setback of No. 12 Cecil Street.

Removal

Tree 23/ Pittosporum undulatum (Sweet Pittosporum) located on the eastern boundary within the eastern setback of No. 12 Cecil Street.

Removal

Tree 27/ Fraxinus excelsior (Ash) located on the eastern boundary within the eastern setback of the heritage item

Removal

Tree 28/ Casuarina cunninghamiana (River Oak) located on the eastern boundary

Removal

Tree 29/ Casuarina cunninghamiana (River Oak) located on the eastern boundary

Removal

Tree 30/ Casuarina cunninghamiana (River Oak) located on the eastern boundary

Removal

Tree 31/ Syzygium paniculatum (Brush Cherry) located on the eastern boundary

Removal

Tree 37/ Corymbia maculata (Spotted Gum)This tree is located on the eastern boundary

Removal

Tree 38/ Corymbia citriodora (Lemon Scented Gum) located on the eastern boundary

Removal

Tree 39/ Agonis flexuosa (Willow Myrtle) located at the rear of No. 12 Cecil Street

Removal

Tree 40/ Syagrus romanzoffiana (Cocos Palm) located at the rear of No. 12 Cecil Street

Removal

Tree 41/ Syagrus romanzoffiana (Cocos Palm) located at the rear of No. 12 Cecil Street

Removal

Tree 42/ Casuarina cunninghamiana (River Oak) located at the rear of No. 12 Cecil Street

Removal

Tree 43/ Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) located at the rear of No. 12 Cecil Street

Removal

Tree 44/ Pittosporum undulatum (Sweet Pittosporum) located at the rear of No. 12 Cecil Street

Removal

Tree 45/ Eucalyptus sp. located at the rear of No. 12 Cecil Street. 

Removal

Tree 47/ Araucaria heterophylla (Norfolk Island Pine) located at the rear of No. 12 Cecil Street

Removal

Tree 48/ Corymbia maculata (Spotted Gum) located near the southern boundary at the rear of No. 12 Cecil Street

Removal

Tree 53/ Pittosporum undulatum (Sweet Pittosporum) located at the rear of No. 12 Cecil Street

Removal

Tree 54/ Lophostemon confertus (Brushbox) located at the rear of No. 12 Cecil Street

Removal

Tree 60/ Eucalyptus sp. located at the south-east corner of the site

Removal

Tree 62/ Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palm) located at the rear of No. 14 Cecil Street

Removal

Tree 63/ Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Palm) located at the rear of No. 14 Cecil Street

Removal

Tree 64/ Stenocarpus sinuatus (Firewheel Tree) located at the rear of No. 14 Cecil Street

Removal

Tree 65/Prunus cerasifera ‘Nigra’ (Purple-Leafed Plum) located at the rear of No. 14 Cecil Street

Removal

Tree 66/ Livistona chinensis (Chinese Fan Palm) located at the rear of No. 14 Cecil Street

Removal

Tree 67/ Stenocarpus sinuatus (Firewheel Tree) located at the rear of No. 14 Cecil Street

Removal

Tree 68/ Cupressus macrocarpa (Monterey Cypress) located at the rear of No. 14 Cecil Street

Removal

 

Removal or pruning of any other tree on the site is not approved.

 

Reason:    To ensure that the development is in accordance with the determination of Council.

 

72. 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 to minimum 700mm depth along the perimeter line of such works, is completed:

 

Schedule

 

Tree/location

Radius from trunk

 

Tree 5/ Juniperus sp.   located within the front setback of No. 14 Cecil Street

7.8m

 

Tree 20/ Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Palm) located within the front setback of No. 12 Cecil Street

2m

 

Tree 26/ Acer buergeranum (Trident Maple) located on the eastern boundary within the adjoining property

3.3m

Tree 34/ Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palm) located on the eastern boundary

2m

 

Tree 35/ Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palm) located on the eastern boundary

2m

 

Tree 50/ Grevillea robusta (Silky Oak) located on the southern boundary at the rear of No. 12 Cecil Street

7.2m

 

Tree 55/ Corymbia maculata (Spotted Gum) located at the south-east corner of the site

2.5m

Tree 56/ Casuarina cunninghamiana (River Oak) located at the south-east corner of the site

4m

 

Tree 57/ Casuarina cunninghamiana (River Oak) located at the south-east corner of the site

5m

 

Tree 58/ Lophostemon confertus (Brushbox) TPZ 7.2m. The tree is located at the south-east corner of the site, within the adjoining property

5m

 

Tree 59/ Eucalyptus saligna (Sydney Blue Gum) TPZ 7.2m. The tree is located at the south-east corner of the site, within the adjoining property

5m

 

Tree 61/ Magnolia grandiflora (Bull-bay Magnolia) located at the centre of the site

9.5m

 

Reason:     To protect existing trees.

 

 

73. Hand excavation

 

All excavation within the specified radius of the trunk(s) of the following tree(s) shall be hand dug under the supervision of the Project Arborist.

 

 

Schedule

 

Tree/location

Radius from trunk

 

Tree 5/ Juniperus sp.   located within the front setback of No. 14 Cecil Street

7.8m

 

Tree 20/ Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Palm) located within the front setback of No. 12 Cecil Street

2m

 

Tree 26/ Acer buergeranum (Trident Maple) located on the eastern boundary within the adjoining property

3.3m

Tree 34/ Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palm) located on the eastern boundary

2m

 

Tree 35/ Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palm) located on the eastern boundary

2m

 

Tree 50/ Grevillea robusta (Silky Oak) located on the southern boundary at the rear of No. 12 Cecil Street

7.2m

 

Tree 55/ Corymbia maculata (Spotted Gum) located at the south-east corner of the site

2.5m

Tree 56/ Casuarina cunninghamiana (River Oak) located at the south-east corner of the site

4m

 

Tree 57/ Casuarina cunninghamiana (River Oak) located at the south-east corner of the site

5m

 

Tree 58/ Lophostemon confertus (Brushbox) located at the south-east corner of the site, within the adjoining property

5m

 

Tree 59/ Eucalyptus saligna (Sydney Blue Gum) located at the south-east corner of the site, within the adjoining property

5m

 

Tree 61/ Magnolia grandiflora (Bull-bay Magnolia) located at the centre of the site

9.5m

 

Reason:     To protect existing trees.

 

74. 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.

 

75. 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.

 

76. 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.

 

77. Removal of noxious plants & weeds

 

All noxious and/or environmental weed species shall be removed from the property prior to completion of building works.

 

Reason:     To protect the environment.

 

78. Survey and inspection of waste collection clearance and path of travel

 

At the stage when formwork for the ground floor slab is in place and prior to concrete being poured, a registered surveyor is to:

 

·      ascertain the reduced level of the underside of the slab at the driveway entry,

·      certify that the level is not lower than the level shown on the approved DA plans; and

·      certify that the minimum headroom of 2.6 metres will be available for the full path of travel of the small waste collection vehicle from the street to the collection area.

·      This certification is to be provided to Council’s Development Engineer prior to any concrete being poured for the ground floor slab.

·      No work is to proceed until Council has undertaken an inspection to determine clearance and path of travel.

 

At the stage when formwork for the ground floor slab is in place and prior to concrete being poured, Council’s Development Engineer and Manager Waste Services are to carry out an inspection of the site to confirm the clearance available for the full path of travel of the small waste collection vehicle from the street to the collection area.  This inspection may not be carried out by a private certifier because waste management is not a matter listed in Clause 161 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

Reason:    To ensure access will be available for Council’s contractors to collect waste from the collection point.

 

79. 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:

 

80. Easement for waste collection

 

Prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that an easement for waste collection has been 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.

 

81. 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. 502813M_02 have been complied with.

 

Reason:     Statutory requirement.

 

82. 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.

 

83. 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.

 

84. Completion of tree works

 

Prior to the release of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority is to be satisfied that all tree works, including pruning in accordance with AS4373-2007 or remediation works in accordance with AS4370-2009, have been undertaken in accordance with the approved plan(s) and conditions of consent.

 

Reason:     To ensure that the tree works are consistent with the development consent.

 

85. 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.

 

86. 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 88B or 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 Volume C Appendix 4R.9 of Ku-ring-gai Local Centres Development Control Plan). 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.

 

87. Certification of drainage works (dual occupancies and above)

 

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 Volume C Part 4 of Ku-ring-gai Local Centres Development Control Plan 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

 

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.

 

88. 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.

 

89. 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 88B or 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 Appendix 4R.9 of Ku-ring-gai Local Centres DCP). 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.

 

 

90. 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.

 

91. 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.

 

92. Certification of as-constructed driveway/car park - RFB

 

Prior to issue of an Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority is to be satisfied that:

 

§     the as-constructed car park complies with the approved Construction Certificate plans

 

§     the completed vehicle access and accommodation arrangements comply with Australian Standard 2890.1 - 2004 “Off-Street car parking" in terms of minimum parking space dimensions

 

§     finished driveway gradients and transitions will not result in the scraping of the underside of cars

 

§     no doors, gates, grilles or other structures have been provided in the access driveways to the basement car park, which would prevent unrestricted access for internal garbage collection from the basement garbage storage and collection area

 

·      Convex mirrors are provided where required to facilitate safe access

§     the vehicular headroom requirements of:

 

-        Australian Standard 2890.1 - “Off-street car parking”,

-        2.6 metres height clearance for waste collection trucks are met from the public street into and within the applicable areas of the basement car park.

 

Note:         Evidence from a suitably qualified and experienced traffic/civil engineer indicating compliance with the above is to be provided to and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

 

Reason:     To ensure that vehicular access and accommodation areas are compliant with the consent.

 

93. Reinstatement of redundant crossings and completion of infrastructure works

 

Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, and upon completion of all works likely to cause damage to Council's infrastructure, 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 any 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.

 

94. 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.

 

Conditions to be satisfied at all times:

 

 

95. 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: 1999 Pedestrian Area (Category P) Lighting and AS4282: 1997 Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting.

 

Reason:     To protect the amenity of surrounding properties.

 

 

96. 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 units 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.

 

 

97. 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.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

 

398

910 Pacific Highway, Gordon - Public Car Park

 

File: S07252/4

Vide: GB.13

 

 

For Council to consider the surrender of a lease of a public car park in a private property at 904 -914 Pacific (AKA 910 Pacific) Highway, Gordon.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Szatow/Pettett)

 

A.    That the General Manager is delegated to negotiate Council’s requirements including compensation for the surrender of the lease of the public car park at 904-914 Pacific (AKA 910 Pacific) Highway, Gordon.

 

B.    Subject to the General Manager completing negotiations that Council grant approval for the surrender of lease of the public car park at 904 -914 Pacific (AKA 910 Pacific) Highway, Gordon.

 

C.    That the compensation amount is allocated towards public parking and upgrades at 828 Pacific Highway, Gordon.

 

D.    That authority is given to the General Manager and the Mayor to affix the Common Seal of the Council to any relevant documents associated with the lease.

 

E.    That Council authorise the Mayor and General Manager to execute all associated lease documentation.

 

F.    That Council authorise the affixing of the Common Seal to the associated lease documentation.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

 

399

828 Pacific Highway, Gordon - Design, Refurbishment and Fit-out - Select Tender

 

File: S09905

Vide: GB.14

 

 

To advise Council of the Expressions of Interest (EoI) received for the design, refurbishment & fit-out of 828 Pacific Highway, Gordon and to seek approval to call select tenders from the recommended shortlist in this report.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Szatow/Pettett)

 

A.    That Council delegates authority for the Mayor and General Manager to accept the preferred shortlist for select tender for the design, refurbishment and fit-out of
828 Pacific Highway, Gordon.

 

B.    That Council approves the calling of select tenders from those companies nominated by the Mayor and General Manager for the design, refurbishment and fit-out of 828 Pacific Highway, Gordon.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

 

 

400

Native Title Claim by Awabakal and Guringai People

 

File: S03213

Vide: GB.16

 

 

To inform Council of a Native Title claimant application made on behalf of the Awabakal and Guringai People.

 

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Szatow/Ossip)

 

That Council receive and note the intended course of action.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

 

401

Acquisition and Divestment of Land Policy - Review

 

File: S07209

Vide: GB.17

 

 

For Council to adopt the revised draft Acquisition & Divestment of Land Policy for public exhibition.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Szatow/Pettett)

 

A.    That Council to adopt the revised draft Acquisition & Divestment of Land Policy for public exhibition for a period of 28 days with a further 14 days for public comment in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 1993.

 

B.    That a further report be presented to Council following the public exhibition process.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

 

402

Draft Commercial Leasing Policy

 

File: S07252/4

Vide: GB.18

 

 

For Council to adopt the draft Commercial Leasing Policy (policy) for public exhibition.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Szatow/Pettett)

 

A.   That Council adopts the draft Commercial Leasing Policy and place the draft policy on public exhibition for a period of 28 days with a further 14 days for public comment in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act, 1993.

 

B.   That a further report be presented to Council following the public exhibition process.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

Councillor Ossip withdrew during discussion

 

 

MOTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN

 

 

403

Aircraft Noise over the North Shore

 

File: S02511

Vide: NM.3

 

 

Notice of Motion from Councillor Fornari-Orsmond dated 2 December 2013

 

As stated on the Sydney Airport Community Forum website: “The Sydney Airport Long Term Operating Plan (LTOP) is the program which was introduced to manage the aircraft noise associated with Sydney Airport. It was drawn up through a major consultative process during 1996 and 1997. The Plan was designed to ensure that aircraft movements are maximised over water and non-residential land. Where overflight of residential areas cannot be avoided the Plan aims to safely share the noise between communities."

 

LTOP targets:

 

The LTOP has the following noise sharing targets for aircraft movements:

 

17% of movements to the North of the Airport

13% of movements to the East of the Airport

15% of movements to the West of the Airport

55% of movements to the South of the Airport

 

After comparing the set targets above against the actuals in Attachment A1, it is clear that these targets are not being adhered to. From speaking to residents about this issue it is also obvious people are frustrated that there is no regard for complying with the LTOP nor any regard for the residents that make complaints about the excessive noise over the North Shore – which is way above, at times double, the set targets and these are figures based over a 3 year period.

 

The residents on the North Shore should be able to expect that a Government agreement set up to ensure equitable distribution of aircraft noise from Sydney Airport be adhered to.

 

I move:

 

“1.  That the General Manager write to the Federal Minister of Infrastructure and Regional Development, with the supporting document (Attachment A1), requesting that Airservices Australia adhere to the agreed LTOP.

 

2.    That the General Manager requests a response from the Minister both as to why Airservices Australia are not adhering to the LTOP targets and when the residents of the North Shore can expect operations will resume as per the agreed LTOP.”

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Szatow/Fornari-Orsmond)

 

That the above Notice of Motion as printed be adopted.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY by those present

 

 

Councillor Ossip returned

 

 

Standing Orders were suspended to deal with

items where there are speakers first and

GB.11 – Heritage Assessment of former 3M Building at 950 Pacific Highway, Pymble

be dealt with before GB.10 – Planning Proposal to include ‘Hardware and Building Supplies’

in the B7 Zone under the KPSO

after a Motion moved by Councillors Malicki and Ossip

was CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

 

GENERAL BUSINESS (cont)

 

 

404

Marian Street Theatre - Strategic Management Options and Building Safety Requirements

 

File: S06620/3

Vide: GB.2

 

 

The following members of the public addressed Council:

 

D Castle

D Burges

M McCrae

W Blaxland

D Newman

 

 

For Council to undertake immediate upgrades to the Marian Street Theatre to ensure the safety of users and patrons of the theatre, and for Council to consider future management model recommendations for the theatre.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Malicki/Pettett)

 

A.    That Marian Street Theatre for Young People be given notice to vacate the building immediately so that the necessary BCA works can be undertaken to ensure safety of people using and attending the theatre.

 

B.    That Council undertake to fund the essential capital, electrical and safety requirement upgrades to Marian Street Theatre of $222,000 including the $75,000 grant funds, as soon as possible, to ensure the safe operation of the theatre.

 

C.    That Council staff consult with the MSTYP about possible Council venues for hire should that be necessary for the time that the works are being undertaken at the Marian Street Theatre.

 

D.    That Council adopt a Direct Management model as the future operational and management model for the Marian Street Theatre. This model will ensure the continued operation of the MSTYP, access for community and professional performing arts, and other commercial bodies.

 

E.    That staff report to Council in early 2014 with further details for a Direct Management model for the Marian Street Theatre. This report will include recommendations for theatre programming and partnership opportunities, marketing, staffing, technical management and financial considerations.

 

F.    That staff report to Council in early 2014 with further details on a comprehensive funding strategy for the capital works proposed in this report. The report will include construction costs and possible funding sources available, including grant opportunities.

 

For the Resolution:                The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson, Councillors Berlioz, McDonald, Ossip, Pettett, Malicki and Fornari-Orsmond

 

Against the Resolution:         Councillors Armstrong, Citer and Szatow

 

 

The above Resolution was CARRIED as an Amendment to the Original Motion.  The Original Motion was:

 

(Moved: Councillors Citer/Szatow)

 

A.      That, in consultation with MSTYP, Council undertakes such short term work as is necessary for the continued assurance of the safety of the premises but in such manner as to cause minimum disruption to the performance and class schedules of MSTYP and so as to avoid MSTYP having to vacate the entire premises.

 

B.      That Council undertake to fund the essential capital, electrical and safety requirement upgrades to Marian Street Theatre of $222,000 including the $75,000 grant funds, as soon as possible, to ensure the safe operation of the theatre.

 

C.      That Council staff consult with the MSTYP about possible Council venues for hire should that be necessary for the time that the works are being undertaken at the Marian Street Theatre.

 

D.      That Council adopt a preferred management model in consultation with stakeholders including MSTYP for the future management and operation of the Marian Street Theatre. This model will ensure the continued operation of the MSTYP, access for community and professional performing arts, and other commercial bodies.

 

E.      That staff report to Council in early 2014 with further details for a preferred management model for the Marian Street Theatre. This report will include recommendations for theatre programming and partnership opportunities, marketing, staffing, technical management and financial considerations.

 

F.      That staff report to Council in early 2014 with further details on a comprehensive funding strategy for the capital works proposed in this report. The report will include construction costs and possible funding sources available, including grant opportunities.

 

 

 

405

Heritage Assessment of Former 3M building at 950 Pacific Highway, Pymble

 

File: S09781

Vide: GB.11

 

 

To consider the heritage significance of the former 3M Building at 950 Pacific Highway, Pymble.

 

 

Motion:

 

(Moved: Councillors Fornari-Orsmond/Pettett) 

 

A.    That a Planning Proposal be prepared, in accordance with section 55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, to amend Draft Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2013 by listing 950 Pacific Highway, Pymble (Lot 1 DP718718) Schedule 5 as a heritage item of local significance.

 

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 Council request the plan-making delegation under Section 23 of the EP&A Act for this planning proposal

 

D.    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.

 

E.    That a report be brought back to Council at the end of the exhibition processes.

 

For the Motion:                      The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson, Councillors Armstrong, Berlioz, Pettett and Malicki

 

Against the Motion:                Councillors Citer, McDonald, Ossip, Szatow and Fornari-Orsmond

 

The Mayor did not exercise her Casting Vote

and ruled the Motion LOST

 

No decision was taken in respect of the above matter

as the Motion when put to the vote was LOST

 

 

 

During debate of the business in Minute No 406,

Standing Orders were suspended to further consider

GB.11 – Heritage Assessment of former 3M Building at 950 Pacific Highway, Pymble

after a Motion moved by Councillors Malicki and Berlioz was CARRIED

 

For the Motion:                  The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson, Councillors Armstrong, Berlioz, McDonald, Pettett, Fornari-Orsmond and Malicki

 

Against the Motion:           Councillors Citer, Ossip and Szatow

 

 

406

Heritage Assessment of Former 3M building at 950 Pacific Highway, Pymble

 

File: S09781

Vide: GB.11

 

 

To consider the heritage significance of the former 3M Building at 950 Pacific Highway, Pymble.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Malicki/Berlioz)

 

A.    That a Planning Proposal be prepared, in accordance with section 55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, to amend Draft Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2013 by listing 950 Pacific Highway, Pymble (Lot 1 DP718718) Schedule 5 as a heritage item of local significance.

 

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 Council request the plan-making delegation under Section 23 of the EP&A Act for this planning proposal

 

D.    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.

 

E.    That a report be brought back to Council at the end of the exhibition processes.

 

For the Resolution:                The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson, Councillors Armstrong, Berlioz, McDonald, Pettett and Malicki

 

Against the Resolution:         Councillors Citer, Ossip, Fornari-Orsmond and Szatow

 

 

 

Standing Orders were suspended to resume consideration of

GB.10 – Planning Proposal to include ‘Hardware and Building Supplies’ in the B7 Zone under the KPSO after a Motion moved by Councillors Malicki and Pettett was CARRIED

 

For the Motion:                  The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson, Councillors Armstrong, Berlioz, McDonald, Pettett, Citer, Fornari-Orsmond and Malicki

 

Against the Motion:           Councillors Ossip and Szatow

 

 

407

Planning Proposal to include 'Hardware and Building Supplies' in the B7 Zone under the KPSO

 

File: S09781

Vide: GB.10

 

 

The following members of the public addressed Council:

 

G Tabuteau

K Gibbons

 

 

For Council to consider a planning proposal to amend the Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance (KPSO) to permit ‘hardware and building supplies’ as a use permissible with consent within the B7 – Business Park zone.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Berlioz/Citer)

 

A.    That the Planning Proposal to amend the Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance to include ‘hardware and building supplies’ as a permissible land use with development consent in Zone B7 (Business Park) be supported in principle.

 

B.    That the Proponent be advised to amend their Planning Proposal as follows:

 

i.       Remove references to the concept design of the proposed future development at 950-950A Pacific Highway and 2 Bridge Street, Pymble from the technical component of the Planning Proposal in accordance with the requirements of Section 117 Direction 6.3 (Site Specific Provisions).

 

ii.      Incorporate appropriate consideration of the State heritage items at
982 Pacific Highway (Pymble Electricity Substation) and the Fire Station at
966 Pacific Highway.  Incorporate appropriate consideration for the building and curtilage on the site at 950 Pacific Highway, Pymble. A copy of the resolution in relation to 950 Pacific Highway, Pymble also be included.

 

iii.     Incorporate an appropriate project time line in consultation with Council staff.

 

C.    That the amended Planning Proposal be prepared to the satisfaction of the General Manager and then be forwarded to the DP&I for a Gateway Determination in accordance with the provisions of the EP&A Act and Regulations.

 

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.

 

For the Resolution:                Councillors Citer, McDonald, Ossip, Pettett, Szatow and Fornari-Orsmond

 

Against the Resolution:         The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson, Councillors Armstrong, Berlioz and Malicki

 

 

 

 

408

St Ives Shopping Village

 

File: S09318

Vide: GB.12

 

 

 

The following members of the public addressed Council:

 

T Martire

J Watts

M Gooley

K Callinan

P Moate

S Barwick

 

 

To consider a proposal from EK Nominees Pty Limited in relation to future planning and redevelopment of the St Ives Shopping Village.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Ossip/Szatow)

 

A.   That a Planning Proposal be prepared, in accordance with section 55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, to reclassify the council car park known as 176 Mona Vale Road, St Ives, being Lot 103 in DP627012 & Lot 105 in DP629388, from community land to operational land via an amendment the Ku-ring-gai LEP Local Centres (2012).

 

B.   That a Planning Proposal be prepared, in accordance with section 55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, to reclassify the Council land known as Village Green Parade (which includes a Council car park, St Ives Library, St Ives Early Childhood Centre and St Ives Neighbourhood Centre) being Lot 201 in DP 1164994 & Lot 200 in DP 1164994 from community land to operational land via an amendment the Ku-ring-gai LEP Local Centres (2012).

 

C.   That a Planning Proposal be prepared, in accordance with section 55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, to reclassify the Council car park known as 11-21 Cowan Road, St Ives, being:

 

-        Lot A in DP 336206,

-        Lot B in DP 336206,

-        Lot 1 in DP 504794 and

-        Lot A in DP 321567 from community land to operational land via an amendment the Ku-ring-gai LEP Local Centres (2012).

 

D.   That a Planning Proposal be prepared, in accordance with section 55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, to reclassify the Council land known as the St Ives Occasional Child Care Centre, 261 Mona Vale Road, St Ives being Lot 31 in DP 719052 from community land to operational land via an amendment the Ku-ring-gai LEP  Local Centres (2012).

 

E.    i.       That Council undertake a public hearing under the provisions of the Local Government Act, 1993 for the proposed reclassification of the land resolved by Council in resolution A  to D from community land to operational land.

 

ii.      In recommendation “B”. Reference to Lot 200 in D.P. 1164994 should be deleted and put into recommendation “C”. 

 

iii.     On page 119 of the business paper, in the Executive Summary for GB.12, the recommendation makes reference to 3 parcels of land, this should be amended to read four (4) parcels of land.

 

F.   That Council formally seek to discharge all interests for the St Ives Council land holdings as set out in the Planning Proposal.

 

G.   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.

 

H.   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.

 

I.     That a report be brought back to Council at the end of the exhibition and public hearing processes.

 

J.    That Council’s submission of a final Planning Proposal to DOPI is contingent on the prior submission and Council adoption of a Planning Proposal by EK Nominees, in relation to height and floor space ratio.

 

K.   That Council write to EK Nominees notifying them of its resolution.

 

L.   That a further report be brought to Council in relation to the compulsory acquisition of the unnamed lane and part Denley Lane as shown in Figure 5.

 

M.   That Council commence preparation of a detailed community facilities strategy for St Ives and that a budget of $60,000 is allocated for the study from S94 2010 Plan – local recreational, cultural and social facilities.

 

N.   That Council begins the process of determining the future of the St Ives Village Precinct in a similar manner to activate Lindfield, by holding meetings, consultations and the like with all parties present including EK Nominees, the St Ives Progress Association, sporting users of Council’s fields, the Neighbourhood Centre, and all interested shopkeepers, community groups and individuals. That there be regular minuting and reporting of these meetings commencing early in the new year (2014).

 

For the Resolution:                The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson, Councillors Citer, Ossip, Szatow and Fornari-Orsmond

 

Against the Resolution:         Councillors Armstrong, Berlioz, McDonald, Pettett and Malicki

 

The voting being EQUAL,

the Mayor exercised her Casting Vote

IN FAVOUR of the Resolution

 

The above Resolution was subject to an Amendment which was LOST.  The Lost Amendment was:

 

(Moved: Councillors Malicki/Armstrong)

 

A.    That Council begins the process of determining the future of the St Ives Village Precinct in a similar manner to activate Lindfield, by holding meetings, consultations and the like with all parties present including EK Nominees, the St Ives Progress Association, sporting users of Council’s fields, the Neighbourhood Centre, and all interested shopkeepers, community groups and individuals.  That there be regular minuting and reporting of these meetings commencing early in the new year (2014).

 

B.    That Council write to EK Nominees notifying them of its resolution.

 

C.    That a further report be brought to Council in relation to the compulsory acquisition of the unnamed lane and part Denley Lane as shown in Figure 5.

 

D.    That Council commence preparation of a detailed community facilities strategy for St Ives and that a budget of $60,000 is allocated for the study from S94 2010 Plan – local recreational, cultural and social facilities.

 

For the Amendment:             Councillors Armstrong, Berlioz, McDonald, Pettett and Malicki

 

Against the Amendment:       The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson, Councillors Citer, Ossip, Szatow and Fornari-Orsmond

 

The voting being EQUAL,

the Mayor exercised her Casting Vote

AGAINST the Amendment

 

The above Resolution was subject to a Foreshadowed Amendment which was LOST.  The Lost Foreshadowed Amendment was:

 

(Moved: Councillors Berlioz/Malicki

 

A.      That a Planning Proposal be prepared, in accordance with section 55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, to reclassify the council car park known as 176 Mona Vale Road, St Ives, being Lot 103 in DP627012 & Lot 105 in DP629388, from community land to operational land via an amendment the Ku-ring-gai LEP Local Centres (2012).

 

B.      That a Planning Proposal be prepared, in accordance with section 55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, to reclassify the Council land known as Village Green Parade (which includes a Council car park, St Ives Library, St Ives Early Childhood Centre and St Ives Neighbourhood Centre) being Lot 201 in DP 1164994 & Lot 200 in DP 1164994 from community land to operational land via an amendment the Ku-ring-gai LEP Local Centres (2012).

 

C.      That the Council car park known as 11-21 Cowan Road, St Ives being:

 

-        Lot A in DP 336206,

-        Lot B in DP 336206,

-        Lot 1 in DP 504794,

-        Lot A in DP 321567,

-        Lot 200 DP 1164994,

 

be excluded from reclassification.

 

D.      That a Planning Proposal be prepared, in accordance with section 55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, to reclassify the Council land known as the St Ives Occasional Child Care Centre, 261 Mona Vale Road, St Ives being Lot 31 in DP 719052 from community land to operational land via an amendment the Ku-ring-gai LEP  Local Centres (2012).

 

E.      i.     That Council undertake a public hearing under the provisions of the Local Government Act, 1993 for the proposed reclassification of the land resolved by Council in resolution A  to D from community land to operational land.

 

ii.    In recommendation “B”. Reference to Lot 200 in D.P. 1164994 should be deleted and put into recommendation “C”. 

 

iii.   On page 119 of the business paper, in the Executive Summary for GB.12, the recommendation makes reference to 3 parcels of land, this should be amended to read four (4) parcels of land.

 

F.      That Council formally seek to discharge all interests for the St Ives Council land holdings as set out in the Planning Proposal.

 

G.      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.

 

H.      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.

 

I.        That a report be brought back to Council at the end of the exhibition and public hearing processes.

 

J.       That Council’s submission of a final Planning Proposal to DOPI is contingent on the prior submission and Council adoption of a Planning Proposal by EK Nominees, in relation to height and floor space ratio.

 

K.      That Council write to EK Nominees notifying them of its resolution.

 

L.      That a further report be brought to Council in relation to the compulsory acquisition of the unnamed lane and part Denley Lane as shown in Figure 5.

 

M.      That Council commence preparation of a detailed community facilities strategy for St Ives and that a budget of $60,000 is allocated for the study from S94 2010 Plan – local recreational, cultural and social facilities.

 

N.      That the reclassification process describing E, F, G, H, and I should not proceed until a planning proposal has been received and adopted from EK Nominees.

 

O.      Any resolution to reclassify community land to operational land in St Ives does not bind Council to adopt the planning proposal by EK Nominees.

 

P.      That Council begins the process of determining the future of the St Ives Village Precinct in a similar manner to activate Lindfield, by holding meetings, consultations and the like with all parties present including EK Nominees, the St Ives Progress Association, sporting users of Council’s fields, the Neighbourhood Centre, and all interested shopkeepers, community groups and individuals. That there be regular minuting and reporting of these meetings commencing early in the New Year 2014.

 

For the Lost Foreshadowed Amendment:        Councillors Armstrong, Berlioz, McDonald, Pettett and Malicki

 

Against the Lost Foreshadowed Amendment:  The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson, Councillors Citer, Ossip, Szatow and Fornari-Orsmond

 

The voting being EQUAL, the Mayor exercised her Casting Vote

AGAINST the Foreshadowed Amendment

 

 

 

A Motion moved by Councillors Malicki and McDonald

to extend the Meeting beyond midnight

was put to the vote

and was CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

 

MOTIONS OF WHICH DUE NOTICE HAS BEEN GIVEN (cont)

 

 

409

Heritage Conservation Areas

 

File: S09768

Vide: NM.1

 

 

The following members of the public addressed Council:

 

Dr N Olbourne

H Loughnan

B Watson

J Hooke

J Watson

J Townend

 

 

Notice of Rescission from Councillors Szatow, Citer and Armstrong dated
2 December 2013

 

We the undersigned hereby rescind that part of the decision of Council of 26 November 2013 to amend the following zoning, FSR and alteration of boundaries of a Heritage Conservation Area (HCA).

 

We hereby rescind:

 

“1.  Amendment of the Heritage Map and Schedule 5 to alter the boundaries of the following HCAs:

 

a.      C24 Marian Street Conservation Area to exclude Lot 6, DP 3694, Lots 1, 2, 3, DP 119937, Lot 2, DP 932235, Lot 1, DP 945545, Parts 30 and 31, DP 3263, Lot 1, DP 102600 (being Part D. i. a. of the resolution).

 

2.    Amendment of the floor space ratio for 20-28 Culworth Avenue, Killara (Lots 1, 2 and 3 DP 119937, Lot 6 DP 3694, Lot 2 DP 932235 to ‘Q’ (1.3:1) and the height of buildings Map ‘P’ (17.5m) (being Part C. 5. of the resolution).”

 

 

Motion:

 

(Moved: Councillors Szatow/Armstrong)

 

That the above Notice of Rescission as printed be adopted.

 

For the Motion:               Councillors Armstrong, Berlioz, Citer, Ossip and Szatow

 

Against the Motion:         The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson, Councillors McDonald, Pettett, Malicki and Fornari-Orsmond

 

The voting being EQUAL,

the Mayor exercised her Casting Vote

AGAINST the Rescission Motion

 

A Procedural Motion was moved before the Motion above asking the Mayor to seek a vote on the matter as there had been 2 speakers For and 2 Against.

 

For the Procedural Motion:             The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson, Councillors Berlioz, McDonald, Pettett, Malicki and Fornari-Orsmond

 

Against the Procedural Motion:      Councillors Armstrong, Citer, Ossip and Szatow

 

 

 

410

Naming of Community Centre and Sportsfield at former UTS site Lindfield

 

File: S08640/3

Vide: NM.2

 

 

The following members of the public addressed Council:

 

K Cowley

 

 

Notice of Rescission from Councillors Malicki, Berlioz and Pettett dated
2 December 2013

 

Following approaches from the community and based on new information including a suggestion of an extremely significant local figure -

 

We the undersigned Councillors, hereby move rescission of Minute No 373/13, GB 6 of the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 26 November, 2013 (Attachment A1) as follows:

 

“1.  That Council name the former UTS sportsfield as the William Symons Sportsground and the community centre as the Leonard Keysor Community Centre.”

 

We further move:

 

“A.  That the former UTS Sportsfield now owned by Council be named the Charles Bean Sportsfield, subject to the concurrence of the Geographical Names Board, and the Community Centre be named the Blair Wark VC Community Centre.  Council notes that these two men were heroes of WW1 and also both strongly associated with Ku-ring-gai. Council will meet the cost of appropriate replacement signage and installation.

 

B.    That DHA be asked to consider other features or buildings within their site to be named after the VC winners they nominated. ”

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Malicki/Pettett)

 

A.    That the former UTS Sportsfield now owned by Council be named the Charles Bean Sportsfield, subject to the concurrence of the Geographical Names Board, and the Community Centre be named the Blair Wark VC Community Centre.  Council notes that these two men were heroes of WW1 and also both strongly associated with Ku-ring-gai. Council will meet the cost of appropriate replacement signage and installation.

 

B.    That DHA be asked to consider other features or buildings within their site to be named after the VC winners they nominated.

 

For the Resolution:                The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson ,Councillors  Armstrong, Berlioz, McDonald, Pettett and Malicki

 

Against the Resolution:         Councillors Szatow, Citer, Ossip and Fornari-Orsmond

 

The above Resolution was CARRIED as a Substantive Motion to the Original Motion. The Original Motion was:

 

(Moved: Councillors Malicki/Pettett)

 

That the above Notice of Rescission, as printed, be adopted.

 

For the Resolution:                The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson ,Councillors  Berlioz, McDonald, Pettett and Malicki

 

Against the Resolution:         Councillors Szatow, Citer, Ossip, Armstrong and Fornari-Orsmond

 

The voting being EQUAL,

the Mayor exercised her Casting Vote

IN FAVOUR of the Rescission Motion

 

A Procedural Motion was moved before the Motion above asking the Mayor to seek a vote on the matter as there had been 2 speakers For and 2 Against.

 

For the Procedural Motion:             Councillors Szatow, Berlioz, Armstrong, McDonald, Pettett and Malicki

 

Against the Procedural Motion:      The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson, Councillors Citer, Ossip and Fornari-Orsmond

 

 

 

 

GENERAL BUSINESS (cont)

 

 

411

Review of Council's Investment Policy - 2013

 

File: S05273

Vide: GB.5

 

 

To review Council's Investment Policy and recommend the adoption of a revised policy.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Malicki/Pettett)

 

A.   That the attached revised Investment Policy be adopted by Council subject to the following amendment:

 

-        Removal of “in general, it is expected that professional advice will be sought before transacting in ‘grandfathered investments’” and insert “Professional advice will be sought before transacting in ‘grandfathered’ investments” in Section 4.2 of Appendix 1 on page 195 of the business paper.

 

B.   That Council’s Investment Policy be reviewed again within two (2) years, or earlier if emergent circumstances require it.

 

For the Resolution:                The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson, Councillors Armstrong, Berlioz, Citer, McDonald, Ossip, Pettett, Malicki and Fornari-Orsmond

 

Against the Resolution:         Councillor Szatow

 

 

 

412

Review of Council Committees

 

File: S02080

Vide: GB.8

 

 

To provide recommendations on Council’s Committee structure following consideration at the Councillor Workshop in November 2013.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Berlioz/Fornari-Orsmond)

 

A.   That Council reinstate the Heritage Reference Committee with meetings to recommence in 2014.

 

B.   That Council elect to the Heritage Reference Committee, the Mayor, Jennifer Anderson as Chairperson and Councillor Szatow as Deputy Chairperson.

 

C.   That Council call Expressions of Interest for external members of the Heritage Reference Committee and report back to Council.

 

D.    That Council hold bi-annual forums for the Environment/Bushland and Sporting Groups to commence in 2014.That the bi-annual forums be held as soon as practicable in the first half of the 2014 calendar year.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

 

413

Consideration of Submissions - Draft Ku-ring-gai Bushland Reserves Plan of Management

 

File: S04326

Vide: GB.15

 

 

For Council to adopt the exhibited 2013 Ku-ring-gai Bushland Reserves Plan of Management (PoM), incorporating the categorisation and re-categorisation of natural areas addressed through a public hearing conducted on 19 November 2013, and the Proposal for an estate - Biobank site at Rofe Park, Sheldon Forest and Comenarra Creek Reserve, with minor amendments and corrections as outlined in this report.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Berlioz/Armstrong)

 

A.    That Council adopts the 2013 Ku-ring-gai Bushland Reserves Plan of Management.

 

B.    That Council adopts the Proposal for an estate - Biobank site at Rofe Park, Sheldon Forest and Comenarra Creek Reserve, with the amendments and corrections detailed in this report.

 

C.    That a copy of the 2013 Ku-ring-gai Bushland Reserves Plan of Management is placed on Council’s website.

 

D.    That Council acknowledges the formal submissions made on the 2013 Ku-ring-gai Bushland Reserves Plan of Management and Proposal for an estate - Biobank site at Rofe Park, Sheldon Forest and Comenarra Creek Reserve and responds to the authors with the outcomes.

 

E.    That Council adopts the independent chairperson’s recommendations in relation to the submissions raised before or at the public hearing on the categorisation and re-categorisation of community land are supported, with the exception of recommendations three (3) and four (4).

 

F.    That a decision on the categorisation of land within Princes Park shown in blue as ‘Scouts’ on Map 26 in Attachment A1 as Natural Area – Bushland (or otherwise) be deferred until a more thorough investigation is undertaken into the current (and desired future) licence agreement for the site, in light of the requirements of Section 47B of the Local Government Act 1993.

 

G.    That Council resolves to conduct a thorough review of Council’s leases and licences relating to buildings on community land categorised as Natural Area – Bushland, to ensure: (i) compliance with the requirements of Section 47B of the Local Government Act 1993; (ii) the appropriate categorisation of community land where these leases and licences apply; and (iii) an appropriate Plan of Management is in place for the community land where these leases and licences apply.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

414

Lindfield Village Green - Tryon Road - Project Update

 

File: S09780

Vide: GB.19

 

 

To update Council on the progress of the masterplanning for Lindfield Village Green and to outline the next steps for the project.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Malicki/Ossip) 

 

A.    That the proposed Lindfield branch library and the proposed Lindfield Community Centre are to be co-located on the Woodford Lane site.

 

B.    That Council continues to actively investigate the potential to provide some of the commuter car parking proposed by Transport for NSW under the proposed Lindfield Village Green.

 

C.    That Council prepares an illustrative concept design for the Lindfield Village Green and proceed to public engagement and, following this, the draft concept is to be reported to Council for their endorsement prior to public exhibition.

 

D.    That pursuant to sections 186(1) and 187(1) of the Local Government Act 1993, the Council compulsorily acquire the unnamed public road shaded in grey and marked as ‘Proposed partial road closure’ in Figure 2 of the report to the Council dated 10 December 2013 for the purpose of creating the Lindfield Village Green in accordance with the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991.

 

E.    That for the purposes of section 30 of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991, the Council, as the owner of the road, agree to the road being acquired for compensation in the amount of $1.00.

 

F.    That Council delegate to the General Manager or his delegate the power to do anything further as necessary to give effect to the compulsory acquisition including obtaining any necessary approvals and publishing any necessary notices in the Gazette.

 

For the Resolution:                The Mayor, Councillor J Anderson, Councillors Armstrong, Berlioz, Citer, McDonald, Ossip, Pettett, Malicki and Fornari-Orsmond

 

Against the Resolution:         Councillor Szatow

 

The above Resolution was carried as an Amendment to the Original Motion. The Original Motion was:

 

A.      That the proposed Lindfield branch library and the proposed Lindfield Community Centre are to be co-located on the Woodford Lane site.

 

B.      That Council continues to actively investigate the potential to provide some of the commuter car parking proposed by Transport for NSW under the proposed Lindfield Village Green.

 

C.      That Council prepares an illustrative concept design for the Lindfield Village Green and proceed to public engagement and, following this, the draft concept is to be reported to Council for their endorsement prior to public exhibition.

 

D.      That pursuant to sections 186(1) and 187(1) of the Local Government Act 1993, the Council compulsorily acquire the unnamed public road shaded in grey and marked as ‘Proposed partial road closure’ in Figure 2 of the report to the Council dated 10 December 2013 for the purpose of creating the Lindfield Village Green in accordance with the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991.

 

E.      That for the purposes of section 30 of the Land Acquisition (Just Terms Compensation) Act 1991, the Council, as the owner of the road, agree to the road being acquired for compensation in the amount of $1.00.

 

F.      That Council delegate to the General Manager or his delegate the power to do anything further as necessary to give effect to the compulsory acquisition including obtaining any necessary approvals and publishing any necessary notices in the Gazette.

 

G.      That there should be no net loss of public car parking spaces with the redevelopment of the Lindfield Village Green and that this include the 25 car spaces lost from the sale of 9 Havilah Lane, Lindfield.

 

H.      That the $4.55 million from the sale of 9 Havilah Lane, Lindfield be directed to cover any shortfall in replacing public car spaces in the Lindfield Village Green project.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

 

 

415

Culworth Avenue Car Park - Site Inspection

 

File: S09768

Vide: QN.1

 

 

Question Without Notice from Councillor Chantelle Fornari-Orsmond

 

I note that Councillor Citer requested a site inspection of Culworth Car Park.  Could the Director of Strategy please remind, to the benefit of Councillors who may have forgotten, that staff did already offer, maybe even twice, an opportunity to Councillors to have an inspection of this site.

 

Answer by Director Strategy and Environment

 

Mayor and Councillors, I will take that one now Madam Mayor.  Councillor Fornari-Orsmond is correct.  There was at least two offers and there was a number of other offers in relation to sites at Binnalong and Calga and related sites.  Some Councillors took up the sites in Roseville and West Pymble but I am not sure that anyone took up the core sites in the Town Centres because it was my understanding that everyone was familiar with those sites.

 

 

 

 

The Meeting closed at 1.10am

 

The Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 10 December 2013 (Pages 1 - 73) were confirmed as a full and accurate record of proceedings on 4 February 2014.

 

 

 

 

          __________________________                                 __________________________

                   General Manager`                                                       Mayor / Chairperson

 

 

 


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 4 February 2014

GB.1 / 78

 

 

Item GB.1

S07505

 

20 January 2014

 

 

Cavalcade of History and Fashion Inc - Renewal of Occupation Licence

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

purpose of report:

For Council to consider granting a 5 year licence, with 3 additional 5 year option periods, to Cavalcade of History and Fashion Inc, for occupation at 4 Babbage Road, Roseville.

 

 

background:

Cavalcade of History and Fashion Inc.(Cavalcade) was formed in 1960 and has occupied the premises at the Babbage Road for over 13 years. Cavalcade uses the premises for the storage, cataloguing and restoration of a historical clothing collection.

 

 

comments:

Cavalcade of History and Fashion Inc has been operating at this location since July 2000. Cavalcade is a volunteer based not-for-profit organisation that is now well established in Ku-ring-gai.

 

 

recommendation:

That Council grant a licence to Cavalcade of History and Fashion Inc for 5 years from 1 March 2014, with options for an additional 3 x 5 years.

 

 

 


  

Purpose of Report

 

For Council to consider granting a 5 year licence, with 3 additional 5 year option periods, to Cavalcade of History and Fashion Inc, for occupation at 4 Babbage Road, Roseville. 

 

Background

 

Cavalcade of History and Fashion Inc is a volunteer based, not for profit organisation that has an extensive range of over 8,000 items, including 2,500 gowns and accessories.

 

The Cavalcade of History and Fashion Inc. (Cavalcade) was originally formed in 1960 and has for the last 13 years operated from the Babbage Road premises. Cavalcade uses the premises for the storage, cataloguing and restoration of a priceless historical clothing collection.

 

Cavalcade occupies a portion of the building at Roseville, known as the East Roseville Community Hall. The remainder of the building is occupied by 2 other community organisations, namely Roseville Kids Care Association and KU Children’s Services.

 

In 2013 Council carried out internal alterations to the East Roseville Community Hall to create additional storage areas for all 3 groups, including Cavalcade who made a sizable financial contribution to Council. The Cavalcade licence agreement has now expired and is currently holding over on a month to month basis.

 

 

Comments

 

The Cavalcade collection of historic gowns and accessories dates back to the late 1700s and has been used by its volunteer custodians to share Australia’s social and fashion history.

 

The collection is used as a resource for a wider variety of community groups including students, craftspeople, artists and historical groups. Its continued purpose is the continued conservation of the collection as a public asset for future generations.

 

Cavalcade is dedicated to preserving the collection and regards Ku-ring-gai as its home. Being able to house the majority of the collection at one site has allowed Cavalcade to invite small groups of interested people to view specific areas of the collection. Activities undertaken at the facility include housing, cataloguing, restoration and preservation of the collection.

 

As Cavalcade has committed to contributing funds towards both the new storage area and renovations to the existing room, they have requested that Council give favourable consideration to a new licence agreement that has several option periods for renewal, to enable amortisation of Cavalcade’s costs in upgrading the facility, including the installation of air conditioning equipment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

integrated planning and reporting

 

Community, People and Culture

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

A harmonious community that respects, appreciates,

celebrates and learns from each other and values our evolving cultural identity.

Our community facilities are

accessible and function as cultural hubs to attract a range of users.

A range of cultural, recreational

and leisure facilities and activities are available to encourage social interaction and stimulate everyday wellbeing

Promote opportunities for cultural groups to stage events consistent with Council’s Sponsorship policy.

Volunteers are recognised and rewarded for their efforts.

 

Governance Matters

 

Council is the owner of Lot Pt. 19-21 DP 9852, Lot Pt. 24 DP 7517 and Lot 23 DP 7517, that is zoned Special Uses 5 (a) Municipal Purposes and classified as Community Land.

 

As per section 47 of the NSW Local Government Act, 28 days public notification of the proposed licence is required.

 

The facility is covered under the Community Halls and Meeting Rooms Plan of Management

(adopted 25 June 2013). Under the Plan, Council is permitted by resolution to enter into lease and licence agreements with relevant authorities, organisations, individuals or companies.

 

The current and proposed licence also complies with Council’s Policy for Management of Community and Recreation Land and Facilities .

 

Risk Management

 

Cavalcade will indemnify Council by undertaking contents insurance as well as $20 million Public Liability Insurance. Evidence of currency is to be supplied annually to Council.

 

Cavalcade has a record over the last 13 years of its occupation of meeting its full responsibilities as a licensee and has complied with the conditions of previous licensing arrangements.

 

Financial Considerations

 

Following a market review, the licence fee payable by Cavalcade of History and Fashion Inc., with 5% increases each successive year, will be:

 

Year 1 - $3,572 pa

Year 2 - $3,750 pa

Year 3 - $3,938 pa

Year 4 - $4,135 pa

Year 5 - $4,341 pa

 

The above fees include a 90% rental rebate in accordance with Council’s current Policy for Management of Community and Recreation Land and Facilities.

 

A market rent review will be applicable at start of each option period and the licence fee at the start of each option period shall be the either the new market fee or the previous year’s fee whichever be the greater. Cavalcade has agreed to these conditions.

 

Additionally, in accordance with Council’s Policy for Management of Community and Recreation

Land and Facilities, Cavalcade is obliged to pay Council’s legal costs incurred associated with the preparation of the lease.

 

It should also be noted that Cavalcade has recently contributed $30,000 towards the recent refurbishment of the premises. Cavalcade has also contributed to recent capital works improvements in the building including air conditioning, shelving and flooring.

 

Social Considerations

 

Cavalcade of History and Fashion Inc has been based in the Ku-ring-gai Local Government Area for over 13 years. The priceless Cavalcade collection provides educational opportunities and activities for the community that present an awareness of earlier social times and the people who lived in those eras. The collection comes to life and contributes to the community’s heritage understanding of past times.

 

With security of tenure for another 5 years, and several option periods, Cavalcade will be able to continue its occupation of this current site on Council’s land with no disruption to its collection and operations.

 

Environmental Considerations

 

There are no environmental considerations associated with the granting of a new licence.

 

Community Consultation

 

As the site is classified as Community Land a 28 day public notification period is required as per the requirements under section 47 of the NSW Local Government Act.

 

No other consultation is required to approve a licence.

 

Internal Consultation

 

Council’s Operations and Development and Regulation Departments have been consulted on a range of building and operational issues associated with Cavalcade over the past 12 months.

 

Summary

 

Cavalcade of History and Fashion Inc has been operating for the last 13 years from the Babbage Road Roseville premises and has established Ku-ring-gai as their home base since this time. Cavalcade has committed a reasonable financial contribution to Council for the upgrading of the premises, together with a willingness to pay an increase in licence fees.

 

As a community based non-profit organisation, Cavalcade has made its resources available to a wider variety of community groups including students, craftspeople, artists and historical groups. The purpose of Cavalcade of History and Fashion Inc is the continued conservation of the collection for future generations.

 

Recommendation:

 

A.       That Council grant a licence to Cavalcade of History and Fashion Inc for a period of 5 years, with additional 3 x 5 year option renewals.

 

B.       That the new licence also include the additional storage area adjacent to the main Cavalcade room.

 

C.       That the licence commence from 1 March 2014 and expire on 28 February 2019.

 

D.       That the Mayor and General Manager or their delegate be authorised to execute the necessary documentation.

 

E.       That Council authorise the affixing of the Common Seal of Council to the Lease Agreement.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael New

Property Officer Recreational Facilties

 

 

 

 

Mark Taylor

Manager Community & Recreation Services

 

 

 

 

Janice Bevan

Director Community

 

 

 

  


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 4 February 2014

GB.2 / 83

 

 

Item GB.2

S07471

 

23 January 2014

 

 

Lifeline Harbour to Hawkesbury Inc - Renewal of Occupation Lease

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

purpose of report:

For Council to consider granting a 2 year lease to Lifeline Harbour to Hawkesbury Inc for continued occupation at 4 Park Avenue Gordon.

 

 

background:

Lifeline Harbour to Hawkesbury Inc has been operating at the Gordon location since 1991. It is a not-for-profit organisation and operates a 24-hour telephone counselling service and face to face counselling for people in need including suicide prevention.

 

 

comments:

Lifeline has complied with the terms and conditions of the previous lease and has requested a renewal of their lease with Council for a further term.

 

 

recommendation:

That Council grant a new lease to Lifeline Harbour to Hawkesbury Inc expiring on 31 January 2016.

 

 

 


  

Purpose of Report

 

For Council to consider granting a 2 year lease to Lifeline Harbour to Hawkesbury Inc for continued occupation at 4 Park Avenue Gordon.

 

Background

 

Lifeline Harbour to Hawkesbury Inc (Lifeline) has been operating for over 22 years at the current location in Gordon. It is a not-for-profit community based organisation operating a 24-hour telephone counselling service and face to face counselling.

 

The lease has expired and is currently holding over on a month to month basis. Council has been in discussions with Lifeline over the last 18 months regarding the renewal of the lease in Park Avenue, Gordon.

 

Comments

 

Lifeline Harbour to Hawkesbury Inc has complied with the terms and conditions of the previous lease and has requested a renewal of their lease with Council for a further term.

 

The granting of a 2 year lease will allow Lifeline certainty to continue its operations throughout 2014 and 2015 at this current location.

 

The Lifeline building is next door to the Gordon Community Preschool. As the Preschool was granted a 2 year lease in late 2013, it is also recommended that Lifeline be granted a lease for the same term expiring on 31 January 2016.

 

integrated planning and reporting

 

Community, People and Culture

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

An equitable and inclusive community that cares and

provides for its members.

 

Volunteers are valued,

recognised and supported in providing services to the community.

Council’s policies, programs and advocacy address the social and health needs of all age groups, reduce disadvantage and address

gaps in service provision.

Facilitate new opportunities for volunteering by the community to achieve community goals.

Provide up to date demographic profile of the community.

 

Governance Matters

 

4 Park Avenue or Lot 11 DP 852087 is classified as Community Land, and as such, a 28 days public notification of the proposed lease is required as per section 47 of the NSW Local Government Act.

 

It is zoned R4 High Density Residential and is coved by Ku-ring-gai Development Control Plan (Town Centres) 2010.

 

The building facility is covered under the Community Halls and Meeting Rooms Plan of Management (adopted 25 June 2013). Under the Plan, Council is permitted by resolution to enter into lease and licence agreements with relevant authorities, organisations, individuals or companies.

 

The current and proposed licence also complies with Council’s Policy for Management of Community and Recreation Land and Facilities .

 

Risk Management

 

Lifeline will indemnify Council by undertaking contents insurance as well as $20 million Public Liability Insurance. Evidence of currency is to be supplied annually to Council.

 

Lifeline has a record over the last 22 years of its occupation in meeting its full responsibilities as a lessee and has complied with the conditions of previous licensing arrangements.

 

Financial Considerations

 

The current rental payable by Lifeline Harbour to Hawkesbury Inc. is $5,701.65 per annum (incl GST).

 

The rental for the 2 year term after rebate will be:

 

Year 1: $5986 pa (incl GST)

 

Year 2: $6,286 pa (incl GST)

 

The above fees include a 90% rental rebate in accordance with Council’s current Policy for Management of Community and Recreation Land and Facilities.

 

Additionally, in accordance with Council’s Policy for Management of Community and Recreation

Land and Facilities, Lifeline is obliged to pay Council’s legal costs incurred associated with the preparation of the lease.

 

Social Considerations

 

Lifeline has over 350 staff and volunteers who provide 24-hour telephone counselling and a range of services including:

 

·     Face-to-Face counselling

·     Gambling Counselling

·     Suicide prevention programs

·     Suicide Bereavement Support Group

·     Men's Anger Management Course

·     Partners in Depression Group

·     Emergency relief (Hornsby & Ku-ring-gai residents)

·     Support Line

·     Community Aid

 

Lifeline also operates telephone counsellor training courses covering a variety of communication and counselling skills, with both theoretical and experiential components.

 

Lifeline offers counselling for people coping with a range of problems including suicide, grief and loss, relationship or family breakdown, depression, financial struggles, anger or violence, problem gambling, and loneliness.

 

Environmental Considerations

 

There are no environmental considerations associated with this report.

 

Community Consultation

 

As the site is classified as Community Land a 28 day public notification period is required as per the requirements under section 47 of the NSW Local Government Act.

 

No other consultation is required to approve a lease.

 

Internal Consultation

 

Council’s Operations and Strategy Departments have been consulted on a range of building and planning issues associated with Lifeline.

 

Summary

 

Lifeline Harbour to Hawkesbury Inc has been operating for over 22 years, and is a not-for-profit community based organisation carrying out essential counselling services for the Ku-ring-gai community. Lifeline has requested a new lease until 31 January 2016 to provide certainty with its operations and staffing over the next 2 years.

 

Recommendation:

 

A.       That Council grant a lease to Gordon Community Preschool for a period of 2 years.

 

B.       That the Mayor and General Manager or their delegate be authorised to execute the necessary documentation.

 

C.       That Council authorise the affixing of the Common Seal of Council to the Lease Agreement.

 

 

 

 

Michael New

Property Officer Recreational Facilties

 

 

Mark Taylor

Manager Community & Recreation Services

 

 

 

 

Janice Bevan

Director Community

 

 

 

  


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 4 February 2014

GB.3 / 87

 

 

Item GB.3

S05273

 

12 December 2013

 

 

Investment Report as at 30 November 2013

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

purpose of report:

To present Council’s investment portfolio performance for November 2013.

 

 

background:

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

 

 

comments:

The net return on investments for the financial year ended November 2013 was $1,686,000 against a revised budget of $1,686,000.

 

 

recommendation:

That the summary of investments performance for November 2013 be received and noted; and that the Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer be noted and report adopted.

 

 

 


  

Purpose of Report

 

To present Council’s investment portfolio performance for November 2013.

 

Background

 

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

 

Comments

 

Investment Portfolio Performance Snapshot

 

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

 

 

          

 

 

Cumulative Investment Return against Revised Budget

 

The net return on investments for the financial year ended November 2013 was $1,686,000 in line with the revised year to date budget. It is expected to achieve the forecasted yearly budget of $3,779,100 by financial year end. The total return on investments (interest and net capital gain) for the month of November is provided below.

 

 

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

 

       

 

 

Cash Flow  and Investment Movements

 

Council’s total cash & investment portfolio at the end of November 2013 is $96,121,000, an increase of $5,218,000 from the opening balance of $90,903,000 on 1 July 2013.

 

The net cash inflow for the month was $1,901,000 mainly due to second instalment of rates income.

 

One investment matured during the month. There were no new investments made in November 2013. Table 1 below provides detailed movement of the investment by institution name, investment rating and interest rate.

 

Table 1 – Investment Movements - November 2013

 

 

Investment Performance against Industry Benchmarks

 

Overall during the month of November the investments performance was well above industry benchmark. The benchmark is specific to the type of investment and details are provided below.

 

 

Ø UBS Bank Bill Index is used for all Council’s Investments

 

A comparison of the portfolio returns against the investment benchmark is provided in Table 2 below.

 

Table 2 - Investments Performance against Industry Benchmark

 

 

Table 3 below provides a summary of all investments by type and performance during the month.

Attachment A1 provides definitions in relation to different types of investments.

 

Table 3 - Investments Portfolio Summary

 

            

  ** Refer to Risk Management section for commentary on these investments

 

 

Investment by Credit rating and Maturity Profile

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

integrated planning and reporting

 

Leadership & Governance

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

L2.1 Council rigorously manages its financial

resources and assets to maximise delivery of

services

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

Continue to analyse opportunities to expand the revenue base of Council

 

 

Governance Matters

 

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

 

A revised Investment Policy was adopted by Council on 10 December 2013.

 

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

 

(1)      The responsible accounting officer of a council:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Risk Management

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Council has two “Grandfathered” investments in structured products that were previously entered into in accordance with The Ministerial Investment Order at the time. The Ministerial Investment Order no longer allows investment in these products. These investments are: 

 

Maple Hill – HSBC Bank

 

Maple Hill, with a face value of $3,000,000, is invested by Council on a “held to maturity” basis being December 2014. This CDO has incurred six previous credit events by the underlying securities and can withstand a further five credit events before principal loss is incurred. There are no distressed securities now and independent advice is that the CDO is at low risk of not recovering the full principal. The investment has not operated outside of its terms and conditions, it continues to fully meet interest payments as and when they fall due and there has not been a reduction in the coupon rate. While Council intends to hold this investment to maturity, the market value at 30 November 2013 was quoted by HSBC at $2,933,000.

 

CPDO PP – Royal Bank of Scotland

 

This Constant Proportion Debt Obligations Principal Protected (CPDO PP), with a face value of $6,000,000, is invested by Council on a “held to maturity” basis being September 2016. This CPDO is capital protected at maturity date by Royal Bank of Scotland. Since December 2011 it ceased to pay interest, due to a decrease in the credit indices it was linked to, creating an unwind event. The investment now takes the form of a zero coupon senior bank bond with a value of $6M. While Council intends to hold this investment to maturity, the market value at 30 November 2013 was quoted by RBS Morgan at $5,347,000.

 

 

Financial Considerations

 

The revised budget for interest on investments for the financial year 2013/2014 is $3,779,100. Of this amount approximately $2,671,200 is restricted for the benefit of future expenditure relating to developers’ contributions, $361,200 transferred to the internally restricted Infrastructure & Facility Reserve, and the remainder of $746,700 is available for operations.

 

Social Considerations

 

Not applicable.

 

Environmental Considerations

 

Not applicable.

 

Community Consultation

 

None undertaken or required.

 

Internal Consultation

 

None undertaken or required.

 

Certification - Responsible Accounting Officer

 

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

 

Summary

 

As at 30 November 2013:

 

 

Ø Council’s total cash and investment portfolio is $96,121,000, which is an increase of $5,218,000 compared to the opening balance of $90,903,000 at 1 July 2013.

 

Ø Council’s net return on investments for the year to November 2013 was $1,686,000 against a revised budget of $1,686,000.

 

Recommendation:

 

A.       That the summary of investments and performance for November 2013 be received and noted.

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

Tony Ly

Financial Accounting Officer

 

 

 

Angela Apostol

Manager Finance

 

 

 

 

David Marshall

Director Corporate

 

 

 

Attachments:

A1View

Investments definitions specific to Council’s investment portfolio

 

2014/019897

  


APPENDIX No: 1 - Investments definitions specific to Council’s investment portfolio

 

Item No: GB.3

 


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 4 February 2014

GB.4 / 96

 

 

Item GB.4

S05273

 

9 January 2014

 

 

Investment Report as at 31 December 2013

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

purpose of report:

To present Council’s investment portfolio performance for December 2013.

 

 

background:

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

 

 

comments:

The net return on investments for the financial year ended December 2013 was $2,021,000 against a revised budget of $2,021,000.

 

 

recommendation:

That the summary of investments performance for December 2013 be received and noted; and that the Certificate of the Responsible Accounting Officer be noted and report adopted.

 

 

 


  

Purpose of Report

 

To present Council’s investment portfolio performance for December 2013.

 

Background

 

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

 

Comments

 

Investment Portfolio Performance Snapshot

 

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

 

          

 

 

Cumulative Investment Return against Revised Budget

 

The net return on investments for the financial year ended December 2013 was $2,021,000 in line with the revised year to date budget. It is expected to achieve the forecasted yearly budget of $3,779,100 by financial year end. The total return on investments (interest and net capital gain) for the month of December is provided below.

 

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

 

        

 

 

 

Cash Flow  and Investment Movements

 

Council’s total cash & investment portfolio at the end of December 2013 is $92,870,000, an increase of $1,967,000 from the opening balance of $90,903,000 on 1 July 2013.

 

The net cash outflow for the month was $3,251,000 mainly due to creditor payments.

 

Three investments matured during the month, and two new investments were made in December 2013. Table 1 below provides detailed movements of the investment by institution name, investment rating and interest rate.

 

 

Table 1 – Investment Movements - December 2013

 

 

 

 

 

 

Investment Performance against Industry Benchmarks

 

Overall during the month of December the investments performance was well above industry benchmark. The benchmark is specific to the type of investment and details are provided below.

 

Ø UBS Bank Bill Index is used for all Council’s investments

 

A comparison of the portfolio returns against investment benchmark is provided in Table 2 below.

 

Table 2 - Investments Performance against Industry Benchmarks

 

 

Table 3 below provides a summary of all investments by type and performance during the month.

Attachment A1 provides definitions in relation to different types of investments.

 

Table 3 - Investments Portfolio Summary

 

            

 *   Weighted average returns

 ** Refer to Risk Management section for commentary on these investments

 

 

Investment by Credit rating and Maturity Profile

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

integrated planning and reporting

 

Leadership & Governance

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

L2.1 Council rigorously manages its financial

resources and assets to maximise delivery of

services

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

Continue to analyse opportunities to expand the revenue base of Council

 

 

Governance Matters

 

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

 

A revised Investment Policy was adopted by Council on 10 December 2013.

 

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

 

(1)      The responsible accounting officer of a council:

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Risk Management

 

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

 

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

 

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

 

Council has two “Grandfathered” investments in structured products that were previously entered into in accordance with The Ministerial Investment Order at the time. The Ministerial Investment Order no longer allows investment in these products. These investments are: 

 

Maple Hill – HSBC Bank

 

Maple Hill, with a face value of $3,000,000, is invested by Council on a “held to maturity” basis being December 2014. This CDO has incurred six previous credit events by the underlying securities and can withstand a further five credit events before principal loss is incurred. There are no distressed securities now and independent advice is that the CDO is at low risk of not recovering the full principal. The investment has not operated outside of its terms and conditions, it continues to fully meet interest payments as and when they fall due and there has not been a reduction in the coupon rate. While Council intends to hold this investment to maturity, the market value at 31 December 2013 was quoted by HSBC at $2,942,000.

 

CPDO PP – Royal Bank of Scotland

 

This Constant Proportion Debt Obligations Principal Protected (CPDO PP), with a face value of $6,000,000, is invested by Council on a “held to maturity” basis being September 2016. This CPDO is capital protected at maturity date by Royal Bank of Scotland. Since December 2011 it ceased to pay interest, due to a decrease in the credit indices it was linked to, creating an unwind event. The investment now takes the form of a zero coupon senior bank bond with a value of $6M. While Council intends to hold this investment to maturity, the market value at 31 December 2013 was quoted by RBS Morgan at $5,365,000.

 

Financial Considerations

 

The revised budget for interest on investments for the financial year 2013/2014 is $3,779,100. Of this amount approximately $2,671,200 is restricted for the benefit of future expenditure relating to developers’ contributions, $361,200 transferred to the internally restricted Infrastructure & Facility Reserve, and the remainder of $746,700 is available for operations.

 

Social Considerations

 

Not applicable.

 

Environmental Considerations

 

Not applicable.

 

Community Consultation

 

None undertaken or required.

 

Internal Consultation

 

None undertaken or required.

 

Certification - Responsible Accounting Officer

 

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

 

Summary

 

As at 31 December 2013:

 

 

Ø Council’s total cash and investment portfolio is $92,870,000, which is an increase of $1,967,000 compared to the opening balance of $90,903,000 at 1 July 2013.

 

Ø Council’s net return on investments for the year to December 2013 was $2,021,000 against a revised budget of $2,021,000.

 

Recommendation:

 

A.       That the summary of investments and performance for December 2013 be received and noted.

 

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

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tony Ly

Financial Accounting Officer

 

 

 

 

Angela Apostol

Manager Finance

 

 

 

 

David Marshall

Director Corporate

 

 

 

Attachments:

A1View

Investments definitions specific to Council’s investment portfolio

 

2013/213934

  


APPENDIX No: 1 - Investments definitions specific to Council’s investment portfolio

 

Item No: GB.4

 


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 4 February 2014

GB.5 / 105

 

 

Item GB.5

CY00438/2

 

17 January 2014

 

 

Amendment to Council Meeting Cycle -
March 2014

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

purpose of report:

To consider amending the adopted Council meeting cycle to avoid the meeting clashing with the Local Government NSW Tourism Conference being held between the
10 – 12 March 2014 in the Hunter Valley.

 

 

background:

Council adopted a meeting cycle for 2014 at the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on the 26 November 2013. The adopted meeting schedule has an Ordinary Meeting of Council held on Tuesday, 11 March 2014.

 

 

comments:

It is proposed that Council should give consideration to the cancellation of the Ordinary Meeting of Council scheduled for Tuesday, 11 March 2014 and instead hold the meeting on Tuesday, 18 March 2014.

 

 

recommendation:

That Council amend its adopted meeting cycle so that the Ordinary Meeting of Council scheduled for Tuesday, 11 March 2014 be rescheduled to Tuesday, 18 March 2014 and that appropriate notice be given to members of the public.

 

 

 


  

Purpose of Report

 

To consider amending the adopted Council meeting cycle to avoid the meeting clashing with the Local Government NSW Tourism Conference being held between the 10 – 12 March 2014 in the Hunter Valley.

 

Background

 

Council adopted a meeting cycle for 2014 at the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on the 26 November 2013. The adopted meeting schedule has an Ordinary Meeting of Council held on Tuesday, 11 March 2014. Council has now been advised that the Local Government NSW Tourism Conference will be held between 10 – 12 March 2014. Both the Mayor and Deputy Mayor will be in attendance at the conference.

 

Comments

 

It is proposed that Council should give consideration to the cancellation of the Ordinary Meeting of Council scheduled for Tuesday, 11 March 2014 and instead hold the meeting on Tuesday, 18 March 2014 to avoid the clash of dates.

 

integrated planning and reporting

 

Leadership and Governance

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

Ensure effective and efficient conduct of Council and committee meetings for the benefit of councillors and the community.

 

Council's Governance framework is developed to ensure probity, transparency and the principles of sustainability are integrated and applied into our policies, plans, guidelines and decision-making processes.

 

Business Papers and associated Minutes are published in an accurate and timely manner for public scrutiny and encourage community participation.

 

 

 

Governance Matters

 

Section 9 of the Local Government Act 1993 requires Council to give notice to the public of times and places of its meetings. Section 365 of the Local Government Act 1993 requires Council to hold at least ten (10) meetings each year, each time in a different month.

 

The proposed amendment to Council’s adopted meeting cycle as identified in the recommendation of this report will not affect Council’s compliance with these sections of the Act.

 

Risk Management

 

There are no risk management considerations associated with the recommendation in this report.

 

 

Financial Considerations

 

There are no financial considerations associated with the recommendation in this report.

 

Social Considerations

 

There are no social considerations associated with the recommendation in this report.

 

Environmental Considerations

 

There are no environmental considerations associated with the recommendation in this report.

 

Community Consultation

 

None undertaken or required.

 

Internal Consultation

 

None undertaken or required.

 

Summary

 

Council adopted a meeting cycle for 2014 at the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on the 26 November 2013. The adopted meeting schedule has an Ordinary Meeting of Council held on Tuesday, 11 March 2014. Council has now been advised that the Local Government NSW Tourism Conference will be held between 10 – 12 March 2014 in the Hunter Valley. Both the Mayor and Deputy Mayor will be in attendance at the conference.

 

It is proposed that Council should give consideration to the cancellation of the Ordinary Meeting of Council scheduled for Tuesday, 11 March 2014 and instead hold the meeting on Tuesday, 18 March 2014 to avoid the clash of dates.

 

Recommendation:

 

A.       That Council amend its adopted meeting cycle so that the Ordinary Meeting of Council scheduled for Tuesday, 11 March 2014 be rescheduled to Tuesday, 18 March 2014.

 

B.       That appropriate notice be given to members of the public.

 

 

 

 

 

Matt Ryan

Manager Records & Governance

 

 

 

David Marshall

Director Corporate

 

 

  


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 4 February 2014

GB.6 / 108

 

 

Item GB.6

S02815

 

6 December 2013

 

 

Australian Local Government Women's Association (NSW) 60th Annual Conference - March 2014

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

purpose of report:

To advise Councillors of the Australian Local Government Women’s Association (NSW) Annual Conference to be held at Broken Hill between 20 – 22 March 2014.

 

 

background:

The theme for the conference is “Embracing Change –
Be the Driver not the Passenger”.

 

 

comments:

The conference will provide a platform for Councillors and staff to discuss current and emerging issues facing women in local government.

 

 

recommendation:

That any Councillors interested in attending the Australian Local Government Women’s Association (NSW) Annual Conference advise the General Manager by Friday,
7 February 2014.

 

 

 


  

Purpose of Report

 

To advise Councillors of the Australian Local Government Women’s Association (NSW) Annual Conference to be held at Broken Hill between 20 – 22 March 2014. 

 

Background

 

The theme for the conference is “Embracing Change – Be the Driver not the Passenger”. The program and registration details are attached

 

Comments

 

The annual ALGWA conference provides a platform for councillors and staff to gather to discuss current and emerging issues facing women in local government. A number of presenters have been scheduled to address the conference. Each presenter will bring to the conference stories of how they have made a difference in the community that they live in.

 

integrated planning and reporting

 

Leadership and Governance

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

 

Council leads the community by advocating, influencing and participating in policy development to the benefit of the local area

 

Council actively engages with stakeholders to inform the development of Council’s strategies and plans as appropriate

 

Pursue opportunities to contribute to policy development affecting Ku-ring-gai at state and regional levels

 

Governance Matters

 

The Policy on Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors provides for Council to meet the reasonable costs of Councillors attending conferences authorised by resolution of Council.

 

Risk Management

 

There are no risk management considerations associated with this report.

 

Financial Considerations

 

The cost of attending the ALGWA Conference is:

 

Early Bird ALGWA Member rate - $865 per delegate. Travel and accommodation costs will be additional due to the location of the conference.

 

Attendance is provided for in the Councillor’s conference budget in accordance with the Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors Policy.

 

Council has an annual budget of $34,200 for Councillor’s attendance at conferences with $19,279 remaining in the 2013/2014 financial year.

 

Social Considerations

 

There are no social considerations associated with the recommendation in this report.

 

Environmental Considerations

 

There are no environmental considerations associated with the recommendation in this report.

 

Community Consultation

 

None undertaken or required.

 

Internal Consultation

 

None undertaken or required.

 

Summary

 

The annual ALGWA Conference is being held in Broken Hill between the 20 – 22 March 2014. The theme for the conference is “Embracing change – be the driver not the passenger”.

 

Attendance is provided for in the Councillor’s conference budget in accordance with the Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors Policy.

 

Council has an annual budget of $34,200 for Councillor’s attendance at conferences with $19,279 remaining in the 2013/2014 financial year.

 

That Council determine if it wishes to send delegates to the 2014 Australian Local Government Women’s Association (NSW) Annual Conference.

 

Recommendation:

 

That any Councillors interested in attending the Australian Local Government Women’s Association (NSW) Annual Conference advise the General Manager by Friday, 7 February 2014.

 

 

 

 

Matt Ryan

Manager Records & Governance

 

 

David Marshall

Director Corporate

 

 

Attachments:

A1View

2014 ALGWA Annual Conference - Embracing Change

 

2014/017432

  


APPENDIX No: 1 - 2014 ALGWA Annual Conference - Embracing Change

 

Item No: GB.6

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 4 February 2014

GB.7 / 124

 

 

Item GB.7

CY00076/6

 

22 January 2014

 

 

Smart Urban Futures Conference

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

purpose of report:

To advise Council of the Smart Urban Futures Conference.

 

 

background:

The conference is to be held in Melbourne from Wednesday, 26 March to Thursday, 27 March, 2014. The conference is being convened by the Municipal Association of Victoria and Victoria Walks.

 

 

comments:

The conference will examine how to design communities to meet the challenges of the 21st century, and will feature a range of significant local and international case studies and world-class presenters.

 

 

recommendation:

That all interested Councillors advise the General Manager of their interest in attending the Smart Urban Futures Conference by Friday, 7 February 2014.

 

 

 


  

Purpose of Report

 

To advise Council of the Smart Urban Futures Conference. 

 

Background

 

The conference is to be held in Melbourne from Wednesday, 26 March to Thursday, 27 March, 2014. The conference is being convened by the Municipal Association of Victoria and Victoria Walks.

 

Comments

 

The conference will examine how to design communities to meet the challenges of the 21st century, and will feature a range of significant local and international case studies and world-class presenters.

 

integrated planning and reporting

 

Leadership and Governance

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

 

Council leads the community by advocating, influencing and participating in policy development to the benefit of the local area

 

Council actively engages with stakeholders to inform the development of Council’s strategies and plans as appropriate

 

Pursue opportunities to contribute to policy development affecting Ku-ring-gai at state and regional levels

 

Governance Matters

 

The Policy of Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors provides for Council to meet the reasonable costs of Councillors attending conferences authorised by resolution of Council.

 

Risk Management

 

There are no risk management considerations associated with the recommendation in this report.

 

Financial Considerations

 

The cost of attending the conference is $550 (including GST).

 

Travel costs will be additional as airfares and accommodation costs will be required due to the location of the conference.

 

Attendance is provided for in the Councillor’s conference budget in accordance with the Policy on the Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors.

 

Council has an annual budget of $34,200 for Councillor’s attendance at conferences with $19,279 remaining in the 2013/2014 financial year.

 

Social Considerations

 

There are no social considerations associated with the recommendation in this report.

 

Environmental Considerations

 

There are no environmental considerations associated with the recommendation in this report.

 

Community Consultation

 

None undertaken or required.

 

Internal Consultation

 

None undertaken or required.

 

Summary

 

The conference is to be held in Melbourne from Wednesday, 26 March to Thursday, 27 March, 2014. The conference is being convened by Municipal Association of Victoria and Victoria Walks.

 

The conference will examine how to design communities to meet the challenges of the 21st century, and will feature a range of significant local and international case studies and world-class presenters.

 

Attendance is provided for in the Councillor’s conference/training budget in accordance with the Policy on the Payment of Expenses and Provision of Facilities to Councillors.

 

Council has an annual budget of $34,200 for Councillor’s attendance at conferences with $19,279 remaining in the 2013/2014 financial year.

 

Recommendation:

 

That all interested Councillors advise the General Manager of their interest in attending the Smart Urban Futures Conference by Friday, 7 February 2014.

 

 

 

 

 

Matt Ryan

Manager Records & Governance

 

 

 

Attachments:

A1View

Smart Urban Futures Conference

 

2014/017361

  


APPENDIX No: 1 - Smart Urban Futures Conference

 

Item No: GB.7

 


 


 


 


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 4 February 2014

GB.8 / 131

 

 

Item GB.8

DA0139/13

 

28 November 2013

 

 

development application

 

 

Summary Sheet

 

Report title:

17 to 25 Boundary Street, Roseville - Demolition of Existing Dwellings and Construction of Two Residential Flat Buildings containing 58 Units and Associated Works

ITEM/AGENDA NO:

GB.8

 

Application No:

DA0139/13

Property Details:

17, 19, 21, 23, 25 Boundary Street, Roseville

Lot & DP No:     Lot 1 DP315280, Lot D DP322051, Lot C

                           DP322051, Lots 9 and 10 DP1143965, Lot 11 DP1143956 and Lot 1 DP943894

Site area (m2):    3,488m2

Zoning:               R4 – High Density Residential

Ward:

Roseville

Proposal/Purpose:

To determine Development Application No. 0139/13 for the demolition of the existing dwellings and construction of two residential flat buildings containing 58 units and associated works.

Type of Consent:

Local

Applicant:

Develotek Roseville Pty Ltd

Owner:

Mrs Denise Voysey, Mr Sung Don Moon, Mrs Eun Ju Kim Moon, Doctor Teck Huah Tang, Mr Paul Ernest Jonas, Mrs Jennifer Karen Jonas, Mr Donald Pearson, Mrs H M Pearson and NSW Roads and Maritime Services (owners of land reserved for road widening)

Date Lodged:

7 May 2013

Recommendation:

Approval.

 


 

  

Purpose of Report

 

To determine Development Application No. 0139/13, which proposes the demolition of existing dwellings and the construction of two residential flat buildings containing 58 dwellings, basement parking and associated landscape works.

 

Executive Summary

 

Issues:

Urban design,  apartment size

Submissions:

One (1) submission received

Land and Environment Court:

N/A

Recommendation:

Approval

 

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

 

History

 

Site

 

The site has no history relevant to this application.

 

Pre-DA

 

No Pre-DA consultation was undertaken with Council prior to the lodgement of this Development Application.

 

Current DA History

 

 

7 May 2013

Application lodged.

 

 

17 May 2013

The application was notified to neighbouring property owners for a period of 30 days. One submission was received.

 

16 August 2013

 

 

A letter was sent to the applicant advising of outstanding issues relating to:

 

-        plan information

-        balcony sizes

-        urban design

-        clothes drying area

-        traffic impacts

-        stormwater management design

-        geo-technical information

-        deep soil landscaping

-        tree impacts

 

 

4 November 2013

Amended plans and additional information was submitted.

 

 

26 November 2013

Council officers advise the applicant of remaining outstanding issues relating to:

 

-      deep soil landscaping

-      plan inconsistencies

-      tree impacts

-      BASIX information

 

 

29 November 2013

Amended plans and additional information was submitted.

 

The Site

 

Site description

 

The five properties that comprise the site encompasses seven (7) allotments, located on the north-western side of Boundary Street, approximately 370 metres south-east of the Roseville local centre and railway station. The site details are as follows:

 

-        17 Boundary Street, Lot 1 DP315280 and Lot D DP322051: The site is an irregular shaped allotment with a frontage to Boundary Street containing a single storey brick dwelling and swimming pool.

-        19 Boundary Street, Lot C DP322051: The site is a rectangular shaped allotment with a frontage to Boundary Street containing a single storey brick dwelling and detached garage.

-        21 Boundary Street, Lots 9 and 10 DP1143965: The site is a rectangular shaped allotment with a frontage to Boundary Street containing a single storey dwelling and detached garage. 

-        23 Boundary Street, Lot 11 DP1143956: The site is a rectangular shaped allotment with a frontage to Boundary Street containing a single storey dwelling and detached garage.

-        25 Boundary Street, Lot 1 DP943894:  The site is a rectangular shaped allotment with a frontage to Boundary Street containing a single storey dwelling and detached greenhouse. 

 

The site is subject to a land reservation for the purpose of widening a Classified Road (Boundary Street) as identified by the maps prepared under Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan (Local Centres) 2012. The reserved area is zoned ‘SP2 – Infrastructure – Classified Road’. The reserved area aligns the Boundary Street frontage of the site and widens from approximately 1.9 metres to 7.3 metres in an east-west direction.

 

The consolidated area of the site is 3,488m2 (exclusive of the abovementioned land reservation) with an approximate frontage of 91 metres to Boundary Street. The average depth of the site is approximately 37 metres. The site slopes away from the rear boundary towards the Boundary Street frontage. The site supports several trees that are spread across the property.

 

Surrounding development

 

Properties to the east, north and west are all zoned ‘R4 – High Density Residential’. The adjoining property to the east (No. 27-31 Boundary Street) contains a recently constructed five storey residential flat development. DA0053/12 for a residential flat development was recently approved on the adjoining property to the west(No. 5-15 Boundary Street).

 

The adjoining northern half of the street block is currently occupied by single, detached dwellings fronting Victoria Street. DA0371/13 was recently lodged (after the lodgement of the subject application) for the demolition of these dwellings (1-31 Victoria Street) and the construction of several residential flat buildings containing 220 units. This application remains under assessment.

Willoughby Local Government Area commences on the opposite side of Boundary Street, to the south of the site. The properties located on this side of Boundary Street are predominantly occupied by single, detached dwellings.  

 

The Proposal

 

The application proposes the demolition of existing dwellings and the construction of two residential flat buildings containing 58 dwellings, basement parking and associated landscape works. The details of the proposed development are as follows:

-        16 x 1 bedroom dwellings

-        36 x 2 bedroom dwellings

-        6 x 3 bedroom dwellings 

 

The application proposes a basement level that connects the two buildings containing 77 car parking spaces, motorcycle and bicycle parking spaces, general storage areas, waste storage areas, plant rooms and stormwater storage tanks distributed across two levels and a mezzanine area. Building 1 (to the west of the site) contains 31 units over five levels. Building 2 (to the east of the site) contains 27 units over 5 levels.

 

The application also proposes various landscaping works, including accessible pathways, open lawn areas, planter beds and a masonry pier with timber slat fence aligning the boundary street frontage of the site. This fence aligns with the boundary of the land reserved for road widening, not the current frontage of the site to Boundary Street.  A single driveway for vehicular access to and from the site is to be provided at the eastern end of the property. This driveway will cross the land reserved for road widening.

 

 

Consultation

 

Community

 

In accordance with the requirements of Part 5, Volume 3 of the Ku-ring-gai Local Centres Development Control Plan, owners of surrounding properties were given notice of the application. In response, Council received a submission from the following:

 

1.       Dr J.H. Drabble – 18 Boundary Street, Roseville

 

The submission raised the following issues:

 

Traffic impacts upon Boundary Street

 

The application has been referred to the NSW Roads and Maritime Services who are satisfied that the proposed development will not unduly impact upon the movement of vehicles along Boundary Street, subject to conditions (addressed in further detail, below).

 

Amended plans received 4 November 2013 and 29 November 2013

 

The amended plans did not alter the proposal in a way that would likely result in a greater environmental impact than the original scheme. Therefore, as per the provisions of Part 5, Volume 3 of the Ku-ring-gai Local Centres Development Control Plan, notification was not required.

 

Within Council

 

Urban Design

 

Council's Urban Design Consultant undertook an assessment of the original proposal against the design quality principles of SEPP 65 (Design Quality of Residential Flat Development) and recommended that the following issues be addressed:

 

·        integration of the upper levels into the overall building design

·        inadequate articulation due to excessive visual bulk, an absence of delineation between horizontal and vertical elements and hidden entrances

·        simplify the plans and sections

·        visual dominance of balconies

·        incoherent use of materials and finishes

·        apartment layouts

·        improve amenity and functionality to lift lobbies

·        absence of mailbox details

 

Council’s Urban Design Consultant has provided the following comments on the amendments that have been made to the application to address these issues:

 

·        integration of the upper levels into the overall building design

 

The straightening of the parapet and the introduction of the horizontal header course assists in creating a top to the four lower levels of both buildings. This improves the relationship between the upper level and the lower levels by indicating a ‘top’ to the lower levels. A top implies that the buildings are meant to terminate at that height and they do not look as if they can extend upwards indefinitely.

 

·        inadequate articulation due to excessive visual bulk, an absence of delineation between horizontal and vertical elements and hidden entrances

 

The introduction of the full height glazing to the living room walls in Units 1G.01; 11.01; 12.01;13.01 on the re-entrant western wall, the oblique views of the building from Boundary Street will be improved. .

 

·       simplify the plans and sections

 

There has only been one minor change to the narrow vertical elements that form the elevations of the buildings, however the introduction of the horizontal string courses at the head and sill of windows in the vertical brickwork elements and the straightened parapet and the brick edge detail at the parapet level and the full height glazing in the walls to the balconies rather than the ‘hole in the wall’ windows has strengthened the horizontality of the building and lessened the impact of the numerous vertical elements.

 

·        visual dominance of balconies

 

Although the balconies have not been reorganised, the additional brick string courses; the parapet edge on the 4th level, the use of full height glazing to the openings in the walls facing the balconies and the extension of the sandstone walls at the base have improved the balance of horizontal and vertical elements.

 

·        incoherent use of materials and finishes

 

Full height glazing and panels for the windows and doors facing the five balconies have been introduced.

 

Horizontal string courses that align in with the heads and sills of the windows have been introduced in the two vertical brickwork elements. 

 

Straightening of the parapet line has been undertaken and an edge brickwork course has been incorporated into the parapet.

 

The sandstone courtyard walls on the southern elevation have been extended.

 

·        apartment layouts

 

Furniture layouts for the living areas are now shown on the drawings.

 

Minor changes have been made to the north-western corner of Building 2 in plan by introducing a re-entrant corner to accommodate a tree. This has resulted in a projecting bedroom on the westerly elevation in Units 2G.02; 11.02; 12:02; 13.02

 

Minor variations to the configuration of the planters on northern side and roof area on the western end of Building 2 have been made.

 

Small pergolas have been introduced on the northern side in to Units 14.01; 1402; 14.03 Building 1 and Units 24.01; 24.02 + 24.03 in Building 2.

 

·        improve amenity and functionality to lift lobbies

 

The urban design report argues that light to the lobbies is adequate. It does not address the fact that the entrance and lobby to Building 2 is set very deeply within the building so even the easterly lobbies will not receive very much light. The western lobbies still receive none.

 

·        absence of mailbox details

 

The location of mailboxes (adjacent to the street frontage) has been provided. 

 

The issues identified by Council’s Urban Design Consultant have been satisfactorily addressed in the amended proposal. Although some concern remains with regard to natural light to lift lobbies, it is noted that this issue is largely related to the street address of the building being oriented to the south. In this regard, providing light to these areas would require the lobby being set deeply into the building, away from the building entrance. As these areas are only used for a short period of time, this issue is not significant. Additionally, as outlined in further detail below, the proposal is consistent with the design quality principles of SEPP 65.

 

Heritage

 

Council’s Heritage Advisor, commented on the proposal as follows:

 

Heritage status

 

None of the houses on the site are listed as heritage items. The site is not within the vicinity of a HCA in Ku-ring-gai, although the opposite side of Boundary Street is within the North Chatswood Conservation Area which is located in the Willoughby Council area.

 

The site is not within the direct vicinity of a heritage item. Heritage items are located at 3 Hill Street (corner of Boundary Street), 16 Victoria Street and 1 Hill Street (corner of Victoria Street).

 

Heritage Impact Statement (HIS)

 

A HIS prepared by an experienced heritage consultant is included with the application. It contains a relatively good background history of the area prior to its residential subdivision and histories of each of the individual houses proposed for demolition. The assessment of heritage impacts has been prepared in accordance with the guidelines prepared by the NSW Heritage Council.

 

The HIS contains a few errors in that it identifies 5 Victoria Street as a listed heritage item and does not recognise No 16 Victoria Street as a heritage item.  No 5 Victoria Street was an item in the KPSO but was removed with gazettal of the Local Centres LEP in January 2013.  Similarly, No 16 Victoria Street was not a heritage item in the KPSO but was gazetted as a local heritage item in the Local Centres LEP.  No consideration of potential impacts on No 16 Victoria Street has been provided in the applicant’s HIS. 

 

The HIS also notes the National Trust UCA classification that applies to the site. The site was previously rezoned as Residential 2(d3) in LEP 194 which allows a similar scale of development. DCP 55 contains objectives and controls for sites rezoned Residential 2(d3) and the HIS refers to those controls. With gazettal of the Local Centres LEP, those controls have become redundant.  Council has adopted controls and objectives for sites zoned in the Local Centres LEP and I will refer to those controls in this report.

 

The HIS concludes that:

 

“…the proposed development is a reasonable response to the Ku-ring-gai LEP (Local Centres) 2012 requirements and the Council R4 residential zoning of the area for increased urban density.  The development will have a limited and acceptable impact on the identified UCA by the National Trust of Australia, UCA 3 – Roseville East and the surrounding development patterns.  It will only have a minor impact on the North Chatswood Conservation Area located opposite the site in Boundary Street.  This impact has been partially mitigated by the physical separation of the site from the conservation area by Boundary Street’s increasing road widening to become a major arterial road.  These items opposite Boundary Street have a low level of contribution to the wider area of residential development.  The developments visual impact on the heritage significance of other items identified in the vicinity of the site, located on Hill and Victoria Streets, is considered marginal and therefore acceptable.  Appropriate recording of the site and recovery of building materials for responsible re-cycling is appropriate in this context”. 

 

Demolition

 

Despite the individual houses having a degree of local significance to the general area, demolition is acceptable as the sites have been rezoned for larger scale development provided photographic recording is undertaken prior to any works commencing. It is also appropriate that building materials salvaged from demolition are re-used appropriately and conditions are provided (Condition Nos 8 and 49).

 

Development within the Vicinity of a Heritage Item or HCA

 

With reference to Chapter 7.3 and 7.6 of the Local Centres LEP, the development site is not within the immediate vicinity of a heritage item or a HCA in the Ku-ring-gai area. 

 

The closest heritage item is No 16 Victoria Street, located on the northern side of the street. The development site is separated from the heritage item by the roadway and existing residential development on the south side of Victoria Street. In this situation the objectives and controls in the Local Centres DCP have little effect. The proposed development would be seen in the background but it is considered to have minimal heritage impacts. The southern side of Victoria Street is zoned for a similar scale of development and it is likely any future development on those sites may impact on the heritage item at No 16 Victoria Street.

 

The HCA – Area C 36 in the Local Centres LEP includes part of Bancroft Avenue and Lord Street. It is located a considerable distance from the subject site and this development is likely to have minimal impact on it.

 

The proposed development is likely to have some impact on the Chatswood North HCA, located in the Willoughby area. The impacts should be limited to those houses facing directly opposite in Boundary Street.  As noted in the applicant’s HIS, the future upgrading of Boundary Street will change the character to a main arterial road which will to some extent provide a reasonable degree of separation.

 

Conclusions and recommendations

 

The proposal is considered to have minimal impacts on the nearby heritage items and HCAs in the Ku-ring-gai area and is acceptable. 

 

The proposed development will have a low level of impact on the Chatswood North HCA, located on the southern side of Boundary Street. 

 

Archival photographic recording of the houses to be demolished should be undertaken. Appropriate recycling of building materials should also be undertaken.

 

Landscaping

 

Council’s Landscape Assessment Officer, commented on the proposal as follows:

 

Deep soil landscape area

 

The calculation for deep soil is 1744m2 or 50.0% of the site area which complies with the 50% deep soil requirement.

 

Tree removal

 

An Arboricultural Assessment prepared by Tree Talk and dated February 2013 has been submitted with the application. Tree numbers refer to this report. A further assessment of the structural integrity of a broken stub and several smaller dead branches, has been provided.

 

The following abbreviations have been used to describe the size of existing trees: height (H), canopy spread(S), diameter at breast height (DBH), tree protection zone (TPZ) and structural root zone (SRZ).

 

Significant trees to be removed

 

The trees to be removed are either exempt under Council’s Tree Preservation Order or less than 8m in height and are not considered significant. Trees 5, 15 and 16 are located within the road reservation widening on Boundary Street.

 

 

 

 

 

Significant trees to be retained

 

Tree 2/ Melaleuca quinquenervia (Broad Leaved Paperbark): This tree is located at the north-western corner of the site.

 

Tree 8/ Angophora costata (Sydney Red Gum): This tree straddles the northern boundary. Recent filling to the boundary on the adjoining property to the north and a pool filter has been constructed within the structural root zone of the tree. The tree displays signs of dieback and epicormic growth. To preserve the health and condition of this tree, the proposed drying area and associated paving is to be set back a minimum of 6m from the tree as measured from the centre of the trunk (Condition No. 23).

 

Tree 11/ Angophora costata (Sydney Red Gum): This mature tree is located within the northern rear yard. The tree is a locally occurring species and a likely remnant tree. The tree is visible from Boundary Street and is considered of high landscape significance. Council’s mapping indicates that it is likely to be a remnant of an endangered ecological community.

 

The tree is described in the arborist report as having possible structural issues due to internal decay. Further investigation, including an aerial inspection has been undertaken. The tree has been assessed as being able to be retained with some remedial pruning.

 

Tree 14/ Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda): This mature tree is located within the front setback of the development, outside of the future road reservation. The tree is to be retained and protected. The proposed excavation within structural root zone of the following tree will require arborist supervision (Condition No. 60).

 

Impacts on trees within adjoining properties

 

Several trees are located on adjoining property boundaries. The proposal should include consideration of root and canopy impacts. This can be conditioned (Condition No’s 23, 56, 57, 59 and 60). Tree A is a Magnolia x soulangiana (Magnolia), not a Jacaranda as shown.

 

Street trees to be removed

 

A row of existing mature Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) are to be retained in the short term. However, these trees are shown to be removed under the future road widening.

 

Landscape plan

 

The site adjoins the North Chatswood Conservation Area within the Willoughby Local Government Area.

 

The management policy includes the following considerations:

 

Retain the scale, form, massing and detailing of original buildings of heritage

significance and the typical scale, rhythm and character of individual

streetscapes;

 

“Retain landscaped settings by minimising hard surfaces forward of the

building line, locating carparking structures behind the building alignment

where possible, and maintaining the existing patterns of low/semi-transparent

fencing to the street; and

 

Infill development must respect existing patterns of development including the

spacing, rhythm and siting of built forms, the landscaped settings, and the

scale massing, form and materials of the general development.”

 

Except for Tree 14, a mature Jacaranda, the existing plantings within the front setback as well as the street tree plantings will be removed as part of the road widening. The landscape treatment within the front setback of the proposed development will therefore provide the principal landscape buffer to the heritage conservation area. 

 

Front setback

 

The proposed front setback provides tall tree planting of Eucalyptus pilularis (Blackbutt), Eucalyptus saligna (Sydney Blue Gum) and Angophora costata (Sydney Red Gum). Planting along the front setback of Boundary Street, in the vicinity of the heritage conservation area is considered sympathetic to the horticultural style of the buildings on the southern side of Boundary Street. The planting will be a mix of locally occurring native and deciduous canopy trees with an assortment of exotic shrubs. To reduce the bulk of the proposed retaining walls within the front setback additional planting forward of the walls is conditioned (Condition No. 24).

 

Tree replenishment

 

The site should support a minimum 13 tall trees capable of attaining at least 13 metres in height. The proposal provides well in excess of this number.

 

Communal open space

 

The development provides a communal open space of consolidated deep soil landscape area that incorporates the central area between the buildings as well as an area at the north-western corner of the site.  Both areas provide seating, receive satisfactory solar access and provide privacy and acoustic amenity.

 

Screen planting

 

Eastern boundary – Camellia japonica (Japanese Camellia) 4m , Rondoletia amoena (Rondoletia) 3m, Franklinia axillaris (Gordonia) 7H

 

Northern boundary–Camellia japonica (Japanese Camellia) 4m , Rondoletia amoena (Rondoletia) 3m, Magnolia ‘Little Gem’ 3m, Franklinia axillaris (Gordonia) 7H

 

Western boundary – Camellia japonica (Japanese Camellia) 4m , Rondoletia amoena (Rondoletia) 3m, Viburnum sp. (Viburnum) 3m, Franklinia axillaris (Gordonia) 7H

 

The density and mix of planting species is considered to be appropriate for screening purposes.

 

BASIX

 

The BASIX Certificate is satisfactory.

 

Stormwater plan

 

The proposed drainage swale along the site boundaries is likely to have adverse impacts on existing trees and vegetation as well as proposed landscape treatment proposed within the side setbacks as part of the development. To preserve existing trees, drainage of landscape areas to building surrounds is to be localised and connected to stormwater lines running adjacent to the building (Condition No. 25).

 

Engineering

Council’s Development Engineer, commented on the proposal as follows:

Water management

 

Amended plans have been received, together with the models requested. 

 

The rainwater tanks have now been sized based on 1,000 litres per unit, a total of 68 cubic metres. Re-use for irrigation and car washing is indicated.  The water balance model confirms that the required reduction in runoff days will be achieved.

 

Proprietary treatment devices have been introduced to achieve Council’s water quality objectives. The MUSIC model demonstrates these will be achieved.

 

Landscape Services have raised concerns about the swale around the high side of the buildings.  A condition is recommended (Condition No. 25) that the swale be replaced with an upturn to the courtyard walls and/or grated pits connected to the main stormwater lines through the basement.  This can be shown on the Construction Certificate plans. 

 

Vehicular access and works in road reserve

 

An amended detail of the entry driveway has been submitted. This has been referred to Roads and Maritime Services (RMS).  It appears that the future kerb alignment is approaching the existing at the location of the driveway entry, so the design will be applicable to both cases. 

 

The footpath elevation and sections requested have not been submitted, however, it appears that the proposed works will provide satisfactory vehicular and pedestrian access for the current and future situation. The recommended conditions require the detailed design for this work to be approved by both Council and RMS prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate (Condition No’s 19, 20 and 30). 

 

Geotechnical report

 

The report has been amended to recommend a tanked basement construction. This is consistent with the requirements of the Local Centres DCP.

 

 

 

Building

Council’s Building Surveyor is satisfied the proposed development will be compliant with the requirements of the Building Code of Australia, subject to conditions (Condition No. 33).  

Outside Council

 

NSW Roads and Maritime Services

 

The works of the proposed development do not encroach within the land required for road that aligns the Boundary Street frontage of the site, with the exception of the driveway crossing. In this regard, the application was referred to the NSW Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) seeking concurrence under Section 138 (2) of the Roads Act 1993 and Part 2, Division 17 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007.

The RMS have issued concurrence to the proposed development, subject to condition relating to the configuration of the vehicle entrance and exit points, the location of kerb and guttering, noise impacts, stormwater management and construction vehicle movements (Condition Nos 11, 19, 20 and 21).  

 

Statutory Provisions

 

This proposal is ‘Local Development’ under Part 4 of the EP and A Act, 1979 and requires development consent pursuant to the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan (Local Centres) 2012 .

 

State Environmental Planning Policies

 

Sydney Regional Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

 

SREP 2005 applies to the site as the site is located in the Sydney Harbour Catchment. The Planning Principles in Part 2 of the SREP must be considered in the preparation of environmental planning instruments, development control plans, environmental studies and master plans. The proposal is not affected by the provisions of the SREP which relate to the assessment of development applications as the site is not located in the Foreshores and Waterways Area as defined by the Foreshores and Waterways Area Map.

 

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007

 

As outlined above, the application has been referred to the RMS for comments, as is required by the SEPP. The RMS have issued concurrence to the proposal, subject to conditions (Condition Nos 11, 19, 20, and 21). Therefore, the application is assessed as being consistent with the matters for consideration set out under the SEPP.     

 

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 - Remediation of Land

 

The provisions of SEPP 55 require consideration of the potential for a site to be contaminated. The site has a history of residential use and is unlikely to be contaminated. Further investigation is not warranted.

 

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

 

An amended BASIX certificate was submitted with the amended plans. The application documentation is consistent with the commitments identified in the BASIX certificate.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No 65-Design Quality of Residential Flat Development

 

SEPP 65 aims to improve the design quality of residential flat buildings across New South Wales and to provide an assessment framework and design code for assessing “good design”.

 

A Design Verification Statement, prepared by James Grant, has been submitted with the application in accordance with clause 50(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

The application has been assessed by Council’s Urban Design Consultant and the amended proposal is considered acceptable.

 

Part 2 of the SEPP sets out design principles against which design review panels and consent authorities may evaluate the merits of a design.  This section is to be considered in addition to the comments of Council’s Urban Design Consultant above. The proposal has been assessed against the heads of consideration specified in SEPP 65 as follows:

 

Principle 1:  Context

 

The proposal is located within an area zoned R4 High Density Residential and is consistent with the desired future character of the R4 High Density Residential zone.

 

The proposal is in keeping with the design outcomes and controls, as detailed in the Local Centres LEP and DCP. The submitted site analysis identified prime constraints and opportunities and the resultant design responds to these. Setbacks allow for adequate separation from Boundary Street and the site boundaries.  Building orientation takes advantage of solar access.

 

Principle 2:  Scale

 

The development provides an acceptable bulk and scale to the streetscape and adjoining properties. The height of the building complies with the building height development standard in Ku-ring-gai LEP (Local Centres) 2012.

 

Principle 3:  Built form

 

The built form is consistent with the desired future character of the zoning featuring a five storey building set back from the street and within a landscape setting. An appropriate scale relationship to the street and the surrounding development is achieved through modulation of façades and setbacks in plan and section. The colours and finishes selected for the building are consistent with neighbouring residential flat developments.

 

Principle 4:  Density

 

The development complies with the development standard for floor space ratio.  The bulk and scale has been controlled by the compliant floor space ratio, setbacks, landscaping, building separating and a top floor with reduced floor area. Sufficient car parking has been provided to cater for the likely demand generated by the development. The density proposed is consistent with the R4 High Density Residential zoning.

 

Principle 5:  Resource, energy and water efficiency

 

The development is based on energy efficient passive solar design that includes natural cross-ventilation and a minimum of 3 hours solar access to >70% of the units. A valid Basix Certificate supports the application which confirms that the development will meet the energy and resource conservation targets and achieve adequate levels of thermal comfort for future occupants.

 

Principle 6:  Landscaping

 

The 50% of the site area that is designated for deep soil landscaping complies with the design control in the Local Centres DCP. Existing significant trees on the site will be retained.

 

The landscaping includes retention of major trees and planting of additional canopy trees and native plants which significantly contribute to the tree canopy, provide habitat for local fauna and integrate the building with the surrounding development.

 

Landscaping provides both green buffers to adjoining properties and a generous outdoor communal open space that is set back from the street and will receive good solar access.

 

Principle 7:  Amenity

 

High levels of internal amenity would be achieved through well designed communal areas such as the pedestrian entry and common open space. Visual privacy is provided through setbacks, separation, window design and screening devices.

 

Principle 8:  Safety and security

 

The layout of the development promotes good natural surveillance of public areas. The front entry path and front entries to the residential flat building towards the communal open space and will be visible from balconies on the northern elevation of the building.

 

Resident access to the common open space is via ramps. Units are accessible by people with disabilities in accordance with AS 1428.1 - Design for Access and Mobility while four units are adaptable in accordance with AS 4299-1995 - Adaptable Housing.

 

Principle 9:  Social dimensions

 

The proposal would provide a mix of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom apartments with differing layouts to maximise housing choice within the Ku-ring-gai Local government Area. Adaptable apartments, visitable apartments and visitor and disabled parking have been provided.

 

Principle 10:  Aesthetics

 

The aesthetic style of the building has been designed to be consistent with the prevailing form of residential flat development within the surrounding area. The building is strongly modelled in plan to reduce the apparent length of elevations and introduce smaller facade segments that are articulated by both recessed and projecting balconies and a variation of finishes. Brickwork and painted rendered concrete have been used to create large scale elements and distinguish the vertical articulation of the building.

 

Residential Flat Design Code Compliance Table

 

Pursuant to Clause 30(2) of SEPP 65 in determining a development application for a residential flat building, the consent authority is to take into consideration the Residential Flat Design Code (RFDC).  The following table is an assessment of the proposal against the guidelines provided in the RFDC. 

 

PART 02

SITE DESIGN

Site Configuration

Deep Soil Zones

A minimum of 25 percent of the open space area of a site should be a deep soil zone; more is desirable. Exceptions may be made in urban areas where sites are built out and there is no capacity for water infiltration. In these instances, stormwater treatment measures must be integrated with the design of the residential flat building.

YES

 

 

Fences + walls

Define the edges between public and private land to provide privacy and security and contribute positively to the public domain.

YES

 

 

Open Space

The area of communal open space required should generally be at least between 25 and 30 percent of the site area. Larger sites and brown field sites may have potential for more than 30 percent.

YES

 

 

 

The minimum recommended area of private open space for each apartment at ground level or similar space on a structure, such as on a podium or car park, is 25m2 .

YES

 

 

Orientation

Optimise solar access, contribute positively to desired streetscape character, support landscape design with consolidated open space areas, protect amenity of existing development and improve thermal efficiency.

YES

 

 

Stormwater management

Minimise impact on the health and amenity of natural waterways, preserve existing topographic and natural features and minimise the discharge of sediment and other pollutants to the stormwater drainage system.

YES

 

 

 

Safety

 

Carry out a formal crime risk assessment for all residential developments of more than 20 new dwellings.

YES – a crime risk assessment report has been undertaken and is acceptable

 

Ensure Residential flat developments are safe and secure for residents and visitors.

YES

 

 

Visual Privacy

up to four storeys/12 metres

 

- 12 metres between habitable rooms/balconies

- 9 metres between habitable/balconies and

non-habitable rooms

- 6 metres between non-habitable rooms

 

five to eight storeys/up to 25 metres

 

- 18 metres between habitable rooms/balconies

-13 metres between habitable/balconies and

non-habitable rooms

- 9 metres between non-habitable rooms

 

YES

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

NO, less than 18 metres separation to the top floor  balconies of the adjacent residential flat buildings

 

Building Entry

Create entrances which provide a desirable residential identity, provide clear orientation for visitors and contribute positively to the streetscape and building façade design.

YES

 

 

Parking

Provide adequate parking for occupants, visitors and disabled.

YES

 

 

Pedestrian Access

 

Identify the access requirements from the street or car parking area to the apartment entrance.

 

YES

 

 

 

Follow the accessibility standard set out in Australian Standard AS 1428 (parts 1 and 2), as a minimum.

 

Provide barrier free access to at least 20 percent of dwellings in the development.

YES

 

PART 03

BUILDING DESIGN

Building Configuration

Apartment layout

Single-aspect apartments should be limited in depth to 8 metres from a window.

YES, habitable areas of all single aspect dwellings within 8 metres of a window

 

The back of a kitchen should be no more than 8 metres from a window.

YES

 

 

The width of cross-over or cross-through apartments over 15 metres deep should be 4 metres or greater to avoid deep narrow apartment layouts.

YES

 

If Council chooses to standardise apartment sizes, a range of sizes that do not exclude affordable housing should be used.  As a guide, the Affordable Housing Service suggest the following minimum apartment sizes, which can contribute to housing affordability: (apartment

size is only one factor influencing affordability)

 

- 1 bedroom apartment 50m²

- 2 bedroom apartment 70m²

- 3 bedroom apartment 95m²

NO - 3 bedroom apartments range in size from 90m2 to 94m2

 

 

Apartment Mix

Include a mixture of unit types for increased housing choice.

YES

 

 

 

Balconies

Provide primary balconies for all apartments with a minimum depth of 2 metres.  Developments which seek to vary from the minimum standards must demonstrate that negative impacts from the context-noise, wind – can be satisfactorily mitigated with design solutions.

YES

 

 

Ceiling Heights

The following recommended minimum dimensions are measured from finished floor level (FFL) to finished ceiling level (FCL).

 

-       in residential flat buildings or other residential floors in mixed use buildings:

-       in general, 2.7 metres minimum for all habitable rooms on all floors, 2.4 metres is the preferred minimum for all non-habitable rooms, however 2.25m is permitted.

YES

 

 

Ground Floor Apartments

Optimise the number of ground floor apartments with separate entries and consider requiring an appropriate percentage of accessible units. This relates to the desired streetscape and topography of the site.

 

NO

 

Combined entrances to the ground floor units of all three residential buildings are provided.

 

Provide ground floor apartments with access to private open space, preferably as a terrace or garden.

 

YES

 



Internal Circulation

In general, where units are arranged off a double-loaded corridor, the number of units accessible from a single core/corridor should be limited to eight.

 

YES

 

Storage

In addition to kitchen cupboards and bedroom wardrobes, provide accessible storage facilities at the following rates:

 

- studio apartments 6m³

- one-bedroom apartments 6m³

- two-bedroom apartments 8m³

- three plus bedroom apartments 10m³

YES - additional storage provided both within units and the basement

 

 

 

Building Amenity

Acoustic Privacy

Ensure a high level of amenity by protecting the privacy of residents within apartments and private open space

YES

 

 

Daylight Access

Living rooms and private open spaces for at least 70% of apartments in a development should receive a minimum of three hours direct sunlight between 9am and 3pm in mid winter.

YES

 

 

 

Limit the number of single-aspect apartments with a southerly aspect (SW-SE) to a maximum of 10% of the total units proposed.

YES

 

Natural Ventilation

Building depths, which support natural ventilation typically, range from 10 to 18 metres.

NO

 

Building depths up to 21 metres are proposed

 

Sixty percent (60%) of residential units should be naturally cross ventilated.

YES

 

 

Twenty five percent (25%) of kitchens within a development should have access to natural ventilation.

NO

Building Performance

Waste Management

Supply waste management plans as part of the development application submission as per the NSW Waste Board.

 

YES

 

Water Conservation

Rainwater is not to be collected from roofs coated with lead- or bitumen-based paints, or from asbestos- cement roofs. Normal guttering is sufficient for water collections provided that it is kept clear of leaves and debris.

YES

 

 

 

 

 

Visual privacy – building separation

 

The top floor balconies along the eastern elevation of proposed Building 2 are 17 metres from those of the adjacent residential flat building at 27-31 Boundary Street. However, the balconies of both the proposed development and those of the existing neighbouring development are orientated towards the public realm and/or the communal open space of the respective sites. These balconies will not directly overlook each other. Additionally, the development provides adequate separation between buildings to control bulk and scale impacts and ensure consistency with the built form character of the area.

 

Building configuration – apartment size

 

The Code recommends that three bedroom units have a minimum area of 95m2. The three bedroom units of the proposed development vary in size from 90m2 to 94m2. However, all of the proposed three bedroom units are located at the fifth floor level of the development and are provided with generous (and often multiple) private open space areas that are well in excess of the required minimums. Additionally, the submitted plans include furniture layouts that demonstrate functional internal areas to all units and all of the units will be provide with good solar access and cross-ventilation. Therefore, this minor non-compliance is acceptable. 

 

Building configuration – ground floor apartment entries

 

Both proposed buildings provide a single entrance point to all units. These entrances are centrally located along the street facing facades and are clearly identifiable through indentation within the building design and pathways leading from the public realm.

 

The entrances to each building serve a maximum of seven units and the front facades of the buildings are well articulated. In this regard, it is not considered that the introduction of additional entrances will be beneficial to either the functionality of the buildings’ internal areas or the presentation of the development to the streetscape.  

 

Natural ventilation – building depth

 

The Code recommends building depths of between 10-18m to support natural ventilation. The proposed building has a maximum depth of 21m. The objective of the maximum building depth control is to promote shallow building depths which in turn promote a high ratio of external wall length to floor area. Shallow building depths maximise opportunities for dual-aspect apartments, promote solar access and natural ventilation and minimise the number of rooms in a development which require artificial ventilation and illumination. Despite the variation to the building depth control, the subject development achieves the requirements of the Code for solar access and ventilation (notwithstanding a minor departure from the requirements for natural ventilation to kitchens, discussed below). As satisfactory daylight and natural ventilation would be achieved, the variation to the building depth control is acceptable.

 

Natural ventilation – kitchens

 

The Code recommends a minimum 25% (15) of kitchens within the development are naturally ventilated by way of an operable window. The proposal provides 14 kitchens that comply, or 24.13%. In this regard, it is noted that the majority of units have been designed in a manner that promotes cross-ventilation (such as through the use of shallow depths and dual aspects) and this cross-ventilation will serve to benefit the kitchens of the proposed dwellings. Therefore, and noting that the extent of the departure from the control is relatively minor, this noncompliance is acceptable.

 

Local Content (LEP, KPSO, etc)

 

Ku-ring-gai LEP (Local Centres) 2012

 

Zoning and permissibility:

 

The site is zoned R4 High Density Residential. The proposed development is defined as a residential flat building and is permissible in the zone. 

 

Residential zone objectives:

 

The development:

 

·        provides increased housing choice (including adaptable dwellings) in proximity to public transport

·        complies with deep soil landscaping requirements and includes a landscape strategy which provides for the protection of existing trees and enhancement of the landscaped character of the area

·        achieves a high level of residential amenity through a high standard of building and landscape design

·        will be energy and water efficient through compliance with BASIX requirements

·        has a rear garden adjacent to a rear garden of another property

·        has an on site detention system to minimise impact on downstream waterways

·        has a basement carpark with dedicated storage areas for waste, household items and bicycles

 

The proposed development therefore upholds the zone objectives.

 

Development standards:

 

Development standard

Proposed

Complies

Building height:  17.5m

16.78m

YES

Minimum street frontage: 30m

91m

YES

Floor space ratio:  1.3:1

1.3:1 – confirmed through compliance diagrams submitted

YES

Minimum allotment size: 1200m2

3,488m2

YES

 

Clause 5.9 – Preservation of trees or vegetation

 

Council’s Landscape Development Officer is satisfied that the proposed development will not unduly impact upon any existing significant trees or vegetation, subject to conditions.

 

 

 

Clause 5.10 – Heritage conservation

 

Council’s Heritage Advisor is satisfied the proposed development is acceptable, subject to the conditions relating to the archival recording of the buildings to be demolished and the re-use of appropriate building materials (Condition Nos 8 and 49). 

 

Clause 6.1 – Earthworks

 

The proposed development will not restrict the existing or future use of the site, adversely impact on neighbouring amenity, the quality of the water table or disturb any known relics. Additionally, the fill to be removed is associated with land used for residential purposes and is unlikely to be contaminated. This fill will be disposed of accordingly.

 

6.2 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 the requirements of the LEP, subject to conditions. 

 

Policy Provisions (DCPs, Council policies, strategies and management plans)

 

Ku-ring-gai Local Centres Development Control Plan

 

COMPLIANCE TABLE

Development control

Proposed

Complies

Volume A

Part 3 Land amalgamation and subdivision

Lot amalgamation is to avoid creating:

 

 

A primary street frontage less than that required by KLEP (Local Centres) 2012

 

A lot size less than that required by KLEP (Local Centres) 2012

The adjoining lots to the north (fronting Victoria Street) could be amalgamated to form a development site which complies with the minimum street frontage and site area requirements of the LEP. The adjoining lots to the east and west have already been developed for the purpose of a residential flat building.

YES

A highly constrained site

No isolated and highly constrained sites will be created by the development

 

 

 

YES

Part 7 Residential flat development controls

7A – Site design

7A.1 Building Setbacks

A minimum street setback of 10m is required.

10m setback to land reserved for road widening

YES

A 2m articulation zone must be provided behind the street setback with no more than 40% of the zone occupied by the building.

<40%

YES

The building line is to be parallel to the prevailing building line in the street.

Building line is parallel to prevailing building line acknowledging the additional separation created by the land reserved for road widening

YES

A minimum side setback of 6m is required up to the fourth storey.

6m

YES

A minimum side setback of 9m is required for the fifth storey and above.

7.5m to eastern boundary of Building 2

NO

For building of 3 storeys or less on sites less than 1800m2 a minimum side setback of 3m is required.

N/A – 5 storey building

N/A

Side setback areas behind the building line are not to be used for driveways or vehicular access into the building.

Side setbacks adjacent to the residential flat buildings do not contain a driveway

YES

Driveways must be set back a minimum of 6m from the side boundary within the street setback to allow for deep soil planting.

The driveway has a 6m setback from the side boundary

YES

Basements must not encroach into the street, side and rear setbacks.

No encroachments

YES

Ground floor terraces and courtyards must have a minimum setback of 8m from the street boundary

7.6m to Unit 1G.01 courtyard

NO

Ground floor terraces and courtyards must have a minimum setback of 4m from the side and rear boundaries

Min. 4m

YES

A maximum of 15% of the total area of the street setback is to be occupied by private terraces and courtyards

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

<15%

YES

7A.2 Building separation

The minimum separation between residential buildings on the development sites and the adjoining sites must be:

 

Up to 4th storey

12m between habitable rooms/balconies

9m between habitable rooms/balconies and non-habitable rooms

6m between non-habitable rooms

 

From 5th to 7th storey

18m between habitable rooms/balconies

 

 

 

 

 

9m between habitable rooms/balconies and non- habitable rooms

6m between non-habitable rooms

 

 

 

 

 

 

>12m

>9m

 

>6m

 

 

16m to 5th floor west elevation of the neighbouring residential flat building (27 Boundary Street)

 

9m

6m

 

 

 

 

 

YES

YES

 

YES

 

 

NO

 

 

 

 

 

YES

YES

7A.3 Site coverage

 

 

The site coverage may be up to a maximum of 35% of the site area providing that the deep soil landscaping requirements in Part 7A.4 can be met.

35% confirmed through compliance diagram

YES

Where a site incorporates an access handle the site coverage must not exceed 35% of the total site area less 35% of the access handle.

No access handle

N/A

7A.4 Deep soil landscaping

Residential flat development must have a minimum deep soil landscaping area of 40% for a site area less than 1800m2 and 50% for a site area of 1800m2 or more

50% - confirmed by submitted compliance diagram

YES

Lots with the following sizes are to support a minimum number of tall trees capable or attaining a mature height of 13m on shale transitional soil and 10m on sandstone derived soils

 

1200m2 of less / 1 per 400m2 of site area

1201-1800m2 / 1 per 350m2 of site area

1801m2 or more / 1 per 300m2 of site area

The site area is 3,488m2.

A minimum of 13 trees capable with a mature height of at least 13m are required. More than 13 trees are proposed.

YES

At least 50% of all tree plantings are to be locally occurring trees and spread around the site.

At least 50% of the proposed tree plantings are locally occurring trees

YES

7B – Access and parking

Residential flat developments must provide on-site car parking within basements

A basement car park is proposed

YES

Basement car park areas must be consolidated under building footprints.

The basement car park is located under the building footprint

YES

The basement car park must not project more than 1m above existing ground level to the floor level of the storey immediately above.

Basement car parking area of Buildings 1 and 2 extends up to 1.5m above ground level  

NO

Direct internal access must be provided from the basement car park to each level of the building

Lift access from the basement to all floors of the residential flat building has been provided

YES

For residential flat developments not within 400m of a railway station the car parking rates for the following apartment types apply:

 

One bedroom: 1 spaces

Two bedroom:1 spaces

Three bedroom:1.5 spaces

A minimum of 61 spaces are required. These have been provided

YES

For every 4 apartments one visitor car space is required. At least one visitor car space is to comply with the dimensional and location requirements of AS2890.6

A minimum 15 visitor spaces are required. These have been provided

YES

One visitor car space is to be provided with a tap to make provision for on-site car washing

One car washing bay to be provided (Condition No. 29)

YES

Each adaptable housing dwelling is to be provided with at least one car space which complies with the dimensional and locational requirements of AS2890.6

Each adaptable dwelling has a car space which complies with the dimensional and locational requirements of AS2890.6

YES

A space to the temporary parking of service and removalist vehicles is to be provided. The space is to have a minimum dimension of 3.5m x 6m and minimum manoeuvring area 7m wide.

The required space is provided on basement level 1

YES

A minimum of 1 bicycle space per 5 units shall be provided within the residential car park area

Twelve resident bicycle spaces provided

YES

A minimum of 1 bicycle space per 10 units shall be provided for visitors in the visitor car park area

Two visitor bicycle spaces provided

NO

7C - Building design and sustainability

7C.1 - Communal Open Space

At least 10% of the site area must be provided as communal open space with a minimum dimension of 5m

>10%

YES

A single parcel of communal open space with a minimum area of 80m2, minimum dimensions of 8m and 3 hours solar access to 50% of the space on 21 June must be provided

Communal open space >80m2 and >8m minimum dimension provided

 

More than 40m2 of  communal open space area will achieve 3 hours solar access

YES

The communal open space must be provided at ground level behind the building line

Open space provided between the proposed buildings and to the rear of the site

YES

Shared facilities such as BBQs, shade structures, play equipment and seating are to be provided in the communal open space

Seating areas provided

YES

7C.2 – Private open space

Ground floor and podium apartments are to have a terrace or private courtyard with a minimum area of 25m2

>25m2

YES

All apartments not at the ground floor or podium level are to include private open space with a minimum area (internal dimension) of::

-     10m2 – 1 bedroom apartment

-     12m2 – 2 bedroom apartment

-     15m2 – 3 bedroom or larger apartment

 

1 bedroom min. 10m2

2 bedroom min. 12m2

3 bedroom min. 15m2

 

YES

YES

YES

The primary outdoor open space must have a minimum dimension of 2.4m

2.4m

YES

The primary private open space is to have direct access from the main living areas

All outdoor spaces are accessed from the main living area

YES

Private open space for ground and podium level apartments is to be differentiated from common areas by:

A change in level

Screen planting, such as hedges and low shrubs

A fence wall to a maximum height of 1.8m, any solid wall component is to be a maximum height of 1.2m with 30% transparent component above plus gate to the common area.

Changes in level, planting and fencing are used to differentiate ground level private open space from common areas. Where fencing above 1.2 metres is proposed, transparent elements will be used.

YES

7C.3 – Solar access

A minimum of 70% of apartments in each building must receive at least 3 hours direct sunlight to living rooms and adjacent private open space between 9am and 3pm on 21 June

72%

YES

A minimum of 50% of the common open space for residents use must receive direct sunlight for 3 hours between 9m and 3pm on 21 June

>50% of the common open space will receive 3 hours solar access

YES

The number of single aspect apartments with a southerly aspect (SW to SE) is limited to 10% of the total number of apartments proposed in each building.

No single aspect apartments to SW or SE

YES

All developments must allow the retention of 3 hours sunlight between 9am and 3pm on 21 June to living areas and the principal portion of the private and communal open space of existing residential flat buildings and multi-dwelling housing on adjoining lots and any residential development in adjoining lower density zones

>3 hours solar access to living areas and the principal portion of the private and communal open space of existing adjacent residential flat buildings. No overshadowing of neighbouring detached dwellings

YES

Developments must allow the retention of a minimum 4 hours direct sunlight to all existing neighbouring solar collectors and solar hot water services

No impact on neighbouring solar collectors and solar hot water services

YES

All developments must utilise shading and glare control

Shading devices are proposed

YES

7C.4 – Natural Ventilation

All habitable rooms are to have operable windows or doors

operable windows and doors provided

YES

At least 60% of apartments must have natural cross ventilation

 

63%

 

YES

At least 25% of kitchens are to be immediately adjacent to an operable window

 

14 / 58 = 24.13%

 

NO

Cross ventilation is not to be dependent on skylights or open corridors where it would impact on privacy

No reliance on windows to open corridors or skylights

YES

7C.5 – Apartment depth and width

Dual aspect apartments are to have a maximum internal plan depth of 18m from glass line to glass line

<18m

YES

Single aspect apartments are to have a maximum internal plan depth of 8m from glass line to internal face of wall of habitable area

<8m depth to the glass line in all single aspect dwellings

YES

The width of dual aspect apartments over 15m deep must be 4m or greater to avoid deep narrow apartment layouts

<15m

YES

All kitchens must not be located more than 8m to the back wall of the kitchen from an external opening

All kitchen are within 8m on an external opening

YES

7C.6 – Apartment mix and sizes

A range of apartment sizes and types must be included in the development

A mix of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom apartments is proposed

YES

One bedroom and studio apartments are to have a minimum floor area of 38.5m2

50m2 min.

YES

Two bedroom apartments are to have a minimum floor area of 70m2

80m2 min.

YES

Three bedroom apartments are to have a minimum floor area of 95m2

90m2 min.

NO

A mix of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom apartments are to be provided on the ground level

A mix of 1 and 2 bedroom apartments are provided at the ground level

NO

At least one apartments for each 10 apartments is to be designed as adaptable housing Class C

Six adaptable apartments have been provided

YES

At least 70% of apartments in the development are to be visitable

71%

YES

7C.7 – Room sizes

Living areas in apartments with two or more bedrooms are to have living areas with a minimum internal plan dimension of 4m

>4m

YES

Living areas in one bedroom apartments are to have a minimum internal plan dimension of 3.5m

3.5m min.

YES

Bedrooms in one and two bedroom apartments must have minimum internal plan dimension of 3m (excluding wardrobes)

3m min.

YES

In apartments with 3 or more bedrooms at least two bedrooms are to have minimum internal plan dimension of 3m (excluding wardrobes)

3m min.

YES

Built in wardrobes are to be provided to all studio apartments, to all bedrooms in one and two bedroom apartments and to at least two bedrooms in apartments of three or more bedrooms

Built in wardrobes have been provided.

YES

7C.8 – Building entries

Buildings must address the street either:

with main entrances to lift lobbies directly accessible and visible from the street; or

with the path to the building entry readily visible from the street where site configuration is conducive to having a side entry.

The entrances to both buildings are visible from the street and directly accessible via the pathways to be provided.

 

YES

Buildings with facades over 18m long must have multiple entries.

 

The facades of both buildings are >18m in length but both provide a single entry

NO

Building entry must be integrated with building facade design. At street level, the entry is to be articulated with awnings, porticos, recesses or projecting bays for clear identification.

 

The entries to the building are identified through awnings and a distinct indent within the buildings front façade

YES

All entry areas must be well lit and designed to avoid any concealment or entrapment areas. All light spill is prohibited.

 

The entry area does not contain concealment or entrapment areas. Light spill will be minimised by the proposed awnings.

YES

Lockable mail boxes must be provided close to the street. They must be at 90 degrees to the street and to Australia Post standards and integrated with front fences or building entries.

Mailboxes are located at the front boundary of the site.

YES

On large development sites comprising multiple building blocks, clear entries, sightlines and way-finding signs are to be provided.

The layout of the development is relatively simple and way finding signage is unlikely to be necessary.

YES

7C.9 Internal Common Circulation

The design of internal common circulation space must comply with the provisions in AS1428.1 and AS1428.2 to provide adequate pedestrian mobility and access.

 

An access report which demonstrates compliance with the standards has been provided.

YES

All common circulation areas including foyers, lift lobbies and stairways must have:

i)        appropriate levels of lighting with a preference for natural light where possible;

ii)       short corridor lengths that give clear sight lines;

iii)      clear signage noting apartment numbers, common areas and general direction finding;

iv)      natural ventilation;

v)       low maintenance and robust materials.

Appropriate lighting, sight lines, way finding, ventilation and materials to be available to lift lobbies and foyers.

YES

 

Where artificial lighting is required energy efficient lights are to be used in conjunction with timers or daylight controls.

This issue is addressed by the BASIX certificate

YES

All single common corridors must:

-        serve a maximum of 8 units

-        >1.5m wide

-        >1.8m wide at lift lobbies

No corridor serves more than 7 units. All corridors are 1.8m wide at lift lobbies and 1.5m wide elsewhere.

 

 

 

 

 

YES

 

7C.10 Building facades

Street, side and rear building facades must be modulated and articulation with wall planes varying in depth by not less than 0.6m. No single wall plane is to exceed 81m2 in area.

The street facing façade of Building 1 has an unarticulated wall plane of 98m2

NO

The continuous length of a single building on any elevation must not exceed 36m. The length of a single building elevation facing the side or rear may exceed 36m providing that:

 

The façade is recessed to an adequate depth and width to appear as distinctive bays or wings

The recess is common area with landscaping which includes at least one medium tree with an 8m canopy diameter at maturity

Building 1 = 36m

 

Building 2 = 33.5m

YES

Air conditioning units must not be located on the building façade or with the private open space

Air conditioning units are located in the basement plant rooms or concealed from view behind the rooftop parapets

YES

Balconies that run the full length of the building façade are not permitted

No balconies that run the full length of the building façade are proposed

YES

Balconies must not project more than 1.5m from the outermost wall of the building facade

No balconies project more than 1.5m from the outermost wall of the building façade

 

YES

Windows to a habitable room are to be situated to encourage opportunities for passive surveillance to the site and on site areas surrounding the building

Windows to a habitable room are located to provide for passive surveillance to the site and on site areas surrounding the building

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

YES

7C.11 – Building storeys

Sites with the following maximum building heights under the Ku-ring-gai LEP (Local Centres) are to have a maximum number of storeys above the basement as follows:

11.5m = 3 storeys

14.5m = 4 storeys

17.5m = 5 storeys

23.5m = 7 storeys

The site is subject to a height limit of 17.5m and the building has a height of 6 storeys due to the basement extending more than 1 metre above ground level

NO

7C.12 – Ground floor apartments

The finished ground level outside the living area at the building line of a ground level apartment must not be more than 0.9m below existing ground level.

The private open space at the rear of Unit 1G.02 is 1.1m below existing ground level

NO

Where the finished ground level outside the living area at the building line is more than 0.5m, the private open space must be level for a minimum of 2.4m from the living area.

Level for >2.4m

YES

No obstructions, such as retaining walls or fences, are permitted to project beyond a 45˚ control plane, (10am sun angle at 23 March) drawn from the finished ground level outside the living area at the building line to the end of the private open space. Plants may project beyond the 45˚ control plane.

No obstructions that will prohibit solar access

YES

7C.13 – Top storey design and roof forms

The gross floor area of the top storey is not to exceed 60% of the gross floor area of the storey immediately below.

Building 1 = 58.13%

 

Building 2 = 59.79%

YES

The top storey of a building is to be set back from the outer face of the floors below on all sides (roof projection is allowed beyond the outer face of the top storey).

Top storey bedrooms align the floors below of both buildings along the street facing elevations

NO

The upper storeys of residential buildings are to be articulated with differentiated roof forms, maisonettes or mezzanine penthouses and the like.

A skillion roof is proposed

YES

Service elements are to be integrated into the overall design of the roof so as not to be visible from the public domain or any surrounding development. These elements include lift overruns, plant equipment, chimneys, vent stacks, water storage, communication devices and signage.

The lift overruns and air-conditioning compressor units have been integrated into the design of the buildings.

YES

Roof design must respond to solar access, for example, by using eaves and skillion roofs.

 

The eaves of the skillion roofs will provide sun protection to the windows on the top floor level.

YES

Where solar panels are provided they must be integrated into the roof line.

Solar panels are not proposed.

YES

Lightweight pergolas, privacy screens and planters are permitted on the roof, provided they do not increase the bulk of the building, create visual clutter or impact on significant views from adjoining properties.

 

The proposed structures to be provided at the roof level will not create visual clutter or impact significant views

YES

7C.14 – Internal ceiling heights

The minimum ceiling height for a habitable room shall be 2.7m

2.7m min.

YES

The minimum ceiling height for a non-habitable room shall be 2.25m

2.4m min.

YES

7C.15 – Visual privacy

Buildings must be designed to ensure privacy for residents of the development and of the neighbouring site. The use of offset balconies, recessed balconies, vertical fins, solid and semi-transparent balustrades, louvres/screen panels and planter boxes is encouraged.

Privacy for residents of the development and neighbouring sites has been considered. Recessed balconies and vertical fins have been utilised.

YES

Privacy for ground floor apartments should be achieved by the use of a change in level and/or screen planting.

Changes in level, fencing and landscaping used to achieve privacy

YES

Continuous transparent balustrades are not permitted to balconies or terraces for the lower 3 storeys.

No continuous balconies across the facades

YES

Screening between apartments must be integrated with the overall building design.

Screening devices are integrated into the design of the building

YES

Landscaped screening must be provided to adjoining sites.

 

Landscape planting has been provided adjacent to the site boundaries

YES

7C.16 - Storage

Storage space shall be provided at the following minimum volumes:

-        6m3 for studio and one bedroom apartments

-        8m3 for two bedroom units

-        10m3 for two bedroom units

-        12m3 for units with three or more bedrooms

At least 50% of the required storage space must be provided inside the apartment.

Storage provision complies with these requirements.

YES

7C.17 – External air clothes drying facilities

Each apartment is required to have access to an external air clothes drying area, e.g. a screened balcony, a terrace or common area.

All apartments have access to a screen clothes drying area.

YES

External air clothes drying areas must be screened from public and common open space areas.

All external clothes drying area are screened from public and common open space areas

YES

7C.18 - Fencing

Front fences and walls (to a public street) and side fences in the street setback must not be higher than:

i) 0.9m if of closed construction (such as masonry, lapped and capped timber or brushwood fences); or

ii) 1.2m if of open construction (such as open paling and picket fences).

Note: Open fencing includes: panels set into a timber frame or between brick piers, where any solid base is not taller than 0.9m, and panels are spaced pickets, palings, or lattice.

An open timber slat fence with brick piers to a maximum height of 1.5 metres is proposed

NO

Closed front fences with a maximum height of 1.8m may be considered where the site fronts a busy road or other sources of undesirable noise. These fences are to be set back at least 2m from the front boundary and screened by landscaping.

Note: Rendered masonry boundary walls are generally inappropriate to the landscape character of Ku-ring-gai.

An open front fence is proposed <1.8 meters in height is proposed

N/A

Fences and walls must step down and follow the natural contours of the site.

 

The new front fence has been stepped to follow the natural slope of the site

YES

All fencing must be designed to highlight entrances, and be compatible with buildings, letterboxes and garbage storage areas.

 

An opening in the front fence identifies the location of the pedestrian entry to the site

YES

External finishes for fencing must be robust and graffiti resistant.

 

The design of the fence is not an attractive graffiti canvas and is easily repainted if graffiti does occur

YES

 

 

Part 1.11 - How to use the DCP design objectives and controls

 

Part 1A of the DCP provides the following guidance of how the provisions of the local centres DCP are to be applied:

 

How to use this DCP  The planning framework contained in this DCP adopts a place-based planning approach. This is supported by design and environmental objectives and detailed controls aimed at achieving a high quality built environment, landscape setting and community spaces. These are supported by diagrams and photos.

1. Objectives

The objectives contained in this DCP outline the outcomes that proposed developments are required to achieve. In order to gain consent, developments need to demonstrate that they have fulfilled the relevant objectives for each element.

Note: The numbering of the aims of the plan and the objectives within each part are for convenience only, and do not indicate priority.

2. Controls

The design controls demonstrate the preferred ways in which the objectives are to be achieved for improving site and building design. The controls focus on building performance/functionality, form, layout, sustainability and residential amenity.

Council may consider alternate solutions to the controls provided in this DCP where:

·        the alternate solution is considered to be a reasonable planning outcome; and

·        the alternate solution achieves the aims and objectives of that design element.

 

An assessment of the variations to the design controls identified in the compliance table is provided below.

 

Fifth floor side setback

 

The eastern elevation of the fifth floor (top storey) of Building 2 is set back 7.5 metres from the side boundary where 9 metres is required by the DCP control.

 

This non-compliance is centrally located along the eastern elevation and is well set back from the street fronting façade. As such, the non-compliant section will not be immediately visible from the public realm and will be of minimal visual impact as viewed from adjacent sites. Moreover, the non-compliance will not result in any undue impacts on solar access, privacy or general amenity. 

 

Courtyard setback to street frontage

 

The proposed courtyard of Unit 1G.01 located at the south-western corner of Building 1 will have a setback of 7.6 metres to the area of land reserved for road widening at the front of the property. However, this area is to be well planted and the remainder of courtyards along the street facing elevations of the development comply with the 8 metres requirement. In this regard, it is not considered that the proposed non-compliance will unduly impact on streetscape character.

 

Building separation

 

At the top storey (fifth level), the DCP control requires a minimum separation of 18 metres between habitable rooms and balconies. The eastern wall elevation of the top floor of Building 2 is associated with a living room and is separated by 16 metres from the western wall elevation of the opposing residential flat building (27-31 Boundary Street) that is also associated with a living room.

 

The objective associated with this control seeks to ensure the retention of appropriate massing and spacing between buildings, protect privacy and solar amenity, facilitate the provision of open space and landscaping and maximise view sharing. For the reasons outlined, the proposed development achieves these objectives. It is particularly noted that the non-compliant wall does not incorporate any windows and as such, cross-looking with the neighbouring building will not occur. 

 

Basement height

 

The DCP limits the protrusion of basement levels above the existing ground level to a maximum of 1 metre (at which point, the basement is considered to be a storey). The basement level of both buildings will extend up to 1.5 metres above the existing ground level and do not comply with this requirement.

 

The non-compliance is largely attributable to the sloping nature of the subject site. While the design of the development has sought to reduce the protrusion of the basement level above ground (i.e. through the stepping of the buildings to follow the slope of the site), the non-compliance will nevertheless occur.

 

The development complies with the overall building height development standard prescribed by KLEP (Local Centres) 2012. This standard operates in a manner that allows for the development of sloping sites as the 17.5 metres height limit is taken from the uppermost point of any feature of the building(s) above the ground level directly below. In this regard, the standard essentially foresees that a building on a sloping site may incorporate basement areas below the ground floor platform that protrude above ground level without creating a breach of the control. This is the case with the subject application as the non-compliant protruding areas are limited to small sections towards the east of the buildings as the ground level slopes away.

 

In order to mitigate the associated impacts, particularly those of bulk and scale, the proposal incorporates a variety of plantings that will conceal the base of the buildings. These measures are considered to be acceptable and will ensure the buildings effectively present as five storey developments, achieving the objectives of the DCP. 

 

Bicycle parking spaces – visitors

 

The proposed development provides formalised (marked) parking areas for two visitor bicycles where the DCP requires six spaces be provided. Council’s Development Engineer raises no issue in this regard, noting that 14 bicycle spaces are provided for residents and that the development complies with the requirements for vehicle parking.

 

Natural ventilation – kitchens

 

This issue has been addressed in the assessment of the proposal against SEPP65 above and is acceptable.

 

 

 

Apartment sizes

 

This issue has been addressed in the assessment of the proposal against SEPP65 above and is acceptable.

 

Apartment mix – ground level

 

The ground level of the development provides a mix of one and two bedroom units but no three bedroom units, as required by the DCP. However, the building does provide six, three bedroom units at the top storey levels of the proposed buildings that will be afforded generous private open space, solar access, cross-ventilation and general amenity. Therefore, with regard to these factors, no issue regarding this non-compliance is raised.

 

Building entries

 

This issue has been addressed in the assessment of the proposal against SEPP65 above and is acceptable.

 

Building façade articulation

 

The street facing elevation of Building 1 incorporates and unarticulated wall area of 98m2, breaching the maximum 81m2 allowable under the DCP control. However, this is the only wall length of the development that breaches the specified control and the remaining elevations of both buildings are well articulated through the use of setbacks, balcony configurations and other architectural design features.

 

In terms of the unarticulated wall area, it is noted that this area incorporates a change in building materials (being face brick work at the lower level and rendered masonry above) that reduces the visual impact of the façade. This, in combination with the overall articulation of the building outlined above, is an acceptable design approach and is supported by Council’s Urban Design Consultant.

 

Building storeys

 

The impacts associated with this non-compliance have been addressed above (refer to ‘Basement height’).

 

Ground floor apartments

 

The private open space to the rear of ground floor Unit 1G.02 located at the north-western corner of Building 1 is to have a finished level of 1.1 metres below the existing ground level, breaching the maximum 0.9 metres allowable under the DCP control. This is largely due to the sloping nature of the property at this location and the excavation is necessary to provide a usable and practical area adjacent to the internal areas of the unit the space services. This area will be provided with adequate solar access and planted areas that will afford an acceptable level of amenity for the occupants of the unit. Therefore, this non-compliance is acceptable.

 

 

 

 

Top storey setback

 

The southern elevations of both buildings incorporate top storey areas that are not set back from the level below, as is required by the DCP control. However, these areas are very small (less than 3.5 metres) and occur at only one point in both buildings. The remainder of the top storeys are well set back from the levels below so as to mitigate the visual bulk and scale impacts of the development as they present to the streetscape. Additionally, as mentioned above, both buildings incorporate good architectural articulation. Therefore, with respect to these factors, no issue regarding this non-compliance is raised. 

 

Front fence height

 

The proposed fence that will align the Boundary Street frontage has a maximum height of 1.5 metres, breaching the maximum 1.2 metres allowable under the DCP control. However, this non-compliance is largely attributable to the cross-fall of the site and the majority of the fence has a maximum height of 1.2 metres or less, largely complying with the control.

 

In terms of merit, the proposed fence utilises a stepped setback from the street frontage to allow for planting to be placed in front of the structure. This planting will soften its appearance and positively contribute to streetscape character. Additionally, the fence is to be constructed of a mixture of timbers slats, masonry piers and sandstone that is consistent with the backdrop that will be created by the proposed buildings.

 

VOLUME B

 

Part 2 – Site design for water management

 

Council’s Development Engineer is satisfied that the proposed development has been designed to control stormwater run-off as per the requirements of the DCP, subject to conditions. 

 

VOLUME C

 

Part 1 – Site Design

 

This part relates to earthworks and landscape design.

 

The proposed development incorporates substantial earthworks, particularly those needed to accommodate the basement level parking areas. These works are effectively integrated into the natural topography of the site and are consistent with the requirements of this part.

 

Additionally, the landscaping works of the proposed development will complement the character of the surrounding area while providing functional and practical spaces on-site for the enjoyment of residents. The plantings to be implemented include a mix of locally occurring and exotic species that are sited in a manner that will retain amenity to the dwellings of the site and neighbouring properties.

 

 

 

 

Part 3.4 – Waste Management

 

A waste management plan prepared in accordance with the DCP has been submitted and is acceptable.

 

Part 3.5 and 3.6 – Acoustic privacy and visual privacy

 

The applicant has submitted an acoustic impact report detailing the measures to be implement to protect resident amenity from noise sources both on and off the site, including vehicular traffic along Boundary Street, that generated by plant equipment and vehicles using the proposed driveway. This report is acceptable.

 

The visual privacy impacts of the development have been assessed having consideration of the controls set out under SEPP65 and LEP (Local Centres) 2012 and the underlying DCP. These impacts are also acceptable.

 

Part 3.7 – Materials, finishes and colours

 

The applicant has submitted a materials and finishes board. The proposed materials and finishes to be used are acceptable.

 

Part 4 – Water management

 

As mentioned, Council’s Development Engineer is satisfied that the proposed development has been designed to control stormwater run-off as per the requirements of the DCP, subject to conditions. 

 

Part 5 – Notification

 

The application has been notified in accordance with the requirements of the DCP. One submission was received and the issues raised have been addressed above.

 

Section 94 Development Contributions Plan 2010

 

The development attracts a section 94 contribution of $1,222,496.58 which is required to be paid prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. (Condition No. 32).

 

Likely Impacts

 

The likely impacts of the development have been considered within this report and 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.

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council as the consent authority grant development consent to DA0139/13 for the demolition of the existing dwellings and construction of two residential flat buildings containing 58 units, basement parking and associated landscaping works on land at 17-25 Boundary Street, Roseville 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:

 

Plan no.

Drawn by

Dated

DA-02C

Fortney + Grant Architecture

27/11/13

DA-03B

Fortney + Grant Architecture

18/09/13

DA-04B

Fortney + Grant Architecture

4/09/13

DA-05B

Fortney + Grant Architecture

18/09/13

DA-06C

Fortney + Grant Architecture

27/11/13

DA-07B

Fortney + Grant Architecture

18/09/13

DA-08B

Fortney + Grant Architecture

18/09/13

DA-09B

Fortney + Grant Architecture

18/09/13

DA-10B

Fortney + Grant Architecture

18/09/13

DA-11D

Fortney + Grant Architecture

27/11/13

DA-12E

Fortney + Grant Architecture

27/11/13

DA-13C

Fortney + Grant Architecture

23/10/13

DA-14B

Fortney + Grant Architecture

4/09/13

DA-15C

Fortney + Grant Architecture

27/11/13

DA-16B

Fortney + Grant Architecture

18/09/13

DA-17C

Fortney + Grant Architecture

23/10/13

DA-18C

Fortney + Grant Architecture

23/10/13

DA-19D

Fortney + Grant Architecture

23/10/13

DA-20B

Fortney + Grant Architecture

18/09/13

DA-21C

Fortney + Grant Architecture

23/10/13

DA-22C

Fortney + Grant Architecture

23/10/13

DA-23B

Fortney + Grant Architecture

18/09/13

DA-24B

Fortney + Grant Architecture

18/09/13

DA-25C

Fortney + Grant Architecture

27/11/13

DA-26B

Fortney + Grant Architecture

18/09/13

DA-27C

Fortney + Grant Architecture

23/10/13

DA-28C

Fortney + Grant Architecture

23/10/13

DA-29D

Fortney + Grant Architecture

23/10/13

DA-30B

Fortney + Grant Architecture

18/09/13

DA-31C

Fortney + Grant Architecture

23/10/13

DA-32C

Fortney + Grant Architecture

23/10/13

DA-33B

Fortney + Grant Architecture

18/09/13

DA-34B

Fortney + Grant Architecture

18/09/13

DA-40B - CMTP

Fortney + Grant Architecture

18/09/13

DA-52B

Fortney + Grant Architecture

18/09/13

DA-38A

Fortney + Grant Architecture

3/05/13

Landscape Plan L01 to L03 Revision B

A Total Concept

27/11/13

H-01 and H-02 Revision C

A K Y Civil Engineering

31 October 2013

 

Document(s)

Dated

BASIX Certificate 480140M_06

28 November 2013

Acoustic Impact Assessment – SLR Global Environmental Solutions

5 March 2013

Access for People with a Disability / Adaptable Housing Report – BCA Access

3 May 2013

Preliminary Geotechnical Site Assessment – JK Geotechnics

25 October 2013

 

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.

 

Conditions to be satisfied prior to demolition, excavation and construction:

 

3.     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.

 

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 Boundary Street over the site frontage, including the full intersection.

·        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.     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.

 

9.    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:

 

Address

·      15 and 27-33 Boundary Street

·      15 to 21 Victoria Street

 

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.

 

10.   Geotechnical report

 

Prior to the commencement of any bulk excavation works on site, the applicant shall submit to the Principal Certifying Authority, the results of the detailed geotechnical investigation comprising a minimum of four cored boreholes and groundwater monitoring as recommended in the report by Jeffery and Katauskas . The report is to address such matters as:

 

·        appropriate excavation methods and techniques

·        vibration management and monitoring

·        dilapidation survey

·        support and retention of excavates faces

·        hydrogeological considerations, including construction stage dewatering and whether referral to NSW Office of Water is indicated

 

The recommendations of the report are to be implemented during the course of the works.

 

Reason:         To ensure the safety and protection of property.

 

11.   Construction and traffic management plan

 

The applicant must submit to Council a Construction Traffic Management Plan (CTMP), which is to be approved prior to the commencement of any works on site.  The CTMP would also be referred to Roads and Maritime Services for approval.

 

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

·        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 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.  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.

 

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 as shown on the following plans as amended by other conditions, 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.

 

Plan no.

Drawn by

Date

Construction Management  and Traffic Control Plan

Fortey and Grant Architecture

18/09/13

 

The tree protection fencing shall be constructed of galvanised pipe at 2.4 metre spacings 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

 

14.   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.

 

15.   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.

 

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.

 

17.   Construction waste management plan

 

Prior to the commencement of any works, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that a waste management plan, prepared by a suitably qualified person, has been prepared in accordance with Council’s DCP 40 - Construction and Demolition Waste Management.

 

The plan shall address all issues identified in DCP 40, including but not limited to: the estimated volume of waste and method for disposal for the construction and operation phases of the development.

 

Note:  The plan shall be provided to the Certifying Authority.

 

Reason:    To ensure appropriate management of construction waste.

 

18.   Noise and vibration management plan

 

Prior to the commencement of any works, a noise and vibration management plan is to be prepared by a suitably qualified expert addressing the likely noise and vibration from demolition, excavation and construction of the proposed development and provided to the Principal Certifying Authority.  The management plan is to identify amelioration measures to achieve the best practice objectives of AS 2436-2010 and NSW Department of Environment and Climate Change Interim Construction Noise Guidelines. The report shall be prepared in consultation with any geotechnical report that itemises equipment to be used for excavation works.

 

The management plan shall address, but not be limited to, the following matters:

 

·        identification of the specific activities that will be carried out and associated noise sources

·        identification of all potentially affected sensitive receivers, including residences, churches, commercial premises, schools and properties containing noise sensitive equipment

·        the construction noise objective specified in the conditions of this consent

·        the construction vibration criteria specified in the conditions of this consent

·        determination of appropriate noise and vibration objectives for each identified sensitive receiver

·        noise and vibration monitoring, reporting and response procedures

·        assessment of potential noise and vibration from the proposed demolition, excavation and construction activities, including noise from construction vehicles and any traffic diversions

·        description of specific mitigation treatments, management methods and procedures that will be implemented to control noise and vibration during construction

·        construction timetabling to minimise noise impacts including time and duration restrictions, respite periods and frequency

·        procedures for notifying residents of construction activities that are likely to affect their amenity through noise and vibration

·        contingency plans to be implemented in the event of non-compliances and/or noise complaints

 

Reason:      To protect the amenity afforded to surrounding residents during the construction process.

 

Conditions to be satisfied prior to the issue of the construction certificate:

 

19.   Driveway access to Boundary Street

 

The design and construction of the proposed new driveway on Boundary Street shall be in accordance with AS2890.1 2004 and the RMS requirement. All vehicles are to enter and leave the site in a forward direction.

 

The existing driveway located on the southern property boundary shall be removed and replaced with kerb and gutter to match existing.

 

Details of the requirements of the proposed driveway and kerb and gutter works can be obtained from the RMS Project Services Manager, Traffic Projects Section, Parramatta (PH: 02 8849 2496).

 

Detailed plans of the proposed gutter crossing are to be submitted to the RMS for approval prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate and commencement of any road works. It should be noted that a plan checking fee (amount to be advised) and lodgement of a performance bond may be required from the applicant prior to the release of the approved road design plans by the RMS.

 

The layout of the proposed car parking areas associated with the subject development (including driveways, grades, turn paths, sight distance requirements, aisle widths, aisle lengths and parking bay dimensions) are to be in accordance with AS2890.1 – 2004 and AS2890.2 – 2002 heavy vehicle usage.

 

Reason:         To ensure the development is undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the NSW Roads and Maritime Service. 

 

20.   Roads and Maritime Service design requirements

 

Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the development complies with the following:

 

-         Road noise from Boundary Street is mitigated by durable materials in order to satisfy the requirements for habitable rooms under Clause 102, Subdivision 3 of State Environmental Planning Policy (Infrastructure) 2007.

-         Any proposed landscaping and/or fencing must not restrict sight distance to pedestrians and cyclists travelling along the footpath of Boundary Street.

-         Should there be any changes to the RMS drainage system, then detailed plans and hydraulic calculations of the stormwater drainage system are to be submitted to the RMS for approval, prior to the commencement of any works at:

 

The Sydney Asset Management

Roads and Maritime Services

PO Box 973 PARRAMATTA CBD 2124

 

-         Note: a plan checking fee will be payable and a performance bond may be required before the RMS approval is issued. With regard to the Civil Works requirement, please contact the RMS Project Engineer, External Works PH: 8849 2114 of FAX: 8849 2766.

-         All demolition and construction vehicles are to be contained wholly within the site as a work zone permit will not be approved on Boundary Street.

-         A Construction Traffic Management Plan detailing construction vehicle routes, number of trucks, hours of operation, access arrangments and traffic control are to be submitted to Council for approval prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

-         All works / regulatory signage associated with the proposed development are to be at no cost to the RMS.

 

Reason:         To ensure the development is undertaken in accordance with the requirements of the NSW Roads and Maritime Service. 

 

 

21.   Stormwater discharge

 

The post development storm water discharge from the subject site into the RMS drainage system is not to exceed the pre-development discharge.

 

Reason:    To protect storm water drainage infrastructure.

 

 

22.   Amendments to environmental site management plan

 

Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the approved 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:

 

Plan no.

Drawn by

Date

Enviromental Site Management Plan DA-40 Issue B

Fortey and Grant

18/09/13

 

The following changes are required to the Environmental Site Management Plan:

 

1.       To preserve the health and condition of the following tree, tree protection fencing is to be shown in accordance with arborist recommendations.

 

Schedule

Tree/location

Radius from trunk

Tree 14/ Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) located within the front setback of the development, outside of the future road reservation.

9.8m

 

Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the environmental site management plan has been submitted as required by this condition.

 

Note:  A site management plan shall be submitted to the Certifying Authority.

 

Reason:      To ensure that the development is in accordance with the determination.

 

23.   Amendments to stormwater plan

 

Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the approved 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:

 

Plan no.

Drawn by

Date

H-01/A to H-02/C

AKY Civil Engineering

31/10/13

 

The following changes are required to the stormwater plan:

 

1.       To preserve the following existing tree/s, the diversion drainage system is to be relocated closer to the building to run along the northern edge of the private courtyard terraces. The diversion system is not to be constructed within the specified radius of the following trees

-        the system west of the central courtyard is to terminate and be diverted into the pit north of Unit 2G05.

-        the system east of the central courtyard is to commence north of Unit 2G03 and continue as proposed.

 

Schedule

Tree/location

Radius from trunk

Tree 2/ Melaleuca quinquenervia (Broad Leaved Paperbark) located at the northwest corner of the site. 

4m

Tree 8/ Angophora costata (Sydney Red Gum) located on the northern boundary.

3m

Tree 11/ Angophora costata (Sydney Red Gum) located within the northern rear yard.

8m

Tree A / Magnolia x soulangiana (Magnolia) located on the western boundary, within the adjoining property

3.0m

 

Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the stormwater plan has been submitted as required by this condition and verified by the Project Arborist.

 

Note:  A stormwater plan shall be submitted to the Certifying Authority.

 

Reason:      To ensure that the development is in accordance with the determination.

 

24.   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:

 

Plan no.

Drawn by

Date

Landscape Plan L01 to L03 Revision B

A Total Concept

27/11/13

 

The following changes are required to the landscape plan:

 

1.       To preserve the garden setting of the front setback of Building 1, additional screen planting that can attain 1.5 metres in height, located in a garden bed forward of the proposed retaining walls along the base of the building, is to be provided. 

 

2.       To preserve neighbour amenity, an additional canopy tree is to be planted at the north-eastern corner of the communal open space area located at the north-western corner of the site. The tree should be a deciduous species that can attain 13 metres in height.

 

3.       To preserve streetscape amenity, the proposed 2 Acer palmatum planted within the planting bed in the front setback of Building 2 are to be substituted  with 2 Pyrus ‘Bradford’.

 

Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the landscape plan has been amended are 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

 

25.   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:

 

Plan no.

Drawn by

Dated

13031 H-02 Revision C

AKY Civil Engineering  31.10.13

31.10.13

 

The above engineering plan(s) shall be amended as follows:

 

The diversion drainage system is not to be provided by a swale but by providing an upturn to the rear courtyard wall and/ or grated inlet pits connected to the internal stormwater drainage system.

 

Note:              An amended engineering plan, prepared by a qualified engineer shall be submitted to the Certifying Authority.

 

Reason:         Tree protection.

 

26.   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.

 

27.   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.

 

28.   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.

 

29.   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 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 areathe vehicle access and accommodation arrangements are to be constructed and marked in accordance with the certified plans

·         a tap for the washing of vehicles is to be provided adjacent to at least one (1) visitor parking space

 

Reason:         To ensure that parking spaces are in accordance with the approved development.

 

30.   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 Roads and Maritime Services and 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 Boundary Street:

 

·        Works to provide vehicular access to the basement carpark, including regrading the footpath and nature strip, the new driveway crossing and the separator island.

 

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 Roads and Maritime Services and Council have 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 RMS and 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):

 

31.   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.

 

32.   Section 94 Contributions – 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:

 

Key Community Infrastructure

Amount

Local parks and local sporting facilities

$560,621.11

Local recreation and cultural facilities;  Local social facilities

$90,002.10

Local roads, local bus facilities & local drainage facilities (new roads and road modifications)

$46,167.31

Local roads, local bus facilities & local drainage facilities (townscape, transport & pedestrian facilities)

$525,706.06

Total:

$1,222,496.58

 

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 will continue to be indexed to reflect changes in the consumer price index and housing price index until they are paid 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.

 

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:

 

33.   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.

 

34.   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.

 

35.   Temporary irrigation

 

Temporary irrigation within the Tree Protection Fencing is to be provided.  Irrigation volumes are to be determined by the Project Arborist.

 

Reason:  To protect trees to be retained on site.

 

36.   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.

 

37.   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.

 

38.   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.

 

39.   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.

 

40.   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.

 

41.   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.

 

42.   Further geotechnical input

 

The geotechnical and hydro-geological works implementation, inspection, testing and monitoring program for the excavation and construction works must be in accordance with the report by Jeffery and Katauskas dated 25 October 2013 and the report submitted prior to commencement of works. Over the course of the works, a qualified geotechnical/hydro-geological engineer must complete the following:

 

·         further geotechnical investigations and testing recommended in the above report(s) and as determined necessary

·         further monitoring and inspection at the hold points recommended in the above report(s) and as determined necessary

·         written report(s) including certification(s) of the geotechnical inspection, testing and monitoring programs

 

Reason:         To ensure the safety and protection of property.

 

43.   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 report prepared by Jeffery and Katauskas dated 25 October 2013 and the report submitted prior to the commencement of works. 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.

 

44.   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.

 

45.   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.

 

46.   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.

 

47.   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.

 

48.   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.

 

49.   Recycling of building material (specific)

 

During demolition and construction, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that, in addition to building materials generally suitable for recycling, the following materials have been forwarded to an appropriate registered business dealing in recycling of materials. All materials to be recycled must be kept in good order:

 

Stone salvaged from footings and front verandas of buildings on the site to be used for landscaping works.

 

Reason:    To facilitate recycling of materials.

 

50.   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.

 

51.   Approval for rock anchors

 

Approval is to be obtained from the property owner for any anchors proposed beneath adjoining private property.  If such approval cannot be obtained, then the excavated faces are to be shored or propped in accordance with the recommendations of the geotechnical and structural engineers.

 

Reason:         To ensure the ongoing safety and protection of property.

 

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.   Temporary rock anchors

 

If the use of temporary rock anchors extending into the road reserve is proposed, then approval must be obtained from Council and/or Roads and Maritime Services in accordance with Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993.  The Applicant is to submit details of all the work that is to be considered, and the works are not to commence until approval has been granted.  The designs are to include details of the following:

 

·        How the temporary rock anchors will be left in a way that they will not harm or interfere with any future excavation in the public road

·        That the locations of the rock anchors are registered with Dial Before You Dig

·        That approval of all utility authorities likely to use the public road has been obtained. All temporary rock anchors are located outside the allocations for the various utilities as adopted by the Streets Opening Conference.

·        That any remaining de-stressed rock anchors are sufficiently isolated from the structure that they cannot damage the structure if pulled during future excavations or work in the public road.

·        That signs will be placed and maintained on the building stating that de-stressed rock anchors remain in the public road and include a contact number for the building manager.  The signs are to be at least 600mm x 450mm with lettering on the signs is to be no less than 75mm high.  The signs are to be at not more than 60m spacing.  At least one sign must be visible from all locations on the footpath outside the property.  The wording on the signs is to be submitted to Council’s Director Operations for approval before any signs are installed.

 

Permanent rock anchors are not to be used where any part of the anchor extends outside the development site into public areas or road reserves.

 

All works in the public road are to be carried out in accordance with the Conditions of Construction issued with any approval of works granted under Section 138 of the Roads Act 1993.

 

Reason:         To ensure the ongoing safety and protection of property.

 

55.   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.

 

56.   Arborist’s report

 

The trees to be retained shall be inspected, monitored and treated by a Project Arborist who must be a qualified (AQF) Level 5 arborist in accordance with AS4970-2009 Protection of trees on development sites.  Regular inspections and documentation from the Project Arborist to the Principal Certifying Authority are required including at the following times or phases of work. All monitoring shall be recorded and provided to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to completion of the works.   An Arboricultural Assessment prepared by Tree Talk and dated February 2013 has been submitted with the application. Tree numbers refer to this report.

 

Schedule

Tree/location

Time of inspection

Tree 2/ Melaleuca quinquenervia (Broad Leaved Paperbark) located at the northwest corner of the site. 

Commencement of demolition of pool and surrounds 

Tree 8/ Angophora costata (Sydney Red Gum) located on the northern boundary.

Commencement of demolition of retaining wall

Tree 11/ Angophora costata (Sydney Red Gum) located within the northern rear yard.

Commencement of demolition of house and paving surrounds, commencement of excavation for private courtyard terrace

Tree 14/ Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) located within the front setback of the development, outside of the future road reservation.

Commencement of demolition of house, driveway and front path, commencement of excavation for entry ramp including excavation within the structural root zone

Tree A / Magnolia x soulangiana (Magnolia) located on the western boundary, within the adjoining property

Commencement of excavation for private courtyard to Unit 1G02

 

Reason:         To ensure protection of existing trees.

 

57.   Canopy/root pruning

 

Canopy and/or root pruning of the following tree(s) which is necessary to accommodate the approved building works shall be undertaken by an experienced AQF level 3 Arborist under the supervision of the Project Arborist and in accordance with the reduction pruning clause of AS4373-2007. All other branches are to be tied back and protected during construction, under the supervision of a qualified arborist.

 

Schedule

Tree/location

Tree works

Tree 11/ Angophora costata (Sydney Red Gum) located within the northern rear yard.

Pruning of branch to the south east for  building clearance, pruning of stub to west (Further arboricultural assessment, Section 7.0 Tree Talk, September 2013)

Tree A / Magnolia x soulangiana (Magnolia) located on the western boundary, within the adjoining property

Minor pruning for  building clearance

 

Reason:         To protect the environment.

 

58.   Treatment of tree roots

 

If tree roots are required to be severed for the purposes of constructing the approved works, they shall be cut cleanly by hand, by an experienced Arborist/Horticulturist with a minimum qualification of Horticulture Certificate or Tree Surgery Certificate.  All pruning works shall be undertaken as specified in Australian Standard 4373-2007 - Pruning of Amenity Trees.

 

Reason:         To protect existing trees.

 

59.   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 to minimum 700mm depth along the perimeter line of such works, is completed:

 

Schedule

 

Tree/location

Radius from trunk

 

Tree 2/ Melaleuca quinquenervia (Broad Leaved Paperbark) located at the northwest corner of the site. 

7.2m

 

Tree 8/ Angophora costata (Sydney Red Gum) located on the northern boundary.

9.6m

Tree 11/ Angophora costata (Sydney Red Gum) located within the northern rear yard.

11m

 

Tree 14/ Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) located within the front setback of the development, outside of the future road reservation.

9.8m

 

Tree A / Magnolia x soulangiana (Magnolia) located on the western boundary, within the adjoining property

3.0m

 

 

Reason:         To protect existing trees.

 

60.   Hand excavation

 

All excavation except for basement and driveways within the specified radius of the trunk(s) of the following tree(s) shall be hand dug under the supervision of the Project Arborist.

 

Schedule

 

Tree/location

Radius from trunk

 

Tree 2/ Melaleuca quinquenervia (Broad Leaved Paperbark) located at the northwest corner of the site. 

7.2m

 

Tree 8/ Angophora costata (Sydney Red Gum) located on the northern boundary.

9.6m

Tree 11/ Angophora costata (Sydney Red Gum) located within the northern rear yard.

11m

 

Tree 14/ Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) located within the front setback of the development, outside of the future road reservation.

9.8m

 

Tree A / Magnolia x soulangiana (Magnolia) located on the western boundary, within the adjoining property

3.0m

 

 

Reason:         To protect existing trees.

 

61.   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.

 

62.   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.

 

63.   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.

 

64.   Removal of noxious plants & weeds

 

All noxious and/or environmental weed species shall be removed from the property prior to completion of building works.

 

Reason:         To protect the environment.

 

65.   Survey and inspection of waste collection clearance and path of travel

 

At the stage when formwork for the ground floor slab is in place and prior to concrete being poured, a registered surveyor is to:

 

·         ascertain the reduced level of the underside of the slab at the driveway entry,

·         certify that the level is not lower than the level shown on the approved DA plans; and

·         certify that the minimum headroom of 2.6 metres will be available for the full path of travel of the small waste collection vehicle from the street to the collection area.

·         This certification is to be provided to Council’s Development Engineer prior to any concrete being poured for the ground floor slab.

·         No work is to proceed until Council has undertaken an inspection to determine clearance and path of travel.

 

At the stage when formwork for the ground floor slab is in place and prior to concrete being poured, Council’s Development Engineer and Manager Waste Services are to carry out an inspection of the site to confirm the clearance available for the full path of travel of the small waste collection vehicle from the street to the collection area.  This inspection may not be carried out by a private certifier because waste management is not a matter listed in Clause 161 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

Reason:       To ensure access will be available for Council’s contractors to collect waste from the collection point.

 

66.   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:

 

67.   Easement for waste collection

 

Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, an easement for waste collection is to be created under Section 88B or 88E 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.

 

68.   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. 480140M_06 have been complied with.

 

Reason:         Statutory requirement.

 

69.   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. 480140M_06 have been complied with.

 

Reason:         Statutory requirement.

 

70.   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.

 

71.   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 Local Centres Development Control Plan). 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.

 

72.   Certification of drainage works (dual occupancies and above)

 

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 Local Centres Development Control Plan 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

 

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.

 

73.   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.

 

74.   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 Local Centres DCP). 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.

 

 

75.   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.

 

 

76.   Certification of as-constructed driveway/carpark - RFB

 

Prior to issue of an Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority is to be satisfied that:

 

·        the as-constructed car park complies with the approved Construction Certificate plans

·        the completed vehicle access and accommodation arrangements comply with Australian Standard 2890.1 - 2004 “Off-Street car parking" in terms of minimum parking space dimensions

·        finished driveway gradients and transitions will not result in the scraping of the underside of cars

·        no doors, gates, grilles or other structures have been provided in the access driveways to the basement carpark, which would prevent unrestricted access for internal garbage collection from the basement garbage storage and collection area

·        the vehicular headroom requirements of:

-        Australian Standard 2890.1 - “Off-street car parking”,

-        2.6 metres height clearance for waste collection trucks are met from the public street into and within the applicable areas of the basement carpark.

 

Note:  Evidence from a suitably qualified and experienced traffic/civil engineer indicating compliance with the above is to be provided to and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate.

 

Reason:         To ensure that vehicular access and accommodation areas are compliant with the consent.

 

77.   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 and Roads and Maritime Services.

 

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 redundant driveway crossings and laybacks must be removed or evidence provided to Council that payment for their removal has been made to RMS.

 

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.

 

78.   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.

 

Conditions to be satisfied at all times:

 

79.   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: 1999 Pedestrian Area (Category P) Lighting and AS4282: 1997 Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting.

 

Reason:      To protect the amenity of surrounding properties.

 

80.   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.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Stuart Ratcliff

Senior Development Assessment Officer

 

 

 

 

 

Shaun Garland

Team Leader Development Assessment South

 

 

 

 

Corrie Swanepoel

Manager Development Assessment Services

 

 

 

 

Michael Miocic

Director Development & Regulation

 

 

Attachments:

A1View

Location sketch

 

2014/016979

 

A2View

Zoning extract

 

2014/016975

 

A3View

Architectural plans

 

2014/017192

 

A4View

Landscape plans

 

2014/017165

  


APPENDIX No: 1 - Location sketch

 

Item No: GB.8

 


APPENDIX No: 2 - Zoning extract

 

Item No: GB.8

 


APPENDIX No: 3 - Architectural plans

 

Item No: GB.8

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 4 - Landscape plans

 

Item No: GB.8

 


 


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 4 February 2014

GB.9 / 219

 

 

Item GB.9

DA0376/13

 

8 January 2014

 

 

development application

 

 

Summary Sheet

 

Report title:

12 Wellesley Road Pymble - Removal of tree (Californian Redwood) in front setback (Heritage Conservation Area)

ITEM/AGENDA NO:

GB.9

 

 

Application No:

DA0376/13

Property Details:

12 Wellesley Road Pymble

Lot & DP No:      Lot 4 DP 14093

Site area (m2):    929.5m2

Zoning:               R2 Low Density Residential

Ward:

St Ives

Proposal/Purpose:

Removal of tree (Californian Redwood) in front setback (Heritage Conservation Area)

Type of Consent:

Local

Applicant:

Mr Anthony Everall

Owner:

Mr Anthony & Mrs Philippa Everall

Date Lodged:

30 September 2013

Recommendation:

Refusal

 

 

  

 


Purpose of Report

 

To determine Development Application No 376/13, which proposes removal of a Sequoia sempervirens (Californian Redwood) within the front setback of No. 12 Wellesley Road, Pymble. The site is located within a Heritage Conservation Area.

 

This matter has been called to full Council for determination by Councillor Ossip.

 

Executive Summary

 

Issues:

Tree removal, Heritage Conservation 

Submissions:

Four (4) submissions received from three (3) persons 

Land and Environment Court:

N/A

Recommendation:

Refusal

 

History

 

Site history

 

Tree works history:

 

·      7 August 2012 – An application (RMTR13/01938) pursuant to Council’s Tree Preservation Order to remove the subject tree was lodged with Council.

·      10 October 2012 - The applicant was asked to provide an arborist’s report and engineer’s report concerning the subject tree.

·      8 November 2012 - A botanist’s report, engineer’s report and a petition containing 24 signatures were received by Council. 

·      3 December 2012 - The application for tree removal was refused by Council under delegated authority for the following reasons:

 

o   The tree is visually significant in the local area and provides a positive landscape element to the streetscape.

o   There are reasonable alternatives to manage the issues raised without removing the tree.

o   Council’s Tree Management Policy requires that tree works decisions have a focus on retaining and protecting trees unless there is strong justification for removal and in this instance the decision to refuse removal is consistent with the outcomes of that Policy.

 

·      5 April 2013 – Council received a request to review the refusal of the tree works application, pursuant to section 82A(7) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. 

·      3 May 2013 – Councillor Ossip presented a notice of motion that a report of the review be presented to full Council for determination.

·      14 May 2013 – The motion was considered at an Ordinary Council meeting. The motion was lost when put to the vote (three for and six against). No decision concerning the review was made at the Council meeting.

·      21 May 2013 – A report by an independent arborist engaged by Council, was received by Council’s Tree Management Officer (refer to Attachment 1).

·      28 May 2013 – Council refused the section 82A(7) review application under delegated authority for the following reasons:

 

o   The tree is visually significant in the local area and provides a positive landscape element to the streetscape.

o   Council determines that the boundary fence and the damaged section of the driveway adjacent to the tree are not classified as major structures and there are options available to manage these issues as outlined in the report by Waddington Consulting and Arborsaw.

o   The survey results within the report from GBG Australia (ground penetrating radar) show roots at an established depth and spread. The report does not state that the tree is unstable nor does it recommend removal of the tree.

o   The professional interpretation of the submitted reports, by Alex Austin, Arborsaw, concludes that the evidence demonstrates that the tree is sufficiently anchored to withstand weather events within the area.

 

Land and Environment Court history:

 

·      5 June 2013 – The applicant lodged a Class One appeal against Council’s refusal of the tree works application.

·      14 June 2013 – Council received legal advice which stated that there are no appeal rights under sections 82A or 97 of the Environmental Planning Act 1979 in relation to the Tree Preservation Order.

·      27 June 2013 - The applicant discontinued the appeal.

 

Planning history:

 

·      8 February 2013 - Ku-ring-gai LEP (Local Centres) 2012 came into effect. The site was rezoned R2 Low Density Residential under this instrument. The Tree Preservation Order no longer applies and the removal of the tree must now be considered against Ku-ring-gai LEP (Local Centres) 2012 and Ku-ring-gai Development Control Plan 2012.

 

The Site

 

Site description

 

The site is No. 12 Wellesley Road, Pymble and is legally known as Lot 4 in DP 14093. The site is located on the north-western side of Wellesley Road, Pymble. The site is an irregular shaped allotment with a street frontage of 20 metres, a rear boundary of 17 metres and side boundaries of 53 metres. The site has an area of 921.6m2.

 

Development currently on the site comprises a part single, part two storey dwelling house with a swimming pool and entertainment area to the rear. Within the front setback is an attached double carport, a sandstone front fence and a paved sandstone driveway.

 

The subject tree, a Sequoia sempervirens (Californian Redwood), is located within the front setback, in the north-eastern corner of the site.

 

Surrounding development

 

The site is situated within Heritage Conservation Area C8B - Pymble Heights under Ku-ring-gai LEP (Local Centres) 2012. The site is also in the vicinity of Heritage Conservation Area C9 – Fern Walk which encompasses the south-eastern (opposite) side of Wellesley Road. 

 

The site is surrounded by a mixture of single storey and two storey dwelling houses.

 

Located opposite the site are heritage items at Nos 3 and 7 Wellesley Road, Pymble.

 

The Proposal

 

The proposal is for removal of the Sequoia sempervirens (Calfironian Redwood) located within the front setback of the site, at the north-eastern corner of the site.

 

The tree is estimated to be 20-25 metres in height. The age of the tree is unknown but it is thought to be more than 70 years old.

 

The applicant has submitted the following arguments for removal of the tree:

 

·     The tree has caused damage to the driveway of No. 12 Wellesley Road, the fences of Nos 12 and 14 Wellesley Road and the water pipe in front of No. 14 Wellesley Road.

·     The applicant’s botanist has advised that the damage will increase as the tree grows.

·     Construction of a raised driveway to prevent damage to the driveway would cost more than $50,000. Construction of a root barrier would not be feasible. There is insufficient room to rebuild the fences on their respective sites. Reconstruction of a new sandstone driveway would be impractical due to cost.

·     The aesthetic value of the tree has been compromised by past pruning and the presence of nearby power lines. 

·     The tree is more appropriate for large spaces such as parks rather than suburban allotments.

·     The visual absorption of the area is such that removal of the tree could be accommodated without any unacceptable changes.

·     The tree is not listed as a heritage item in its own right.

·     The majority of residents in Wellesley Road support the removal of the tree.

 

The applicant would replace the tree with a smaller native tree and would provide two replacement specimens to be planted in Council’s parks.

 

 

 

 

 

Consultation

 

Community

 

Council notified and advertised the application from 9 to 23 October 2013. During this period, Council received three (3) submissions from the following:

 

1.   Mr G. Tabuteau and Mrs J. Tabuteau – No. 1 Wellesley Road, PYMBLE

2.   Mr D. Low – No. 14 Wellesley Road – No. 14 Wellesley Road, PYMBLE

3.   Mr J. Bialkowski – No. 11 King Edward Street, PYMBLE

 

The tree is significant and appears mature and healthy

 

The tree was assessed by an independent arborist engaged by Council who described the tree as “mature” and “free from defects and in good health.” The arborist also assessed the tree as having a very high visual/aesthetic value.

 

The tree makes a substantial contribution to the street, its period homes and garden settings

 

It is agreed that the tree makes an important contribution to the streetscape. The location of the tree adjacent to the driveway is evidence of place marking which was a popular theme in garden design during the late19th and early 20th centuries.

 

The tree and its surrounding area lies within Heritage Conservation Areas C8And C9

 

The subject tree is located within Heritage Conservation Area C8B - Pymble Heights and is the vicinity of Heritage Conservation Area C9 - Fern Walk.

 

Damage attributable to the tree appears to be limited and repairable

 

It is agreed that the damage attributed to the tree is minor and/or cosmetic in nature.

 

Removal of the tree would be unjustifiable

 

Removal of the tree is not considered to be justified as it is in good health, has a positive streetscape contribution and has only caused minor damage.

 

Request that the owner of the tree reinstate the fences to 12 and 14 Wellesley Road

 

This is a civil matter which does not fall under Council’s jurisdiction.

 

The tree is inappropriate for a suburban environment

 

The tree is appropriately located on the allotment and is adequately set back from nearby dwellings. Under the current site conditions (soil, rainfall etc.), Council’s Landscape Officer considers that the tree will not grow to the height it would in its native environment of California.

 

 

 

 

Potential damage by growing root system

 

Potential damage by a tree is not a justifiable reason to remove a tree. Whilst it is acknowledged that the tree has caused damage to a driveway and two fences, it is considered that these structures were built too close to the tree. The damage to the structures is considered minor and can be easily rectified.

 

Loss of the tree will not impact on the streetscape due to the presence of other native trees

 

Whilst the tree is not a native tree, it makes a significant contribution to the Wellesley Road streetscape. The upright form and distinct foliage of the tree make it a prominent element of the streetscape when viewed from the north-east and the south-west.  The subject tree is one of several large exotics in the locality which contribute to the character and heritage significance of the streetscape.

 

Stability of the tree

 

The tree was assessed by an independent arborist on behalf of Council on 30th of April 2013.  The tree was found to be free from defects and in good health. It was given Safe Useful Life Expectancy of 1B which means it is suitable for long term retention (more than 40 years) subject to minor remedial works.

 

Within Council

 

Council’s Senior Landscape Officer commented as follows:

 

Plans/reports sighted

 

Plan/document

Designer

Drawing No.

Date

Environment and Heritage Impact Assessment Report

Chris Betteridge

 

17/09/13

Botanist’s Report

John Ford

 

14/10/12

Supplementary  Report

John Ford

 

26/03/12

 

Reports prepared

 

A report from John Ford, a consulting botanist, dated 14 October 2013 was submitted with the application for removal of the tree. Two additional reports by Keen (2013) and Austin (2013) have been reviewed in a table in the Environment and Heritage Impact Assessment Report (pp.14, 16-17). The report by Alex Austin, an AQF5 consulting arborist, was prepared in May 2013 on behalf of Council.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Tree description and condition

 

The tree is a mature Sequoia sempervirens (Californian Redwood) of approximately 20-25 metres in height, diameter at breast height of 1.2 metres and is located at the north-eastern corner of the site, on the front boundary.

 

The tree is described as vigorous and healthy (Ford 14/10/12) and of good health and condition (Austin 2013). The tree is located 18.5 metres from the subject residence, 13 metres from the carport and 13 metres from the adjoining residence at No. 14 Wellesley Road (Ford 14/10/12).

 

The subject tree is visually prominent in the streetscape due to its location in the front setback, mature size and distinctive pyramidal form. The tree’s canopy has been pruned for overhead wires on its eastern side and is otherwise intact. The subject tree is assessed as having ‘very high visual and aesthetic values’ (Austin 2013). The heritage report considers that the tree has ‘aesthetic value’ however the pruning for wires has meant that its ‘intactness and integrity are compromised.’

 

Reasons for removal

 

a.     Unsuitability of the species for the location

 

The applicant considers the tree to be unsuitable due to its mature size and proximity to dwellings, masonry walls, paving and overhead wires. The applicant has argued that the mature size of the tree is not suited to a suburban situation.

 

The Sequoia sempervirens (Californian Redwood) in its natural habitat along the central and northern California coast, has recorded heights of greater than 100 metres due to the even temperature and high level of moisture from the heavy winter rains and summer fog.  Annual precipitation varies between 640 and 3100 mm and these trees reach maximum development on the alluvial soils. However, as altitude, dryness, and slope increase, Redwoods are smaller in size.

 

http://www.na.fs.fed.us/pubs/silvics_manual/Volume_1/sequoia/sempervirens.htm.

 

For these reasons, Californian Redwoods planted in Australia, where the climate and soils are far less favourable, only attain about a third of the size that they would attain in their native habitat, (Macoboy, 1979; Macquarie Dictionary of Trees and Shrubs 1986). References provided from European and American sources, such as regarding trees in Britain, Ireland or California, are of little relevance unless comparative climatic and soil conditions to the subject site prevail. The link between the specimens in cultivation listed (2.4.3 Betteridge 2013) and the species being unsuitable for suburban gardens is disputed as the list does not claim to be comprehensive, as trees in private gardens are not included and the properties that have been selected are those which are most easily viewed, such as public parks and large gardens.

 

It is agreed that a tree with a possible mature height of 30-35 metres, such as the subject tree, is a tall tree. It is however not unusual to have both locally occurring and exotic planted specimens such as Araucaria heterophylla (Norfolk Island Pine) and Araucaria bidwillii (Bunya Pine), of similar size within the gardens of the relative large suburban lots of Ku-ring-gai where the predominant Eucalyptus saligna (Sydney Blue Gum) reach in excess of 40 metres in height. The subject site is approximately 929m2 and the adjoining lot at No. 14 Wellesley in which a proportion of the canopy overhangs, is 1151m2. It is evident that many of the adjoining lots of similar size, support trees of a similar if not greater size, all of which are in similar situations in relation to the built environment.

 

Conclusion: The mature height of the tree does not make it unsuitable for the location.

 

b.     Damage to driveway and front fence

 

A section of masonry front fence, approximately 1.5m in length has been pushed out of vertical alignment by the roots of the subject tree. A similar length of front fence of the adjoining property (No. 14 Wellesley Road) has also been moved. The driveway edging that is located against the trunk of the tree is being pushed out by the base of the trunk and there is evidence of cracking in the pavement within approximately 3 metres of the tree.

 

The house, constructed c.1929, had a single garage and an original single sandstone crazy-paved driveway. A broad garden bed approximately 2-3 metres in width was situated along the northern boundary of the front setback. The subject tree was planted within this garden bed in the north-eastern corner of the site, approximately 2 metres from the driveway. It is unknown if the front sandstone wall is original. The driveway paving and stepped drystone retaining wall were consistent with the pedestrian path to the front porch and associated drystone terracing. 

 

In 1982, a double carport was constructed in front of the garage and the single driveway was widened between the house and the street to approximately 4.5 metres. This would have required the driveway pavement and the northern pier of the front fence to be constructed in close proximity to the trunk of the subject tree. The paving laid for the widening can be seen on site to be of less substantial construction. The structural integrity of the footings of both sections of front fence in the vicinity of the tree is unknown, however it can be assumed that in 1982 the northern pier was constructed within the structural root zone of the subject tree. As the widened driveway was laid over the structural root zone of a tree, it is likely that over time there would have been movement caused by the structural roots. Similarly, it is likely in this situation in relation to the tree that there would be some movement in the alignment of the front fence.

 

Clause 13.3(1) of Ku-ring-gai DCP (Local Centres) refers to the Tree Assessment Guidelines for Private Lands. These guidelines include criteria that are not considered as justification for tree removal where there are feasible alternatives to mitigate or solve problems and retain the tree, and the tree is significant. The criteria include:

 

·     minor lifting of driveways, paths and paving

·     minor damage to roof structures, outbuildings, gardens structures and walls,  and

·     damage to underground services (such as sewer lines, water services and the like)

 

The alternatives suggested by Ford include a suspended slab or a root barrier. Neither methods would be feasible, the suspended slab due to existing levels and the root barrier due to the mature age of the tree and associated root plate. 

 

A reasonable alternative would be to reduce the width of the driveway and enlarge the garden bed by removing the paving in close proximity to the trunk of the tree. The driveway crossing width of approximately 4.5 metres exceeds Council maximum of 3.5 metres. The paving should be relaid in accordance with the arborist’s recommendations (Austin 2013). The front fence construction on the northern side of the driveway should be modified to be of more flexible construction (i.e. pier rather than strip footings). The water pipe should be relocated in accordance with the arborist’s recommendations.

 

The damage to the driveway and front fence are not considered to be valid justification for the removal of the tree.

 

c.     Public safety risk and the likelihood of failure - Safe Useful Life Expectancy (SULE) categories (after Barrell 1995)

 

The tree has been given a SULE of 1B (Austin 2013). Category 1 is a safe useful life expectancy applied to trees ‘that appeared to be retainable at the time of assessment for over 40 years with an acceptable degree of risk, assuming reasonable maintenance’. 1B can be further defined as ‘trees which could be made suitable for long-term retention by remedial care’. Evidence to substantiate the claims that the tree is unstable has not been provided (Austin 2013).

 

The tree has a safe useful life expectancy of over 40 years and is therefore not considered a public safety risk.

 

Effect of the proposed tree removal on the heritage significance of the area including the associated setting

 

A heritage conservation area is defined as a mapped area of land of heritage significance and includes buildings, works, archaeological sites, trees and places, situated on or within that land. The proposed removal of this mature tree located within a heritage conservation area is not considered by Council to be works of a minor nature and therefore requires development consent under Clause 5.10 KLEP (Local Centres) 2013.

 

The principle heritage objective is ‘to conserve the heritage significance of heritage items and heritage conservation areas, including associated fabric, settings

and views’ (Clause 5.10, (1)(b) KLEP (Local Centres) 2013.  As fabric refers to all the physical material of the place, the impact on the significance of the setting and the views should be included when considering the loss of the tree (The Burra Charter).

 

The setting is defined as the visual catchment of an area. Council objectives identify the importance of setting, ‘to ensure streetscape within the HCAs are characterised by front gardens with substantial landscaped area and minimum hard surfaces’ (Objective 16, Part 7.4 Ku-ring-gai Local Centres Development Control Plan 2013). To achieve this setting ,‘gardens, garden structures, landscaping and vegetation that contribute to the significance of the HCAs, are to be conserved.’

 

The significance of the Pymble Heights Heritage Conservation Area (HCA8B) is described as the largely intact streetscapes of Federation to Inter-war housing (7.7.13 Ku-ring-gai Local Centres DCP (2013). The term “streetscape” overwhelmingly refers to individual houses in garden settings on individual lots (p 9, Paul Davies 2010). These streetscapes are unique as opposed to those of HCAs in many other areas of Sydney due to the substantial front setbacks and generous garden settings. The consistent siting of buildings to preserve the large setbacks for generous front gardens is an important part of the HCA (Controls 14-19, 7.4 Ku-ring-gai Local Centres DCP (2013).

 

Effect of the proposed tree removal on the heritage significance of the area including the associated views

 

Significant views of prominent houses and gardens, and in particular trees, are also to be retained in an HCA( Objective 4,  7.4 Ku-ring-gai Local Centres DCP (2013).

 

It is recognised in the heritage report submitted with the application that ‘unrestricted views of the subject tree from the public domain’ are available and that it is ‘a prominent landscape element in its part of Wellesley Road’ (2.6 Betteridge 2013). It has also been described as ‘visible from a considerable distance and against the skyline’ as being an ‘excellent representation of species’ and ‘a significant contribution to the visual contribution of the area (Austin 2013)’. 

 

The subject tree is visually prominent in the streetscape due to it’s location in the front setback, mature size and distinctive pyramidal form. Its height and form are typical of the period of inter-war gardens, where tall evergreen trees were used as specimen plantings within the large front setbacks of suburban blocks to signify site entries such as driveways and to enframe the residence when viewed from the street. The subject tree is assessed as having ‘very high visual and aesthetic values’ (Austin 2013).

 

The distinct visual form and focal location of the tree when approaching the subject site along Wellesley Road from either direction, makes the tree an important part of the existing views of the HCA. Its removal will adversely impact the heritage significance of the area including the setting and views.

 

Mitigation works - replacement planting

 

It is not proposed to replace the subject tree with a tree of the same species. To mitigate the loss the removal of the tree, a smaller replacement tree species is proposed on the site. Up to two (2) additional trees of the same species are proposed to be planted in other locations, such as public parks, however these would not be within the subject HCA.

 

The subject tree is historically significant as the mid-20th century planting date relates specifically to the inter-war period of the heritage conservation area. The proposal does not conserve the scale and horticultural style of garden and streetscape plantings within the heritage conservation area.

 

Conclusion

 

The removal of the subject tree is therefore not supported.

 

Council’s consultant Heritage Adviser, Robyn Conroy, commented as follows:

 

Heritage status

 

The property is within the Pymble Heights Conservation Area C8B listed under Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan (Local Centres) 2012 and is in the vicinity of the Fern Walk Conservation Area (C9) and two individually listed heritage items at Nos 3 and 7 Wellesley Road (listed under the KPSO). The existing property is understood to have been established in 1929, which is within the key period of significance for the Conservation Area (late 19th Century to WWII). Both the house and garden demonstrate heritage values consistent with those of the Heritage Conservation Area and the property has been assessed as making a positive contribution to the heritage significance of the conservation area.

 

The tree provides evidence of the ongoing theme of place-marking that characterised the suburbanisation of Ku-ring-gai, with owners seeking exotic plantings and garden features to distinguish their properties. In this regard, the tree also provides evidence of the embrace of all things American that can be seen throughout Ku-ring-gai in the inter-war period, which included movie culture, architecture and landscapes. The Sydney Morning Herald carried articles regularly about the impressive and unique qualities of the Californian Redwood during this period and it is possible that its localised popularity in the precinct was a result of this (Sydney Morning Herald: accessed via the National Library of Australia’s Trove collection).

 

Under the provisions of the Ku-ring-gai LEP (Local Centres), the removal of a tree in a heritage conservation area is a form of demolition and development consent is required. The heritage provisions of the KPSO also include matters that must be considered when development is proposed in the vicinity of a heritage item or heritage conservation area (this is relevant to the development being in the vicinity of the Fern Walk Conservation Area and two heritage items).

 

Information submitted with the application included a Heritage Impact Assessment by Chris Betteridge (MUSEscape Pty Ltd) (2013), Botanical Assessment by John Ford (botanist) (2012 and 2013), and Sam Keen (2013), root survey by GBG Australia (2013), proposed remedial works by Waddington Consulting Pty Ltd (2013) and a petition signed by local residents supporting the removal of the tree.

 

Other information available included a report by consultant arborist for Ku-ring-gai Council, Alex Austin (2013) and advice from Stuart Read, the NSW Heritage Branch’s (currently known as the Heritage Division of the Office of Environment and Heritage) Specialist Landscape Heritage Officer.

 

 

 

Background

 

The property on which the tree was planted was created as part of the subdivision of the Pymble Heights Estate in the early 20th Century. The site is approximately 930m2, with the house set toward the middle of the block and surrounded by a very well-tended and maturing garden that includes many of the plantings typical of the area such as camellia japonica and azaleas.

 

The streetscape is characterised by its large (c900-1000m2) lots, substantial houses and mature gardens. It falls gradually from south-west to north-east.

 

The subject tree is located in the north-eastern corner of the site adjacent to the boundary with No. 14 Wellesley Road. It has been assessed by both Ford and Austin as a good and healthy example of the species known commonly as the Californian Redwood. The height of the tree has been estimated as approximately 20-25 metres at present, with a trunk diameter of 1.2 metres measured at breast height, and it’s condition has been assessed as sound, being in mid-life (according to the life expectancy of the species in cultivation in Australian soils and climate). With the exception of the lower branches on the street side which have been trimmed to accommodate street power lines, the tree has a good quality and distinctive conical form. It is located 18.5 metres from the dwelling on the site and 13 metres from the dwelling on the adjoining property No. 14 Wellesley Street. It is also 13 metres from the carport between the two dwellings. The root analysis (via ground penetrating radar) reveals that roots (potentially those of this tree) extend under much of the driveway area and this is evidenced by lifting of the sandstone paving in places.

 

The tree’s height, distinctive conical form and location close to the public domain mean that it plays an important role in the local streetscape, rising well above the skyline and providing the most prominent element in views from both directions along Wellesley Road.

 

The gardens in the vicinity of the property (Wellesley Road and Mocatta Avenue) are all substantial in scale and mature in character and many include large exotic coniferous and Cedar trees. These trees form an aesthetically cohesive and distinctive layer that plays an important role in unifying and characterising the local streetscape in the vicinity of the property. One appears from site inspection to also be a Redwood, a preliminary identification agreed with by Chris Betteridge in his HIS. This is discussed further below.

 

The base of the tree sits in a narrow garden bed that defines the edge of the driveway. The driveway is wide and has been paved in random-laid sandstone flagging commonly known as ‘crazy paving’. The pattern of paving reveals that the driveway was originally narrower and the garden bed wider than it is now. Lifting of the paving slabs is evident on the driveway near the tree. A modest, well-proportioned sandstone stone wall has been built on the street boundary to No. 12 Wellesley Road, Pymble and a low brick wall to No. 14 Wellesley Road, Pymble. Both fences have been displaced by the growth of the trunk and are now well off vertical alignment, to the point where they are in danger of toppling over.

 

Issues

 

The removal of a tree within a heritage conservation area is defined in the LEP as demolition:

 

demolish, in relation to a heritage item or an Aboriginal object, or a building, work, relic or tree within a heritage conservation area, means wholly or partly destroy, dismantle or deface the heritage item, Aboriginal object or building, work, relic or tree. (KLEP (Local Centres) 2012).

 

Under the provisions of the LEP, development consent is required for the demolition of a tree in a heritage conservation area, and the following objectives must be applied to the consideration of the application:

 

(1)  The objectives of this clause are as follows:

 

(a)  to conserve the environmental heritage of Ku-ring-gai,

(b)  to conserve the heritage significance of heritage items and heritage conservation areas, including associated fabric, settings and views,

(c)  to conserve archaeological sites,

(d) to conserve Aboriginal objects and Aboriginal places of heritage significance. (5.10.1)

 

Subclause 5.10.4 states:

 

The consent authority must, before granting consent under this clause in respect of a heritage item or heritage conservation area, consider the effect of the proposed development on the heritage significance of the item or area concerned. This subclause applies regardless of whether a heritage management document is prepared under subclause (5) or a heritage conservation management plan is submitted under subclause (6).

 

A heritage management document (the Heritage Impact Assessment prepared by MUSEscape Pty Ltd) has been submitted in support of the application. Several of the arguments it presents will be discussed in more detail below.

 

Development Control Plan

 

The Local Centres DCP also provides controls and requirements that are to be addressed in the proposed demolition. See below for a more detailed assessment of the proposed development against the requirements of the DCP.

 

Matters raised in the HIS

 

The argument in the HIS (which is supported by the applicant’s other reports) for removal of the tree can be summarised as responding to three main issues: it is an unsuitable species for the location; the damage it has caused/will cause to the front fences and driveway paving; and risks to public safety.

 

The HIS and arborist reports prepared in support of the application place an emphasis on the unsuitability of this species for standard suburban lots. It should be noted however that the subject lot is part of a traditional, early 20th  Century ‘quarter acre’ subdivision, whereas the references cited in support of the argument that the tree should not be planted in residential subdivisions were published in recent years in the USA, where, like in Australia, the standard lot size has shrunk to less than half that of the subject site. It is not disputed that the tree is not suitable for a contemporary residential subdivision of 400-500m2 standard, particularly if planted in its native soils and climate of the west coast of the USA, but the subject site is approximately 930m2 and is quite capable, both physically and aesthetically, of supporting a large tree.

 

This generous lot size and the scale of front gardens throughout the precinct (including both heritage conservation areas) means that the subject tree sits comfortably within the streetscape. The tree does not crowd the site, obstruct important views or read as being out of scale in the streetscape. It can be argued that the tree provides an aesthetically satisfying counterbalance to the horizontality of the house in views over the site and is an important element in local streetscape views; and if not present there would be a loss in the aesthetic qualities of these views due to a lack of vertical or softening elements in the viewscape (see photos below).

 

It is not disputed that the Californian Redwood is a tall-growing species but it needs to be considered in the context of other trees endemic to the Ku-ring-gai area such as the Eucalyptus saligna (Sydney Blue Gum), which commonly reaches heights of at least 40 metres; as well as the trees that were planted commonly as ‘marker’ trees (i.e. specifically for their tall-growing habit) in the 19th Century throughout Sydney, the Araucaria Bidwillii (Bunya Pine) and Araucaria Cunninghamii (Hoop Pine) which can grow to even greater heights in Australian gardens. The Redwood is tall, but not significantly taller than other trees in the vicinity, and even if it was to reach the 30-40 metres which is cited as the tallest height likely to be reached by the species in cultivation (and in favourable climatic conditions and soils), the tree would still not be out of scale with or unduly prominent in the views along the streetscape of Wellesley Road. It would however read as a local ‘marker’ tree, which was likely to have been the intention when planted originally. That the public was made aware of the species and its majestic qualities in its native California is revealed by the wondering tone of the many articles in media such as the Sydney Morning Herald in the inter-War and early post-War eras.

 

Further, its suitability for cool, mountain climates rather than the coastal plains does not negate the validity of the subject tree as part of the streetscape of the heritage conservation area. It does however suggest that the tree may not reach even the heights that are nominated as being expected in the Australian context.

 

The suggestion in the reports that Californian Redwoods are found primarily in parks and publicly accessible gardens is perhaps more actually an indication of the scope of most arboreal surveys. These have traditionally focused on documenting public parks and gardens (and the significant/publically accessible gardens of stately Victorian homes) rather than trees in the more recent ‘ordinary’ private suburban landscape.

 

The gardens of Ku-ring-gai are notable for their plantings of exotic and specimen trees, and the subject tree is an excellent example of the genre.

 

The HIS includes an assessment of the heritage value of the tree as an individual specimen, i.e. using the NSW Heritage Council’s criteria to assess whether the tree has inherent heritage values that would justify its listing as a heritage item, which it concludes that it does not. This conclusion is of little relevance to the subject application because the issue of concern is not whether the tree should be listed as a heritage item or not, rather, its role as part of the heritage conservation area. For example, the argument that the significance of the tree has been diminished because it has been trimmed to allow clearance for the power lines may have the potential to carry more weight if the tree was being considered for possible listing as a separate heritage item for its horticultural value but is of lower import when its contribution to the streetscapes of the heritage conservation areas is the issue being considered. Like most of the large trees throughout Ku-ring-gai that are located on the same side of the street as overhead power lines, the lower branches have been cut back by utility authorities to achieve statutory clearances. Once again, this does not negate the heritage value of the tree, although of course the streetscape presentation would be more complete were the tree to be untrimmed. This could be said of all trees on nature strips and in private gardens in proximity to power lines throughout the LGA and is not an argument for its removal. The impact of the trimming on streetscape views will not worsen: the tree grows from its tip and the existing bare area will remain roughly where it is now and will not require further trimming.

 

Similarly, the presence of power lines, whilst unfortunate, is a feature of most streets in Ku-ring-gai and is not sufficient justification to argue that the quality of views in the vicinity of the tree are diminished because the lines are visible.

 

The assessment does not explore in any detail the contribution that the tree makes to the heritage values and significance of the streetscape as part of the heritage conservation area; nor of its contribution to the heritage significance and in particular the setting of the adjacent Fern Walk Conservation Area and the nearby heritage items (two of which are almost opposite the subject site). These areas and items are joined by, and are described by, the streetscape qualities of Wellesley Street, qualities that are expressed to a large part by the gardens and settings of the individual houses.

 

In particular, although the report identifies some of the other similar trees in the immediate vicinity it does not identify the group (i.e. collective) value of the prevalence of coniferous species in streetscapes of Wellesley Road and Mocatta Avenue. Grouping of similar forms, whether trees or houses, plays an important role in establishing and maintaining the aesthetic (and historic) character of a precinct and the loss of individual elements has the potential to have an adverse impact on this heritage value. If one of these trees is removed for the reasons proposed it is reasonable to predict that applications to remove other coniferous trees in the area would follow and much of the essential character of this precinct would be eroded.

 

In the case of the subject tree, site inspection revealed that there is another tree which is also likely to be a Redwood and is of a similar age and stage in the group. This tree is growing in the north-western corner of the garden of No. 7 Wellesley Road, Pymble (which is the Heritage Item diagonally opposite the subject site). If so, this may be a very rare pair of Redwoods planted in the private domain (no other similar groups are known to the author, and discussion with Stuart Read, the NSW Heritage Branch’s (currently known as the Heritage Division of the Office of Environment and Heritage) Specialist Landscape Heritage Officer confirmed that this may indeed be the case.

 

The tree is particularly prominent in views when travelling south along Wellesley Road. These views cannot be assumed to be short in duration and therefore of negligible contributory value as is suggested in the report. The area is suburban and travel speeds are slow, including a high proportion of pedestrians and people walking to enjoy the qualities of the streetscapes in the heritage conservation area.

 

With regard to the damage to property caused by the tree, that to the fence is appreciable, and the need to demolish this part of the wall (to both Nos 12 and 14 Wellesley Road, Pymble) agreed. Given this, it is noted that the tree trunk forms an effective marker of the edge of the property and that it may not be necessary or even appropriate to re-build a masonry wall in this position. Both the wall and the tree contribute to the aesthetic qualities of the streetscape but the tree plays a more prominent role. A more appropriate option would be to allow the tree itself to mark the boundary, and if necessary, infill the area at the base with shade tolerant planting.

 

The lifting of paving on the driveway is also noted but the damage appears to be worst in the part of the driveway that was created by infilling much of the garden bed within which the tree had been planted when the carport was built. Crazy paving is created by the fitting together of separate slabs of stone of irregular form and variable size and is readily capable of being repaired or altered by re-laying stone (including the lifted slabs, even if cracked) in the same pattern. Part of this additional paved area near the street frontage could potentially be removed to reinstate the garden (i.e. permeable zone) beside the driveway where the roots could access water readily without adverse impact on the aesthetic qualities of the property. Active manipulation of the root zone (e.g. cutting roots/installing root barriers) would not be likely to be successful and could destabilise the tree.

 

The damage to the underground services attributed to the tree is unfortunate but is commonly found throughout any area where trees are planted close to services and any replacement tree in this part of the site or nature strip would potentially cause similar problems. Given that the lowest branches on the street side have already been cut to provide clearance for power lines, undergrounding them (as suggested in the HIS) will not make any significant difference.

 

Significant weather events have occurred in the area, including the major storm that damaged and destroyed densely planted areas of trees (ie relatively sheltered by trees of similar height) as well as individual specimens; and even the most recent mini-tornado in the Hornsby area. All trees are vulnerable to strong winds, regardless of species. Any replacement tree that is capable of replacing the streetscape qualities of the existing would potentially be at similar risk.

 

 

Figure 1: View to the north-east along Wellesley Road. The subject tree is a prominent element, with the delicate tracery of its branches clearly defined against the skyline (blue arrow). The tree to its left is now in very poor condition and has lost most of its foliage. (Image Google Earth 2009)

 

 

Figure 2: The tree is also prominent in streetscape views towards the south-west, with the branches clear against the sky and minimal background vegetation present that would otherwise soften the view. The loss of the tree would leave views over the western side of Wellesley Street noticeably less well vegetated. (Image Google Earth 2009)

 

 

Figure 3: The ‘pair’ of Redwoods at No. 7 Wellesley Road, Pymble (left) and No. 12 Wellesley Road, Pymble (right) are of similar size, form, maturity and planted position, each being at the front corner of their property close to the northern boundary. This suggests co-ordinated, or at least copied planting between the owners of the two properties.

 

 

Figure 4: The other Redwood is planted at the front corner of No. 7 Wellesley Road, Pymble, near the driveway leading to No. 9 Wellesley Road, Pymble.

 

 

Figure 5: The subject tree also forms one of a group of exotics with distinctive forms and dark foliage that contrast with the other plantings in the area. These include the other Redwood, other coniferous species and the Deodaras (Himilayan Cedars). (Image Google Earth 2009)

 

 

Figure 6: The entrance to the driveway is close to the base of the tree. This image shows clearly the original (left) and widened (right) sections of the driveway. The area that has been widened was originally a garden area which provided generous room for the growth of the trunk. Its covering by pavement has potentially encouraged root spread. The houses are set well back from the front boundary and their setting is not overwhelmed by the presence of the tree. (Image Google Earth 2009)

 

 

Figures 7 and 8: The subject tree and detail showing its proximity to the property boundary as well as damage that has occurred because the wall and paving have been placed too close to the base of the tree and inadequate area allowed for its growth. The required space could be achieved readily by removing the damaged paving (i.e. reinstating the original garden bed over part of the driveway) and by allowing the tree, rather than the fence, to mark the front corner of the property.

 

The tree is approximately 75% of the size that the species is likely to achieve in favourable soils, climate (cool and wet) and situation (in a valley) in cultivation in Australia. Although it is still growing, it is debatable whether this example will reach the height it would if growing in optimum conditions.

 

The question of ‘acceptable change’

 

The HIS concludes that the removal of the tree will change the aesthetic qualities of the streetscape but that this change will be acceptable in the context of the streetscape qualities of the precinct and the other matters that were raised in the report.

 

Council has resolved to protect and conserve the heritage significance of the recently gazetted heritage conservation areas and this commitment includes the retention of the quality and variety of substantial trees that create the unique canopies of Ku-ring-gai’s conservation areas.

 

When considering the impact of a proposed development in a heritage conservation area, however, it is necessary that the proposal be considered not only in terms of its implications for the owners of the subject site but also on the impact that the development may have on the heritage significance of the area.

 

One of the defining characteristics of a heritage conservation area is its size and in particular the way that it includes many (usually dozens, sometimes up to thousands) of separate properties, each with structures and in most instances in the suburban context, gardens.  Although it is often argued that one element on one property in a heritage conservation area can be changed and the remainder of the area is not affected, this is rarely the case, particularly when the element is a visually prominent component of the streetscape; as well as being a potentially rare example of an even rarer group.

 

It is agreed that the removal of the tree will change the aesthetic qualities of the streetscape but after consideration of the submitted reports and my additional research, I am of the opinion that this change will have a significant adverse impact on the streetscape qualities of the precinct and therefore the heritage values of the heritage conservation areas and nearby heritage items, for the following reasons:

 

·        The tree is a good example of a cultivated variety of the species in the context of a siting, soil, and climate that is notably different to its native habitat.  Its growth rate, form and expected life expectancy have all been modified by these factors and it is not considered to be, or have the potential to grow to be, an inappropriate species for a lot of this size and scale.

 

·        The tree is well-sited on its property, which is large and aesthetically capable of including a large tree without crowding, dominating or obscuring views of the house.

 

·        Examples of this tree in Sydney are understood to be rare, with few documented in the private domain. Such a prominent and healthy example should be retained if at all possible. This is a requirement of Council’s adopted DCP.

 

·        The subject tree appears to be part of a group planting that included at least one other of this species in the immediate vicinity.  This is the only occurrence of this known to the author, or in NSW.

 

·        The planting of the Californian Redwood in the first half of the 20th Century (the likely date) provides rare surviving botanical evidence of the contemporary fashion for American culture (including buildings, gardens and lifestyle) that is part of the historic theme of Americana that was prominent in Ku-ring-gai in the Inter-War and early post-War periods. That the house is not of Spanish Mission or similar style does not negate this contributory value, since it is possible (based on the aerial photos submitted with the application) that the tree was planted at least 15 years after the house was constructed.

 

·        The tree is a prominent element in streetscape views, particularly when viewed from the north (along Wellesley Road), where it rises well above the prevailing skyline and its characteristic conical shape with delicate tracery is notable.

 

·        The subject tree is one half of a ‘paired’ planting with a matching specimen in the garden of the heritage item of No. 7 Wellesley Road. It’s removal will have an adverse impact on the heritage values of this item and its setting and on the framing of streetscape views between the two trees.

 

·        The tree also forms part of a group of similar ‘statement’ trees with distinctive exotic forms and dark-foliaged with delicate tracery that characterise the streetscape in this part of the precinct (Wellesley Road and Mocatta Avenue).  Its removal will erode the integrity of this group.

 

Conclusion and recommendation

 

The existing tree should be retained because its removal would have an adverse impact on the aesthetic and historic values of the Pymble Heights Conservation Area, the Fern Walk Conservation Area and the heritage significance of the two heritage items in the immediate vicinity of the site, including the significance of the garden of No. 7 Wellesley Road and the quality of the setting of both items and areas.  Approval would therefore be contrary to the Ku-ring-gai LEP (Local Centres) 2012 and Ku-ring-gai DCP; which require that gardens, garden structures, landscaping and vegetation that contribute to the significance of heritage conservation area(s) are to be conserved.

 

Although it is only one element in the context of the wider heritage conservation area, the subject tree is one of the most visually prominent features of the streetscape views along this part of Wellesley Road. Wellesley Road forms the boundary between the Pymble Heights and Fern Walk Conservation Areas.  It is also a prominent element in the setting of the nearby heritage items at Nos. 3 and 7 Wellesley Road, which are situated in close proximity to the subject tree. The tree also reads as a paired planting with another located in the same (front northern corner) position in the garden of No. 7 Wellesley Road. The presence of a paired planting of Redwoods in private gardens is potentially rare.

 

The growth of the tree has damaged the fence and driveway because the structures are located too close to its trunk. The diameter of the trunk (and the maximum diameter likely in cultivation on unfavourable soils, aspect and climate) is not extraordinary in the context of the historic cultural landscape of Ku-ring-gai, which is renowned for its majestic trees and similar space would be required for any replacement species of appropriate scale and form. 

 

Space for continued growth could be achieved readily by removing the damaged paving (i.e. by narrowing the driveway width near the front of the property (whilst retaining the area in front of the carport), allowing the original wide garden bed to be reinstated. 

 

The tree and other plantings, rather than constructed fences, could mark the north-eastern corner of the property effectively.  The low wall to the adjoining property (No. 14 Wellesley Road, Pymble) is less directly affected and could be reconstructed using piers rather than strip footings, and/or with the wall commencing clear of the maximum expected diameter and an infill planting placed in the gap.

 

All trees in the vicinity of service lines have the potential to affect lines and infrastructure and council and authorities have guidelines for the management of the interface. The subject tree is no different in this regard to all other substantial trees in the LGA.

 

The contributory heritage values of the existing tree could not be replaced by new planting unless it is an equivalent to the existing tree, and such a replacement would raise similar issues to the existing with regard to the need to remove the fence, amend the configuration of the driveway and maintain (and potentially repair) services. 

 

Replacement by smaller scaled and native vegetation (as proposed in the DA) would not be appropriate in the context of this streetscape.

 

Statutory Provisions

 

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

 

This application is deemed to be ‘Local Development’ under Part 4 of the EP and A Act, 1979 and requires development consent pursuant to the KLEP (Local Centres) 2012.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land

 

The provisions of SEPP55 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. Further investigation is not warranted in this case.

 

Sydney Regional Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

 

Matters for consideration under SREP 2005 include biodiversity, ecology and environmental protection, public access to and scenic qualities of foreshores and waterways, maintenance of views, control of boat facilities and maintenance of a working harbour. The proposal is not in close proximity to, or within view, of a waterway or wetland and is considered satisfactory.

 

Local Content (LEP, KPSO, etc)

 

KLEP (Local Centres) 2012

 

The removal of a tree within a Heritage Conservation Area is defined by the KLEP as demolition. To demolish is defined as follows:

 

demolish, in relation to a heritage item or an Aboriginal object, or a building, work, relic or tree within a heritage conservation area, means wholly or partly destroy, dismantle or deface the heritage item, Aboriginal object or building, work, relic or tree. (KLEP (Local Centres) 2012).

 

Under the provisions of clause 5.10(2), development consent is required for demolition of a tree in a heritage conservation area. Clause 5.10(4) requires the consent authority to consider the effect of the proposed development on the heritage significance of the item or area concerned.

 

Clause 5.10(1) of the KLEP provides objectives which must be applied to the consideration of an application. The relevant objectives are considered below: 

 

Assessment of compliance with the heritage objectives of LEP (Local Centres) 2012

 

Objective

Comment

(a) to conserve the environmental heritage of Ku-ring-gai,

 

The proposed development will result in the demolition of a significant landscape element in a heritage conservation area. 

 

 

(b)  to conserve the heritage significance of heritage items and heritage conservation areas, including associated fabric, settings and views,

 

The loss of the tree will not conserve the aesthetic values of the streetscape of Wellesley Road and its contribution to the heritage conservation area. The conical form of the tree and its delicate and distinctive tracery are distinctive in the streetscape views, from many angles. Loss of the tree will have an adverse impact on these views, the streetscape and the heritage significance of the group of similar coniferous/cedar trees in the vicinity within the heritage conservation area.

 

The existing property is believed to have been established within the key period of significance, with both the house and the garden making a positive contribution to the heritage significance of the area. The use of an exotic tree in a prominent location on the site provides evidence of the ongoing theme of place-marking which characterised the suburbanisation of Ku-ring-gai. The gardens in the vicinity of the subject site are substantial in scale and mature in character and many include large exotic trees. These trees form an aesthetically cohesive and distinctive layer which unifies the streetscape.

 

The loss of the tree will also have an adverse impact on the setting of the adjacent Fern Walk heritage conservation area by removing one of the trees that together form an aesthetically distinctive group of similar species in the immediate streetscape. 

 

The subject tree forms one half of a pair of Redwoods of similar scale and form, and which were planted in mirror-imaged positions on the properties Nos. 7 and 12 Wellesley Road, thus forming a distinctive and potentially rare ‘paired’ planting pattern of this species.  The loss of the tree would therefore not conserve the setting and potentially the heritage significance of the item at No. 7 Wellesley Road. 

The proposed replacement tree (a smaller native, nectar producing species) is not consistent with the qualities of the streetscape.

 

 

The removal of the subject tree would result in the loss of a significant and characteristic element of the streetscape. The loss of the tree would be apparent and detrimental to the streetscape when viewed from both directions. Photo montages have been created to demonstrate the effect the loss of the tree would have on the streetscape (Figures 9 and 10). It is noted that the loss of the tree cannot easily be quantified as the impact of the loss changes depending on the location of the viewer.

 

Description: E:\KMC-H Adv2013\Pymble-Welesley-12-TreeRemoval\FromWellesley-treeOnLHSisNowDying.JPG

Description: \\kmc\data\Users\bgregory\My Documents\Tree Assesment - brodee gregory.jpg

 

Figure 9: Before and after views towards the north-east (photo taken out front of No. 8 Wellesley Road)

 

 

Description: E:\KMC-H Adv2013\Pymble-Welesley-12-TreeRemoval\FromWellesley.JPG

 

Figure 10: Before and after views towards the south-west (photo take out front of No. 16 Wellesley Road)

 

Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance

 

The subject site is the vicinity of two heritage items at Nos. 3 and 7 Wellesley Road, Pymble. The heritage items are outside the local centres area and are governed by the KPSO.

 

Clause 61E of the KPSO states that the Council cannot grant consent to an application in the vicinity of a heritage item unless it has made an assessment of the effect the carrying out of that development will have on the heritage significance of the item and its setting.

 

The subject tree is paired with a similar tree, which appears to also be a Redwood, which is situated within the front setback of No. 7 Wellesley Road, Pymble. This is potentially a very rare pairing of Redwoods planted in the private domain. Removal of the subject tree would therefore have a detrimental impact on the setting of the heritage item at No. 7 Wellesley Road.

 

Policy Provisions (DCPs, Council policies, strategies and management plans)

 

Local Centres DCP

 

Part 4 Dwelling houses

 

Part 4 of Ku-ring-gai Local Centres DCP concerns dwelling houses and ancillary development. Clause 1 in Section 4A.1Local Character and streetscape provides the following assessment criteria for visual character:

 

i)          architectural themes

ii)         building scale and setbacks

iii)        landscape themes

iv)        fencing styles

 

Landscape themes (such as garden design and tree species) make an important contribution to visual character throughout Ku-ring-gai. The proposed tree removal does not comply with this clause.

 

The importance of landscaping is also addressed in Section 4A.4 Landscaping, with a stated objective of this section being to protect and enhance the tree canopy of Ku-ring-gai. Further, clause 1 states that trees will be valued and conserved as an integrated feature of the area and their dominant role in the landscape will be protected and enhanced.

 

Part 7 Heritage and Conservation Areas

 

Part 7 of Ku-ring-gai Local Centres DCP provides detailed heritage provisions for heritage items and heritage conservation areas within the local centres. An assessment of compliance has been taken below:

 

Assessment of compliance with the heritage provisions of Ku-ring-gai DCP 2012

 

Aims of heritage controls:

Comment

 

 

xii)    Retain and enhance the heritage items, HCAs and their associated settings in the Local Centres;

 

xiii)   Ensure the heritage significance, streetscape and landscape character of HCAs are maintained;

 

xiv)   Ensure alterations and additions to existing heritage buildings respect those buildings and do not compromise the significance and character of the individual heritage items or the HCAs; and

 

xv)    Ensure new development in the vicinity of heritage items and HCAs respects the heritage context and is sympathetic in terms of form, scale, character, bulk, orientation, setback, colours and textures and does not mimic or adversely affect the significance of heritage items or HCAs and their settings.

 

 

The development proposes the demolition of an element that is part of the streetscape in the Pymble Heights HCA. 

Specific objectives for development in a heritage conservation area (section 7.4)

 

1.   To retain contributory buildings within the HCA.

2.    To ensure that new development retains the identified historic and aesthetic character of the HCA in which it is situated.

3.    To ensure new development respects the character of, and minimises the visual impact upon, the HCA and its streetscapes through appropriate design and siting.

4.    To maintain and enhance the existing heritage character of the streetscape and the precinct.

 

 

The removal of the tree will result in the loss of an element that forms part of the streetscape in the heritage conservation area.  Although the streetscape of Wellesley Street is not ‘identified’ in the Statement of Significance which (in common with the other HCA assessments) focuses on the architectural characteristics of individual properties); Wellesley Road and adjoining streets such as Mocatta Avenue are good examples of the streetscapes of the heritage conservation area, their cohesiveness providing evidence of the interest in establishing and maintaining high quality gardens in the area over many years.  This quality is enhanced further by the group of similar trees seen in the vicinity of the site.

 

Objective relevant specifically to gardens

 

16 To ensure streetscape within the HCAs are characterised by front gardens with substantial landscaped area and minimum hard surfaces.

 

 

 

 

No change is proposed to the ratio of hard:soft landscaped area.  If the area of the driveway was reduced by removing the paving in the vicinity of the tree (i.e. making it a single-car width) this objective would be better satisfied.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Gardens and Landscaping - Controls

 

58 Gardens, garden structures, landscaping and vegetation that contribute to the significance of HCAs are to be conserved.

The tree is individually aesthetically distinctive and is also one of a group of similar species that together contribute to aesthetic value of the Wellesley Road streetscape. 

 

59 Traditionally designed gardens that enhance the appearance of the historic houses and streetscapes are encouraged.

 

The tree is the focal planting in its garden and is an important element in the streetscape, particularly when approaching the heritage conservation area from the north.

It is also interesting to note that the house is of Inter-War Georgian Revival style.  The original Georgian and early Victorian bungalow villa was noted for its inclusion of large ‘marker trees’ of exotic and tall-growing species.  The subject tree could be considered a 20th century reinterpretation of this tradition.

The planting and long-term maintenance of unusual and exotic trees in the generous gardens of Ku-ring-gai is one of the most distinctive characteristics of the streetscapes of the LGA and is exemplified by its heritage conservation areas.

Removal of the tree would be contrary to this provision.

 

60 Gardens in HCAs that are historically characterised by either predominantly native plants, predominantly introduced plants or a mix of both should retain that historic character.

 

 

The prevailing character of the existing garden and that of the streetscape in the vicinity of the site is exotic. This character should be retained. The tree should not be removed and replaced by a native shrub or small tree.

61 Paving and hard surfacing, particularly to front gardens is to be limited; gardens including substantial trees and shrubs are to be established along street elevations; front gardens within the HCA must have minimum 70% landscaped area.

The DCP encourages the planting of substantial trees along the street elevation. Reducing the amount of paving would help to further comply with this control.  A similarly substantial tree would be required to satisfy this requirement.

The existing double-width driveway at the street alignment would not comply with Council’s current controls.

63 Provide landscape screening and softening to buildings throughout the HCA.

 

The existing tree softens views over and within the buildings in the local streetscape. It also softens the skyline views.  If removed, the views to the west over this part of Wellesley Street will have a much more open and starker character.

 

Any replacement tree would need to be of similar size to soften streetscape views. 

Detailed controls for the Pymble Heights Conservation Area:

The detailed controls for the HCA address architectural and fabric issues. No controls specific to the gardens in the HCA have been adopted.  The general controls for gardens in HCAs (above) apply. 

 

The DCP also contains clauses relating to driveway width. Clause 43 states that the maximum width of a driveway at street frontage should be 3.5 metres. Part of the applicant’s argument is that the tree should be removed because it is causing damage to the driveway. However, the driveway is excessively wide (approximately 4.5 metres) and exceeds Council’s current maximum driveway width. The width of the driveway could reasonably be reduced by up to one metre which would reduce its streetscape impact, allow more room for the tree to grow and remove the hazard caused by the uplifted stones.

 

Section 7.7.13 of the DCP contains a specific description and controls relating to the Pymble Heights Conservation Area. Whilst this section does not specifically refer to the subject tree, it is noted that no individual trees are mentioned in the DCP. However, retention of individual trees is encouraged by the overarching objectives of the part (specifically objective xiii), specific objectives of section 7.4 and the clauses concerning landscaping described above.

 

Likely Impacts

 

The subject tree is a significant feature of the Wellesley Road streetscape. The tree is highly visible from both the south-western and north-eastern approaches. The tree is also part of a unifying layer of distinctive exotic trees which unify the streetscape and is characteristic of late 19th and early 20th century development.

 

Removal of the tree would result in adverse streetscape impacts to Wellesley Road when viewed from the north-east and south-west. It would also compromise the historical significance of Heritage Conservation Area C8B – Pymble Heights which is significant for its intact streetscapes.

 

The tree is in good health and condition and Council’s arborist considers it suitable for long-term retention, subject to minor remedial action (such as removal of fencing and driveway pavers.

 

Suitability of the Site

 

The site is zoned R2 Low Density Residential and is suitable for residential purposes.

 

Development on the site currently comprises a dwelling with a detached double carport in the front setback and pool and entertaining area in the rear setback. The site also features generous areas of landscaping, particularly within the front setback.

 

The site has an area of approximately 930m2, which is an average sized allotment in Ku-ring-gai, but generous by current subdivision standards in Sydney. Development on the site is typical of a low density residential setting and is not compromised by the subject tree. The subject tree is appropriately located on the lot and is set back a suitable distance from the nearest dwellings (13-18.5 metres).

 

The applicant has argued that the tree is inappropriate for a suburban setting and has sited numerous sources which state that Redwoods are suitable for parks, large gardens etc. Nonetheless, as Council’s Consultant Heritage Adviser has concluded, this is perhaps more an indication of the scope of most arboreal surveys than the appropriateness of such trees in the suburban landscape. It is also noted that the lot sizes in Ku-ring-gai are significantly larger than more recently created allotments, both in Australia and overseas.

 

The height of the subject tree is also comparable to that of other exotic planted specimens such as Araucaria heterophylla (Norfolk Island Pine) and Araucaria bidwillii (Bunya Pine) and locally occurring trees such as Eucalyptus saligna (Sydney Blue Gum) and Eucalyptus pilularis (Blackbutt). Council’s consultant arborist has advised that the risks associated with these large native trees (which are prone to dropping large branches) are often far greater than those presented by the subject tree.

 

Lidar imaging of the subject and surrounding sites shows that the height of the subject tree is comparable to that of many other trees in the locality. The tree is shown to have a height of 20-25 metres, whilst other trees on the opposite side of Wellesley Road are shown to have a height of approximately 40 metres (refer to Attachment 2). In this regard, the scale of the tree is appropriate for both the site and the streetscape.  

 

Public Interest

 

Four submissions were received from three neighbours during the notification period. One submission was received in support of the proposal and one was received against the proposal. The remaining two submissions (made by the same person) are somewhat neutral, and request that the applicant reinstate the damaged fence at No. 14 Wellesley Road, Pymble.

 

The applicant has submitted a petition containing 24 signatures supporting the removal of the tree. The addresses of the signatories have been provided and most reside within Wellesley Road, Pymble. As Council’s Consultant Heritage Adviser has noted, petitions cannot be considered to be an accurate indicator of social heritage value. It is also noted that, whilst many of these residents were notified of the subject development application, none of the signatories made a submission to Council.

 

Conclusion

 

Having regard to the provisions of section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the proposed development is considered to be unsatisfactory. Therefore, it is recommended that the application be refused.

 

 


Recommendation:

 

PURSUANT TO SECTION 80(1) OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT ACT, 1979

 

THAT Council, as the consent authority, refuse development consent to Development Application No. 376/13 for Removal of tree within front setback (Californian Redwood) within Heritage Conservation Area on land at No. 12 Wellesley Road, Pymble, for the following reasons:

 

1.     The subject tree is in good health and condition.

 

Particulars:

 

(a)      The tree is a mature Sequoia sempervirens (Californian Redwood) of approximately 20-25 metres in height with a diameter at breast height of 1.2 metres.

(b)      The tree has been described by the applicant’s arborist (Ford, October 2012) as “vigorous and healthy” and by Council’s consultant arborist as “free from defects and in good health” (Austin, May 2013).

(c)      The tree has been assessed Council’s consultant arborist has having a SULE of 1B which means that it could be made suitable for retention in the long term (40 years plus) by remedial care.

 

2.     The subject tree is visually significant and its removal would result in adverse streetscape impacts.

 

Particulars:

 

(a)      The considerable height, conical form and distinctive dark foliage of the tree make it a prominent element of the Wellesley Road streetscape. Views of the tree are significant travelling down the street towards the north-east and up the street towards the south-west. The prominence of the tree can be seen by persons travelling on foot or in a vehicle.

 

b)       The presence of tall trees and landscaped gardens are defining characteristics of the character of Ku-ring-gai. The proposed tree removal does not comply with sections 4A.1 and 4A.4 of Ku-ring-gai Development Control Plan which emphasise the importance of landscape themes and the conservation of trees as important elements of visual character and streetscape.

 

3.       Removal of the tree would result in adverse impacts to Heritage Conservation Area C8B – Pymble Heights and Heritage Conservation Area C9 – Fern Walk.

 

(a)      The dwelling and garden of No. 12 Wellesley Road demonstrate heritage values consistent with those of the heritage conservation area and the property has been assessed as making a positive contribution to the heritage significance of the conservation area. The dwelling was constructed during the period of core significance for the conservation area which is from the late 19th Century to World War II. The tree may also have been planted during this period. The tree is located in a garden bed that defines the edge of the driveway and provides evidence of place-marking. The height and form of the tree are typical of the period of inter-war gardens where tall evergreen trees were used as specimen plantings. The tree forms part of a group of large exotic trees which form an aesthetically cohesive and distinctive layer which unifies the heritage conservation area. Removal of the tree would not conserve the significance of the heritage conservation area and does not comply with the objectives contained within clause 5.10(1) of Ku-ring-gai LEP (Local Centres) 2012.

(d)      The proposed tree removal does not comply with objective 4 of section 7.4 of Local Centres Development Control Plan which is to maintain and enhance the existing heritage character of the streetscape and the precinct. The proposed tree removal is also inconsistent with clauses 58, 59 and 60 of Ku-ring-gai Development Control Plan. The tree is an exotic, which is characteristic of garden design from the late 19th Century to the inter-war period. The tree retains the historic character of the locality and enhances the streetscape. It also makes a significant contribution to two heritage conservation areas.

 

 

4.     The damage caused to ancillary structures and services does not warrant removal of the tree.

 

Particulars:

 

(a)      The damage to the water pipe and sandstone driveway is minor. The driveway has been constructed too close to the tree and that the eastern half of the driveway is of lower quality. 

(b)      The width of the driveway is approximately 4.5 metres which is much wider than necessary. The driveway does not comply with part 7.4 clause 43 of Local Centres DCP which allows a maximum driveway width of 3.5m at the street frontage.

(c)      Damage to the masonry front fences of Nos. 12 and 14 Wellesley Road, Pymble is cosmetic. The fences are not structural walls and serve only to mark the front boundary of each property. The damaged part of each fence needs to be removed, though does not need to be replaced as the tree forms an effective marker of the edge of the property.

 

 

5.     The subject tree is suitable for the site.

 

Particulars:

 

(a)      The site has an area of approximately 930m2. The site contains a dwelling house,         pool, entertainment area and double carport. Development on the site has not been hindered by the size or location of the tree.

(b)      The tree is appropriately located on the site and is located 18.5 metres from the dwelling on the subject site and 13 metres from its carport. The tree is set back 13 metres from the adjoining dwelling at No. 14 Wellesley Road, Pymble.

(c)      The height of the subject tree is comparable to that of other locally occurring trees such as Eucalyptus saligna (Sydney Blue Gum) and exotic planted specimens such as Araucaria heterophylla (Norfolk Island Pine) and Araucaria bidwillii (Bunya Pine). Lidar imaging produced by Council indicates that the tree has a height of 20-25 metres and that there are numerous trees on the opposite side of Wellesley Road with a height of approximately 40 metres.

 

 

6.     The proposed replacement planting with a smaller native species is unsuitable.

 

Particulars:

 

(a)      The contributory heritage values of the existing tree could not be replaced by a new planting unless it is equivalent in size and form to the existing tree. Any suitable replacement tree would grow to a similar size as the subject tree and would also necessitate removal of the front fences.

 

7.     Removal of the tree would have an adverse impact on the heritage significance of the heritage item at No. 7 Wellesley Road, Pymble.

 

Particulars:

 

(a)      The subject tree is one half of a ‘paired’ planting with a matching specimen in the garden of the heritage item of 7 Wellesley Road.  The proposed tree removal would have an adverse impact on the heritage value of this item and its setting and does not comply with clause 61E of the KPSO.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Brodee Gregory

Senior Assessment Officer

 

 

 

 

Selwyn Segall

Team Leader - Development Assessment North

 

 

 

 

Corrie Swanepoel

Manager Development Assessment Services

 

 

 

 

Michael Miocic

Director Development & Regulation

 

 

Attachments:

A1View

Arborist's report

 

2014/010626

 

A2View

Lidar image

 

2014/019934

 

A3View

Public opinion

 

2014/010030

 

A4View

Zoning map

 

2014/010036

  


APPENDIX No: 1 - Arborist's report

 

Item No: GB.9

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 2 - Lidar image

 

Item No: GB.9

 


APPENDIX No: 3 - Public opinion

 

Item No: GB.9

 


APPENDIX No: 4 - Zoning map

 

Item No: GB.9

 


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 4 February 2014

GB.10 / 277

 

 

Item GB.10

DA0220/13

 

14 January 2014

 

 

development application

 

 Summary Sheet

 

Report title:

10 Kimo Street Roseville - Alterations and additions to the existing dwelling, construction of a garage and driveway, provision of stormwater infrastructure and Torrens title subdivision of one lot into two.

ITEM/AGENDA NO:

GB.10

 

 

Application No:

DA0220/13

Property Details:

10 Kimo Street Roseville

Lot & DP No: Lot 118 DP 13028

Site area : 4829m2

Zoning: Residential 2(a)

Ward:

Roseville

Proposal/Purpose:

Alterations and additions to the existing dwelling, construction of a garage and driveway, provision of stormwater infrastructure and Torrens title subdivision of one lot into two.

Type of Consent:

Integrated

Applicant:

Matthew Benson Planning Pty Ltd

Owner:

Ms J Cummins & Mr M Lochtenberg

Date Lodged:

25 June 2013

Recommendation:

Approval

 

 

  

 


Purpose of Report

 

To determine Development Application No. DA0220/13 for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling, construction of a garage and driveway, provision of stormwater infrastructure and Torrens title subdivision of one lot into two.

 

The application is to be determined by full Council in accordance with the requirements of the Department of Planning. Council’s attention is directed to the attached Planning Circular PS08-014 from the NSW Department of Planning which requires all development applications that involve a variation of greater than 10% under the provisions of SEPP No 1 to be determined by full Council. The proposed variation to the site width development standard exceeds 10%. The application is also reported to Council as it proposes Torrens title subdivision of land that contains remnant bushland.

 

integrated planning and reporting

 

Places, Spaces & Infrastructure

 

Community Strategic Plan

Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

P3.1 The built environment delivers attractive, interactive and sustainable living and working environments.

A high standard of design quality and building environmental performance is achieved in new development.

Assessment of applications is consistent with Council’s adopted LEPs and DCPs.

 

History

 

Pre-DA

 

On 28 February 2013 a Pre DA consultation was held for a proposal to subdivide the site into two allotments, construct a garage and carry out alterations and additions to an existing dwelling.

 

DA History

 

25 June 201                                       The DA is lodged.

 

28 June 2013                                      A letter is sent to the applicant requesting payment of the Integrated Development referral fee.

 

31 July 2013                                       The Rural Fire Services requests additional information.

 

29 August 2013                                   A letter is sent to the applicant requesting additional information and amended plans.

 

17 October 2013                                 Additional information and amended plans are submitted.

 

26 November 2013                             The Rural Fire Services provides General Terms of Approval.

 

13 January 2014                                 A SEPP 1 objection is requested by council.

 

14 January 2014                                 A SEPP 1 objection is submitted.

 

The Site

 

Site description

 

The site is a 4829m2 allotment located in a cul-de-sac known as Kimo Street and is accessed from the head of the cul-de-sac. The south-eastern end of Kimo Street is unformed. The site contains a dwelling-house, swimming pool and detached garage. The upper portion of the site is relatively flat however the lower portion has a steep fall in a south-easterly direction. The existing dwelling is located near the rear (southern) boundary in a steep portion of the site and is not visible from the street. The existing swimming pool is located below the dwelling. The site is identified as land of biodiversity significance and riparian land by the Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance.

 

Surrounding development

 

The site is an uncharacteristically large allotment located in a low density residential area. The adjoining site to the rear (south-western boundary) is the Ku-ring-gai Campus of UTS. This site is subject to a Concept Plan Approval under Part 3A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act for 345 dwellings, including single lot dwellings, townhouses and apartments. The Concept Plan Approval includes the construction of a row of nine single lot dwellings behind the existing dwellings on the south-eastern side of Kimo Street. An Asset Protection Zone for the purposes of bushfire protection has been established on this site. The south-eastern boundary of the site adjoins Sugarbag Reserve which is zoned RE1 Public Recreation.

 

The Proposal

 

·     Subdivision of the existing 4829m2 allotment into a 1000m2 vacant allotment (proposed lot 1) and an 3829m2 allotment (proposed lot 2) containing the existing dwelling.

·     Demolition of existing detached garage located in the south-western corner of the site.

·     Construction of a driveway and detached garage in proposed lot 2 containing bin storage room, two car spaces and a storage room.

·     Alterations and additions to the existing dwelling including demolition of existing laundry and the construction of a new laundry, one bedroom and roof light windows.

·     Removal of 14 trees.

 

Consultation

 

Community

 

In accordance with Development Control Plan No. 56, owners of surrounding properties were given notice of the application. No submissions were received.

 

Amended plans

 

Amended plans and additional information were submitted on 3 October 2013 and 17 October 2013. In accordance with Development Control Plan No. 56, owners of surrounding properties were given notice of the application. No submissions were received.

 

Within Council

 

Ecology

 

Council’s Ecological Assessment Officer commented on the amended proposal as follows:

 

Vegetation

 

The vegetation within the lower and mid levels of the subject property was identified as Sydney Sandstone Gully Forest (SSGF) a non-threatened vegetation type. A small area of Sydney Sandstone Ridgetop Woodland was identified along the western boundary and partly transitions with the SSCF community at the top (northern) end of the subject property.

 

Threatened species

 

No endangered ecological communities, threatened flora or endangered populations were identified on the subject property during the site inspection. However the intact areas of native vegetation within the subject property contain habitats that would provide suitable habitat for threatened flora & fauna species.

 

Biodiversity and riparian land controls

 

Ecological constraints/environmental controls

 

The native vegetation (Sydney Sandstone Gully Forest) within the site which occurs primarily adjacent to the watercourse (southern portion) has been mapped as category 1 'core" biodiversity significance under the KPSO.

 

The site is also mapped as containing a category 1 riparian corridor which occurs on the lower southern portion of property. In accordance with Council’s Riparian Policy, the Category 1 watercourse requires a 40m core riparian zone (CRZ). The proposed subdivision will result in the extensive removal of vegetation within the category 1 watercourse.

 

The vegetation along the watercourse has also been mapped as Category 1 Watercourse under the KPSO. The required setback under the KPSO is 40m which is also in accordance with Council’s Riparian Policy.

 

In order to establish the subdivision vegetation within the area of land identified as biodiversity significance and within the Category 1 Watercourse will require modification for fire protection purposes.

 

Note: The requirement to manage the area of land identified as biodiversity significance and riparian would be required irrespective of the proposal to ensure fire protection to the existing asset (house).

 

A vegetation management plan (VMP) has been prepared which addresses the required management of the area of land identified as biodiversity and riparian with regards to fire protection. The VMP ensures that the ecological values of the biodiversity and riparian areas as defined under clauses 61L and 61M of the KPSO are maintained and are not likely to be detrimentally affected by the proposal.

 

Review of technical reports

 

Amended flora and fauna report

 

The amended flora and fauna assessment has addressed previous comments and is now considered to be satisfactory. The level of survey effort to detect threatened flora and fauna species is in accordance with the Introduction and Amphibians by DECCW (April 2009) and the Biodiversity Survey and Assessment: Guidelines for Development and Activities - Working Draft by DEC (November 2004).

 

The impact assessments (7-part tests) for the threatened species are now in accordance with section 5a of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979.

 

Amended arborist report

 

The amended arborist report has now considered tree loss as result of proposed fire protection. The report clearly notates those trees that are proposed for removal for fire protection.

 

The arborist, ecologist and bushfire consultant have collaborated to establish those trees which are of poor health, low habitat value which are required to be removed to achieve canopy separation for fire protection within the asset protection zones (APZ) ensuring a balance between tree removal & retention.

 

Amended Vegetation Management Plan

 

The amended Vegetation Management Plan IVMP) is now considered to be satisfactory having addressed my previous comments. The VMP is sufficient to ensure the enhancement, protection and ensure the long-term viability of the SSGF community and channel vegetation upon the site. The VMP demonstrates compliance with proposed Asset Protection Zones and demonstrates the retention of vegetation within the Category 1 Watercourse to ensure compliance with Council’s riparian & biodiversity controls. The proposal is also considered to fulfil the riparian controls set by NSW of Office of Water.

 

The VMP has selected appropriate species which are to be planted that are representative of SSGF community within the rear of the eastern lot, soft (Non-sclerophyllic) species have been selected to be planted over sclerophyllic species as they have a lower combustion.

 

The VMP describes each task necessary for the implementation of the plan, the duration and priority. Maps, diagrams and plant species lists are contained within the plan. The VMP describes the existing vegetation and natural features to be retained, proposed vegetation, sediment and erosion control and land stabilisation works.

 

Vegetation Management Plan prepared by Narla Environmental Consultants revised October 2013

 

The vegetation management plan is adequate to ensure the protection and enhancement of the vegetation within the site. On this basis the development application is deemed satisfactory and is unlikely to compromise the existing vegetation within the site.

 

Landscaping

 

Council's Landscape and Tree Assessment Officer has commented on the amended proposal as follows:

 

Tree impacts

 

An arborist report, prepared by Perfect Outdoors dated 7/05/13, has been submitted with the application. Tree numbers refer to this report. The following abbreviations have been used to describe the size of existing trees: height (H), canopy spread (S), diameter at breast height (DBH), tree protection zone (TPZ) and structural root zone (SRZ).

 

Trees to be removed

 

A map prepared by Narla Environmental has been submitted indicating trees to be retained and removed across the entire site.

 

Development of Subdivision 1 Site

There are no significant trees identified for removal as part of the subdivision 1 site (Trees 3,4,6, 9, 10a,10b,10d and 10f) . There is no landscape objection to the removal of these trees.

 

Subdivision 2 site

A total of 14 trees are proposed to be removed within subdivision site 2. Three (3) of these trees are considered significant.

 

Tree 12/ Eucalyptus pilularis (Blackbutt) This mature co-dominant tree is located within the front of the site. The tree exhibits a high level of canopy dieback. There is no objection to the removal of this tree.

 

Tree 16/ Eucalyptus pilularis (Blackbutt) This mature tree is located at the north-western corner of the site. The tree exhibits a bracket fungus on one of the trunks and exhibits several large diameter branch failures as well as a high level of epicormic growth and canopy dieback. The tree is to be removed for the proposed garage. There is no objection to the removal of this tree.

 

Tree 18/ Eucalyptus piperita (Sydney Peppermint) This mature co-dominant tree is located adjacent to the pedestrian entry to Subdivision 2. The tree exhibits several large cavities and a high level of canopy dieback. There is no objection to the removal of this tree.

 

The following trees can be removed without permission as they are exempt under Council’s Tree Preservation Order – Tree 1, 3, 11, 13.

 

Trees to be retained

 

Driveway to proposed lot 2

 

To preserve the existing Trees 15 and 19 that are located on the site, the driveway is to be located on the existing driveway with new aggregate-filled permeable plastic paving grid to be constructed above grade. The driveway turning circle is to be suspended construction. This is considered satisfactory with conditions. (Conditions 11, 12, 13, 14 and 33)

 

Stormwater plan

 

There are no landscape objections to the proposed stormwater drainage.

 

Bushfire prone land

 

The new allotment (Subdivision 1) shall be managed as an Inner Protection Area in its entirety.

 

The existing allotment (Subdivision 2) shall be managed as an Inner Protection Area for a distance of 35m or the boundary to the east, and 25m or the boundary to the north and other aspects. The proposed tree removal and retention are considered to result in the required tree canopy cover.

 

Environmental site management plan

 

The Construction Management Plan is to indicate tree protection fencing in accordance with the arborist recommendations. This has been provided in the Environmental Site Management Plan by Narla Environmental dated October 2013.

 

Engineering

 

Council's Development Engineer commented on the proposal as follows:

 

Water management

 

The amended stormwater plan shows rainwater tanks to a proposed house and garage on new Lot 1, with overflow from the tanks conveyed to a gross pollutant trap and thence to a level spreader consisting of a slotted pipe concealed in a landscaped rock wall, dispersing evenly onto the massive rock shelf.  From this rock shelf, the contours indicate that surface flow would disperse evenly over the site between the proposed garage and the existing residence.

 

A similar level spreader is proposed for the overflow from the garage rainwater tank.  No length is given for either spreader.  Roughly scaling off the reduced plan gives a length of about 6 metres for the spreader for the garage and about 10 metres for the spreader for the new lot.  These lengths are included in the recommended conditions, as they will provide an even outflow which will minimise the effects on the downslope vegetation. 

 

Because the application does not include any dwelling or garage on proposed Lot 1, it is considered that the gross pollutant trap and level spreader should be constructed in conjunction with the subdivision and that tanks should be provided with the later DA for the new residence – this will allow for some flexibility in the siting of any new buildings. 

 

The Environmental Site Management Plan now refers to the stormwater plan and identifies the dispersal of garage rainwater tank overflow by level spreader as having potential impacts in relation to weed growth. 

 

The Vegetation Management Plan includes the monitoring of overflows from the garage rainwater tanks and the installation of a small drainage channel to divert flows to merge with flow coming from the Kimo Street drainage system.  This monitoring is intended to be carried out after completion of the garage and issue of the Occupation Certificate, in conjunction with other vegetation management works.  It will be covered by an ecological condition endorsing the Vegetation Management Plan in its entirety – there are no additional engineering conditions which would apply to these works after the Subdivision and Occupation Certificates had been issued.

 

Section 1.10.8 of the ESMP states that the effects of vegetation removal for bushfire protection will only be minor in regard to increased overland flows.

 

 

Vehicular access

 

The garage plans include a vehicle barrier, noted as being constructed to AS2890.1 and AS1170.1.  This is satisfactory and can be detailed on the Construction Certificate drawings.  There is no need for a specific condition, as it is on the DA plans.

 

The DA has two components, the new garage and works to the existing residence, and the subdivision.  Most of the recommended engineering conditions relate to the subdivision and require implementation prior to issue of the Subdivision Certificate.  An Occupation Certificate will be required in relation to the works to the residence and the new garage, which would require the construction of the new driveway crossing and the rainwater tanks and level spreader to the garage to be completed.  These works do not depend on the subdivision and could be completed first. 

 

 

Outside Council

 

Rural Fire Services

 

Subdivision of bushfire prone land requires a bush fire safety authority under Section 100B of the Rural Fires Act 1997. The application was referred to the Rural Fire Services for General Terms of Approval as Integrated Development. The Rural Fire Services provided their General Terms of Approval by letter dated 26 November 2013.

 

 

Statutory Provisions

 

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

 

Sydney Regional Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

 

SREP 2005 applies to the site as the site is located in the Sydney Harbour Catchment. The Planning Principles in Part 2 of the SREP must be considered in the preparation of environmental planning instruments, development control plans, environmental studies and master plans. The proposal is not affected by the provisions of the SREP which relate to the assessment of development applications as the site is not located in the Foreshores and Waterways Area as defined by the Foreshores and Waterways Area Map.

 

Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance

 

Part A: Development standards

 

Proposed Lot 1:

 

Development standard

Proposed

Complies

Site area:  1000m2

Minimum size allotments

 

 

Site area:  790m2 (min)

1000m2

YES

Site width: 18m (min) at 12.2m from street alignment

12.1m

NO

Land must have frontage to a public road

The allotment has frontage to Kimo Street

YES

Built upon area 60%(600m2)(max)

0%

YES

 

Proposed Lot 2:

 

Development standard

Proposed

Complies

Site area:  3829m2

Minimum size allotments

 

 

Site area:  790m2 (min)

3829m2

YES

Site width: 18m (min) at 12.2m from street alignment

75m

YES

Land must have frontage to a public road

The allotment has frontage to Kimo Street

YES

Built upon area

60% (2297.4m2) (max)

16% (625m2)

YES

Building height: 8m (max)

<8m

YES

 

Allotment width

 

The width of proposed Lot 1 at a distance of 12.2m from the street frontage is 12.1m, this does not satisfy the 18m width requirement specified by the KPSO. An allotment width of 12.1m represents at 32.7% variation to the development standard for allotment width.

 

A SEPP 1 objection has been submitted (Attachment 4). The main arguments advanced by the applicant in the SEPP 1 objection are:

 

(i)       The subdivision could be redesigned to achieve compliance with the development standard ,however this would result in greater environmental impact through the loss of additional trees as the new garage and driveway for the existing dwelling would need to be relocated downslope to a more sensitive part of the site.

(ii)      The proposal provides the opportunity to locate the future dwelling on Lot 1 away from Kimo Street where it would have minimal amenity impacts on surrounding properties and the environment.

(iii)     The dimensions of proposed lot 1 provide adequate space for a dwelling located towards the rear of the lot.

(iv)     The proposal has been designed to maintain the environmentally sensitive areas of the existing allotment by retaining the existing dwelling and providing an opportunity for a new dwelling in a less sensitive part of the site.

 

SEPP 1 CONSIDERATION

 

whether the control is a development standard

 

The allotment width control in clause 58B of the KPSO is a development standard as defined under section 4 of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act, 1979.

 

the underlying objectives or purpose behind the standard

 

There are no specifically stated purposes or objectives expressed in the Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance for the allotment width control. The general aims for the Residential 2(a) zone are:

 

(a)to maintain and, where appropriate, improve the existing amenity and environmental character of residential areas;

(b)to permit new residential development only where it is compatible with the existing environmental character of the locality and has a sympathetic and harmonious relationship with adjoining development.

 

An allotment width control works in conjunction with the allotment area control to create consistency in allotment size and shape within the zone. The size and shape of allotments has an impact on the characteristics of an area as it influences the way in which houses and gardens are designed. Wide allotments enable the provision of side setbacks that can support screen planting and provide separation between buildings which influences privacy, amenity and the character of an area.

 

whether compliance with the development standard is consistent with the aims of the policy and, in particular, whether compliance with the development standard hinders the attainment of the objectives specified under Section 5(A)(i), (ii), (iii) and (iv) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

 

The SEPP 1 objection states that strict compliance would hinder the attainment of the objects of the Act as the objectives of the development standard are achieved notwithstanding the non compliance with the development standard.

 

The aim of SEPP 1 is to:

 

Provide flexibility in the application of planning controls operating by virtue of development standards in circumstances where strict compliance with those standards would, in any particular case, be unreasonable or unnecessary or tend to hinder the attainment of the objects specified in Section 5(a) (i) and (ii) of the Act.

 

In this regard, the objectives of Section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Act are:

 

(a) To encourage:

 

1. the proper management, development and conservation of natural and artificial resources, including agricultural land, natural areas, forests, minerals, water, cities, towns and villages for the purpose of promoting the social and economic welfare of the community and a better environment;

 

2. the promotion and co-ordination of the orderly and economic use and development of land.

 

For the reasons outlined below it is agreed that strict compliance with the development standard would hinder the attainment of the objectives of the Act in this instance as the proposal is consistent with the objectives of the Act despite the non compliance.

 

whether compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case

 

The unique circumstances of the case are that the site is located at the end of Kimo Street and neither the existing dwelling nor a future dwelling on proposed Lot 1 will have a significant visual presence in the streetscape. The existing impression of the site is one of a heavily landscaped allotment that seamlessly blends with the bushland located on the adjacent land to the north-east, south-east and south-west. The non compliant width of the allotment will encourage future development on the site to be located towards the rear of the allotment where it will be screened by existing vegetation.

 

The application does not seek to create a non compliant allotment within a row of existing allotments. As the proposed allotment is located at the end of Kimo Street the future development of the allotment would have minimal impact on the streetscape.

 

The applicant has argued that the non compliant allotment width has reduced the environmental impact of the new garage by allowing for the preservation of existing trees and avoiding development in a steep part of the site to the west of the proposed garage. Development in the steeper part of the site would require additional earthworks and have greater impact on existing trees.

 

Compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary as the objectives of the control are achieved despite the non compliance and if compliance were achieved it is likely to result greater environmental impacts. The potential for greater environmental impacts should be avoided as they would be inconsistent with the objectives of the Residential 2(a) zone under the KPSO and the draft E4 Environmental Living zone under the draft Ku-ring-gai LEP.

 

whether the objection is well founded

 

In Wehbe v Pittwater Chief Justice Preston expressed the view that there are five different ways in which an objection may be well founded:

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

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

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

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

5.   the zoning of the particular land is unreasonable or inappropriate so that a development standard appropriate for that zoning is also unreasonable and unnecessary as it applies to the land and compliance with the standard would be unreasonable or unnecessary.  That is, the particular parcel of land should not have been included in the particular zone.

 

The applicant submits that the objective satisfies criterion 1 and 3 for the following reasons:

 

Criterion 1

 

The objectives of the standard essentially relate to development fitting into the

character of the locality and resulting in acceptable environmental amenity. As set out

above, the depth of proposed allotment 1 is sufficient for a satisfactory dwelling house

to be accommodated in character with the locality notwithstanding non-compliance

with the development standard. Furthermore, the proposal represents an appropriate

outcome on balance, given the size of the existing allotment and given that the

proposed design is preferable in relation to environmental impacts compared to a

compliant design.

 

Criterion 3

 

The SEPP 1 objection satisfies this criterion because, as set out above, a compliant

proposal would have a negative outcome in relation to the underlying objective of the

standard compared to the present proposal.

 

The applicant submits that criteria 2, 4 and 5 are not relevant to the circumstances of the case.

 

It is agreed that criteria 4 and 5 are not relevant to the circumstances of the case, however it is considered that a sound argument can be established for the satisfaction of criterion 2. Criterion 2 is satisfied by the development as the draft Ku-ring-gai LEP seeks to zone the site E4 Environmental Living. The draft LEP is considered to be imminent and certain and therefore it is entitled to significant determinative weight. The objectives of the E4 Environmental Living zone are different to the objectives of the current Residential 2(a) zone. The objectives of the E4 Environmental Living zone seek to achieve low-impact development in areas that have special ecological, scientific or aesthetic values. The focus is on minimising impacts on ecological communities, biodiversity corridors, significant vegetation and habitat. The objectives of the Residential 2(a) are primarily aimed at minimising the impacts of new development on the residential amenity and maintaining the architectural character of residential areas. The non-compliant width and irregular shape of proposed Lot 1 will significantly influence the design of future development on the allotment by encouraging the main building to be located away from the street and allow for the retention of existing vegetation in the north-eastern part of the allotment.

 

whether non-compliance with the development standard raises any matter of significance for State or regional environmental planning, and

 

      There are no matters of significance for State or regional environmental planning. Council’s Ecologist has advised that the development will not have an impact on any endangered or threatened ecological communities.

 

whether there is public benefit of maintaining the planning controls adopted by the environmental planning instrument.

 

The SEPP 1 register shows that the allotment width standard in the KPSO has been varied on previous occasions. In this instance, the applicant has demonstrated that compliance with the development standard would be unnecessary as the objectives of the control are achieved despite the non compliance. The unique circumstances of the case will not create an undesirable precedent for the variation of the development standard in other development applications.

 

Part B: Aims and objectives for residential zones:

 

The proposal is consistent with the aims and objectives for residential development as outlined by Schedule 9.

 

Draft Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2013

 

The draft LEP was on exhibition from 25 March 2013 to 6 May 2013. The draft LEP was adopted by Council on 26 November 2013 and has been forwarded to the Minster for Planning to be made. The site is zoned E4 Environmental Living under the draft LEP and subject to a minimum allotment size of 1500m2. The proposal is permissible under the provisions of the draft LEP and compliant with the development standards for floor space ratio and building height, however it does not comply with the development standard for minimum allotment size because the site area of proposed Lot 1 is less than 1500m2 and the allotment has a width of less than 18m at a distance of 12m from the street frontage. The applicant has acknowledged that the proposal does not comply with the development standard in the draft LEP and has provided the following justification for the variation to the minimum allotment size control:

 

·     The proposal creates two allotments out of the existing single allotment having an average lot size of 2,414.5 square metres. Therefore, the overall density of the development is less than is provided for by the provision;

 

·     The distribution of density is concentrated to the northern area of the site, where the proposed new allotment would create a breach in the draft development standard. The area of the existing lot where the breach would occur is furthest from the most environmentally sensitive areas of the existing lot, which are to the south where the site adjoins bushland;

 

·     Objective (a) of the minimum lot size provision is to ensure that lot sizes and dimensions are able to accommodate development consistent with relevant development controls. As set out elsewhere in this report, the proposal otherwise complies with those relevant controls;

 

·     Objective (b) of the minimum lot size provision is to allow development to be sited to protect natural features such as remnant vegetation, habitat and waterways and to provide generous landscaping to support the amenity of surrounding properties. In that regard, as set out elsewhere in this report the proposal will not cause any unacceptable amenity impact to surrounding properties. Furthermore, as set out in the ecological, bushfire and Arboricultural documentation accompanying the development application, the proposal does not cause an unacceptable impact upon existing natural features. To the extent that there is an impact, that arises from the triggering of bushfire hazard mitigation measures for the existing dwelling rather than from requirements associated with the construction of a dwelling on the proposed allotment that does not comply with the proposed development standard. Therefore, to the extent that there would be any impact on the natural features of the site, that impact does not arise from the proposed non-compliance with the draft development standard;

 

·     Objective (c) of the minimum lot size provision is to ensure that the subdivision of low density residential areas reflects and reinforces the predominant subdivision pattern of the area. In that regard, the proposed allotment that would breach the draft minimum allotment size development standard is larger than the adjoining allotment to the north, which has an area of approximately 924 square metres, and is consistent with the general areas of allotments in the locality.

 

If the subject application was submitted to Council after the draft LEP had been gazetted, the applicant would be required to submit a request for a development standard variation in accordance with the requirements outlined in clause 4.6 ‘Exceptions to development standards’. This clause requires an applicant to demonstrate that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case and that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard.

 

The objectives of the zone and the minimum subdivision lot size control must be considered. In this instance it is considered that the applicants’ justification for the variation to the draft minimum allotment size control is well founded. While a compliant proposal could be achieved for the site, the subject proposal preserves the ecologically important areas of the site within a single allotment whilst providing for future development opportunities in the less significant part of the site. This outcome is consistent with the objectives of the E4 Environmental Living zone which requires that development does not have an adverse impact on ecological values and avoids further fragmentation of ecological communities and significant vegetation. The variation to the development standards in draft Ku-ring-gai LEP 2013 is supported in this instance.

 

Local Environmental Plan 218

 

LEP 218 was gazetted on 5 July 2013 and inserted provisions into the KPSO regarding riparian land, biodiversity and heritage. The site is identified as riparian land and land of biodiversity significance and is subject to the biodiversity protection (cl. 61L) and riparian land (cl. 61M) clauses of the KPSO.

 

The objectives of the biodiversity protection clause are to protect, maintain and improve the diversity and condition of native vegetation and habitat. Prior to granting development consent for development on land identified as having biodiversity significance the following issues must be considered by the consent authority:

 

(a) the impact of the proposed development on the following:

(i) any native vegetation community,

(ii) the habitat of any threatened species, population or ecological community,

(iii) any regionally significant species of plant, animal or habitat,

(iv) any biodiversity corridor,

(v) any wetland,

(vi) the biodiversity values within any reserve,

(vii) the stability of the land, and

(b) any proposed measure to be undertaken to ameliorate any potential adverse environmental impact, and

(c) any opportunity to restore or enhance remnant vegetation, habitat and biodiversity corridors.

Development consent must not be granted for development on land identified as land of biodiversity significance unless the consent authority is satisfied that the development:

 

(a) is consistent with the objectives of this clause, and

(b) is designed, and will be sited and managed, to avoid any potential adverse environmental impact or, if a potential adverse environmental impact cannot be avoided:

(i) the development minimises disturbance and adverse impacts on remnant vegetation communities, habitat and threatened species and populations, and

(ii) measures have been considered to maintain native vegetation and habitat in parcels of a size, condition and configuration that will facilitate biodiversity protection and native flora and fauna movement through biodiversity corridors, and

(iii) the development avoids clearing steep slopes and facilitates the stability of the land, and

(iv) measures have been considered to achieve no net loss of significant vegetation or habitat.

 

Council’s Ecological Assessment Officer has assessed the proposal and has determined that it is consistent with the Biodiversity Protection clause of the KPSO.

 

The objectives of the riparian land and waterways clause are:

 

(a) to protect and improve the following:

(i) water quality within waterways,

(ii) the stability of the bed and banks of waterways,

(iii) aquatic and riparian species, communities, populations and

habitats,

(iv) ecological processes within waterways and riparian lands,

(v) scenic and cultural heritage values of waterways and riparian lands, and

(b) where practicable, to provide for the rehabilitation of existing piped or

channelised waterways to a near natural state.

 

Prior to granting development consent for development on land identified as riparian land the following issues must be considered by the consent authority:

 

(a) whether or not the development is likely to have any adverse impact on the following:

(i) the water quality in the waterway,

(ii) the natural flow regime, including groundwater flows to a waterway,

(iii) aquatic and riparian species, populations, communities, habitats and ecosystems,

(iv) the stability of the bed, shore and banks of the waterway,

(v) the free passage of native aquatic and terrestrial organisms within or along the waterway and riparian land,

(vi) public access to, and use of, any public waterway and its foreshores, and

(b) any opportunities for rehabilitation or re-creation of the waterway and riparian land, and

(c) any appropriate measures proposed to avoid, minimise or mitigate the impacts of the development.

 

Development consent must not be granted for development on land identified as riparian land unless the consent authority is satisfied that the development:

 

(a) the development integrates riparian, stormwater and flooding measures, and

(b) the development is designed, sited and will be managed to avoid any significant adverse environmental impact, or if that impact cannot be reasonably avoided by adopting feasible alternatives, the development is designed, sited and will be managed to minimise that impact to a satisfactory extent.

 

The application does not include any building works within the area identified as riparian land, however tree removal for the establishment of an Asset Protection Zone is proposed within the riparian land and the application includes the provision of stormwater infrastructure for proposed Lot 1 and the garage on proposed Lot 2. To minimise the impact of the development on the riparian land tree removal has been limited to that required to establish the asset protection zone for bushfire protection purposes and stormwater disposal for the new allotment and new garage is in the form of level spreaders with gross pollutant traps. Rainwater tanks with a capacity of 5000 litres are proposed for the new garage and rainwater tanks will also be required for the future dwelling on proposed Lot 1. The rainwater tanks will allow for the capture and reuse of rainwater thereby minimising runoff from the site and impacts on waterways. The development is consistent with the requirements of clause 61M ‘Riparian land and waterways’ of the KPSO.

 

 

Policy provisions

 

Development Control Plan No. 38 - Ku-ring-gai Residential Design Manual

 

The proposed works include the construction of a new garage and driveway in proposed Lot 2 and alterations and additions to the existing dwelling on Lot 2. An assessment of the proposed building works on Lot 2 against the provisions of DCP 38 is provided below.

 

Development Control

Proposed

Complies

4.1 Streetscape:

Building setbacks (s.4.1.3)

 

 

Rear setback:  12m(min)

 

2.5m

NO

4.2 Building form:

FSR (s.4.2.1)   0.3:1 (max)

 

0.08:1

 

YES

Building height plane (s.4.2.3)

450 from horizontal at any point 3m above boundary

 

 

No encroachments

 

 

YES

Built-upon area (s.4.2.7) 

50% (m2) (max)

 

 

16% (625m2)

 

YES

 

4.3 Open space & landscaping:

Soft landscaping area (4.3.3)

50%  (min)

 

 

84% (3204m2)

 

YES

Tree replenishment (s.4.3.6)

min. 10 trees

 

 

>10 trees

 

YES

Useable open space (s.4.3.8)

Min depth 5m and min area 50m2

 

 

Depth >5m     

Area >50m2

 

 

YES

YES

4.5 Access & parking:

No. of car parking spaces (s.4.5.1)

2 spaces behind building line

 

2 spaces in front of building line

 

NO

Design of Carports and Garages (s4.5.3)

Where forward of the building line, front setback complies with s4.1.3 and/or the building line

 

Proposed garage is set back 14.4m from the street boundary. Part 4.1.3 specifies a minimum setback of 9m.

 

YES

Carport/garage <6m in width or <40% site width whichever is the lesser

 

The garage is 6.2m wide

NO

 

4.6 Ancillary facilities:

Outbuildings (s.4.6.3)

 

 

Setback from boundary:  2m

 

3m minimum side setback for the proposed garage

YES

 

Part 4.1 - Streetscape:

 

The proposed bedroom for the existing dwelling has a setback of 2.5m from the rear boundary. The rear setback of the existing dwelling is a minimum of 900mm and a maximum of 11.4m. The DCP specifies a minimum setback of 12m for sites which have a depth of more than 48m. The objectives of the rear setback control include maintaining the amenity of adjacent properties, allowing for the provision of landscaping and minimising bushfire hazard by preserving a fuel free zone where development is adjacent to high bushfire hazard areas.

 

The site represents a unique circumstance as the rear boundary is adjacent to a bushland reserve and there are no ‘neighbours’ adjacent to the site, apart from the proposed lot which will be vacant until such time that it is developed. The site area is more than 3800m2 and only a small proportion of the site, less than 10%, is built upon area. The location of the bedroom would not impact on the amenity of adjacent properties and the landscaped area of 84% significantly exceeds the DCP requirement of 50%. The bedroom addition will be protected from bushfire by the use of fire protection construction techniques recommended in Planning for Bushfire Protection and the Asset Protection Zone that has been established in the adjacent site.

 

 

Part 4.5 – Access and Parking

 

The proposed detached garage on proposed Lot 2 is located in front of the existing dwelling and has a setback of 14.4m from the front boundary. Part 4.5.1 states that two car spaces must be provided behind the building line, however part 4.5.3 states that parking spaces can be located at or behind the building line defined by the existing dwelling or the minimum setback specified in part 4.1.3 of the DCP. The required front setback for a single storey dwelling on the low side of the street is 9m, therefore the proposed setback of 14.4m generously complies with the requirements of the DCP. The DCP also specifies that the maximum width of a garage is 6m, the proposed garage has a width of 6.2m. The non compliant width of the garage is considered acceptable as the garage is set back 14.4m from the street boundary, the site is at the end of a no through road and the street setback of the carport of the closest dwelling (No. 8 Kimo Street) is less than 4m. In these circumstances is it considered that the garage will not dominate the site or the streetscape and the variation to the garage width control is supported.

 

The existing garage on proposed Lot 1 is to be demolished as part of the development, this will leave the existing house of proposed Lot 2 without a suitable car parking facility until the new garage is built. To ensure that adequate car parking is provided to the existing dwelling at all times a condition (Condition 43) has been included in the recommendation which requires that the subdivision certificate may be issued until construction of the new garage on proposed Lot 2 has been completed and an occupation certificate has been issued.

 

Development Control Plan No. 47 – Water Management

 

The requirements of DCP 47 have been considered by Council’s Development Engineer who has advised that the proposal is acceptable, subject to conditions.

 

Section 94 Plan

 

Condition 20 requires the payment of the applicable Section 94 development contributions.

 

Likely Impacts

 

The likely impacts of the development have been assessed and are considered acceptable having regard to the zoning of the site and the requirements of the planning controls.

 

Suitability of the Site

 

The site is considered to be suitable for the proposed development.

 

Public Interest

 

The proposal is consistent with the requirements of the planning controls, approval of the application 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. Therefore, it is recommended that the application be approved.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

PURSUANT TO SECTION 80(1) OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING AND ASSESSMENT ACT, 1979

 

A.       THAT Council, as the consent authority, is of the opinion that the objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards to clause 58B – allotment width of the Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance is well founded.  The Council is also of the opinion that strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of this case as the objectives of the standard are achieved notwithstanding the failure to achieve compliance with the development standard.

 

AND

 

B.      THAT Council, as the consent authority, being satisfied that the objection under  SEPP No. 1 is well founded and also being of the opinion that the granting of consent to DA0220/13 is consistent with the aims of the Policy, grant development consent to DA0220/13 for ‘alterations and additions to the existing dwelling, construction of a garage and driveway, provision of stormwater infrastructure and Torrens title subdivision of one lot into two’  on land at 10 Kimo Street Roseville, for a period of two (2) years from the date of the Notice of Determination, subject to the following conditions:

 

Integrated referral conditions:

1.     Rural Fire Services - General Terms of Approval

i.)         At the issue of subdivision certificate and in perpetuity, asset protection zones shall be maintained as illustrated in 'Figure 7: Diagrammatic approximation of recommended APZs' of the Bushfire Hazard Assessment prepared by Bushfire Consulting Services numbered 177/13 and dated 'Issue 5 dated 1 October 2013' in accordance with section 4.1.3 and Appendix 5 of 'Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006' and the NSW Rural Fire Service's document 'Standards for asset protection zones'.

 

ii.)        Water, electricity and gas for the proposed new dwelling are to comply with section 4.1.3 of 'Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006'.

 

Property access roads for the proposed new dwelling shall comply with section 4.1.3 (2) of 'Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006' except that an alternate access is not required.

 

iii.)       Property access roads for the existing dwelling shall comply with the following

requirements of section 4.1.3 (2) of 'Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006'. -

A minimum vertical clearance of 4 metres to any overhanging obstruction,

including tree branches. - The capacity of road surfaces and bridges is

sufficient to carry fully loaded fire fighting vehicles (approximately 15 tonnes

for areas with reticulated water, 28 tonnes or 9 tonnes per axle for all other

areas).

 

iv.)       All new fencing shall be non-combustible.

 

v.)        New construction of the proposed new dwelling shall comply with Sections 3

and 7 (BAL 29) Australian Standard AS3959-2009 'Construction of buildings in

bush fire-prone areas' and section A3.7 Addendum Appendix 3 of 'Planning for

Bush Fire Protection'.

 

vi.)       New construction on the existing dwelling shall comply with Sections 3 and 8

(BAL 40) Australian Standard AS3959-2009 'Construction of buildings in bush

fire-prone areas' and section A3.7 Addendum Appendix 3 of 'Planning for Bush

Fire Protection'.

 

vii.)      The existing dwelling is required to be upgraded to improve ember protection.

This is to be achieved by enclosing all openings (excluding roof tile spaces) or

covering openings with a non-corrosive metal screen mesh with a maximum

aperture of 2mm. Where applicable, this includes any sub floor areas,

openable windows, vents, weepholes and eaves. External doors are to be

fitted with draft excluders.

 

Reason: Statutory requirements.

 

2.     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:

 

Plan no.

Drawn by

Dated

A011/A - Existing Ground Floor Plan

Seeman Rush Architects

3/06/13

A016/A - Construction Management Plan

Seeman Rush Architects

3/06/13

A017/A - Site Analysis

Seeman Rush Architects

3/06/13

A100/A - New Floor Plan

Seeman Rush Architects

3/06/13

A101/A - Proposed Roof Plan

Seeman Rush Architects

3/06/13

A101/C - Site Plan

Seeman Rush Architects

14/10/13

A102/B - Subdivision Site Plan

Seeman Rush Architects

9/09/13

A310/A - Elevations 1

Seeman Rush Architects

3/06/13

A311/A - Elevations 1

Seeman Rush Architects

3/06/13

A700/C - Proposed Garage

Seeman Rush Architects

14/10/13

A701/C - Garage Sections 1

Seeman Rush Architects

14/10/13

A702/C - Garage Sections 2

Seeman Rush Architects

14/10/13

A703/C - Garage Elevations

Seeman Rush Architects

14/10/13

2013/92-SW1 Revision A - Site/Concept Stormwater Plan, Details and Stormwater Notes

Law and Dawson Pty Ltd

27/09/13

 

Document(s)

Dated

Waste Management Plan

5 June 2013

Bushfire risk assessment certificate prepared by Catherine Gorrie of Bushfire Consulting Services Pty Ltd

17 April 2013, revised 1 October 2013

Basix certificate No. A163933

3 June 2013

Bush fire risk hazard assessment (Issue 5) prepared by Catherine Gorrie of Bushfire Consulting Services Pty Ltd

1 October 2013

Stormwater drainage letter prepared by Law and Dawson Pty Ltd

1 October 2013

Vegetation Management Plan prepared by Narla Environmental Pty Ltd

October 2013

Environmental Site Management Plan prepared by Narla Environmental Pty Ltd

October 2013

Tree Assessment Report Revision 3 prepared by Perfect Outdoors Pty Ltd

7 May 2013

 

Reason:         To ensure that the development is in accordance with the determination.

 

3.     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.

 

 

Conditions to be satisfied prior to demolition, excavation or construction:

 

4.     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.

 

5.     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

 

6.     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.

 

7.     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.

 

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.     Access through public reserve not permitted

 

Access for construction purposes shall not be gained through the adjoining public reserve.  Should no alternative access exist, an application for access to the construction site via the public reserve shall be submitted to Council for consideration and approval prior to the commencement of works.

 

Reason:         To protect public reserves.

 

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 excluding structure

 

To preserve the following tree/s, no work shall commence until the area beneath their canopy excluding that area of the proposed driveway and turning bay shall be fenced off for the specified radius from the trunk 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 work on site:

 

Schedule

Tree/location

Radius from trunk

Tree 15/ Eucalyptus saligna (Sydney Blue Gum) This mature tree is located at the northwest corner of the site.

7.2m

 

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 metre 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 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:

 

15.   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:

 

Plan no.

Drawn by

Dated

2013/92-SW1 Revision A

Law & Dawson

27.09.13

 

 

 

 

The above engineering plan(s) shall be amended as follows:

 

i.)         The lengths of the level spreaders are to be indicated - minimum 10 metres for Lot 1 and minimum 6 metres for the garage on Lot 2.

ii.)        The plans are to note that the gross pollutant trap and level spreader for Lot 1 are included in the subdivision works, but the rainwater tanks for Lot 1 need not be constructed prior to the issue of the Subdivision Certificate.

 

Note:              An amended engineering plan, prepared by a qualified engineer shall be submitted to the Certifying Authority.

 

Reason:         To protect the environment.

 

16.   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.

 

17.   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.

 

18.   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.

 

19.   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.

 

 

Conditions to be satisfied prior to the issue of the construction certificate or prior to demolition, excavation or construction (whichever comes first):

 

20.   Section 94 contribution - residential development

 

A contribution pursuant to section 94 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act as specified in Ku-ring-gai Section 94 Contributions Plan 2010 for the services detailed in column A and for the amount detailed in Column B is required.

 

Column A

Column B

LGA Wide Local Recreational & Cultural

$2,925.08

Southern Area Local Parks & Sporting Facilitiies

$17,324.51

Total contribution is:

$20,249.59

 

The contribution shall be paid to Council prior to the issue of the construction certificate for the approved stormwater works in proposed lot 1, subdivision certificate or release of the linen plan/subdivision certificate or prior to occupation of the premises, whichever occurs first. The charges may vary at the time of payment in accordance with Council’s Section 94 Contributions Plan to reflect changes in land values, construction costs and the consumer price index. Prior to payment, you are advised to check the contribution amount required with Council.

 

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.

 

Reason:         To ensure the provision, extension or augmentation of community facilities, recreation facilities, open space and administration that will, or are likely to be, required as a consequence of the development.

 

21.   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.

 

22.   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:

 

Document title

Prepared by

Dated

Bush fire risk hazard assessment (Issue 5)

Bushfire Consulting Services Pty Ltd

1 October 2013

 

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:

 

23.   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.

 

24.     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.

 

25.   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.

 

26.   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.

 

27.   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.

 

28.   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.

 

29.   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.

 

30.   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.

 

31.   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.

 

32.   Treatment of tree roots

 

If tree roots are required to be severed for the purposes of constructing the approved works, they shall be cut cleanly by hand, by an experienced Arborist/Horticulturist with a minimum qualification of Horticulture Certificate or Tree Surgery Certificate.  All pruning works shall be undertaken as specified in Australian Standard 4373-2007 - Pruning of Amenity Trees.

 

Reason:         To protect existing trees.

 

33.   Hand excavation

 

All excavation within the specified radius of the trunk(s) of the following tree(s) shall be hand dug:

 

Schedule

Tree/location

Radius from trunk

Tree 15/ Eucalyptus saligna (Sydney Blue Gum) This mature tree is located at the northwest corner of the site.

7.2m

 

Reason:         To protect existing trees.

 

34.   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.

 

35.   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.

 

36.   Removal of noxious plants & weeds

 

The following noxious and/or environmental weed species shall be removed from the property by ecological sustainable practices prior to the issue of the Subdivision Certificate:

 

Schedule

Plant species

Asparagus aethiopicus (Asparagus fern)   Asparagus asparagoides (Bridal Creeper)    Bidens pilosa (Cobblers Pegs)     Cardiospermum grandiflorum (Balloon Vine)    Celtis sinensis (Chinese Celti)   Chlorophytum comosum (Spider Plant)   Cinnamomum camphora (Camphor Laurel)   Crassocephalum crepidioides (Thickhead)    Ehrharta erecta Panic (Veldtgrass)    Hedychium gardnerianum (Ginger Lily)    Hedera helix (English Ivy)    Hydrocotyle bonariensis (Pennywort)    Ipomoea indica (Morning Glory)   Ipomoea cairica (Coastal Moring Glory)  Jacarandas mimosifolia (Jacarandas)   Lantana camara (Lantana)    Ligustrum lucidum (Large Leaf Privet)    Ligustrum sinense (Small Leaf Privet)      Lonicera japonica (Japanese Honey Suckle)  Monstera deliciosa (Fruit Salad Plant)   Nephrolepis cordifolia (Fishbone Fern)    Ochna serrulata (Ochna)   Persicaria capitata    Phyllostachys sp. (Rhizomatous Bamboo)  Plectranthus verticillatus    Ricinus communis (Castor Oil Plant)    Rubus fruticosus (Blackberry)     Senna pendula (Cassia)    Setaria incrassate (Pigeon Grass)   Solanum mauritianum (Wild Tobacco)     Tradescantia fluminensis (Wandering Jew)    Wisteria sp. (Chinese wisteria) 

 

Reason: To protect the environment.

 

Conditions to be satisfied prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate:

 

37.   Compliance with BASIX Certificate

 

Prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate for the works to the existing dwelling on proposed lot 2, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that all commitments listed in BASIX Certificate No. A163933 have been complied with.

 

Reason:         Statutory requirement.

 

 

 

 

38.   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 driveway crossing in accordance with levels and specifications issued by Council

·           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.

 

 

Conditions to be satisfied prior to the issue of a Subdivision certificate:

 

39.   Vegetation Management Plan (VMP)

 

The Vegetation Management Plan, prepared by Narla Environmental Consultants, dated Revised October 2013, is endorsed in its entirety.

 

·     All works detailed within the VMP-revegetation, weed removal, weed techniques, environmental protection measures and proposed planting are to be carried out in accordance with the VMP.

 

·     All noxious and environmental weeds (Appendix C) are to be removed from within the site.

 

·     All works detailed within the VMP are to be conducted by a suitably qualified bush regenerator. The minimum qualifications minimum qualifications and experience (for bush regenerator) are a TAFE Certificate 2 in Bushland Regeneration and one year demonstrated experience (for other personnel).  In addition the site supervisor is to be eligible for full professional membership of the Australian Association of Bush Regenerators (AABR).

 

Reason: To ensure the protection and enhancement of riparian lands & an area of biodiversity significance.

 

40.   Sydney Water Section 73 Compliance Certificate

 

Prior to release of the linen plan/issue of the subdivision certificate, the Section 73 Sydney Water compliance certificate which refers to the subdivision application must be obtained and submitted to the Council.

 

Reason:    Statutory requirement.

 

41.   Infrastructure repair - subdivision works

 

Prior to issue of the Subdivision Certificate, any infrastructure within the road reserve along the frontage of the subject site or within close proximity, which has been damaged as a result of subdivision works, must be fully repaired to the satisfaction of Council’s Development Engineer and at no cost to Council.

 

Reason:         To protect public infrastructure.

 

42.   Provision of services

 

Prior to issue of the Subdivision Certificate, separate underground electricity, gas and phone or appropriate conduits for the same, must be provided to each allotment to the satisfaction of the utility provider. A suitably qualified and experienced engineer or surveyor is to provide certification that all new lots have ready underground access to the services of electricity, gas and phone. Alternatively, a letter from the relevant supply authorities stating the same may be submitted to satisfy this condition.

 

Reason:         Access to public utilities.

 

43.   Issue of Subdivision Certificate

 

The Subdivision Certificate must not be issued until all conditions of development consent have been satisfied and a Final Certificate of Compliance has been issued by the certifiying authority.

 

The gross pollutant trap and level spreader for proposed lot 1 must be in place, and compliance with the Construction Certificate plans certified by a suitably qualified engineer. The construction of the garage on proposed lot 2 must have been completed and an Occupation Certificate for the garage issued.

 

Reason:         To ensure that the development is completed prior to transfer of responsibility for the site and development to another person.

 

44.   Submission of 88b instrument

 

Prior to the issue of the Subdivision Certificate, the applicant must submit an original instrument under Section 88B of the Conveyancing Act with the plan of subdivision, plus 2 copies to Council. Ku-ring-gai Council must be named as the authority whose consent is required to release, vary or modify the burdens.

 

Reason:         To create all required easements, rights-of-carriageway, positive covenants, restrictions-on-use or other burdens/benefits as may be required.

 

45.   Submission of plans of subdivision (Torrens title)

 

For endorsement of the subdivision certificate, the applicant shall submit an original plan of subdivision plus 2 copies, suitable for endorsement by Council. The following details must be submitted with the plan of subdivision and its copies:

 

a)         the endorsement fee current at the time of lodgment

b)         the 88B instrument plus 2 copies

c)         a copy of the Final Certificate of Compliance for the driveway, garage and stormwater works

d)         all surveyor’s and/or consulting engineers’ certification(s) required under this subdivision consent

e)         The Section 73 (Sydney Water) Compliance Certificate for the subdivision.

f)          Proof of payment of S94 contribution

 

Council will check the consent conditions on the subdivision. Failure to submit the required information will delay endorsement of the linen plan and may require payment of rechecking fees. Plans and copies of subdivision must not be folded. Council will not accept bonds in lieu of completing subdivision works.

 

Reason:         Statutory requirement.

 

46.   General easement/R.O.W. provision and certification

 

Prior to issue of the Subdivision Certificate, a registered surveyor is to provide details to Council that all physical structures are fully contained within the proposed allotments or will be fully covered by the proposed burdens upon registration of the final plan of subdivision.  Alternatively, where the surveyor is of the opinion that creation of burdens and benefits is not required, then proof to this effect must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

Reason:         To ensure that all physical structures are fully contained within the proposed allotments or will be fully covered by the proposed burdens upon registration of the final plan of subdivision.

 

Conditions to be satisfied at all times:

 

47.   Swimming pool

 

At all times:

 

1.       Access to the swimming pool must be restricted by fencing or other measures as required by the Swimming Pools Act 1992.

 

2.       For the purpose of health and amenity, the disposal of backwash and/or the emptying of a swimming pool into a reserve, watercourse, easement or storm water drainage system is prohibited.

 

Reason:         Health and amenity.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Jonathan Goodwill

Executive Assessment Officer

 

 

 

 

Shaun Garland

Team Leader Development Assessment South

 

 

 

 

Corrie Swanepoel

Manager Development Assessment Services

 

 

 

 

Michael Miocic

Director Development & Regulation

 

 

Attachments:

A1View

Plans and elevations

 

2014/012695

 

A2View

Location Sketch

 

2014/011031

 

A3View

Zoning Extract

 

2014/011028

 

A4View

SEPP 1 Objection

 

2014/018619

 

A5View

Planning Circular PS08-014

 

2012/287313

  


APPENDIX No: 1 - Plans and elevations

 

Item No: GB.10

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 2 - Location Sketch

 

Item No: GB.10

 


APPENDIX No: 3 - Zoning Extract

 

Item No: GB.10

 


APPENDIX No: 4 - SEPP 1 Objection

 

Item No: GB.10

 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 5 - Planning Circular PS08-014

 

Item No: GB.10

 


 


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 4 February 2014

GB.11 / 326

 

 

Item GB.11

S06785/3

 

10 January 2014

 

 

Update Report on the Development Contributions System

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

purpose of report:

The purpose of this report is to provide Council with an overview of key activities and highlights in the development contributions system over the past six months and anticipated highlights for the coming twelve months.

 

 

background:

Development contributions are a whole-of-Council activity, encompassing policy development, development assessment, customer services, financial management and project management and delivery of community assets.

 

 

comments:

This report focuses on key aspects of the development contributions policy, systems management and communications and highlights in asset instigation.

 

 

recommendation:

That the information in the report be received and noted.

 

 

 


  

Purpose of Report

 

The purpose of this report is to provide Council with an overview of key activities and highlights in the development contributions system over the past six months and anticipated highlights for the coming twelve months. 

 

Background

 

Development contributions are a whole-of-Council activity, encompassing policy development, development assessment, customer service, financial management (including works programme cash-flow) and project management and delivery of community assets.

 

A report is provided to Council on a six-monthly basis outlining progress on the delivery of key items of infrastructure through the development contributions system.  This report focuses on key aspects of development contributions policy, systems management and communications and highlights in asset instigation.

 

Comments

 

Ku-ring-gai Contributions Plan 2010

 

Ku-ring-gai Contributions Plan 2010  came into force on 19 December 2010 and has continued to lawfully operate and apply to all new development in the Local Government Area of Ku-ring-gai – notwithstanding the changing statutory planning context in the centres along the Pacific Highway and in St Ives.  Following the gazettal of Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan (Local Centres) 2012 on 25 January 2013, the catchment mapping was updated (through the statutory processes of exhibition and adoption by Council) to accurately reflect the new statutory planning context. 

 

Data on the full title, works programme and delivery progress of this Contributions Plan has recently been provided to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure as part of an audit of contributions plans (undertaken by JBA planning consultants on their behalf) to ensure Ku-ring-gai’s plan is recognised in respect of future Savings and Transitional arrangements at such time as the Planning Bill may become law.

 

The White Paper – A New Planning System for NSW – Planning Bill 2013

 

As reported in the previous six-monthly update (OMC 13 August 2013), Ku-ring-gai Council made a comprehensive submission on the White Paper and Planning Bill. In respect of Chapter 7 – Provision of Infrastructure, key points included:

 

·        emphasising the different but very real infrastructure needs of established areas undergoing intensive urban renewal resulting in a changing urban form in the local centres;

·        supporting the principal of integrated infrastructure provision and noting emerging trends in the demography of residents in new housing developments – including younger adults and increasingly including families with children;

·        the importance of new local and civic open space compared to regional open space;

·        the need to properly allow for costs of paved civic spaces in urban areas as a ‘baseline’ cost in any generic guideline for the future funding where grass is not an appropriate response to the urban context;

·        objecting strongly to an impractical time-limit on the expenditure of contributions proposing instead that a local government authority that can demonstrate a well-planned rolling works programme of infrastructure delivery over the development life of the LEP should be able to be exempted from any such arbitrary requirement – linked to support in principal for greater reporting of the detailed staged delivery programme under Contributions Plans.  Considerable work in the form of community consultation, detailed design, approval processes and tendering takes place before the visible on-the-ground construction of community infrastructure commences which can contribute to an erroneous impression that infrastructure is not being delivered and/or that a council is ‘hoarding’;

·        demonstrating through the inclusion of plans and photographs with commentary that Ku‑ring-gai Council currently has community infrastructure works at all stages of the delivery process as part of a rolling works programme linked to the Long Term Financial Plan;

·        objecting to the deferral of payment to a later stage as the draft included in the White Paper would involve transferring considerable financial risk to Council and the community among many other practical and logistical issues; and

·        expressing concern that any future contributions towards State infrastructure e.g. new and augmented schools and improvements to State Roads, should not reduce the capacity for local government to deliver key open space, community facilities and transport upgrades in the planning (and levying) since the start of the current redevelopment phase in 2004.

 

The Planning Bill underwent only a few minor amendments to infrastructure contributions matters before being presented to Parliament last year; most of the amendments that took place both between consultation and introduction to Parliament and subsequently, especially in the Legislative Council, related to other aspects of the Bill.  There remains within the Bill a time-limit on the time to expend contributions but this has been extended from three years to five years with the option for the Minister to grant extensions.  The Bill also still contains provisions to allow for the payment of contributions to be delayed until later in the development phase.  In both cases, the detail will not be known until the Regulations are drafted. 

 

The importance of contributions to rapidly redeveloping and intensifying established (brownfield) areas like Ku-ring-gai, and also Green Square in the south of Sydney, including the difference in what constitutes ‘baseline’ surfaces and facilities for areas of intensive public usage, needs regular reiteration as it seems to be greenfield release areas that are at the forefront of perceptions where infrastructure funding is considered.  It is important that the new system caters for all variations of infrastructure required to support new development in all its forms.

 

Parliament next sits on 25 February 2014 (Legislative Assembly).  It is unknown if the Planning Bill will be reintroduced immediately.

 

Development, infrastructure and development contributions

 

Development – including intensive redevelopment in established area - brings with it demand for physical and community infrastructure.  The demands for new and upgraded infrastructure in areas of urban renewal are different from those found in greenfield areas but they are no less essential to supporting a successful intensification of density.  Infrastructure, provided by contributions that are levied on higher-density development, supports a significant change in density in many areas, integrating improvements in public squares, civic spaces, new parks, new roads and pedestrian linkages with the surrounding development.  Infrastructure is essential to support the shift in character of a suburban centre to an urban one, bringing with it changing lifestyles and demographics.  These are very real infrastructure demands.

 

The paragraphs below provide an overview of Ku-ring-gai’s actions as well as future intentions with respect to the provision of infrastructure supporting development in the local centres.

 

New open space and new civic space

 

To date, Ku-ring-gai Council has acquired approximately 23,100sqm of land at a cost of just over $47.7M for the provision of new local parks and civic spaces – excluding the acquisitions of 2, 4 and 6 Bent Street, Lindfield which were in the process of settlement as this report was being finalised.  The process of designing and delivering some of these prospective new parks is well underway.

 

The following is a stepped process for delivering a new park:

 

1.       property acquisition and site consolidation (at least three, usually more properties);

2.       first stage community consultation – surveys of local residents and potential park users;

3.       detailed preliminary designs;

4.       second stage community consultation – seeking feedback on the draft preliminary design;

5.       detailed final design;

6.       approval processes and tenders;

7.       construction phase begins;

8.       construction phase; and

9.       handover and official opening.

 

Lindfield Community Hub, Woodford Lane, Lindfield

 

On 28 May 2013 Council resolved to prepare a master plan for the site and allocated a budget for the project. A Project Control Group has been established with representatives of Council and TFNSW to guide the preparation of the master plan.

 

One of the key constraints of the site is vehicle access and circulation, particularly if Council is to consider a mix of uses on the site such as residential, retail and community uses. In order to inform planning for the site, council has commenced preparation of a Lindfield Local Centre Transport Network Model Study. This project involves:

 

·     Development of a comprehensive transport network model for Lindfield Local Centre compatible with current Roads and Maritime Services (RMS) standards. The model will include existing and future traffic movements, public transport, pedestrian patterns and cycle movements, and will incorporate the latest traffic improvements proposed by Council as per the Lindfield Local Centre Traffic Improvement Concept Plan.

·     Testing alternative development scenarios to determine the network impacts and capacity; as well as recommend traffic network improvements.

 

The consultants have completed a full review of background material on the project, including Council reports, traffic and transport studies as well as Council’s Parking Management Plan. The consultants have completed the survey work which includes:

·     full traffic counts for key intersections within the Lindfield local centre;

·     counts of other transport options within the centre including pedestrian volumes and desire lines, cycle, taxi, bus and train movements; and

·     input of traffic generation from projected development as a result of KLEP (Local Centres) 2013 as verified by Council staff.

 

A base model has now been prepared and has been peer-reviewed. Capacity testing is currently being carried out on the network model. The transport consultant will then use the data to test scenarios and recommend potential network changes to maximise capacity. From this data, Council will develop a range of traffic improvement measures across the Lindfield Local Centre.

 

Description: Ariel

 

Lindfield Community Hub – location diagram

 

Lindfield Village Green, Tryon Road, Lindfield

 

At the OMC of 9 April 2013 Council resolved to commence detailed planning for the Lindfield Village Green Project. At the same time they allocated a project budget for this work. Lindfield Village Green will be a large green space on the eastern side of Lindfield.

 

Description: Ariel

Lindfield Village Green – location diagram

 

Community Facilities

 

The critical decision for Council is whether to co-locate a new branch library with the Lindfield Village Green, as nominated in Council’s Contributions Plan, or to co-locate the library and multi-purpose community facility within the Lindfield Community hub site.

 

To address these questions Elton Consulting P/L. were engaged to prepare a Community Facilities Study for Lindfield. A draft of the study was completed in December 2013 and the results of this study were reported to Council on the 10th December 2013.

 

The key findings to date from the Community Facilities Study are:

 

·        the preferred size of the library is 1,217sqm; and

·        the preferred siting strategy is to co-locate the new facilities combining the Lindfield branch library and the multi-purpose community centre on the Woodford Lane site.

 

Council has resolved to proceed with the master planning of the Lindfield Village Green on the basis that there will be no library on the site and that the consultant continue to develop the functional briefs for the facilities on the Woodford Lane site consistent with this direction.

 

Road closures

 

The Tryon Road site has an unnamed lane which runs east-west across the site. The lane currently forms part of the car park circulation. In order to deliver the Lindfield Village Green, Council will need to consolidate various properties owned by Council fronting Kochia Lane, Chapman Lane and Tryon Road and partially close and realign local public roads as shown in the diagram below. It is noted this arrangement is intended to not disadvantage any adjoining landowners.

 

Council has sought advice as to the best manner and the statutory requirements to effect partial closure of the local public road on the Tryon Road site. Advice was received from Lindsay Taylor Lawyers. The advice reviewed two ways by which the road can be closed:

 

by the Minister administering the Roads Act 1993 (Minister) pursuant to an application lodged by the Council; or

by way of compulsory acquisition of the road by the Council.

 

Based on this advice Council resolved on the 10 December 2013 to compulsorily acquire the unnamed public road and delegate to the General Manager to do anything further as necessary to give effect to the compulsory acquisition and publishing any necessary notices in the Gazette.

Description: \\kmc\data\users\ntranter\System\Redirected\Desktop\Lindfield\Unnamed Lane Closure.jpg

 

Sale of 9 Havilah Lane Lindfield

 

Contributions are a key component of funding for these facilities although not the exclusive source.  Additional funding for the Lindfield Village Green project also derives from the excellent sale result arising from the divestment of 9 Havilah Lane, a small, isolated, 25-space car park located a short distance from the future Village Green.

 

Next Steps

 

Council will now prepare an illustrative concept design for the Lindfield Village Green and proceed to public engagement and, following this, the draft concept is to be reported to Council for their endorsement prior to public exhibition.

 

Description: Picture5

Section showing proposed village green with basement car park under looking north to Kochia Lane

 

Carcoola Road Park , St Ives

 

Carcoola Road Park at 14-18 Carcoola Road, St Ives provides an opportunity to develop parkland of 2,800sqm in concert with the local community.  Carcoola Road Park is currently at Stage 3 of the process outlined above.

 

Community consultation, including surveys of local residents and potential park users, was completed in September 2013. Results have been assessed and concept design plans are currently being developed, based on this feedback. Survey results show that a local playground and picnic facilities are most valued, with parking, fencing and cycle paths attracting support. A site analysis has been completed to inform the design plans, and some minor site contamination works have been completed.

 

Description: N:\Image Library\Carcoola Park\13-01-2014\IMG_0368.JPG

 

Plans for tender are anticipated to be completed in the middle of the 2014-15 financial year for construction.

 

Eton Road Community Centre and synthetic sports field

 

A new community centre has being constructed by Defence Housing Australia as part of the voluntary planning agreement for redevelopment of part of the former UTS site at Lindfield.  The community centre is now complete and was officially opened on Tuesday 17 December 2013 together with the adjoining sports oval.  Currently two-thirds of upper floor is being utilised by the DHA as a housing display and sales area under agreement for approximately one to two years but, as the community begins to move in, it will come into its own as the community centre for this brand new housing area and for the wider KMC community.  The change rooms and public toilets on the sports field level are already in use with matches being held on the oval including the inaugural match on opening day.

 

A new synthetic playing field has been constructed by Council and Defence Housing Australia as part of the voluntary planning agreement for redevelopment of part of the UTS site at Lindfield.  The synthetic playing field is complete and was concurrently officially opened on Tuesday 17 December 2013.  A valuable contribution of $100,000 from the Northern Suburbs Football Association (NSFA) assisted with the installation of a more durable synthetic playing surface and sportsfield lighting.  A NSW Government Community Building Partnership grant of $40,000 assisted with the construction of change rooms and public toilets for the oval.

 

Opening Day Tuesday 17 December 2013

 

 

Ready to take the field for the inaugural opening day match

 

Ready for players and spectators

 

Greengate Park (located in Bruce Avenue Killara)

 

Located on Bruce Avenue and Greengate Lane in Killara, this project has been recently completed and became available for use by the public just before Christmas.  It is already proving very popular with locals. The official opening will be scheduled in the near future. The name, ‘Greengate Park’ is awaiting formal approval from the Geographic Names Board.  Greengate Park is at the final stage - Stage 9 - of the process outlined above.

 

Description: N:\Image Library\Bruce Avenue Park\2014 Completion Photos\10.01.14 Details\IMG_2458.JPG

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The new playground and picnic shelter with BBQ on the far right of the picture

 

New BBQ and nearby tap and bubbler

 

Pathway suitable for bikes and adjacent to the picnic area

 

Another quieter space

 

Cameron Park extension

 

Located in Gilroy Road in Turramurra and adjoining the existing Cameron Park, the new acquisitions will effectively double the size of Cameron Park when complete.  Council adopted a final concept plan at the OMC of 25 June 2013. Cameron Park is concurrently in Stages 6-7 of the process outlined above.

 

Demolition of the four houses commenced in November 2013 and will be completed during January 2014. The site will then be secured with 1.8 metre chain-wire fencing until construction of the park commences, which, at this stage, is anticipated to be in late 2014.

 

Description: N:\Image Library\Cameron Park\Gilroy Road - Houses - Demolition\Demolition\10.12.13\IMG_2187.JPG    Description: N:\Image Library\Cameron Park\Gilroy Road - Houses - Demolition\Demolition\10.12.13\IMG_2178.JPG

Demolition of houses, Gilroy Road, Turramurra

 

Description: \\kmc\data\Users\broyal\My Documents\My Pictures\Picture1.jpg

Adopted concept plan, Cameron Park extension

 

Areas of priority for new parkland and/or civic spaces

 

Ku-ring-gai Council is actively pursuing opportunities for land acquisitions for new parks in areas of recent development activity where no new parks have yet been established. 

 

As indicated above, an area of continued focus is Lindfield which has experienced substantial development and has further approved development yet to commence.  Council’s ownership on land for a new park commenced with the purchase of 8 and 10 Bent Street, Lindfield which settled on 17 May 2013.  This was followed by the acquisition of 12 Bent Street on 15 August 2013 which will allow the realignment of Drovers Way.  The final three properties at 2, 4 and 6 Bent Street settled on 15 January 2014.  The master planning of the site as part of the Woodford Lane commuter car parking project is outlined in detail above.

 

A vital contribution to other major works

 

The funding of two of Ku-ring-gai’s major capital works – the West Pymble Aquatic Centre and the North Turramurra Recreation Area (NTRA) come from a number of sources of which contributions from development are only a small but important part. The West Pymble Aquatic Centre is nearing completion and will be a valuable year-round facility for Ku-ring-gai. Work on the NTRA is also actively progressing.

 

New roads and traffic and pedestrian improvement works

 

To date, Ku-ring-gai Council has acquired several properties for the provision of new link roads to facilitate traffic and pedestrian access in and around the local centres.

 

Gordon is the target of several new link roads to break the very long blocks that stretch from the Pacific Highway to Vale Street and, thereby, improve vehicular and pedestrian circulation and access around the local centre.  The affected properties were zoned for acquisition as SP2 Infrastructure and revert to the relevant residential zone after acquisition by Ku-ring-gai Council.  This facilitates the divestment of any part of the width of the affected property that is not required for the provision of the link road reservation itself.

 

The Dumaresq Street to McIntyre Street link has been designed to draft stage.  The cottage at 36 McIntyre Street has been demolished and the site secured. Detailed planning on the delivery of this road by Council is underway. Demolition of the house at 41 Dumaresq Street will proceed when the current tenant vacates the property in coming months.

 

The Dumaresq Street to Moree Street link is planned to proceed in stages with the first stage to be delivered as part of a Voluntary Planning Agreement (VPA) with the adjoining developer.  The draft VPA has been exhibited with the Development Application and Council has agreed to enter into it. However, there remain issues with the Development Application that have delayed its presentation to the Joint Regional Planning Panel (JRPP) and, accordingly, the VPA has not yet been executed.  Construction drawings are near final and demolition ahead of construction has taken place.  Council continues to negotiate with the adjoining owner with a view to the second stage of the road delivery being possible in the future.

 

Council has also acquired 4A Moree Street Gordon for a road link to St Johns Avenue, however the present development activity in the Gordon commercial area does not yet trigger need for this link.

 

Current levels of development activity in McIntyre, Dumaresq and Moree Streets make these two link roads from Dumaresq Street a much higher priority.

 

No. 12 Bent Street, Lindfield has also been purchased by Council, which will eventually create a new road linking a new realigned Drovers way to Beaconsfield Parade, Lindfield and Bent Street Lindfield. This is part of the integrated Woodford Lane Lindfield project.

 

The Local Centres Local Environmental Plan (LEP) removed a proposed link road through 12A Park Crescent in Pymble.  On 23 October 2012 Council resolved to divest 12A Park Crescent and on the 15 June 2013 the property was sold.

 

Census 2011

 

A relatively small proportion of the development approved from mid-2004 onwards was both constructed and inhabited by the time of the 2006 census, and considerable development has taken place since then. As such, the 2011 census is a very important census for Ku-ring-gai and the first opportunity to understand who is living in these new developments.

 

Data from the 2011 census is expected to provide valuable information on new residents arising from new development both directly (in terms of the residents of newly constructed units) and indirectly (new residents moving into established housing vacated by people down-sizing, though this is more difficult to definitively examine). Concentrated census analysis is on hold until there is more certainty arising from the new planning regime following the White Paper and Planning Bill.

 

 

 

 

Voluntary Planning Agreement Policy

 

Ku-ring-gai’s current Planning Agreement Policy 2008  is nearly five years old. There had been no active use of this policy until the negotiation of the Planning Agreement to deliver the infrastructure, arising from the concept approval by the Department of Planning of the Defence Housing Australia redevelopment of lands which were formally part of the University of Technology Sydney (UTS) at Lindfield.  A second draft VPA for another site is currently in final draft stages. 

 

Following the experience of these two VPAs it would be appropriate to review and update this policy in the 2013/2014 year.  Once drafted, a report will be put to Council prior to the exhibition of any such draft document.

 

integrated planning and reporting

 

Theme One: Community, People and Culture

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

C1.1 An equitable and inclusion community that cares and provides for its members

 

Our community facilities are accessible and function as cultural hubs to attract a range of users

C6.1.1.1.1-C6.1.1.1.3 New community facilities under design and planned delivery for Lindfield Town Centre

C4.1 A community that embraces healthier lifestyle choices and practices

 

New and enhanced open space and recreation facilities have been delivered to increase community use and enjoyment

C4.1.2.1.1; C4.1.2.1.2; and C4.1.2.1.3

Greengate Park ready to open. Eton Road Oval and community centre opened 17 December 2013. Balcombe Park Wahroonga opened last year. Cameron Park Turramurra ready to commence construction.

 

Theme Three: Places, Spaces and Infrastructure

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

P1.1 Ku-ring-gai’s unique and visual character and identity is maintained

 

Place making programmes are being implemented for selected council owned areas

 

P1.1.1.1.2

Lindfield town centre – both east and west of the railway line/Pacific Hwy – undergoing urban renewal

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

Strategies, plans and processes are in place to effectively manage the impact of new development

P8.1.1.1.1.1-2

Ku-ring-gai Contributions Plan 2010 ensures new development contributes towards the cost of delivering supporting infrastructure.

P4.1 Our centres offer a broad range of shops and services and contain lively urban village spaces where people can live, work, shop, meet and spend leisure time

Plans to revitalise local centres are bring progressively implemented and achieve quality design outcomes in collaboration with key agencies, landholders and the community

P1.1.1.1.2

Lindfield is the first centre to undergo comprehensive Masterplanning for revitalisation.

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

A programme is being implemented to improve existing recreation, sporting and leisure facilities and facilitate the establishment of new facilities.

C4.1.2.1.2-3;

New facilities are being established including: Eton Road Oval, Greengate Park and Cameron Park.

P7 Multipurpose community buildings and facilities are available to meet the community’s diverse and changing needs

Standards are developed to improve the condition and functionality of existing and new assets

C6.1.2.1.2

New community facilities including a new library and multi-purpose community facilities are in the Masterplanning stages for Lindfield.

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

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

C6.1.2.1.2; C4.1.2.1.3

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

 

Theme Four: Access, Traffic and Transport

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

T1.1 A range of integrated transport choices are available to enable effective movement to, from and around Ku-ring-gai

 

A network of safe and convenient links to local centres, major land uses and recreational opportunities is in place

C6.1.2.1.1; T1.1.3.1.1

Lindfield Commuter car park, park, community facilities and realigned Drovers Way.

 

T3.1 An accessible public transport and regional road network that meets the diverse and changing needs of the community

 

A strategic access, traffic and transport plan is being implemented for the Northern Sydney Region

C6.1.2.1.1; T 1.1.3.1.1

Commuter car parking and new link roads

 

 


 

Theme Six: Leadership and Governance

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

L1.1 A shared long term vision for Ku-ring-gai underpins strategic collaboration, policy development and community engagement

Council’s responses to government policy and reforms are guided by and aligned with the adopted Community Strategic Plan 2030 “Our Community – Our Future’

L1.1.2.1.1 and L1.1.2.1.2

Ku-ring-gai made a comprehensive submission to the White Paper and Planning Bill and continues to have input into on-going planning for the future Planning System in respect of the future contributions system with the Department of Planning and Infrastructure.

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

 

Council expenditure satisfies the needs of the community and Council has increased its commitment to infrastructure asset management priorities

C6.1.1.1.2

Council is leveraging the value of its assets to combine with contributions to deliver major community assets in Lindfield

 

 

Governance Matters

 

Regular reporting

 

The need to give members of Council and the community more information on progress and activity in the development contributions systems was identified as part of the Delivery Program and the Operational Plans.  It is intended to continue to provide this report regularly (six-monthly) and to provide additional information and links on Council’s website throughout the year.

 

Internal audit

 

Council’s Contributions System was recently the focus of an internal review.  While generally the system is well managed, there are a couple of areas that could be further improved including documenting and updating of current procedures for incorporation in the procedures manuals of each relevant section of Council which is involved in a component of the contributions process, and a formal audit that contributions arising from privately certified applications have been paid (and appropriate legal proceedings instigated if required).  An internal committee has been set up to ensure these matters are attended to and work is progressing.

 

Risk Management

 

The works programme arising out of Ku-ring-gai Contributions Plan 2010  through to at least 2031 is a multi-million dollar undertaking.  Infrastructure delivery will be possible only through the receipt of contributions which will be affected by several economic cycles over the life of the contributions plan.  The risks in taking such a strategic horizon are managed through regular reviews of the contributions plan, at a minimum after the release of data from each five-yearly census or, more frequently, if the pace or scale of development is definitely changed by any statutory process or economic cycle.  The rate and scale of development is monitored by Council staff.

 

A much greater risk is the uncertainty surrounding the implementation of many of the proposals provided for in the White Paper: A New Planning System for NSW  and associated Draft Exposure Bill. This will be a key focus of effort and activity during 2014.

 

Acquisition of a number of targeted sites by negotiation has not been possible.  Council may need to consider compulsory acquisition of some of these sites to assist with finalisation of a range of park and local road land projects in a timely manner.

 

An internal review is currently being undertaken by Council’s Finance Section for the purpose of confirming receipts of section 94 development contributions and projecting future contributions income for currently operating development applications. The process involves the reconciliation and maintenance of the section 94 contributions register in compliance with the Environmental Planning & Assessment (EP&A) Act and Government Information (Public Access) Act (GIPA) requirement and the review of procedures followed by staff to ensure adequate controls are in placed when levying and collecting contributions. It is anticipated that the outcome of the review will facilitate the analysis of funding available for the Long Term Financial Plans capital works programme and allow better cash-flow management.

 

Financial Considerations

 

Council maintains a dynamic Long Term Financial Plan.  The works programme of Ku-ring-gai Contributions Plan 2010  was integrated into the Long Term Financial Plan from the start of 2011 and adopted by Council on 3 May 2011.  It is updated annually and duly reported to Council to ensure its currency. Staff of both the Finance Unit and the Urban Planning & Heritage Unit monitor both income and development growth respectively and liaise to maintain a deliverable works programme. The scheduling of works through to the long term should be considered somewhat fluid depending on strategic opportunities that might arise from time-to-time and the management of cash flows during the economic cycle. 

 

In this context, Ku-ring-gai Contributions Plan 2010 comprises a large range of works from small-scale parkland embellishments to major community infrastructure facilitating considerable flexibility in managing a financially deliverable work programme over time.  Ku-ring-gai Council Finance staff continue to refine the cash-flow management of development contributions to support and facilitate the delivery programme over the life of the Contributions Plan.  As part of this process, staff from both the Finance and the Strategy Planning Unit have met to consider managing the issue of pooling contributions across the Contributions Plan to facilitate an efficient programme of infrastructure delivery over time.  A much-anticipated improvement is a dedicated cash-flow management system feeding into the Long Term Financial Plan for the analysis and improved financial cash-flow management of development contributions.  This will become an even greater priority in 2014 ahead of new systems to be instigated by the Department of Planning and Infrastructure.

 

Social Considerations

 

Ku-ring-gai Local Government Area has been going through a period of change commencing in 2004.  This is bringing about population growth following years of declining and stable population since the 1980s.  Infrastructure is essential to support and encourage the integration of the new residents of Ku-ring-gai, both among residents of the new dwellings being built and those moving into larger existing housing vacated by the members of Ku-ring-gai’s older population who have ‘downsized’ into smaller local accommodation.

 

The provision of additional community infrastructure providing both outdoor and indoor community spaces will continue to support this process and help Ku-ring-gai continue to be a vibrant and popular place to live for all ages.

 

Environmental Considerations

 

Environmental considerations are part of the detailed design of every item of infrastructure provided for in the Contributions Plan.  The provision of this infrastructure is required to support cohesive and sustainable communities in areas of increasing urbanisation.

 

Community Consultation

 

One of the areas where Council could do better is in the publication of information relating to the delivery of infrastructure arising from development contributions on an on-going basis.  The recent review, redesign and upgrade of Ku-ring-gai Council’s website can facilitate this process.  This remains a key objective for the second half of 2013/2014.

 

As well as providing a current information resource for the community and local developers, this visual demonstration of Council’s on-going delivery of infrastructure will also assist in addressing media inquiries and criticism from external development agencies.

 

Internal Consultation

 

The management of the development contributions system is a truly whole-of-Council system from policy development, to contributions calculation, through inflation and receipting to infrastructure development.  All aspects of the contributions system are co-ordinated across Council with input from all areas with a direct interest in that aspect on an on-going basis.

 

Summary

 

This report summarises where Ku-ring-gai is heading in the delivery of infrastructure funded, or partly funded, by development contributions across the LGA with particular reference to the local centres along the Pacific Highway and in St Ives where the majority of redevelopment is concentrated. This is the fifth in a series of six-monthly updates since 2011.  It outlines progress on the delivery of community infrastructure on recently acquired sites for the both parks and roads as well as other works wholly or partly funded by development contributions.

 

More technical financial detail is reported quarterly in Council’s Long Term Financial Plan, in Council’s annual budget and as part of individual key infrastructure items such as the West Pymble Aquatic Centre and North Turramurra Recreation Area.

 

Recommendation:

 

That the latest update report on the development contributions system in Ku-ring-gai be received and noted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kate Paterson

Infrastructure Co-ordinator

 

 

 

 

Roger Faulkner

Team Leader Sport & Recreation Planning

 

 

 

 

Bill Royal

Team Leader Urban Design

 

 

 

 

Antony Fabbro

Manager Urban & Heritage Planning

 

 

 

 

Andrew Watson

Director Strategy & Environment

 

 

 

  


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 4 February 2014

GB.12 / 345

 

 

Item GB.12

S02294

 

9 January 2014

 

 

Regional Waste Project

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

purpose of report:

To seek Council’s consent for application to the Minister of Local Government under Section 358 of the Local Government Act, 1993, to participate in entering a Waste Alliance Agreement with other Councils associated with NSROC for waste disposal.

 

 

background:

In May 2013, Council agreed to participate in preparing a joint Tender for processing and disposal of waste with NSROC Councils.

 

 

 

comments:

NSROC has been working with member Councils to phase in a regional contract to help achieve better waste disposal charges and possibly provide incentives for new waste technologies.

 

 

recommendation:

That Council resolve to make application to the Minister for Local Government under Section 358 of the Local Government Act, 1993, with a report back to Council detailing associated roles and governance of the Waste Alliance Agreement.

 

 

 


  

Purpose of Report

 

To seek Council’s consent for application to the Minister of Local Government under Section 358 of the Local Government Act, 1993, to participate in entering a Waste Alliance Agreement with other Councils associated with NSROC for waste disposal.

 

Background

 

In May 2013, Council recommended the preparation of a joint Tender for processing and disposal of waste with Northern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (NSROC) and resolved as follows:

 

A.      That Council endorse participation in preparations to go to tender for procurement of waste disposal/processing services for NSROC Councils for a contract commencing in 2014, noting that a further report on tender criteria will come to Council in July-August 2013 for final agreement as to participation in the tender.

 

B.      That Council agree to be part of an application for authorisation, through revocation and substitution of 2003 authorisation, from the Australian Competition and Consumer Commission for group purchasing of waste disposal services.

 

C.      That Council agree to formal participation arrangements with NSROC Councils to contribute to the costs of establishing partnership arrangements for shared services procurement and management by NSROC Councils, on a case-by-case basis, commencing with the waste disposal tender.

 

D.      That Council agree to contribute to the governance structure establishment costs on an equal basis amongst all NSROC Councils, and the tender preparation costs, in line with volume participation in the waste contract.

 

E.      That Council’s existing disposal Contracts be extended due to extenuating circumstances associated with the regional procurement process and their extension being of sufficient duration to allow the regional contracts to come into effect.

 

The previous report to Council dated 28 May 2013, advised of proposed governance arrangements for the Regional Waste Project to formalize the legal and operational processes for Council participating in the regional waste service.

 

The governance arrangements are now termed “The Northern Sydney Waste Alliance Agreement” which is being formally drafted for consideration of Council.

 

As indicated, the Northern Sydney Waste Alliance Agreement will establish a clear legal relationship between all Councils associated with NSROC for the purpose of cooperative procurement of waste services and to identify the procedures and roles for the management of the service.

 

In July 2013, NSROC sought advice from the Division of Local Government in respect of the Northern Sydney Waste Alliance Agreement. The Chief Executive advised Council must seek approval from the Minister for Local Government’s before entering into an agreement. It is deemed to fall within the requirement of a Council obtaining prior approval from the Minister to form an ‘entity’.

 

The advice further indicated the wording of the previously adopted recommendations was not sufficiently specific and each Council planning to enter into the Northern Sydney Waste Alliance Agreement would need to pass a specific resolution supporting an application under Section 358 of the Local Government Act 1993.

 

A specific resolution from Council is required to proceed with the application to the Minister for Local Government.

 

Comments

 

The Regional Waste Tender is a joint procurement opportunity made possible by the current contract termination dates for member Councils of NSROC.

 

Between 2014 and 2015 all seven (7) Councils associated with NSROC agreed to join a shared Contract for waste services. The benefits of the shared approach have been detailed in the report considered by all Councils associated with NSROC in May/June 2013. The strategic and likely commercial advantages explained in the report are unchanged.

 

Establishing the Alliance Agreement requires a special resolution by Council, as noted above, in respect of Section 358 of the Local Government Act, 1993 and under DLG Circular 07/49. In addition to the resolution from Council, the submission to the Minister is required to address the following four (4) criteria:

 

·     Is the proposal consistent with the functions of the council or an existing service that the council provides?

·     Will the proposed entity be legally separated from the council?

·     Is the council currently financially viable?

·     What is the impact of the proposal on existing council staff?

 

The criteria above will not present any impediments for the submission to the Minister by participating Councils. Further, the Alliance Agreement allows for other Councils to join the arrangement.

 

 

integrated planning and reporting

 

Natural Environment

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

N51.1 Community progressively reducing its consumption of resources and leading in recycling and reuse

 

% household waste diverted from landfill

 

Participate in regional waste/processing procurement process

 

 

 

Governance Matters

 

Details of the final agreement associated with the role and operational processes will be the subject of a further report to Council. This report is confined to seeking a specific resolution from Council to make an application to the Minister for Local Government  for consent  to proceed in forming an Alliance Agreement for procuring  a long term regional waste disposal / processing Contract.

 

Risk Management

 

The aim in proceeding with the joint regional procurement for waste disposal is to lessen the risk of escalating costs associated with disposal and secure a long term contract with a reliable supplier with sufficient quantities of waste to allow for development of higher level processing technologies for reducing waste to landfill.

 

Financial Considerations

 

Councils associated with NSROC have contributed funds for the establishment of agreements and no further contributions are required to implement this recommendation.

 

Funds relating to disposal and processing are currently within Council’s recurrent budgets for domestic and non- domestic operational wastes.

 

Social Considerations

 

The regional procurement process will allow for more incentive in the market for the development of high level technologies in processing waste and diverting waste from landfill. This will provide environmental and social benefits with the improved management of wastes.

 

Environmental Considerations

 

Increased diversion from landfill will result due to the Contract structure requiring processing as part of its service specifications over the term of the Contract.

 

Community Consultation

 

No formal consultation is required to proceed with this process.  Media release and other waste educational material will be provided for the community on securing any long term Contract.

 

Internal Consultation

 

Council’s Corporate Lawyer was consulted on legal aspects associated with this report.

 

Summary

 

The Regional Waste Project has taken longer to deliver than expected for a number of reasons, including staffing changes at NSROC and the emergence of the merger proposal between NSROC and SHOROC.

 

Approval is sought from Council for a submission of an application to the Minister for Local Government under Section 358 of the Local Government Act, 1993, seeking the Minister’s consent to enter into an “entity” called the Northern Sydney Waste Alliance Agreement.

 

The Northern Sydney Waste Alliance Agreement will outline the roles for Councils’ decision making and governance processes of the operation for a shared waste disposal Contract.

 

The details of the Northern Sydney Waste Alliance Agreement will be subject to a further report to Council before implementation.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

A.       That Council resolve to make application to the Minister for Local Government under Section 358 of the Local Government Act, 1993, for consent to enter into a joint agreement specifying the roles and governance of participating Councils for the purpose of a joint waste disposal and processing Contract.

 

B.       That upon receipt of the Minister’s consent and finalisation of the details associated with the roles and governance processes of the Northern Sydney Waste Alliance Agreement, a further report will be tabled to formalise Council’s participation.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Colin Wright

Manager Waste, Drainage & Cleansing

 

 

 

 

Greg Piconi

Director Operations

 

 

  


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 4 February 2014

GB.13 / 350

 

 

Item GB.13

S09916

 

22 January 2014

 

 

Wahroonga Park Playground Upgrade - Tender T11-2013

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

purpose of report:

To consider the tenders received for the refurbishment and upgrade of Wahroonga Park Playground, Wahroonga, and appoint the preferred tenderer.

 

 

background:

Council, as part of the Open Space Capital Works Program, approved funding for the refurbishment and upgrade of Wahroonga Park Playground, Wahroonga, including replacement of out-dated play equipment and improved landscaping works.

Tender documents were released through Tenderlink on 12 November 2013 with a closing date of 17 December 2013.

 

 

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 A1).

 

 

 


  

Purpose of Report

 

To consider the tenders received for the refurbishment and upgrade of Wahroonga Park Playground, Wahroonga, and appoint the preferred tenderer. 

 

Background

 

Council, as part of the Open Space Capital Works Program, approved funding for the refurbishment and upgrade of Wahroonga Park Playground, Wahroonga, including replacement of out-dated play equipment and improved landscaping works.

 

Following this approval, staff undertook consultation and preparation of tender documents which were released through Tenderlink on 12 November 2013 with a closing date for receipt of tenders of 17 December 2013.

 

As the estimated cost of the refurbishment works is over $150,000, Tenders were called using Tenderlink in accordance with the tender requirements of the Local Government Act and Regulation.

 

Comments

 

Four (4) tenders were received and recorded in accordance with Council’s tendering policy.

 

Tenders were received from the following companies:

 

·        Eco Fresh Solutions Pty Ltd.

·        Furnass Landscape Pty Ltd.

·        GJ’s Property Management Pty Ltd.

·        Go Gardening 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, Strategy & Environment Departments and the Corporate Department was formed to assess the four (4) tenders received. 

 

The evaluation took into account:

·        lump sum fee,

·        provisional rates,

·        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

·        company’s financial capacity. 

 

Confidential attachments to this report include:

·        List of tenders received and additional financial information (Attachment A1),

·        Tender Evaluation Panel’s comments and recommendation (Attachment A2), and

·        An independent Performance and Financial Assessment which was carried out by Corporate Scorecard Pty Ltd (Attachment A3).

 

From the four (4) submissions received and the available information taken into account during the evaluation and scoring of each element of the assessment, Tenderer ‘A’ was identified as providing the best value to Council.

 

In order to ensure Council is not exposed to financial risk and Tenderer ‘A’ is trading in a sound and profitable manner, an independent Performance and Financial Assessment was carried out by Corporate Scorecard Pty Ltd.

 

Tenderer ‘A’ was 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 12 November 2013 with a closing date of 17 December 2013.  At the close of tender, three (3) tenders were received. The fourth submission was received after the closing date / time. All submissions were recorded in accordance with Council’s tendering policy.

 

A Tender Evaluation Panel consisting of staff from the Operations Department, Strategy & Environment Departments and Corporate Department was formed to assess the four (4) tenders received.

 

 The evaluation took into account:

·        conformity of submission,

·        lump sum fee,

·        provisional rates,

·        company and staff experience,

·        the ability to provide the full range of services required, work program,

·        previous performance in relation to similar type work and

·        the company’s financial capacity. 

 

Confidential attachments to this report include the list of tenders received, the Tender Evaluation Panel’s comments and recommendation and the independent Performance and Financial Assessment carried out by Corporate Scorecard Pty Ltd.

 

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:

 

·        That work needed to be carried out by a suitably qualified company with experience of landscape/urban work in close proximity to residential properties.

 

·        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 within 16 weeks or less, subject to weather delays.

 

·        That Council should not be exposed to financial risk.  As part of the evaluation process, tenderers were assessed on providing all information and costs requested within the tender document and an independent Performance and Financial Assessment was carried out on the preferred tender to ensure that they were trading responsibly and had the financial capacity to undertake the work as detailed within the tender documents.

 

Following evaluation, including an independent Performance and Financial Assessment of Tender ‘A’ 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 Financial and Performance Assessment the following areas were examined:

 

·        Tenderer ‘A’ has the financial capacity to undertake the proposed value of work;

·        that Tender ‘A’ has been trading in a profitable and responsible manner during the last three (3) years; and

·        that Tender ‘A’ has sufficient assets/reserves to cover all possible debts during the period of work.

 

The financial aspect of the assessment shows Tender ‘A’ is able to satisfy all requirements and is unlikely to expose Council to any financial risk if awarded the tender as detailed within Council’s tender documents.

 

 

Financial Considerations

 

This project is currently listed in Council’s 2013/14 Delivery Program and Operational Plan as PJ101566 Wahroonga Park Playground Upgrade. The current funding allocation for the project in PJ101566 is $391,800, of which $13,100 has been spent on project design costs to date.

 

The project is fully funded through the Section.94 2004-09 Contributions Plan (Local Parks and Sports Facilities – LGA). Additional funding, as identified in confidential Attachment A1, is required from the Section 94 reserve to pay the tender price, contingency, project management and other projects costs.

 

During the planning and design stages of this project, it was always planned the budget would be increased following the tender assessment in order the correct amount could be allocated. When Council adopted the Wahroonga Park Precinct Landscape Masterplan on 4 December 2012, the estimate provided for the playground upgrade was $500,000.

 

Now the tender price is known, the required balance of funds, identified in the confidential Attachment A1 needs to be allocated from the S.94 2004-09 reserve following approval to award the tender. In accordance with statutory obligations, at the finalisation of the project, all unspent funds will be returned to this plan.

 

Additional financial details are included within the confidential attachments to this report.

 

Social Considerations

 

Wahroonga Park is heavily utilised and much loved parkland.  The present playground within the park has served the community for a number of years but has now become dated and has reached the end of its useful life. The present equipment is becoming both difficult and expensive to maintain.

 

The proposed works to replace the existing playground 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 & Environment Department, as part of the design process, carried out community consultation prior to finalising the present proposed design.  The design aims to maintain the heritage aspect of the site while providing new, challenging and interesting play for children.

 

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. 

 

The children’s playground will be closed during the construction period. The remainder of the park will be kept open and available for use.

 

Internal Consultation

 

Consultation was undertaken by officers from Strategy & Environment Department for the proposed construction of the playground, with staff from the Operations and Community Departments being consulted.

 

Summary

 

At the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 4 December 2012, Council resolved to proceed to the documentation and tender process with the adoption of the Wahroonga Park Precinct Landscape Masterplan.  Following this approval staff undertook final preparation of plans and specification with tender documents being released through Tenderlink on 12 November 2013 with a closing date for receipt of tenders of 17 December 2013.

 

A Tender Evaluation Panel was formed consisting of representatives from Operations Department, Strategy & Environment Department and Corporate Department.

 

At the close of tender, three (3) tenders were received with one additional tender being received after the closing date and time. All tenders were 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.

 

Recommendation:

 

A.      That Council accept the tender submission from Tenderer ‘A’ to carry out the refurbishment and upgrade of Wahroonga Park Playground, Wahroonga.

 

B.      That Council approve the balance of funds required to be transferred from Section 94 funds 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 Council’s decision in accordance with Clause 178 of the Local Government Tendering Regulations.

 

 

 

 

 

David Morris

Manager Projects

 

 

 

Greg Piconi

Director Operations

 

 

Attachments:

A1

List of Tenders received and financial considerations

 

Confidential

 

A2

Tender Evaulation Panel's comments and recommendation

 

Confidential

 

A3

Corporate Scorecard - Tenderer A - Financial and Performance Assessment

 

Confidential

 

A4

Corporate Scorecard - Tenderer B - Financial and Performance Assessment

 

Confidential

   


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 4 February 2014

NM.1 / 356

 

 

Item NM.1

CY00020/6

 

21 January 2014

 

 

Notice of Motion

 

 

Promoting Awareness of Road Safety and
Parking Signs in School Zones

 

  

Notice of Motion from Councillor Fornari-Orsmond dated 21 January 2014

 

There have been a number of issues with illegal parking around schools which results in safety concerns for the school children and fines for parents who illegally park.

 

Council’s Road Safety Officer, along with Road Safety Officers from other Councils, have developed a brochure that will be sent to all schools in the area advising them of the rules about parking around school sites. The schools will be asked to include the brochure in their newsletters that go out to the parents.  A copy of the brochure is attached.

 

I am proposing that Council send out a similar brochure with the last quarter rate notices in order to get the message out to all residents about the rules associated with parking signs and related traffic issues in schools zones.  The aim is to enable residents to have a better understanding of these rules to hopefully improve the safety for children around school zones.

 

I am also proposing that an advertisement be placed in the local paper incorporating some of the points in the brochure to help spread the message further.

 

It is proposed that the funding for this work be costed against Council’s Road Safety budget.

 

Therefore, I move that:

 

“A.     That a brochure on road parking signs around school zones be sent with Council’s last quarter rates notice.

 

B.      That an advertisement be placed in the local paper outlining the parking regulations regarding parking in school zones and the fines applicable for any breaches.”

 

Recommendation:

 

That the above Notice of Motion as printed be adopted.

 

 

 

Councillor Chantelle Fornari-Orsmond

Councillor for Wahroonga Ward

 

 

Background Information:

A1View

Park Safe and Stay Safe around schools Brochure

 

2014/018674

  


APPENDIX No: 1 - Park Safe and Stay Safe around schools Brochure

 

Item No: NM.1

 


 


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 4 February 2014

NM.2 / 359

 

 

Item NM.2

CY00455/2

 

23 January 2014

 

 

Notice of Motion

 

 

Letter of Appreciation to Departing Superintendent
Jeff Philippi of Kuring Gai Local Area Command NSW Police

 

  

Notice of Motion from Councillor Fornari-Orsmond dated 23 January 2014

 

Superintendent Jeff Philippi has been the Commander of the Kuring Gai Local Area Command (LAC) since February 2012.  In this role, he also has a number of other important community positions, one being the Local Emergency Management Controller (LEOCON) for major emergencies including bushfires.

 

Prior to Christmas I received a call from Superintendent Philippi to let me know that he has been posted to Mt Druitt LAC and would be moving on from Kuring Gai LAC in February 2014. This is certainly a case of their gain is our loss.

 

I have known Superintendent Philippi for a few years now, through the involvement of my community activities with Kuring Gai LAC.  I have found him to be very hands on, showing to be extremely committed and passionate about both his personal role in the community and that of the fine officers under his command.  Importantly, he has been readily prepared to give his time when requested to participate in community events.

 

Superintendent Philippi has served our community very well indeed during his term as Commander at Kuring Gai LAC and we owe him a debt of gratitude.

 

Therefore I move that:

 

“The Mayor write a letter of appreciation to Superintendent Jeff Philippi, on behalf of Ku-ring- gai Council and residents, thanking him for his valuable contribution to our community and wishing him the best for the future.”

 

Recommendation:

 

That the above Notice of Motion as printed be adopted.

 

 

 

 

 

Councillor Chantelle Fornari-Orsmond

Councillor for Wahroonga Ward

 

 

 

  


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 4 February 2014

NM.3 / 360

 

 

Item NM.3

S02777/8

 

24 January 2014

 

 

Notice of Motion

 

 

Bike Plan

  

 

Notice of Motion from Councillor McDonald dated 24 January 2014

 

Previously the Roads and Traffic Authority (RTA), now the Roads and Maritime Services (RMS), had a 2010 Bike Plan that incorporated a bike route along the railway corridor from Hornsby to the City. This was never implemented.

 

With the growing success of the sport of road cycling there is an increasing risk of major injuries and fatalities where bikes are using main roads.

 

The proposed Bike Plan was never fully implemented and the RMS is now looking at alternatives to the original plan. There is a definite need for bikes to be provided with a safe route to the city and this could be best done by using the railway corridor.

 

The original plan was before the current Liberal Government’s time and I recommend that the Mayor write to the Premier and the Local Member requesting support for the implementation of the original bike plan corridor.

 

Therefore, I recommend:

 

“That the Mayor write to the Premier, Mr O’Farrell MP and the Local Member for Davidson, Mr Jonathan O’Dea MP requesting the State Government reinstate the original RTA Bike Plan 2010 and in particular provide an off road link from Hornsby to the City.”

 

Recommendation:

 

That the above Notice of Motion as printed be adopted.

 

 

 

 

 

Councillor Duncan McDonald

Councillor for Wahroonga Ward