Ordinary Meeting of Council

TO BE HELD ON Tuesday, 8 September 2015 AT 7.00pm

Level 3 Council Chamber

 

Agenda

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

 

 

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

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

 

 

APOLOGIEs

 

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

 

Confirmation of Reports to be Considered in Closed Meeting

 

NOTE:

 

A.      That in accordance with the provisions of Section 10 of the Local Government Act 1993, all officers’ reports be released to the press and public, with the exception of the following Confidential Reports and their respective attachments:

 

C.1        Gordon Golf Club Limited - Contract Fee Review

 

C.2        Teetop Pty Ltd - Contract Fee Review - Gordon Golf Course

 

C.3      General Manager’s Performance Assessment  - for councillors only

 

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

 

GB.3  Gordon Golf Course Masterplan Communications and Consultation Outcomes

Attachment A3: ................................... Gordon Golf Course - Masterplan options

GB.9        Lindfield Community Hub Preferred Option

Attachment A7: . Addendum No. 2 Feasibility Analysis of Exhibited Options 1-4 Prepared by SJB Urban, by JLL, dated 21 July 2015

GB.12      Adshel Infrastructure Technology Upgrade proposal

Attachment A2: . Adshel Infrastructure Development Proposal

GB.13      Tender NSROC - Road Surfacing, Patching, and associated Works - 2015 to 2017

Attachment A1: . Report evaluation comments and recommendations

Attachment A2: . Tender Evaluation Committee – Minutes

Attachment A3: . Comparison of Supply and Delivery  

 

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 25 August 2015

Minutes numbered 232 to 252

 

 

minutes from the Mayor

 

 

Petitions

 

 

Recommendations from Committee

 

RC.1        Minutes from Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee                                                               53

File: CY00022/7

Meeting held 20 August 2015

Minutes numbered KTC11 to KTC17.

 

 

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        Draft General and Special Purpose Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2015                                                                                                                                       60

 

File: S08023/7

 

To present to Council the draft Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2015 for certification and referral to Council’s external auditor, UHY Haines Norton Chartered Accountants and seek approval to carry over budgets to fund incomplete works at 30 June 2015.

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council receive, certify and refer the draft Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2015 to Council’s external auditor UHY Haines Norton Chartered Accountants, and that carry forward expenditure for the amount of $10.602m and associated loan funding of $1.465m be approved.

 

GB.2        Climate Change Policy for Public Exhibition                                                            207

 

File: S09069/5

 

To seek Council’s endorsement of the Draft Climate Change Policy 2015 and Draft Greenhouse Gas Reduction Action Plan 2015 for public exhibition.

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council endorses the public exhibition of the Draft Climate Change Policy 2015 and Draft Greenhouse Gas Reduction Action Plan 2015.

 

GB.3        Gordon Golf Course Masterplan Communications and Consultation Outcomes 303

 

File: S09625

 

To report the outcomes of the Communications and Consultation Program undertaken in relation to the Regional Park Masterplan for Gordon Golf Course and provide a preferred concept for the Gordon Golf Course Masterplan.

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council receive and note the consultation report for the Gordon Golf Course Masterplan and that Council adopt the preferred concept for the Masterplan consisting of part golf course, recreational area, facilities and small scale residential.

 

GB.4        Gordon Community Preschool - 2A Park Avenue Gordon - Renewal of Lease 358

 

File: S07458

 

For Council to consider the granting of a 5 year lease to Gordon Community Preschool (GCP) for continued occupation at 2A Park Avenue, Gordon.

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council grant a new 5 year lease to Gordon Community Preschool from1 February 2016 to 31 January 2021.

 

GB.5        Lifeline Harbour to Hawkesbury Inc - 4 Park Avenue Gordon - Renewal of Licence                                                                                                                                              365

 

File: S07471

 

For Council to consider the granting of a 5 year licence to Lifeline Harbour to Hawkesbury Inc (Lifeline) for continued occupation at 4 Park Avenue, Gordon.

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council grants a new 5 year licence to Lifeline Harbour to Hawkesbury Inc from1 February 2016 to 31 January 2021.

 

GB.6        Northern Sydney Aboriginal Heritage Office - proposal for relocation to the Ku-ring-gai Wildflower Garden                                                                                                    374

 

File: S02414

 

To advise Councillors of a proposal for the Northern Sydney Aboriginal Heritage Office (AHO) to relocate to the Ku-ring-gai Wildflower Garden.

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council support the relocation of Northern Sydney Aboriginal Heritage Office to the Ku-ring-gai Wildflower Garden, and that a Business Model along with an agreement, determining terms and conditions for the AHO to be accommodated at the Wildflower Garden, is developed between the AHO and Ku-ring-gai Council.

 

GB.7        31 Tryon Road, Lindfield - Demolition of existing structures and construction of a residential flat building comprising 11 units, basement parking and landscaping works                                                                                                                                  389

 

File: DA0508/14

 

Ward: Roseville

Applicant: Playoust Churcher Architects

Owner: Allan Roy Tattersall and Cheryl Ann Tattersall

 

To determine Development Application DA0508/14 which proposes demolition of existing structures and construction of a residential flat building comprising 11 units, basement parking and landscaping works

 

Recommendation:

 

Approval

 

GB.8        49-51 Boomerang Street, Turramurra - Torrens Title subdivision of one lot into two lots.                                                                                                                                      486

 

File: DA0078/15

 

Ward: Wahroonga

Applicant: DL Long and JC Long
C/-Vaughan Milligan Development Consultants P/L

Owner: DL Long and JC Long

 

Torrens title subdivision of one lot into two lots

 

Recommendation:

 

Approval

 

GB.9        Lindfield Community Hub Preferred Option                                                             512

 

File: S10749

 

Present a comprehensive assessment of the 4 (four) exhibited illustrative development options for the Lindfield Community Hub site, and recommend a preferred option for Council adoption.

 

Recommendation:

 

It is recommended that Council adopt Option 2 (as exhibited) as the preferred option for the Lindfield Community Hub subject to further refinements or adjustments that may necessary to address any concerns or issues raised by the private sector prior during market sounding.

 

GB.10      Heritage Listing - 28 Cook Road Killara                                                                     744

 

File: S10066

 

To have Council consider 28 Cook Road, Killara as a potential heritage item under the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015.

 

Recommendation:

 

That a planning proposal be prepared to list 28 Cook Road, Killara as an item of local heritage significance under KLEP 2015.

 

GB.11      Consideration of Submissions on the Planning Proposal to heritage list 6 Caithness Street, Killara and 51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra                                                 902

 

File: S10453

 

For Council to consider the submissions received during the public exhibition of the planning proposal to heritage list 6 Caithness Street, Killara and 5 Warrangi Street, Turramurra.

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council take no further action on the heritage listing for 6 Caithness Street, Killara and 51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra.

 

GB.12      Adshel Infrastructure Technology Upgrade proposal                                         1179

 

File: S03552/14

 

To consider and endorse support for the Adshel Technology upgrade proposal.

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council support the proposal to upgrade advertising at various locations on bus shelter light boxes with digital and scrolling format and provide owner’s consent to the submission of a Development Application on the terms set out in this report.

 

GB.13      Tender NSROC - Road Surfacing, Patching, and associated Works - 2015 to 2017                                                                                                                                            1186

 

File: S10628

 

To seek Council's approval to accept the Northern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (NSROC) tender for the schedule of rates for supply; supply and delivery; and supply, delivery and laying of asphaltic concrete, including associated road profiling and heavy patching and other work items for the period 2015/2016 and 2016/2017.

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council accepts the tenderers identified in Confidential Attachment A1 to supply; supply and delivery; and supply, delivery and laying of asphaltic concrete, including associated road profiling and heavy patching and other work items for the period 2015/2016 and 2016/2017.

  

 

Extra Reports Circulated to Meeting

 

 

Motions of which due Notice has been given

 

NM.1        Clearway St Ives                                                                                                            1191

 

File: TM1/07

 

Notice of Motion from Councillor Berlioz dated 31 August 2015

 

RMS is proposing a clearway through St Ives 7 days a week. A net 52 public car spaces will be lost. The clearway hours proposed will severely impact on the survival of the retail strip shops located between Stanley Street and Rosedale Road. 

 

The St Ives small businesses on the southern side of Mona Vale Road provide the only retail and commercial businesses choice to the St Ives community, services to the local and wider community and they rely heavily on passing trade. A vital part of their business depends on weekend trade.

 

In the last 12 months three of these retailers have invested heavily in opening new businesses or expanding. Other long-standing businesses of 40 years prove their valued contribution to the community. 

 

The RMS proposal for St Ives is for clearways to operate Monday to Friday 6am to 10am and 3pm to 7pm in both directions.

 

Saturday and Sunday 9am to 6pm both directions with the exception of Stanley Street to Porter’s Lane which will operate from 2pm to 6pm.

 

In contrast, clearways on roads with similar or heavier traffic volumes (RMS 2012) Pacific Highway through Ku-ring-gai, Boundary Road through French’s Forest and Roseville Chase, Warringah Road through Beacon Hill, Penshurst Street through Chatswood only apply on one side either morning or evening and they do not apply on weekends.

 

A weekend clearway has recently been put in place for Victoria Road Rozelle. However, Victoria Road carries 30% more vehicles than Mona Vale Road.  Further, in the case of Victoria Road Rozelle which loses 44 cars due to the clearway, RMS is spending $1.267M for to make up for the loss of car parking.

 

The traffic volumes and speeds on Mona Vale Road St Ives do not warrant a weekend clearway through the shopping strip between Stanley Street and Porter’s Lane.

 

I move that council write urgently to RMS including a copy of this Notice of Motion and that council:

 

·    Request withdrawal of any weekend clearway on Mona Vale Road from Stanley Street to Porter’s Lane.

 

·    Send copy of the letter to MP for Davidson Jonathan O’Dea and the Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight, Duncan Gay

  

 

 

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           Gordon Golf Club Limited - Contract Fee Review

 

File: S07448

 

In accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 and the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, in the opinion of the General Manager, the following business is of a kind as referred to in section 10A(2)(d)(ii), of the Act, and should be dealt with in a part of the meeting closed to the public.

 

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 Community dated 13 July 2015

 

C.2           Teetop Pty Ltd - Contract Fee Review - Gordon Golf Course

 

File: S07447

 

In accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 and the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, in the opinion of the General Manager, the following business is of a kind as referred to in section 10A(2)(d)(ii), of the Act, and should be dealt with in a part of the meeting closed to the public.

 

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:

 

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

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

(vi)         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 Community dated 13 July 2015

  

 

 

C.3           2016 General Manager’s Performance Assessment

 

Confidential Mayoral Minute by the Mayor, Councillor Jennifer Anderson dated 21 August 2015 – circulated to Councillors only.

 

 

John McKee

General Manager

 

 

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


Minute                                           Ku-ring-gai Council                                               Page

MINUTES OF Ordinary Meeting of Council
HELD ON Tuesday, 25 August 2015

 

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)

Councillor C Fornari-Orsmond (Wahroonga Ward)

 

 

Staff Present:

General Manager (John McKee)

Director Corporate (David Marshall)

Director Operations (Greg Piconi)

Director Community (Janice Bevan)

Corporate Lawyer (Jamie Taylor)

Acting Director Development & Regulation (Corrie Swanepoel)

Acting Director Strategy & Environment (Antony Fabbro)

Manager Corporate Communications (Virginia Leafe)

Governance Officer (Christine Dunand)

Minutes Secretary (Judy Murphy)

 

 

The Meeting commenced at 7.00pm

 

The Mayor offered the Prayer

 

 

232

Apologies

 

File: S02194

 

Councillor Duncan McDonald tendered an apology for non-attendance [business reasons ] and requested leave of absence.

 

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Fornari-Orsmond/Pettett)

 

That the apologies  be accepted and leave of absence granted

 

. CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

Address the Council

 

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

 

P Wass     -        Marian Street Theatre

 

 

 

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:

MM.2 - VALE Barrett 'Barry' Leslie Lewis AO - Former

Ku-ring-gai Councillor 

 

MM.3 - VALE Andrea Coleman 1959 – 2015 Volunteer Member of Ku-ring-gai Rural Fire Service Brigade

 

MM.4 -  Councillor Elaine Malicki – Ku-ring-gai Council’s Longest Serving Elected Representative

 

PT.1 - Proposed Child Care Centre 18-20 Lady Game Drive Killara DA0588/14 - (One hundred and sixty seven [167] Signatures)

 

PT.2 -  Proposed Clearway at Mona Vale Road St Ives (Six Hundred and Two [602] Signatures)

 

Councillors Information:

Attachment 1 to GB.1  - Delivery Program 2013 – 2017 & Operational Plan 2014 – 2015 – Bi-annual Report

 

Traffic Management in St Ives - Memorandum from Director Operations dated 18 August 2015 in relation to QWN from Councillor Ossip regarding a report on Traffic Management in St Ives.

 

Stolen Sundial at Lookout Park Turramurra – Memorandum from Director Operations dated 20 August 2015 in relation to QWN from Councillor Malicki regarding the stole sundial at Lookout Park Turramurra.

 

Late Confidential Items:

C.1 - 2016 General Manager’s Performance Agreement

 

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTEs

 

233

Minutes of Ordinary Meeting of Council

 

File: S02131

 

 

Meeting held 11 August 2015

Minutes numbered 220 to 231

 

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Citer/Malicki)

 

That Minutes numbered 220 to 231 circulated to Councillors were taken as read and confirmed as an accurate record of the proceedings of the Meeting, with a change to Minute No 228 Proposed Interim Heritage Order - Berrilee 25 Bushlands Avenue Gordon the reference to Sir Robert Christian Simpson be changed to Sir Robert Christian Wilson. 

 

That the Apologies to include ‘Cr Cheryl Szatow was also absent under a previous apology tendered to Council.’

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

minutes from the Mayor

 

234

VALE Jean Rixon

 

File: CY00455/3

Vide: MM.1

 

 

It is my sad duty to inform my Councillor colleagues and the Ku-ring-gai community of the passing of a much loved resident, Jean Rixon from Roseville.

 

Until her death last month, Jean was an energetic volunteer who since her retirement as an esteemed local pharmacist, had made it her life’s mission to serve Ku-ring-gai residents.

 

Despite being in her mid-eighties, Jean gave her time tirelessly as a volunteer pastoral worker for St Andrews Anglican Church at Roseville. She visited the sick in hospitals, the elderly in their homes and nursing homes and provided meals for anyone who needed them.

 

Such was her cheerfulness, energy and dedication that she inspired others to become pastoral care volunteers at the church.

 

Jean was also a keen tennis player, playing every week at Roseville until shortly before her death.

 

Despite being an only child and never marrying, Jean touched lives and brought comfort to many. She was admired for her compassion and empathy for others. Members of St Andrews Church nominated her for a Mayoral Seniors Award this year, which I was pleased to present to her in March.

 

The Ku-ring-gai community and her many friends have lost a great person who will be remembered long after her passing. May Jean rest in peace knowing the appreciation of the community she served well.

 

 

Resolved:

 

A.   That the Mayoral Minute be received and noted.

 

B.   That we stand for a minute’s silence to honour Jean Rixon.

 

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

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

One minutes silence was observed

 

 

235

VALE Barrett 'Barry' Leslie Lewis AO - Former Ku-ring-gai Councillor

 

File: CY00455/3

Vide: MM.2

 

 

I have received the sad news that former Ku-ring-gai Council alderman Barry Lewis passed away at his home in Port Macquarie on 7th July 2015 aged 87 years.

 

Mr Lewis was an alderman for more than 30 years at the Sutherland, Sydney City and Ku-ring-gai councils respectively. His distinguished career in local government began in 1956 when he was elected to Sutherland Council. In 1969 he was elected to Sydney City Council, serving as Deputy Lord Mayor 1973-74 and 1976-77, and where he was to meet his wife of almost 40 years, Nanette Rudge. Nanette was also a Sydney City alderman and together they continued to serve the Sydney community throughout the 1970s and early 1980s.

 

Mr Lewis became an experienced and knowledgeable committee member on topics ranging from parking to health services. It was this breadth of experience that Ku-ring-gai Council was to benefit from when he and his wife Nanette were elected in 1987. Both of them served the Ku-ring-gai community between 1987 and 1991, representing Roseville Ward.

 

When they retired to Port Macquarie 15 years ago, they found a new community to serve. Their shared love of heritage meant they became involved in the restoration of the historic Wesleyan chapel in Horton Street. In 1998 Barry became project director of the St Thomas's Anglican Church Restoration project - a position he held until 2004.

 

Both Barry and Nanette were recognised for their services to the community in 2007 with the Medal of the Order of Australia. Arguably they were one of the few husband and wife duos to be awarded double honours.

 

Their selfless record of service to every community they have lived in deserves special mention and recognition. We acknowledge and thank Barry Lewis for his contribution to the Ku-ring-gai community and offer our condolences to his family and friends.

 

 

Resolved:

 

A.   That the Mayoral Minute be received and noted.

 

B.   That we stand for a minute’s silence to honour Barry Lewis

 

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

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

One minutes silence was observed

 

 

236

VALE Andrea Coleman 1959 – 2015 Volunteer Member of Ku-ring-gai Rural Fire Service Brigade

 

File: CY00455/3

Vide: MM.3

 

 

It is my sad duty to advise my Councillor colleagues and Ku-ring-gai residents of the untimely death of a much loved member of our community, Ms Andrea Coleman.

 

Andrea became a volunteer with the Ku-ring-gai RFS Brigade in 2010. With her children growing older she felt she wanted to give back something to the community she lived in.

 

Initially she was made assistant training officer, but her organisational skills and warm engaging personality soon saw her become the brigade’s community engagement officer.

 

In this role, Andrea had the responsibility of putting on education displays at locations such as
St Ives Shopping Village and open days at the brigade headquarters. She also hosted community engagement activities such as street meetings and school visits to discuss bushfire prevention with the public.

 

Last week Ku-ring-gai RFS Brigade captain Mark Unsworth paid tribute to the positive impact Andrea had on educating residents on the dangers of bushfire. “She was a brilliant organiser, full of energy. I knew that I could give her any task and she would not only make sure it was done, but that it was a great success.”

 

Her passing has special poignancy for Council staff. Andrea worked closely with members of our environment and bush management team in organising educational events. Her happy nature and ability to connect with everyone she met will be sorely missed by them.

 

We are deeply sorry to hear of Andrea’s sudden and unexpected passing. On behalf of the Council and the Ku-ring-gai community, I extend my sincere condolences to her family – especially her children Max and Philippa – and to the members of the Ku-ring-gai RFS Brigade who knew and loved her.

 

 

Resolved:

 

A.   That the Mayoral Minute be received and noted.

 

B.   That we stand for a minute’s silence to honour Andrea Coleman

 

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

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

  

One minutes silence was observed

 

 

237

Councillor Elaine Malicki - Ku-ring-gai Council's Longest Serving Elected Representative

 

File: CY004553

Vide: MM.4

 

 

Tonight I would like to especially acknowledge Cr Elaine Malicki, who has achieved the distinction of becoming Ku-ring-gai Council’s longest serving elected representative.

 

Since her election in September 1991, Cr Malicki has impressively notched up close to 24 years of service, now surpassing the previous record of just over 23 years and eight months held by the late Tony Hall.

 

For the benefit of residents and those present at tonight’s meeting, here is an outline of Cr Malicki’s achievements during her long career in local government.

 

Cr Malicki has served three terms as Mayor, notably during centenary celebrations for the Council in 2006 and two terms as Deputy Mayor. She has served on a range of Council committees, including planning and bushfire management.

 

Cr Malicki has been a key driver and advocate in many large projects including the Ku-ring-gai Fitness and Aquatic Centre, North Turramurra Recreation Area, several new parks and upgrades to neighbourhood centres. She is a passionate supporter of sport in Ku-ring-gai and a committed proponent of creating a regional park on the site of Gordon Golf Course.

 

Cr Malicki received a Long Service Award from the Minister for Local Government in 2012 and a high commendation in the 2013 Women in Local Government Awards.

 

Cr Malicki’s experience on Council is reflected in her interest in local community affairs, particularly those affecting Ku-ring-gai’s beautiful natural environment. Prior to her election on Council, Elaine was president of a coalition of community groups which successfully opposed the building of a freeway through the Lane Cove Valley bushland. She was also secretary of the Ku-ring-gai Ratepayers Association and instigator of the Urban Runoff Committee. She also instigated the Ku-ring-gai Residents' Coalition, which allowed local action groups to join together for mutual support.

 

The Rural Fire Service honoured Cr Malicki with an award for her work in educating the community on bushfire prevention. Cr Malicki also had the pleasure of officially opening the new RFS headquarters at Wahroonga in 2013, a project in which she played a leading role.

 

In conclusion, on behalf of the Council and our community, I thank Cr. Malicki for her long commitment to preserving Ku-ring-gai’s unique qualities and her dedication to local government. We extend our congratulations on her record breaking service to Ku-ring-gai Council and its community.

 

 

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Mayor, Councillor Anderson)

 

That this Mayoral Minute be received and noted.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

PETITIONS

 

238

Proposed Child Care Centre 18-20 Lady Game Drive Killara DA0588/14 - (One hundred and sixty seven [167] Signatures)

 

File: DA0588/14

Vide: PT.1

 

 

“We, the undersigned, petition the Mayor and Councillors of Ku-ring-gai  to stop the proposed change of use of the residential property located at 18-20 Lady Game Drive Killara to a Child Care Centre.”

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Citer/Armstrong)

 

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

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

239

Proposed Clearway at Mona Vale Road St Ives (Six Hundred and Two [602] Signatures)

 

File: TM1/07

Vide: PT.2

 

 

“We, the undersigned, request the Mayor and Councillors of Ku-ring-gai to petition the State Government of NSW to stop the proposed clearway for Mona Vale Road St Ives. (Six Hundred and Two [602] Signatures).”

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Berlioz/Ossip)

 

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

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

GENERAL BUSINESS

 

240

Extinguishment and Relocation of Council Easement - 6A-8 Buckingham Road Killara

 

File: CY00066/7

Vide: GB.2

 

 

To seek Council approval to the extinguishment and relocation of an easement in favour of Council at 6A‑8 Buckingham Road, Killara

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Malicki/Szatow)

 

A.       That the General Manager or his delegate be authorised to negotiate Council’s requirements including compensation for the extinguishment of the existing easement (J344860) and the modification/creation of a new easement in favour of Council at 6A‑8 Buckingham Road, Killara.

 

B.       Subject to the General Manager or his delegate completing negotiations as set out in the report that Council grant approval for the extinguishment of the existing easement and the creation of a new easement in favour of Council at 6A-8 Buckingham Road, Killara.

 

C.       That Council authorises the Mayor and General Manager to affix the Common Seal of the Council to the instrument for the release of the easement and the creation of the new easement and to execute all associated documentation.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

241

Investment Report as at 31 July 2015

 

File: S05273

Vide: GB.3

 

 

To present Council’s investment portfolio performance for July 2015.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Malicki/Pettett)

 

A.      That the summary of investments and performance for July 2015 be received and noted.

 

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

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

242

Analysis of Land and Environment Court Costs - 4th Quarter 2014 to 2015

 

File: S05273

Vide: GB.4

 

 

To report legal costs in relation to development control matters in the Land and Environment Court for the year ended 30 June 2015.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Malicki/Pettett)

 

That the analysis of Land and Environment Court costs for the year ended 30 June 2015 be received and noted.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

243

90–92 Eton Road Lindfield - DA0552/14 - Construction of 13 Small Lot Dwellings, New Road, Stormwater System and Community Title Subdivision into 14 Lots

 

File: DA0552/14

Vide: GB.5

 

 

Construction of 13 small lot houses, new private roadway, stormwater works and Community title subdivision into 14 lots.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Malicki/Pettett)

 

THAT the Council, as the consent authority, grant deferred development consent to DA0552/14 for the construction of 13 small lot houses and Community Title subdivision into 14 lots, being 13 residential Torrens title lots and 1 community Lot for the private road, at 90-92 Eton Road, Lindfield (formerly 100 Eton Road), for a period of two (2) years from the date on which the consent becomes operable.

 

SCHEDULE A: Deferred Commencement - Terms to be satisfied prior to the consent becoming operable

 

The following deferred commencement terms must be complied with to the satisfaction of Council within 24 months of the date of issue of this deferred commencement consent:

 

Approval for relocation of Council pipe and easement

 

In order for the consent to become operable;

 

(i)      The applicant must obtain a resolution from Ku-ring-gai Council, as the asset owner, that it will consent to the relocation of the existing Council easement for     drainage and underground pipe.

 

(ii)     A full hydraulic design for the relocation of the pipe is to be prepared in accordance with the requirements of Chapter 9 of Council’s DCP 47 Water Management and submitted to Council with the relevant application and fees.  The design must be suitable for construction.

 

(iii)    Council’s resolution is required for the relocation of the pipe, extinguishment of the existing easement and where required, the creation of a new easement.

 

 

Reason:      To protect the environment and Council's assets.

 

Once the consent becomes operable, the following conditions apply:

 

SCHEDULE B – Conditions of Development Consent

 

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

P5-DA01-100[2]

Batessmart

04.06.15

P5-DA02-101[2]

Batessmart

04.06.15

P5-DA05-001[1]

Batessmart

10.04.15

P5-DA05-002[1]

Batessmart

10.04.15

P5-DA05-003[1]

Batessmart

10.04.15

P5-DA05-004[1]

Batessmart

10.04.15

P5-DA05-005[1]

Batessmart

10.04.15

P5-DA05-006[1]

Batessmart

10.04.15

P5-DA05-007[1]

Batessmart

10.04.15

P5-DA05-008[1]

Batessmart

10.04.15

P5-DA05-009[1]

Batessmart

10.04.15

P5-DA05-010[1]

Batessmart

10.04.15

P5-DA05-011[1]

Batessmart

10.04.15

P5-DA05-012[1]

Batessmart

10.04.15

P5-DA05-013[1]

Batessmart

10.04.15

P5-DA07-001[2]

Batessmart

10.04.15

P5-DA07-002[2]

Batessmart

10.04.15

P5-DA07-100[1]

Batessmart

04.12.14

P5-DA07-101[1]

Batessmart

04.12.14

P5-DA07-102[1]

Batessmart

04.12.14

P5-DA07-103[1]

Batessmart

04.12.14

P5-DA07-104[1]

Batessmart

04.12.14

P5-DA07-105[1]

Batessmart

04.12.14

P5-DA07-106[1]

Batessmart

14.09.26

P5-DA07-107[1]

Batessmart

04.12.14

P5-DA07-108[1]

Batessmart

04.12.14

P5-DA07-109[1]

Batessmart

04.12.14

P5-DA08-002[1]

Batessmart

04.12.14

P5-DA08-003[1]

Batessmart

04.12.14

Materality Sheets 1 and 2

Batessmart

Undated

C101 Rev C

James Taylor and Associates

07.04.15

C102 Rev B

James Taylor and Associates

07.04.15

C104 Rev B

James Taylor and Associates

07.04.15

C105 Rev C

James Taylor and Associates

07.04.15

C106 Rev B

James Taylor and Associates

07.04.15

C107 Rev A

James Taylor and Associates

07.04.15

C201 Rev B

James Taylor and Associates

07.04.15

DA-L-100 Rev 3

Turf

11/06/15

DA-L-300 Rev 3

Turf

11/06/15

DA-L-400 Rev 3

Turf

11/06/15

L-P5-DA-10

Turf

09/04/15

L-P5-DA-11

Turf

09/04/15

TDS-SK-001 Rev 1

Turf

02/04/15

Draft Precinct 5 subdivision plan

Peter William Vandergraaf

03.06.2015

TMP01 Issue B Sheet 1 of 2

Naturally Trees

08/04/15

TMP01 Issue B Sheet 2 of 2

Naturally Trees

08/04/15

 

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

 

2.     Inconsistency between documents

 

In the event of any inconsistency between conditions of this consent and the drawings/documents referred to above, the conditions of this consent prevail.

 

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

 

3.     Approved landscape plans

 

Landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the following landscape plan(s), listed below and endorsed with Council’s stamp, except where amended by other conditions of this consent:

 

Plan no.

Drawn by

Dated

DA-L-100 Rev B, DA-L-300 Rev B,  A-L-400 Rev B, DA-L-500 Rev B,   L-P5-DA-10 Issue 2, L-P5-DA-11 Issue 2  TDS-SK-001 Rev 1

Turf

11/06/15   9/04/15   2/04/15

 

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

 

4.     Amendments to approved plans

The approved plans including architectural, landscaping and engineering shall be amended as follows:

 

-        The proposed sandstone retaining wall to the landscape easement between the private open space of Precinct 5 and the adjoining Asset Protection Zone is to follow the     existing contours to ensure compliance with maximum 1 metre height and avoid          conflicts with rock outcropping (5.7.5 Edgelea Urban Design Guidelines February 2012).

 

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 the development is in accordance with the determination

 

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

 

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 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, including kerb and gutter, of Eton Road from Abingdon Road to the southern extremity of the subject site, including the bus bay.

          Tubbs View, full road pavement.

 

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.

 

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

 

 · 64 Abingdon Road.

 

· 10 Kimo Street (if construction of dwelling has commenced).

 

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.   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.

 

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 plan is to consist of a report with Traffic Control Plans attached.

 

The report is to contain commitments which must be followed by the 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   Excavation

o   Concrete pour

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. 

 

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 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.

 

14.   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.

 

15.   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.

 

16.   CCTV report of existing Council pipe system near works

 

Prior to the commencement of any works on site, qualified practitioners must undertake a closed circuit television inspection and then report on the existing condition of the Council drainage pipeline through Lots 8 to 14. The report must be provided to Council’s, Development Engineer and is to include a copy of the video footage of the pipeline. A written acknowledgment from Council’s Development Engineer (attesting to this condition being appropriately satisfied) shall be obtained and submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the commencement of any works on site.

 

Reason:    To protect Council’s infrastructure.

 

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

 

17.   Project ecologist

 

A Project Ecologist shall be commissioned prior to the release of the Construction Certificate to ensure all bushland/environmental protection measures are carried out in accordance with the conditions of consent.

 

The Project Ecologist shall have a minimum qualification of TAFE Certificate III in Bush Regeneration or Conservation and Land Management - Natural Area Restoration. He/she shall have at least 4 years experience in the management of native bushland in the Sydney region. Details of the arborist including name, business name and contact details shall be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority with a copy to Council.

 

Reason:    To ensure the protection of existing biodiversity values of the site

 

18.   Fauna protection

 

Prior to works commencing and/or tree removal works a qualified ecologist shall investigate all trees within the development for fauna occupation. In accordance with appropriate licensing requirements the ecologist shall supervise the relocation of any fauna found within the trees approved for removal.

 

The qualified ecologist must hold an Animal Ethics Permit from the Office of Environment & Heritage and a wildlife licence under section 132C of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 issued by the Office of Environment and Heritage.

 

Evidence of engagement of the qualified ecologist and the required licensing must be provided to the Private Certifying Authority with a copy to Council prior to the trees being removed.

 

Reason:    To ensure protection of fauna species.

 

19.   Nest boxes

 

Prior to works commencing and/or tree removal works being undertaken eighteen nest boxes comprising of 6 small mammal & 6 medium mammal, 6 microbat boxes shall be installed within the retained (bushland) area to the south of the proposed development. The nest boxes shall be constructed of durable wood material (marine ply) and installed at a minimum height of 6 metres from the ground and positioned under the direction of a qualified ecologist.

 

The qualified ecologist must hold an Animal Ethics Permit from the Office of Environment & Heritage and a wildlife licence under section 132C of the National Parks and Wildlife Act 1974 issued by the Office of Environment and Heritage.

 

Reason:      To ensure protection of fauna species.

 

20.   Amendments to approved tree protection plan

 

Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the approved tree protection 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

TMP01 Sheets 1- 2 Rev B

Naturally Trees

8/04/15

 

The above tree protection plan(s) shall be amended in the following ways:

 

1. Tree protection and ground protection is to be provided to the bushland edge directly southeast of the proposed access road, retaining wall to Lot 14 and stormwater works. The fencing is to connect to that shown in association with Trees 830 and 831. Sediment fencing is to be relocated along the line of the tree protection fencing.

 

Note:                  An amended plan, prepared by a qualified arborist and verified by the Project Arborist and Project Ecologist shall be submitted to the Certifying Authority.

 

Reason : To protect existing trees during construction phase

 

21.   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.

 

22.   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.

 

23.   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.

 

 

 

24.   Tree protection fencing/ground protection

 

To preserve the following tree/s, no work shall commence until the area beneath their canopy is fenced off or ground protection installed as per following Tree Management Plans to prevent any activities, storage or the disposal of materials within the fenced area.  The fencing/ground protection shall be maintained intact until the completion of all demolition/building work on site.

 

Plan no.

Drawn by

Date

TMP01 Sheets 1- 2 Rev B

Naturally Trees

8/04/15

 

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. Ground protection shall be in accordance with AS4970-2009 Protection of trees on development sites.

 

Reason : To protect existing trees during construction phase

 

25.   Design of works in public road (Roads Act approval)

 

If the design for the new Council pipe from Eton Road to the bioretention basin has not been approved with the Council report, then prior to issue of the Construction Certificate, the Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that  engineering plans and specifications prepared by a qualified consulting engineer have been approved by Council’s Development Engineer. The plans to be assessed must be to a detail suitable for construction issue purposes

 

Development consent does not give approval to these works on Council's asset.  The applicant must obtain a separate approval under sections 138 and 139 of The Roads Act 1993 for the works required as part of the development. The Construction Certificate must not be issued, and these works must not proceed until Council has issued a formal written approval under the Roads Act 1993.

 

The required plans and specifications are to be designed in accordance with the General Specification for the Construction of Road and Drainage Works in Ku-ring-gai Council, dated November 2004. The drawings must detail existing utility services and trees affected by the works, erosion control requirements and traffic management requirements during the course of works.  Survey must be undertaken as required. Traffic management is to be certified on the drawings as being in accordance with the documents SAA HB81.1 - 1996 - Field Guide for Traffic Control at Works on Roads - Part 1 and RTA Traffic Control at Work Sites (1998). Construction of the works must proceed only in accordance with any conditions attached to the Roads Act approval issued by Council.

 

A minimum of three (3) weeks will be required for Council to assess the Roads Act application. Early submission of the Roads Act application is recommended to avoid delays in obtaining a Construction Certificate. An engineering assessment and inspection fee (set out in Council’s adopted fees and charges) is payable and Council will withhold any consent and approved plans until full payment of the correct fees. Plans and specifications must be marked to the attention of Council’s Development Engineers. In addition, a copy of this condition must be provided, together with a covering letter stating the full address of the property and the accompanying DA number.

 

Reason:    To ensure that the plans are suitable for construction purposes.

 

26.   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.

 

27.   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):

 

28.   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 hat 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.

 

29.   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

Bushfire Protection Assessment

Ecological Australia

October 2014

 

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:

 

30.   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.

 

31.   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.

 

32.   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.

 

33.   Rural Fire Service conditions

Asset Protection Zones

The intent of measures is to provide sufficient space and maintain reduced fuel loads so as to ensure radiant heat levels of buildings are below critical limits and to prevent direct flame contact with a building. To achieve this, the following conditions shall apply:

1. At the commencement of building works, and in perpetuity, the site shall be managed as an Inner Protection Area (IPA) as outlined within 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'.

Water and utilities

The intent of measures is to provide adequate services of water for the protection of buildings during and after the passage of a bush fire, and to locate gas and electricity so as not to contribute to the risk of fire to a building. To achieve this, the following conditions shall apply:

2. The provision of water, electricity and gas shall comply with section 4.1.3 of 'Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006'.

Access

The intent of measures for property access is to provide safe access to/from the public road system for fire fighters providing property protection during a bush fire and for occupants faced with evacuation. To achieve this, the following conditions shall apply:

3. The proposed shared property access road shall comply with section 4.1.3 (2) of ‘Planning for Bush Fire Protection 2006’.

Design and construction

The intent of measures is that buildings are designed and constructed to withstand the potential impacts of bush fire attack. To achieve this, the following conditions shall apply:

4. The north-east, south-east and south-west elevations of dwellings proposed on lots 11-14 (as shown on drawing no. P5_DA02.001[1], prepared by BatesSmart, revision 1, dated 26/9/2014) shall comply with section 3 and section 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' 2006’.

5. The north-west elevations of dwellings proposed on lots 11-14 and north-east and south-east elevations of dwellings proposed on lots 8-10 (as shown on drawing no. P5_DA02.001[1], prepared by BatesSmart, revision 1, dated 26/9/2014) shall comply with section 3 and section 6 (BAL 19) Australian Standard AS3959-2009 ‘Construction of buildings in bush fire-prone area’ and section A3.7 Addendum Appendix 3 of 'Planning for Bush Fire Protection' 2006’.

6. The south-west and north-west elevations of dwellings proposed on lots 8-10 and all elevations of dwellings proposed on lots 2 to 7 (as shown on drawing no. P5_DA02.001[1], prepared by BatesSmart, revision 1, dated 26/9/2014) shall comply with Sections 3 and 5 (BAL 12.5) 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 2006'.

Reason:   statutory requirement

 

34.   Temporary irrigation

 

Temporary irrigation within the Tree protection fencing is to be provided where necessary during all stages of works.  Irrigation volumes are to be determined by the Project Arborist.

 

Reason:  To protect trees to be retained on site.

 

35.   Demolition of existing site structures

 

To preserve the health and condition of existing trees to be retained,  all demolition of existing structures including tree removal, are to be undertaken within the access restricted to the existing roads and in accordance with Section 2, Appendix 6 and Appendix 7, Arboricultural Impact Appraisal and Method Statement, Naturally Trees, 8/04/15(Rev B). Where vehicular access is required across existing soft landscape area, temporary ground protection capable of supporting the vehicles is to be constructed in accordance with Section 4.5.3, AS4970-2009 Protection of trees on development sites.

 

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.   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.

 

39.   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.

 

40.   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.

 

41.   Post-construction dilapidation report

 

The applicant shall engage a suitably qualified person to prepare a post construction dilapidation report at the completion of the construction works. This report is to ascertain whether the construction works created any structural damage to adjoining buildings, infrastructure and roads. The report is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority. In ascertaining whether adverse structural damage has occurred to adjoining buildings, infrastructure and roads, the Principal Certifying Authority must:

 

·         compare the post-construction dilapidation report with the pre-construction dilapidation report

·         have written confirmation from the relevant authority that there is no adverse structural damage to their infrastructure and roads.

 

A copy of this report is to be forwarded to Council at the completion of the construction works.

 

Reason:    Management of records.

 

42.   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.

 

43.   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.

 

44.   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.

 

45.   Certification of footings & excavation adjacent to easements

 

During demolition and construction, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that:

 

·         footings, and any required permanent excavation or drainage easement support, are constructed in accordance with the conditions of this consent relating to footings and excavation adjacent to drainage easements and/or drainage pipes

·         footings allow for complete future excavation over the full width of the easement to a depth of the invert of the pipe, without the need to support or underpin the subject structure

 

Reason:    Safety.

 

46.   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.

 

47.   Maintenance period for works on Council asset

 

A maintenance period of six (6) months applies to all work on Council's assets carried out by the applicant - after the works have been completed to the satisfaction of Ku-ring-gai Council. In that maintenance period, the applicant shall be liable for any section of the public infrastructure work which fails to perform in the designed manner, or as would reasonably be expected under the operating conditions. The maintenance period shall commence once the applicant receives a formal letter from Council stating that the works involving public infrastructure have been completed satisfactorily.

 

Reason:    To protect public infrastructure.

 

 

48.   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.

 

49.   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.

 

50.   Footings and excavation near easements

 

Footings to be located adjacent to easements and/or Council drainage pipes shall be sited and constructed so that all footings are located outside of easement boundaries.

 

The applicant shall refer to Council Plan 80-011 concerning such works. Footings must extend to at least the depth of the invert of the adjacent pipe within the easement unless the footings are to be placed on competent bedrock.  If there is no pipe within the easement, a future depth of pipe of 1.6 metres is to be assumed for future pipe placement.  If there is a Council pipe without an easement a future easement width of 1.8 metres centred on the pipeline is to be adopted. 

 

If permanent excavation is proposed beneath the obvert of the pipe within the easement, suitable means to protect the excavation from seepage or other water flow from the pipe and trench and means to retain the easement and associated pipe cover are to be provided at no cost to Council.  Council accepts no liability for such seepage or water flows now or at any time in the future resulting from such excavation.

 

Reason:    To ensure structural stability.

 

51.   Structures to be clear of drainage easements

 

During all phases of demolition, excavation and construction, it is the full responsibility of the applicant and their contractors to:

 

·         ascertain the exact location of the Council drainage pipe traversing the site in the        vicinity of the works

·         take full measures to protect the in-ground Council drainage system

·         ensure dedicated overland flow paths are satisfactorily maintained through the site

 

Drainage pipes can be damaged through applying excessive loading (such as construction machinery, material storage and the like). All proposed structures and construction activities are to be sited fully clear of Council drainage pipes, drainage easements, watercourses and trunk overland flow paths on the site. Trunk or dedicated overland flow paths must not be impeded or diverted by fill or structures unless otherwise approved. 

 

If a Council drainage pipeline is uncovered during construction, all work is to cease and the Principal Certifying Authority and Council must be contacted immediately for advice. Any damage caused to a Council drainage system must be immediately repaired in full as directed and at no cost to Council.

 

Reason:    To protect existing Council infrastructure and maintain over land flow paths.

 

52.   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.

 

53.   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. 

 

Schedule

Tree/location

Time of inspection

As shown on Tree Management Plan, Naturally Trees, 15/04/14  

As per Programme of arboricultural input,  Appendix 7, Arboricultural Impact Appraisal and Method Statement, Naturally Trees, 15/04/14.  

 

Reason:    To ensure protection of existing trees.

 

54.   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.

 

55.   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.

 

56.   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.

 

57.   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:

 

58.   Concept approval

 

All works associated with the development and its ongoing use shall have regard to, and be undertaken in accordance with the Conditions and supporting documentation of Concept Approval MP06_0130.

 

Reason:   To ensure compliance with the Concept Approval.

 

59.   Positive covenant and easement over bioretention basin

 

Prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority is to be satisfied that an easement or equivalent has been created over the bioretention basin in terms which allow its maintenance by the community association together with a positive covenant and restriction on use describing how it is to be maintained.  The terms of the positive covenant and restriction on use can be generally in accordance with Council's "draft terms of Section 88B Instrument for the protection of on site detention facilities".

 

Reason:  To protect the environment.

 

60.   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. 577084M have been complied with.

 

Reason:    Statutory requirement.

 

61.   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.

 

62.   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.

 

63.   Retention and re-use positive covenant

 

Prior to issue of the Final 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 and water quality measures (such as rain-gardens) on the property.

 

The terms of the instruments are to be generally in accordance with the Council's "draft terms of Section 88B instruments for protection of retention and re-use facilities" and to the satisfaction of Council (refer to appendices of Ku-ring-gai Water Management Development Control Plan No. 47). For existing titles, the positive covenant and the restriction on the use of land is to be created through an application to the Land Titles Office in the form of a request using forms 13PC and 13RPA. The relative location of the reuse and retention facility, in relation to the building footprint, must be shown on a scale sketch, attached as an annexure to the request forms.

 

Registered title documents showing the covenants and restrictions must be submitted to and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issue of the Final Occupation Certificate.

 

Reason:    To protect the environment.

 

64.   Certification of drainage and roadworks

 

Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority is to be satisfied that the stormwater drainage and roadworks have been satisfactorily completed in accordance with the approved Construction Certificate drainage plans.

 

Note:  A suitably qualified engineer is to provide evidence documenting the above.

         

Reason:    To protect the environment.

 

65.   WAE plans

 

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 and the new road and retaining structures. 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.

 

66.   CCTV report of pipe after work

 

Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, a closed circuit television inspection and report on the Council drainage pipeline traversing the site is to be undertaken by appropriate contractors and provided to Council’s Development Engineer.  The report is to include a copy of the footage of the inside of the pipeline.  Any damage that has occurred to the section of the pipeline since the commencement of construction on the site must be repaired in full to the satisfaction of Council’s Development Engineer at no cost to Council.

 

Reason:    To protect the environment.

 

67.   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.

 

68.   Construction of infrastructure works - approved plans

 

Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority must be satisfied that all approved drainage works have been completed in accordance with the Council Roads Act approval and accompanying drawings, conditions and specifications.

 

The works must be supervised by the applicant’s designing engineer and completed and approved to the satisfaction of Ku-ring-gai Council.

 

The supervising consulting engineer is to provide certification upon completion that the works were constructed in accordance with the Council approved stamped drawings.  The works must be subject to inspections by Council at the hold points noted on the Roads Act approval.  All conditions attached to the approved drawings for these works must be met prior to the Occupation Certificate being issued. 

 

Reason:    To ensure that works undertaken on Council's assets are to the satisfaction of Council.

 

69.   Infrastructure repair

 

Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority must be satisfied that any damaged public infrastructure caused as a result of construction works (including damage caused by, but not limited to, delivery vehicles, waste collection, contractors, sub-contractors, concrete vehicles) is fully repaired to the satisfaction of Council Development Engineer and at no cost to Council.

 

Reason:    To protect public infrastructure.

 

Conditions to be satisfied prior to the issue of a Subdivision certificate:

 

70.   Easement for waste collection

 

An easement for waste collection is to be created under Section 88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919. This is to permit legal access for Council, Council’s contractors and their vehicles over the subject property for the purpose of collecting waste from the property.  The terms of the easement are to be generally in accordance with Council’s draft terms for an easement for waste collection and shall be to the satisfaction of Council’s Development Engineer.

 

Reason:    To permit legal access for Council, Council’s contractors and their vehicles over the subject site for waste collection.

 

71.   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.

 

72.   Requirements of public authorities for connection to services

 

Prior to the issue of the Subdivision Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the applicant has complied with the requirements of any public authorities (e.g. Energy Australia, Sydney Water, Telstra Australia, AGL, etc) in regard to the connection, relocation and/or adjustment of the services affected by the proposed subdivision. All costs related to the relocation, adjustment or support of services are the responsibility of the applicant.

 

Note:         Details of compliance with the requirements of any relevant public authorities are to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

Reason:    To ensure that services are available to the allotments of land.

 

73.   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.

 

74.   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 six (6) 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.

 

75.   Submission of plans of subdivision

 

For endorsement of the subdivision certificate, the applicant shall submit an original plan of subdivision plus 6 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 lodgement

b)       the 88B instrument plus 6 copies

c)       all surveyor’s and/or consulting engineers’ certification(s) required under this           subdivision consent

d)       The Section 73 (Sydney Water) Compliance Certificate for the subdivision.

e)       The Precinct Plan

 

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.

 

76.   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.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

244

Proposed Exhibition of Draft Percentage Levy Contributions Plan

 

File: S10604

Vide: GB.6

 

 

The purpose of this report is to present a draft percentage levy (indirect) contributions plan to Council and to seek a recommendation that the draft document be exhibited.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Malicki/Pettett)

 

A.   That the draft indirect s94A Contributions Plan be placed on statutory exhibition for a minimum of 28 days and that a report be prepared back to Council following the completion of the exhibition period.

 

B.   That delegation be granted to the General Manager to make any typographical changes of an explanatory or clarifying nature to the draft Contributions Plan that do not alter the intent of the s94A Contributions Plan as reported to Council.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

245

Destruction of Council records

 

File: S04882

Vide: NM.1

 

 

Notice of Motion from Councillor Malicki dated 17 August 2015

 

I have been informed by staff that all records connected with Ku-ring-gai's recreation areas prior to 1997 no longer exist. This includes Development and Building Applications which as we know contain conditions of consent and other important and relevant information.

 

I move that council receive a report on this matter including where the documents went, the extent of the cull which occurred, whether other areas of council records have likewise been removed, who authorised the removal or destruction of these records and when, and any other relevant matter.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Malicki/Szatow)

 

That the above Notice of Motion as printed be adopted.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

246

Angle parking St Ives Village Green

 

File: S07533

Vide: NM.2

 

 

Notice of Motion from Councillor Berlioz dated 17 August 2015

 

The Masterplan for St Ives Village Green adopted 11/05/2010 includes the provision of right angle (perpendicular) parking spaces on Memorial Avenue and Cowan Road. This method of parking provides more parking spaces than the tradition parallel parking.

 

One major drawback of perpendicular parking however is that it is a lot more hazardous to get out of a perpendicular spot compared to a parallel spot. Traffic vision is generally much more constrained (by adjacent vehicles, mostly) and you tend to have to stick yourself right into the flow.

 

Angle parking is a compromise solution with a better view of the roadway for leaving, and better angle for faster switching from parked mode to traffic mode.

 

Since the adoption of the St Ives Village Masterplan four years ago, development of multi unit dwellings in both Memorial Avenue and Cowan Road roads and in surrounding areas means Cowan and Memorial roads have become more heavily used and vehicle volumes have increased and are likely to continue to do so.

 

Both streets are undergoing multi-unit development and both streets carry increased traffic resulting from local development as well as development outside our local area

 

Competing needs of parking versus efficient vehicle movement can impede mobility and compromise safety. Given the increased traffic volumes in Memorial Avenue and Cowan Road, I move that:

 

A.      A comparative study be undertaken of three parking scenarios on Memorial Avenue and Cowan Road (perpendicular parking, 60degree angle parking and indented Parallel parking) using updated traffic data to assess the safety factors and the potential impacts on traffic flow.

B       For each of the three scenarios, the study should include:

·          Concept drawings of required dimensions of car spaces and width of maneuverability.

·          An overlay demonstrating the square metreage of St Ives Village Green and trees which will be lost.

·          The yield or loss of car spaces compared with the existing number available.

·          For each option an estimate of cost.

C.      A report comes back to council within the first quarter of 2016.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Berlioz/Ossip)

 

That the above Notice of Motion as printed be adopted.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

247

2016 General Manager Performance Agreement

 

File: CY00254/7

Vide: C.1

 

 

Confidential Mayoral Minute by the Mayor, Councillor Jennifer Anderson dated 21 August 2015

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillor Malicki/Pettett)

That the 2016 General Manager Performance Agreement be deferred for until the next Ordinary Meeting of Council to be held on Tuesday 8 September 2015. 

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

248

Delivery Program 2013-2017 and Operational Plan 2014-2015 - Bi-annual Report

 

File: FY00382/7

Vide: GB.1

 

 

To report to Council on the progress of the Revised Delivery Program 2013-2017 and Operational Plan 2014-2015, for the period January to June 2015. 

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Malicki/Pettett)

 

A.      That the report on the six (6) monthly progress review of the Revised Delivery Program, 2013-2017 and Operational Plan 2014/2015 for the period of January 2015 to June 2015 be received and noted.

 

B.      That 2014-2015 Tasks as listed in the report be carried over or included for completion in Council’s 2015-2016 Operational Plan.

 

C.      That Council receive  and note the report having regard that comments contained therein reflect achievements across Council for the last twelve months.

 

D.      That the final paragraph in the Key Achievements section of P1.1.1.1 page 67 Book 1 relating to the Canoon Road Recreation Area Master Plan being:

 

            ‘Following facilitated meetings between user groups and residents the Canoon Road Recreation Area Master Plan (as part of the Plan of Management) has become more than a statutory document. It has established some common ground between the local residents and users, and will establish a framework that involves all parties in the management of the land into the future.’

 

         be removed from the Revised Delivery Program 2013-2014 & and Operational Plan 2014/2015 attachment.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

BUSINESS WITHOUT NOTICE - SUBJECT TO CLAUSE 241 OF GENERAL REGULATIONS

 

 

The following item after a

Motion moved by Councillors Ossip and Berlioz

to have the matter dealt with at the meeting was

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

and the Chairperson ruled urgency

 

 

249

Proposed Imminent Clearway for Mona Vale Road St Ives

 

File: TM1/07

Vide: BN.1

 

 

Councillor David Ossip drew Council’s attention to the RMS plans to implement a seven (7) days a week clearway on Mona Vale Road between the Pacific Highway, Pymble and Kitchener Street, St Ives. This clearway will include the segment of Mona Vale Road between Stanley Street and Rosedale Road in St Ives, with consequential impacts upon the strip of shops adjacent to Mona Vale Road which currently benefit from street parking opportunities available outside their stores.

 

The strip of shops on Mona Vale Rd between Stanley Street and Rosedale Road is a focal point for the St Ives community. For decades, residents of St Ives and Ku-ring-gai have been well served by this collection of small businesses. I am personally aware of the substantial risks many of these business owners have taken to set up their businesses and refit their stores. Some owners have mortgaged their own family home or made other sacrifices in order to establish businesses which enliven our community and invigorate our local economy. We must never forget this sacrifice and must always remember that these small businesses add to the amenity of living in Ku-ring-gai by providing the goods and services we all desire and by providing a source of local employment.

 

With this mind, I would like to formally note my concern about the impact the proposed clearway will have on the strip of shops which occupy this part of Mona Vale Road. The owners of the various stores estimate that they will lose significant revenue as a result of this clearway, putting their future at risk. This is because of their reliance on passing trade, which they believe will be lost should the clearway proceed. This is particularly distressing to a few business owners who have either recently entered into new leases for their premises or spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on new fit-outs for their respective stores.

 

Given the risks that are taken to establish such businesses and the substantial benefits that the community as a whole derive from such risk, government has a role in creating an environment in which small business can succeed. Certainly, it is not government’s role to ensure the success of every small business – the fact that some businesses succeed and some fail is a natural feature of the capitalist system. But equally, it’s not government’s job to make life more difficult for small business.

 

This is certainly the view of Jonathan O’Dea MP who has been a very strong advocate for these businesses and who has done everything within his power thus far to ensure that all viewpoints have been taken into consideration and appropriate process has been followed.

 

 

Resolved:

 

(Moved: Councillors Ossip/Berlioz)

 

A.      That Council formally notes its concern about the potential adverse impact of the proposed clearway on the strip of shops on Mona Vale Road, between Stanley Street and Rosedale Road in St Ives, and formally asks if further consideration can be given to reducing the impact of the proposed clearway on these businesses.

 

B.     That a copy of this motion be sent as a matter of urgency to the local State member of parliament, Jonathan O’Dea MP and to the appropriate RMS representative.

 

CARRIED UNANIMOUSLY

 

 

QUESTIONS WITHOUT NOTICE

 

250

Educating Residents to the Recent Changes to 10/50

File: S10321

Vide: QN.1

 

 

Question Without Notice from Councillor Elaine Malicki

 

What are we going to do to educating residents to the recent changes to 10/50?

 

Answer by Acting Director Strategy and Environment

 

The Acting Director Strategy and Environment advised he will take the question on notice.

 

 

 

251

Notification of Changes to 10/20

File: S10321

Vide: QN.2

 

 

Question Without Notice from Councillor Elaine Malicki

 

Can we put out a Press Release or in other ways use the website or use any other method to make this clear (relating to changes to 10/50)?

 

Answer by Acting Director Strategy and Environment

 

The Acting Director Strategy and Environment will take the question on notice.

 

 

252

Update on the Net Additional Dwellings Constructed in Ku-ring-gai since April 2004

File: S07685/2

Vide: QN.3

 

 

Question Without Notice from Councillor Christiane Berlioz

 

Could we be provided with an update on the net additional dwellings constructed in Ku-ring-gai since April 2004, specifying additional dwellings for each suburb and specifying dwellings inside and outside the town centres as we used to get, making sure it is delivered the way I’d like it delivered.

 

Answer by Acting Director Strategy and Environment

 

The Acting Director Strategy and Environment advised he will take that on notice. Noting that the Metropolitan Urban Development Program is now the formal and official calculator for development yields in Ku-ring-gai, but we can look at what data we have to furnish the question. 

 

 

 

The Meeting closed at 8.24pm

 

 

The Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting of Council held on 25 August 2015 (Pages 1 - 52) were confirmed as a full and accurate record of proceedings on 8 September 2015.

 

 

 

 

 

          __________________________                                 __________________________

                   General Manager                                                         Mayor / Chairperson

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Minute                                              Ku-ring-gai Council                                            Page

MINUTES OF Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee
HELD ON Thursday, 20 August 2015

 

Present:

Ku-ring-gai Council (Councillor Christiane Berlioz, Chairperson)

Director Operations (Mr Greg Piconi)

Roads & Maritime Services (Ms Kathryn Hawkins)

Roads & Maritime Serivces (Ms Amy Burrows)

Representing Police Local Area Command North Shore
    (Snr Const Samantha Sholkie)

Representing Member for Davidson (Mr Michael Lane)

 

 

Staff Present:

Traffic Team Leader (Mr Deva Thevaraja)

Senior Traffic Engineer (Mr John Gill)

 

 

Others Present:

Representing Bike North (Ms Lyness Beavis)

 

 

Apologies:

Representing Police Local Area Command Kuring-gai

    (Snr Const Narelle Tomich)

Representing Member for Ku-ring-gai (Mr David Ross)

Manager Traffic and Transport (Mr George Koolik)

Strategic Transport Engineer (Mr Joseph Piccoli)

 

 

 

The Meeting commenced at 9.00am

 

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

No interest was declared.

 

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTEs

 

 

Minutes of Ku-ring-gai Traffic Committee

File: CY00022/7

 

Meeting held 18 June 2015

Minutes numbered KTC06 to KTC10

 

 

The Committee Recommends:

 

That Minutes numbered KTC06 to KTC10 were received and confirmed as an accurate record of the proceedings of the meeting.

 

 

 

 

 

GENERAL BUSINESS 

 

KTC11

General Matter Items Under Delegated Authority

 

File: S02738

Vide: GB.1

 

 

Advice on matters considered under Delegated Authority.

 

 

The Committee Recommends:

 

That the information regarding traffic facilities approved during June to August 2015 be noted.

 

 

 

KTC12

Greengate Road, Killara

 

File: TM2/07

Vide: GB.2

 

 

To consider a request from AAA Traffic Control to partially close a section of Greengate Road at Pacific Highway and to implement traffic control measures on Pacific Highway on Christmas Eve 2015 at Greengate Hotel.

 

 

The Committee’s Comments:

 

Council’s Team Leader Traffic advised that the TMP has yet to be approved by RMS.

 

 

The Committee Recommends:

 

That Council approve the temporary partial closure of Greengate Road between Pacific Highway and the eastern end of Greengate Hotel on Thursday, 24 December 2015, 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 2015.

 

B.      The Roads and Maritime Services approving the Traffic Management Plan submitted by AAA Traffic Control for Christmas Eve 2015.

 

C.      The event organiser 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.

 

D.      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 2015, while the westbound traffic on Greengate Road will be controlled by traffic controllers from 9.00pm on 24 December and 1.00am 25 December 2015.

 

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 event organiser to inform the affected residents of the proposed road closure of Greengate Road and other detour arrangements in the area on Christmas Eve 2015.

 

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

 

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

 

I.        AAA Traffic Control responds in writing to Council by Friday, 11 December 2015, 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 2015.

 

 

 

KTC13

Wahroonga Village Shops - Parking Changes

 

File: S02281

Vide: GB.3

 

 

To report findings and recommendation from a review of the current parking restrictions at the Wahroonga Village shopping precinct.

 

 

The Committee’s Comments:

 

The Representative for RMS advised that the signage on the Plan attached to the report was not correct near the traffic signals at Coonanbarra Road/Pacific Highway, as the statutory signage is ‘No Stopping’ on either side of Coonanbarra Road within 30m of the traffic signals.  Director Operations advised that no changes are made to the existing statutory restrictions associated with traffic signals.

 

The Representative for Bicycle NSW questioned what the Block Grant covers and what facilities.  The Director Operations advised that it covers lines and signs only.

 

 

 

 

The Committee Recommends:

 

A.   That the existing timed parking restriction on both sides of Railway Avenue, between Redleaf Lane and Coonanbarra Road be replaced with ‘1/2P 8.30am-6pm Mon-Sun’, as shown in Plan No: Wahroonga Village On-Street Parking Arrangements.

 

B.   That existing timed parking restriction on the eastern side of Coonanbarra Road  between Railway Avenue and the entrance to the Coonanbarra Car Park be replaced with ‘1/2P 8.30am-6pm Mon-Sun’, as shown in Plan No: Wahroonga Village, On-Street Parking Arrangements.

 

C.   That existing timed parking restriction on the western side of Redleaf Avenue, between Railway Avenue and the Pacific Highway be replaced with ‘1/2P 8.30am-6pm Mon-Sun’, as shown in Plan No: Wahroonga Village, On-Street Parking Arrangements.

 

D.   That existing timed parking restriction on the western side of Coonanbarra Road and on the east side of Redleaf Avenue, be replaced with ‘1P 8.30am-6pm Mon-Sun’ ‘, as shown in Plan No: Wahroonga Village, On-Street Parking Arrangements.

 

E.   That the Coonanbarra Car Park be divided into two areas for two (2) hour (137 spaces) and three (3) hour (36 spaces) parking time limits ‘8.30am–6pm Mon-Sun’, as shown on Plan No: Wahroonga Village Coonanbarra Car Park Parking Arrangements.

 

F.   That improved and clearer signage be displayed at the entrances to the Coonanbarra Road Car Park and within the car park.

 

G.   That there are no limits on the number of entries to the Coonanbarra Car Park. The one/two entries per day limit be abolished.

 

H.   That Wahroonga Chamber of Commerce and Council’s Regulation & Compliance be informed of Council’s decision.

 

 

 

KTC14

Road Safety Audit - Secondary Road 2043

 

File: S02904

Vide: GB.4

 

 

To consider recommended treatments along Secondary Road 2043 (SR2043) identified with a safety risk in the Road Safety Audit Report (7 July 2015).

 

 

The Committee’s Comments:

 

The Representative of the Member for Davidson expressed concern that the recent restoration works carried out by Ausgrid in Archbold Road was not of an acceptable standard.  Both the Director Operations and Chairperson advised that they found the restoration work to be satisfactory.

 

The Rep for Bicycle NSW questioned if the safety of cyclists was taken into consideration in this study.  Director Operations advised that the study was on existing conditions and any future design to improve traffic facilities will consider accommodating cyclists.

 

The Representative of Member for Davidson raised the issue of sunken manhole covers at Horace Street and Eastern Arterial and generally.  Director Operations advised that these matters will be investigated.

 

 

The Committee Recommends:

 

A.   That Council approve in principle the recommended treatments in Secondary Road 2043 as identified in the Road Safety Audit Report prepared by Bitzios Consulting.

 

B.   That an investigation be undertaken to find treatments to reduce the risk of cars going off Burns Road between Hampden Road and Clissold Road, Wahroonga.

 

C.   That Council apply for funding under the NSW Safer Roads Programme and the Australian Government Black Spot Programme.

 

 

 

KTC15

Road Safety Audit - Yanko Road / The Comenarra Parkway

 

File: S02904

Vide: GB.5

 

 

To consider recommended treatments along Yanko Road, Doncaster Avenue and The Comenarra Parkway identified with a safety risk in the Road Safety Audit Report (July 2015) and the Skid Resistance Test Results (September 2014).

 

 

The Committee’s Comments:

 

The Representative for RMS raised that the recommendation to introduce 50km speed limit on Yanko Road/The Comenarra Parkway, between Browns Road and Jordan Road, should be referred to RMS’ Speed Management Centre for investigation..

 

 

The Committee Recommends:

 

A.   That Council approve in principle the recommended treatments for Yanko Road to The Comenarra Parkway as identified in the Road Safety Audit Report prepared by Cardno Consulting.

 

B.   That an investigation be undertaken to find treatments to reduce the risk of cars going off The Comenarra Parkway between Hicks Avenue and Stainsby Close.

 

C.   That Council apply for funding under the NSW Safer Roads Programme and the Australian Government Black Spot Programme, for eligible treatments/projects.

 

 

 

KTC16

Road Safety Audit - Kissing Point Road, Turramurra

 

File: S02904

Vide: GB.6

 

 

To consider recommended treatments along Kissing Point Road identified with a safety risk in the Road Safety Audit Report (July 2015).

 

 

The Committee’s Comments:

 

The Representative for Bicycle NSW pointed out that Kissing Point Road is a very popular bicycle route but very dangerous and therefore would like to provide input to any proposed traffic facilities for Kissing Point Road, and would like to see more funding going towards cyclists facilities.

 

 

The Committee Recommends:

 

A.   That Council approve in principle the recommended treatments for Kissing Point Road, Turramurra, as identified in the Road Safety Audit Report prepared by Cardno Consulting.

 

B.   That Council apply for funding under the NSW Safer Road Programme and the Australian Government Black Spot Programme, for eligible treatments/projects.

 

 

 

KTC17

Road Safety Audit - Lady Game Drive

 

File: S02904

Vide: GB.7

 

 

To consider recommended treatments along Lady Game Drive identified with a safety risk in the Road Safety Audit Report (July 2015) and the Skid Resistance Test results (September 2014).

 

 

The Committee’s Comments:

 

The Representative for Bicycle NSW advised that cyclist safety should be considered in the design process of any traffic facilities along Lady Game Drive.

 

 

The Committee Recommends:

 

A.   That Council approve in principle the recommended treatments in Lady Game Drive as identified in the Road Safety Report prepared by Cardno.

 

B.   That an investigation be undertaken to find treatments to reduce the risk of cars going off Lady Game Drive roadway between the ‘Wild Life’ sign and De Burgh Road.

 

C.   That Council apply for funding under the NSW Safer Roads Programme and the Australian Government Black Spot Programme, for eligible treatments/ projects.

 

 

 

 

general discussion

 

  1. Mona Vale Road, St Ives

The Chairperson requested an update on the proposed clearway restrictions in Mona Vale Road, St Ives.  Director Operations advised that RMS have put this matter on hold until a meeting with the Minister and shopowners is held by end of August.

 

  1. Parking across driveways
    The Chairperson discussed the recently adopted Council’s Policy on parking across driveways and suggested a review.  She believes that the Policy should consider safety of all residents exiting their driveways rather than giving priority to those from multi-residential developments.  Director Operations responded that it is the Policy approved by Council and can be reviewed at any time.  However, he indicated that the Policy has recently been changed to introduce parking restrictions on either side of multi-residential developments as the number of vehicles exiting these developments are considerably higher than those from individual residences.

 

 

 

 

 

 

The Meeting closed at 9.40am

 


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 8 September 2015

GB.1 / 57

 

 

Item GB.1

S08023/7

 

10 August 2015

 

 

Draft General and Special Purpose Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2015

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

purpose of report:

To present to Council the draft Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2015 for certification and referral to Council’s external auditor, UHY Haines Norton Chartered Accountants and seek approval to carry over budgets to fund incomplete works at 30 June 2015.

 

 

background:

In accordance with Section 413(2)(C) of the Local Government Act 1993, Council must prepare a statement on the General & Special Purpose Financial Reports as to its opinion on the reports prior to formally referring them to the auditor.

Analyses of the financial performance of the Council for the year ended 30 June 2015 are also provided in this report.

 

 

comments:

The Draft Financial Statements show an operating surplus of $22.58m including capital grants and contributions. If capital grants and contributions are excluded, the operating surplus is $13.46m and when considered with other financial indicators it demonstrates that Council is in a sound financial position.

 

 

recommendation:

That Council receive, certify and refer the draft Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2015 to Council’s external auditor UHY Haines Norton Chartered Accountants, and that carry forward expenditure for the amount of $10.602m and associated loan funding of $1.465m be approved.

 

 

 


  

Purpose of Report

To present to Council the draft Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2015 for certification and referral to Council’s external auditor, UHY Haines Norton Chartered Accountants and seek approval to carry over budgets to fund incomplete works at 30 June 2015.

 

 

Background

 

The Draft General and Special Purpose Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2015 have been completed and audited by Council’s external auditor UHY Haines Norton Chartered Accountants. These financial reports have also been endorsed by Council’s Audit and Risk Committee on 20 August 2015.

 

 

Comments

 

The endorsement of these statements is required before referral to Council to formalise the external audit of the Financial Statements. The Draft Financial Statements 2014/2015 are attached to this report (Attachment A1).

 

Annual Financial Statements Process

 

The process that Council must follow in the production, audit, adoption and the advertising of the Financial Statements is prescribed in detail by the Local Government Act 1993.  The following timetable will allow these processes to be satisfied and for the Financial Statements to be adopted by Council.

Timeframe

Deliverable

8 September 2015

Ordinary Meeting of Council – 2014/15 Draft Financial Statements presented to Council seeking Council to resolve to certify the draft statements and formally refer them to the auditor (Section 413 - LG Act 1993).

 

9 September 2015

 

External Auditor’s Report – External Auditor’s report anticipated to be received by Council.

 

11 - 18 September 2015

Draft Financial Statements placed on public exhibition. Public advertising notifies that the Financial Statements are available for inspection at the Council Chambers, libraries and Council’s website. The advertisement also advises that the Financial Statements will be formally presented to Council on 6 October 2015 and submissions will be received until 13 October 2015. (Section 418, 420 – LG Act 1993)

 

6 October 2015

Ordinary Meeting of Council – Final adoption. Council’s auditor’s report on the Financial Statements formally presented to Council. Council considers a response to any public submissions received to date on the Financial Statements.

 

13 October 2015

 

Closing date for public submissions on the Financial Statements.  All submissions received must be referred to Council’s auditor for consideration (Section 420 – LG Act 1993).

 

The draft Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2015 have been prepared in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 (as amended) and Regulations made thereunder, the Australian Accounting Standards and professional pronouncements and the Local Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial Reporting (Update No 23). The Draft Financial Statements comprise the following reports:

·     General Purpose Financial Statements (independently audited)

·     Special Purpose Financial Statements  (independently audited)

·     Special Schedules

 

Financial Performance and Position of Council as at 30 June 2015

 

The comments below provide highlights of Council’s financial performance during 2014/15 and financial position at 30 June 2015.

 

A summary of the financial results from the Draft Financial Statements 2014/15 is presented below:

 

Income Statement

‘000

Actual

2015

Actual

2014

Income from Continuing Operations

133,320

116,869

Expenses from Continuing Operations

110,734

100,828

Net Operating Result for the Year

22,586

16,041

Net Operating Result for the year before Grants and Contributions for Capital purposes

13,460

3,117

 

Statement of Financial Position

‘000

Actual

2015

Actual

2014

Current Assets

45,686

57,969

Non-Current Assets

1,139,045

1,084,550

Total Assets

1,184,731 

 1,142,519 

Current Liabilities

23,445

25,759

Non-Current Liabilities

24,280

39,630

Total Liabilities

47,725

65,389

Net Assets

1,137,006

1,077,130

Total Equity

1,137,006

1,077,130

 

Statement of Cash Flows

‘000

Actual

2015

Actual

2014

Net Cash Flow from Operating Activities

29,265

34,768

Net Cash Flow from Investing Activities

(11,122)

(55,922)

Net Cash Flow from Financing Activities

(17,909)

8,076

Net Decrease in Cash

234

(13,078)

Plus: Cash at beginning of year

(50)

13,028

Cash at end of Year

184

(50)

Plus: Investments on hand at end of year

97,100

92,462

Total Cash & Investments

97,284

92,412

 

 

Income from Continuing Operations

 

During the financial year 2014/15 Council received $133.32m in income from Continuing Operations from the following sources:

 

 

 

Rates & Annual Charges

 

Rates and Annual Charges contributed $76.3m or 57% ($72.9m in 2013/14). Rates income increased by a total of 3% from the last financial year taking into consideration the approved rate peg increase of 2.3%, as well as supplementary rates during the year. Annual Charges which are predominantly represented by domestic waste charges increased by 11%. This reflects the provision of funds towards the cost of remediating the former tip site at the North Turramurra Recreation Area.  Whilst a major component of these costs was chargeable to the Domestic Waste Management reserve, it was necessary in the short term to fund part of this project from the Infrastructure and Facilities reserve and recover costs in future from increased Domestic Waste charges.

 

User Charges & Fees

 

User Charges and Fees totalled $13.68m (10%) compared to $11.48m in 2013/14, an increase of 19%. This category of income mainly includes regulatory/statutory fees and community facilities hire. The principal increase from 2013/14 financial year was due to income received from Council’s Fitness & Aquatic Centre (KFAC) which officially opened in October 2014. Additional expenditure for KFAC to offset income has also been incurred and is reflected in Materials and Contracts expenditure. No other major variations were observed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Interest and Investment Revenue

 

A total of $4m (3%) compared to $3.96m in 2013/14 was received from Interest and Investment revenue.  While there is no major variance in interest earned from previous year, interest income was still lower in 2014/15 when compared to the total average portfolio invested during the year.  This is mainly due to lower average interest rates (3.87%) in 2014/15 compared to the previous year (4.27% in 2013/14).

 

Council’s Cash and Investments at the end of the financial year totalled $97.28m. Notwithstanding the decrease in income compared to investments portfolio, Council ended the year with a strong investment performance which exceeded the bank bill benchmark by 1.27% (the weighted average return for the total portfolio as at end of year was 3.87% compared to the benchmark of the UBS Bank Bill Index of 2.60%). Compared to revised budget, the net return on investments at the end of June 2015 recorded a favourable variance of $199k.

 

Other Revenue

 

Income from “Other Revenue “totalled $9.53m (7%) compared to $9.30m in 2013/14.

Other Revenues have increased by 2.4% compared to 2013/14 which is principally due to higher income from program fees (from Community events held during the year) and an increase in recycling income achieved by changing the recycling contractor.

 

Operating Grants and Contributions

 

During 2014/15 a total of $7.7m (6%) compared to $4.7m in previous year was received by Council. Grants & Contributions provided for Operating Purposes increased by 64% on the previous financial year. This was largely due to the full payment of the Financial Assistance Grant (FAG) as opposed to only 50% received in 2013/14.  The Financial Assistance Grant for 2013/14 reflected a one off reduction due to the fact that this grant was no longer being paid in advance. Other variations in operational grants income were due to additional grants received in the Recreation & Culture category (eg.St Ives Showground Regional playground) and the reclassification of Roads to Recovery (RtoR) grant from capital to operational. This reclassification is due to the fact the RtoR grants are not specifically given to Council for capital purposes, therefore, should be treated and disclosed as operational grants.

 

Capital Grants and Contributions 

 

Grants and Contributions provided for Capital Purposes decreased by 29% on the previous financial year with $9.12m received in 2014/15 compared to $12.92m in 2013/14. This was largely due to decreased Section 94 contributions from developers and reclassification of the Roads to Recovery grant from capital to operational.

 

Net Gains from Disposal of Assets

 

One of the largest variations in the current draft financial statements is identified in the Net Gains from Disposal of Assets. Net gains from asset sales  were $12.85m ($1.51m in 2013/14) largely due to the sale of Council’s car park at  Culworth Avenue, Killara and 24 lots from B2 Land subdivision (the settlement of 2 lots is due to be finalised by December 2015). The net gain represents the gross sale price less the written down value of assets. A summary of major variations in Net Gain on Asset Sales follows:

 

·     B2 land subdivision

 

Council owned assets that were part of the development of 26 lot residential land subdivision at South Turramurra with the NSW Department of Planning. Council’s owned assets were disclosed in Note 22 “Assets Held for Sale” in previous years. Construction and development of the site was completed during 2014/15 and 24 lots were offered for sale. Council received gross proceeds of $13.97m from the sale during 2014/15. After accounting for the book value of assets held for sale, the net gain on asset sales was recorded at $7.5m.

Further disclosure relating to this project is available in Note 19 – Interests in other entities.

 

·     Culworth Avenue Car Park - 20-28 Culworth Ave, Killara NSW 2071

 

During 2014/15 Council divested a portion of the Culworth Avenue Car Park to Rail Corporation NSW. Total proceeds from the sale were $7m. After accounting for the book value of assets held in Council’s financial register, the net gain on asset sales was recorded at $6.2m

 

Expenses from Continuing Operations

 

Total Operating Expenses for the financial year ended 30 June 2015 were $110.73m, compared to $100.82m in 2013/14, this is an increase of 9.8% on the previous financial year.

 

 

Employee Benefits and On-costs

 

Employee Costs were $36.1m compared to $35m in 2013/14, which is an increase of 3.2% on the previous financial year. The major variation was due to the award increase. It must be noted that notwithstanding the increase, a significant saving was achieved in Workers compensation insurance with a decrease of 62% from the previous year ($296k in 2014/15, $778k in 2013/14). This reflects the continuation of Safestart and other safety training programs for staff. The decrease includes a favourable adjustment of $212k to Council’s premium relating to 2013/14 received in 2014/15.

 

Borrowing Costs

 

Borrowing Costs totalled $1.56m compared to $1.46m in 2013/14. There was no significant variation during the year. A total of $750k (relating to 828 Pacific Highway loan), in addition to existing loans, has been accrued /recognised in the accounts during the financial year which was not a cash outflow, but rather an increase in the outstanding balance of the loan. As per the loan agreement Council is required to start interest and principal repayments on this loan by 2016/17.

 

 

Materials & Contracts

 

Materials & Contracts is the largest category of expenditure representing 35% of the total  Council expenditure. A total of $38.4m compared to $31.1m in 2013/14 was spent on Materials and Contracts during 2014/15. This is an increase of 23.5% on the previous financial year. The principal components of this increase are within Contractor & Consultancy costs, in particular, costs associated with KFAC, increased costs resulting from remediation of Council’s old depot at Carlotta Avenue, Gordon, tree maintenance costs from storm damages, legal expenses and others.  

 

Depreciation and Amortisation

 

Depreciation and Amortisation has risen by $892k or 4.8% on previous year from $18.45m in 2013/14 to $19.34 in 2014/15, primarily due to additional assets recognised in the Recreational Facilities ( February 2014) asset class and depreciated over a full financial year. Council revalued infrastructure assets in 2014/15 and also performed an independent review on Council’s asset data. As part of this review depreciation rates and assets useful lives were revised for each class of infrastructure assets. The revised useful lives are disclosed in Note 1 to the Financial Statements.

 

Other Expenses

 

Material expenditure items in this category include electricity costs, insurance, street lighting, rental rebates and other expenses. Other Expenses have increased by $511k or 3.5% compared to previous financial year, mainly due to increased costs for advertising (community events), insurance and utility expenses. 

 

Operating result

 

The operating result is a measure of the increase in the value of Council’s net assets. It takes into account the income received by Council less the expenses from operations including depreciation of assets. The operating result excludes capital expenditure (expenditure on assets).

 

Council’s net operating result for the 2014/15 financial year is disclosed in the Income Statement. For the financial year ended 30 June 2015 Council had an operating surplus excluding revenue from capital grants and contributions of $13.46m compared to $3.11m in 2013/14. The operating result after capital grants and contributions was $22.58m, a variance of $6.54m in comparison to previous financial year ($16m in 2013/14). This variance is mainly due to net gains from asset sales and additional operational grants offset by higher expenditure in Materials & Contracts.

 

A comparison of Operating Result for 2014/15 to original budget and 2013/14 financial year is provided in the table below. It must be noted that major variations in expenditure and income compared to original budget are disclosed in Note 16 of the Draft Financial Statements.

 

 

 

 

$’000

2014/15

Actual

2014/15

Original Budget

2013/14

Actual

Net Operating Result

(Surplus)

 

22,586

 

20,480

 

16,041

Net Operating Result

(before Capital grants & contributions)

 

13,460

 

3,370

 

3,117

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Council’s operating result is strong. The operating surplus means that Council’s revenue exceeds both the cost of running its day to day operations and the depreciation of its assets. This surplus is available for capital works.

 

The operating result (shown separately as including and excluding capital grants and contributions) for the last three financial years is provided in the chart below.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Working capital

 

Working capital is a measure of Council’s liquidity and ability to meet its obligations as they fall due. It is one of the primary measures of the overall financial position of Council, which allows for unforeseen expenditure or reductions in revenue.

 

Working capital represents Council’s net current assets, after deducting internal and external restrictions.  

 

The available working capital at the end of 2014/15 financial year is $4.67m, in line with the target identified in Council’s Annual Budget. This level of working capital highlights an adequate liquidity position with Council being able to meet its short term liabilities when they fall due.

 

Chart below provides a comparison of Council’s working capital for the last 3 financial years.

 

 

Performance Measurement Indicators

 

The Statement of Performance Measurement (Note 13 of the Draft Financial Statements and Special Schedule 7) provide ratios used to assess various aspects of Council’s financial performance. These ratios have been prescribed by the Code of Accounting Practice for 2014/15, which are mainly the financial ratios identified in T-Corp’s Financial Assessment and Benchmarking Report. The Infrastructure assets ratios listed in “Special Schedule 7 - Report on Infrastructure Assets” are Building & Infrastructure Renewal Ratio, Infrastructure Backlog Ratio, Asset Maintenance Ratio and Capital Expenditure Ratio.

 

The results of all financial indicators, including asset ratios, providing previous three year comparisons and commentary are detailed in the table and charts below.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Financial Indicator

 

2014/15

2013/14

2012/13

 

Operating Performance Ratio

Total Operating Revenue (excl Capital grants & Contrib.) – Operating Expense

Total Operating Revenue

 

0.51%

1.56%

5.84%

Own Source Operating Revenue

Total Operating Revenue ( less all grants & Contributions)

Total Operating Revenue

 

86.00%

84.72%

84.22%

Unrestricted Current Ratio

Current Assets( less all External Restrictions)

Current Liabilities (less Specific Purpose Liabilities)

 

2.50x

2.78x*

2.04x

Debt Service Cover Ratio

Operating Result before capital excl.interest & depreciation

Principal repayments plus borrowing costs

 

1.09x

4.82x

10.88x

Rates, Annual charges, Interest outstanding Percentage

Rates, Annual Charges Outstanding

Rates, Annual Charges Collectible

 

3.18%

3.25%

3.47%

Cash Expense Cover Ratio ( expressed in months)

(Current Years cash & Cash Equivalents ( incl. Term Deposits)

 Payments from cash flow of operating and financing activities) X 12

 

 

6.08

8.01

7.68

Asset Ratios

 

 

 

Building & Infrastructure Renewal Ratio

Asset Renewals( Building & Infrastructure)

 Depreciation, Amortisation & Impairment

 

100.01%

104.46%

94.06%

Infrastructure Backlog Ratio

Estimated cost to bring Assets to a satisfactory condition

Total value of Infrastructure, Building, other structure and Land Imp Assets

 

4.36%

28.78%

29.79%

Asset Maintenance Ratio

Actual Asset Maintenance

Required Asset Maintenance

 

1.01x

0.95x

0.81x

Capital Expenditure Ratio

Annual Capital Expenditure

Annual Depreciation

1.28x

2.29x

4.05x

*The ratio includes $8.7m of Assets held for sale

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Operating Performance Ratio

 

This ratio measures Council’s achievement of containing operating expenditure within operating revenue. It is important to distinguish that this ratio is focussing on operating performance and hence capital grants and contributions, fair value adjustments and reversal of revaluation decrements are excluded. The benchmark is greater than (-4%).

 

Council performance ratio is above the benchmark which means that Council can easily contain operating expenditure (excluding capital grants and contributions) within its operating revenue. The ratio has been above benchmark for the last three years. The main decrease from last year is mainly due to higher expenditure in Materials & Contracts from old depot remediation costs, KFAC contractors, tree maintenance costs and others.

 

Own Source Operating Revenue

 

This ratio measures fiscal flexibility. It is the degree of reliance on external funding sources such as operating grants and contributions. Council’s financial flexibility improves the higher the level of its own source revenue. The benchmark is greater than 60%.

 

Council’s Own Source Operating Revenue Ratio (86%) has remained above the benchmark of (>60%) in the last three years.  Council has sufficient level of fiscal flexibility, in the event of being faced with unforseen events.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Unrestricted Current Ratio    

 

 

The Unrestricted Current Ratio is designed to represent Council’s ability to meet short term obligations as they fall due. The benchmark is greater than 1.5x.

Council’s Unrestricted Current Ratio at 2.5x is above benchmark of >1.5x and has been outperforming benchmark for the last three years. Council’s liquidity is good and it can readily pay its debts as they fall due.

 

 

 

Debt Service Cover Ratio

 

This ratio measures the availability of operating cash to service debt including interest, principal and lease payments. The benchmark is greater than 2x.

 

The Debt Service Cover Ratio has been below benchmark (unfavourable) in 2014/15 and it has decreased compared to previous years due to increased one off principal and interest repayments during the financial year. 

 

 

Rates, Annual Charges, Interest & Extra Outstanding Percentage

 

The purpose of this ratio is to assess the impact of uncollected rates and annual charges on liquidity and the adequacy of recovery efforts.

 

The percentage of rates and annual charges that are unpaid at the end of the financial year is a measure of how well Council is managing debt recovery. Council’s ratio of 3.18% is satisfactory and is better than benchmark of “less than 5%”.

 

 

 

 

 

Cash Expense Cover Ratio

 

This liquidity ratio indicates the number of months a Council can continue paying for its immediate expenses without additional cash inflow.

 

Council’s Cash Expense Cover Ratio is satisfactory and above benchmark of “greater than 3 months”.

 

 

 

Building and Infrastructure Renewal Expenditure

 

This indicator assesses Council’s rate at which buildings and infrastructure assets are being renewed against the rate at which they are depreciating.  An indicator of 100% indicates that the amount spent on asset renewals equals the amount of depreciation.  Council’s ratio was in line with the benchmark in 2014/15.

Council is continuing to focus on appropriate asset standards for renewal and maintenance as identified in Council’s Asset Management Strategy. Future financial and asset management plans have consciously prioritised renewal capital works programs over new programs.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Infrastructure Backlog Ratio

 

This ratio shows what proportion of the backlog is against the total value of Council’s infrastructure. Council achieved a backlog ratio of 4.4% at the end of 2014/15, which is a major decrease from the previous year. This was mainly due to an independent review on infrastructure assets that was undertaken during the year. This review was focused on assessing condition of Council’s assets by asset class and reviewing Council’s methodology to determine cost to bring assets to a satisfactory condition. The ratio of 4.4% is an improvement from previous years; however, it indicates that Council still has an infrastructure backlog. Council is continuing to focus on appropriate asset standards for renewal and maintenance of its assets.

 

Asset Maintenance Ratio

 

This ratio compares actual versus required annual asset maintenance. A ratio of above 1.0

indicates that Council is investing enough funds within the year to ensure assets reach their useful lives. The benchmark is greater than1.0.

Council is committed to increase expenditure on asset maintenance in future to maintain its infrastructure assets in satisfactory condition in the long term.

 

 

 

Capital Expenditure Ratio

 

This indicates the extent to which Council is forecasting to expand its asset base with capital expenditure spent on both new assets, and renewal of existing assets. The benchmark is greater than 1.1x. Council’s Capital Expenditure Ratio of 1.28x continues to be above the benchmark reflecting its significant capital expenditure program on new assets and the renewal of existing assets compared to their depreciation. The decrease from previous year is largely due to less capital works undertaken compared to previous year.

 

Budgetary Position as at 30 June 2015

 

The section below analyses Council’s overall financial performance against revised budget for the year ended 30 June 2015.

 

The operating result including capital items for the 2014/15 financial year was a surplus of $22.59m compared to a budgeted surplus of $20.47m resulting in a positive variance of $2.12m. After adjusting for operational projects proposed to be carried forward ($1.411m), the true budgetary variance is $706k favourable.

 

The main variations to the operating result were savings in Domestic Waste Management costs (restricted) and Employee costs, higher Interest income and other corporate accounts items. This is partly offset by lower Section 94 income (restricted), lower parking fines income and additional costs required for tree maintenance resulting from storm damages. More details are listed in the tables provided below.

 

Capital & Operational Projects

 

Actual expenditure for capital and operational projects for the period ending 30 June 2015 is $35.2m against the annual revised budget of $44.16m, resulting in a variance of $8.9m. There are incomplete projects of $10.6m which are proposed to be carried forward.  Budgets voted for some works had not been fully spent as at 30 June 2015 and accordingly are requested to be carried forward into the current financial year.

 

Details of Operational & Capital projects and projects proposed to be carried forward to 2015/16 are provided further in this report.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Major Budget Variations

 

The table below provides comments for major budget variations in Operational budget and reserve movements after allowing for proposed carried forward expenditure.

 

 

 

 

The actual working capital balance as at 30 June 2015 is still to be determined as end of financial year processes are not yet finalised. It is anticipated that the long term financial plan target of $4.644m will be achieved.

 

 

Cash and Investments position

 

Restricted funds are invested in accordance with Council’s Investment Policy. Total investments portfolio as at end of June 2015 was $97.28m. Closing balances of Council’s reserves as at end of June  are provided below.

 

 

A detailed Restricted Assets Report as at 30 June 2015 (Actual) is shown in Attachment A2

 

 

Capital & Operational Projects Summary

 

Actual expenditure for capital and operational projects for the period ending 30 June 2015 is $35.2m against the annual revised budget of $44.16m, resulting in a variance of $8.9m. This variance is mainly due to incomplete projects of $10.6m which are proposed to be carried forward, partly offset by overruns in some projects. The total overrun on operational and capital projects is $1.6m.

 

The Proposed Carried Forward Expenditure from 2014/2015 is detailed in Attachment A3

 

 

Major Project Budget Variations from Revised Budget 2014/15

 

û Ku-ring-gai Fitness & Aquatic Centre Fit-out $233k - due to additional establishment costs for YMCA from delay of opening and additional items required, such as data connection points and fencing.

û Old Depot Remediation at Carlotta Avenue, Gordon $138k - due to more testing required to meet Auditor's requirements for Site Validations.

û B2 Land Subdivision $258k - to provide for additional parking and repairs to the site and infrastructure following storm damage.

û Roads Renewal Programs $120k - Roads Renewal program was overspent partly due to early commencement of 2015/16 works.

û New Street between Dumaresq St & McIntyre St $169k – additional budget allowed for in the 2010 Contributions Plan not reflected in the budget.

û Drainage Renewal Program $144k - primarily due to Pipe installation at Karanga Avenue requiring special pipes and more complex works.

û Footpaths Renewal Programs $136k – over expenditure mainly in bank stabilisations with 5 landslips to address due to storm damages.

û Community Major Events including St Ives Medieval Fair and the Big Swing -  $172k

 

 

The table and chart below show the annual actual projects expenditure against annual revised budget for the year ended 30 June 2015.

 

 

 

 

 

Proposed carried forward to 2015/16

 

Attachment A3 lists projects which were included in the 2014/2015 budget. Budgets voted for some works had not been fully spent as at 30 June 2015 and accordingly are requested to be carried forward into the current financial period. The total requested carried forward works is $10.602m.

The carry over budgets are funded from the following sources:

 

 

 

*The External loan funding relates to 828 Pacific Highway upgrade project. The project formed part of the original budget 2014/15. Upgrade works were not completed at the end of the financial year, therefore, the loan funding was not drawn.  It is recommended to carry this project forward, requiring loan borrowing of $1.465m in the 2015/16 financial year.

 

It is now proposed to seek approval to carry over budgets to fund the incomplete works at 30 June

2015. A detailed summary of all carried forward projects can be found in Attachment A3.

 

The chart below provides historical carried forward expenditure from 2009/10 to the proposed 2014/15.

 

 

 

 

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.

L2.1.2 Council’s financial services provide accurate, timely, open and honest advice to the community.

Manages financial performance to achieve targets as defined in the Long Term Financial Plan.

 

Governance Matters

 

In accordance with Section 413(2)(C) of the Local Government Act 1993, Council must prepare a statement on the General & Special Purpose Financial Reports as to its opinion on the reports prior to referring them to audit.

 

The draft Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2015 have been prepared in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 (as amended) and Regulations made thereunder, the Australian Accounting Standards and professional pronouncements and the Local Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial Reporting.

 

It should be noted that the Financial Statements are presented to Council in draft form at this stage.  These draft Financial Statements are required to be audited in accordance with Sections 415, 416 and 417 of the Local Government Act 1993. Upon finalisation of the audit, the Financial Statements and the audit report will be presented to Council in accordance with Sections 418 and 419 of the Local Government Act 1993.  It is intended that the public meeting will be conducted at the Ordinary Meeting of Council on 6 October 2015.  A representative from Council’s external auditor, UHY Haines Norton Chartered Accountants will be present at the public meeting.

 

 

Risk Management

 

Council is financially sound which positions it well to deal with unforseen events as they arise.

 

The Financial Statements are audited by the external auditors who, amongst other things, form an opinion on the Financial Statements whether:

 

·     the Council’s accounting records have been kept in accordance with the requirements of the Local Government Act 1993, Chapter 13 part 3 Division 2; and

 

·     the Financial Statements:

o   have been presented in accordance with the requirements of this Division;

o   are consistent with the Council’s accounting records;

o   present fairly the Council’s financial position, the results of its operations and its cash flows; and

o   are in accordance with applicable Accounting Standards and other mandatory professional reporting requirements in Australia.

 

·     all information relevant to the conduct of the audit has been obtained; and

 

·     there are no material deficiencies in the accounting records or financial statements that the auditors have become aware of during the course of the audit.

 

 

 

Financial Considerations

 

Council has achieved a sound financial result for 2014/15. Council’s net operating result for the financial year ended 30 June 2015 is a surplus of $22.58m including Grants and Contributions for capital purposes. After adjusting for Capital Grants and Contributions, the net operating result was $13.46m.

 

The actual working capital for 2014/15 is $4.67m in line with the target identified in Council’s Annual Budget.

 

 

 

Social Considerations

 

Not applicable.

 

 

Environmental Considerations

 

Not applicable.

 

Community Consultation

 

The draft Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2015 were referred to the Audit Committee on 20 August 2015 for review and were endorsed.

 

The draft Financial Statements will be on public exhibition from 11 September 2015. The Financial Statements will be formally presented to Council on 6 October 2015. Submissions from the public will be received until 13 October 2015 and any comments received will be referred to the external auditor.

 

 

Internal Consultation

 

All departments have been consulted on the end of year financial results for 2014/15.

 

 

Summary

 

The purpose of this report is to present to Council the draft Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2015 for certification and referral to Council’s external auditor, UHY Haines Norton Chartered Accountants.

 

The draft Financial Statements have been prepared in accordance with:

 

*     Local Government Act 1993 (as amended) and Regulations made thereunder

*     The Australian Accounting Standards and professional pronouncements

*     Local Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial Reporting

 

 

In accordance with Section 413(2)(C) of the Local Government Act 1993, Council must prepare a statement on the General & Special Purpose Financial Reports as to its opinion on the reports prior to referring them to audit.

 

On 6 October 2015 the audited financial reports, together with the auditor’s reports, will be formally presented to Council at which time Council’s auditor will be present to answer questions in relation to their Audit report.

 

Recommendation:

 

A.       That Council receive and certify the Draft Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2015.

 

B.       That the Draft Financial Statements be referred to Council’s external auditor, UHY Haines Norton Chartered Accountants to provide an opinion on the draft Financial Statements ended 30 June 2015 and to report to Council.

 

C.       That the Draft Financial Statements ended 30 June 2015 be certified by the Mayor, Deputy Mayor or one other Councillor, the General Manager and the Responsible Accounting Officer in accordance with Section 413(2)(C) of the Local Government Act 1993 and the Local Government Code of Accounting Practice and Financial Reporting.

 

D.       That 6 October 2015 be fixed as the date for the public meeting to present the audited Financial Statements and the audit reports for the year ended 30 June 2015 as required by Section 419 of the Local Government Act 1993, and that Council’s external auditor be present to answer questions.

 

E.       That Council adopt carry over expenditure of $10.602m to carry forward to the 2015/16 financial year, as listed in Attachment A3, and borrow $1.465m for the external loan funded portion of these works.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Angela Apostol

Manager Finance

 

 

 

 

David Marshall

Director Corporate

 

 

Attachments:

A1View

Draft General Purpose and Special Purpose Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2015

 

2015/231025

 

A2View

Restricted Assets Report as at 30 June 2015

 

2015/221108

 

A3View

Proposed Carried Forward Expenditure from 2014/15

 

2015/221079

  


APPENDIX No: 1 - Draft General Purpose and Special Purpose Financial Statements for the year ended 30 June 2015

 

Item No: GB.1

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 2 - Restricted Assets Report as at 30 June 2015

 

Item No: GB.1

 


APPENDIX No: 3 - Proposed Carried Forward Expenditure from 2014/15

 

Item No: GB.1

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 8 September 2015

GB.2 / 204

 

 

Item GB.2

S09069/5

 

16 July 2015

 

 

Climate Change Policy for Public Exhibition

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

purpose of report:

To seek Council’s endorsement of the Draft Climate Change Policy 2015 and Draft Greenhouse Gas Reduction Action Plan 2015 for public exhibition.

 

 

background:

The warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the oceans have acidified, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, and sea level has risen. Human influence on the climate system is clear and in recent decades changes in climate have caused detrimental impacts on natural and human systems on all continents and across the oceans. Limiting future climate change impacts and risks will require substantial and sustained reductions in greenhouse gas emissions together with adaptation. Ku-ring-gai Council, as a key asset owner, service provider and decision-maker, has a responsibility to its community to effectively mitigate against and adapt to the impacts of climate change.

 

 

comments:

The Draft Climate Change Policy 2015 provides a revised management framework for Council to respond to the observed and projected implications of climate change on Ku-ring-gai’s natural and built environment, community and economy. The Draft Greenhouse Gas Reduction Action Plan 2015 supports the Draft Climate Change Policy 2015 by providing a mitigation response to climate change and describing how Council intends to meet its 2020 greenhouse gas (GHG) emission reduction target.

 

 

recommendation:

That Council endorses the public exhibition of the Draft Climate Change Policy 2015 and Draft Greenhouse Gas Reduction Action Plan 2015.

 

 

 


  

Purpose of Report

To seek Council’s endorsement of the Draft Climate Change Policy 2015 and Draft Greenhouse Gas Reduction Action Plan 2015 for public exhibition.

 

 

Background

 

Why should Council address climate change?

 

“The warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the oceans have acidified, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, and sea level has risen.” (IPCC 2014b, p2)

 

Globally, averaged combined land and ocean surface temperature show a warming of 0.85°C between 1880 and 2012 (IPCC 2014b). Australia’s air and ocean temperatures are now, on average, 0.9°C warmer than they were in 1910, with most of the warming occurring since 1950. The frequency of very warm months in Australia has increased five-fold over the past 15 years, while the frequency of very cool months has declined by around a third, compared to 1951–1980. (BoM and CSIRO 2014)

 

Since 1970, there have been large increases in annual rainfall in Australia’s north-west and decreases in the south-west. South-east Australia has experienced below average autumn and early winter rainfall since 1990. Natural variability continues to play the dominant role in extreme rainfall. (BoM and CSIRO 2014)

 

In Australia, mean sea level was 0.225m higher in 2012 than in 1880, the earliest year for which robust estimates are available. Rates of sea level rise in Australia are similar to global averages. Ocean acidity levels have increased since the 1800s due to increased CO2 absorption from the atmosphere. (BoM and CSIRO 2014)

 

Human influence on the climate system is clear. “Anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions have increased since the pre-industrial era, driven largely by economic and population growth, and are now higher than ever. Their effects, together with those of other anthropogenic drivers, have been detected throughout the climate system and are extremely likely to have been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century.“ (IPCC 2014b, p4)

 

Australian temperatures are projected to continue to warm, with more hot days and warm nights and fewer cool days and cold nights. As with global projections, the degree of change will depend on future emission scenarios. Up to 2.5°C of warming this century is anticipated if we curb greenhouse emissions, but under high emission scenarios temperatures could increase from 2.2°C to 5.0°C by 2070 (BoM and CSIRO 2014).

 

Average rainfall in southern Australia is projected to decrease, with a likely increase in drought frequency and severity. An increase in the number and intensity of extreme rainfall events is projected for most regions. Hotter, drier weather conditions will increase the number of extreme fire-weather days as well as fire severity and intensity in southern and eastern Australia (BoM and CSIRO 2014).

Regional data, incorporating the Ku-ring-gai Local Government Area, echoes Australian climate projections over the course of the century. These projections include: future increases in the intensity of extreme rainfall events and the time spent in drought; continued substantial increases in projected mean, maximum and minimum temperatures; increases in extreme temperatures, with a substantial increase in the temperature reached on hot days, the frequency of hot days, and the duration of warm spells; and harsher fire-weather. (CSIRO 2015a, CSIRO 2015b)

 

A summary of climate projections for the Sydney Metropolitan region are provide below:

Figure 1: Climate projections for the Sydney Metropolitan region (Source: OEH 2014, p3)

 

“In recent decades, changes in climate have caused impacts on natural and human systems on all continents and across the oceans. In many regions, changing precipitation or melting snow and ice are altering hydrological systems, affecting water resources in terms of quantity and quality (medium confidence). Many terrestrial, freshwater, and marine species have shifted their geographic ranges, seasonal activities, migration patterns, abundances, and species interactions in response to ongoing climate change (high confidence).The negative impacts of climate change on crop yields have been more common than positive impacts (high confidence). Some impacts of ocean acidification on marine organisms have been attributed to human influence (medium confidence). Impacts from recent climate-related extremes, such as heat waves, droughts, floods, cyclones and wildfires, reveal significant vulnerability and exposure of some ecosystems and many human systems to current climate variability (very high confidence).”  (IPCC 2014b, p7-8)

 

Climate change is projected to undermine food security, and to reduce renewable surface water and groundwater resources in most dry subtropical regions, intensifying competition for water among sectors. In urban areas, climate change is projected to increase risks for people, assets, economies and ecosystems, including risks from heat stress, storms and extreme precipitation, inland and coastal flooding, landslides, air pollution, drought, water scarcity, sea-level rise, and storm surges. (IPCC 2014b)

 

“Our future climate will depend on committed warming caused by past anthropogenic emissions, as well as future anthropogenic emissions and natural climate variability”. (IPCC 2014b, p10)

 

“Continued emissions of greenhouse gases and rising rates and magnitudes of warming and other changes in the climate system, accompanied by ocean acidification, increase the risk of severe, pervasive, and in some cases irreversible detrimental impacts.” (IPCC 2014b, p13)

 

“Limiting climate change will require substantial and sustained reductions in greenhouse gas emissions which, together with adaptation, can limit climate change risks.” (IPCC 2014b, p8)

 

“Mitigation involves some level of co-benefits and of risks due to adverse side-effects, but these risks do not involve the same possibility of severe, widespread, and irreversible impacts as risks from climate change, increasing the benefits from near-term mitigation efforts.” (IPCC 2014b, p17) 

 

A full summary of climate change observations, projections, impacts and risks at a global, national, state and regional level is attached to this report as Attachment A1.

 

In light of the above, Ku-ring-gai Council, as a key asset owner, service provider and decision-maker, has a responsibility to its community to effectively mitigate against and adapt to the impacts of climate change.

 

Council’s response

 

At the OMC of 13 October 2009 Council adopted its first Climate Change Policy.  At the OMC of 8 June 2010 Council adopted an Energy Reduction Strategy, which included a program of works for Council’s buildings and facilities, to reduce corporate energy consumption in line with the adopted Climate Change Policy and GHG emission reduction targets, and to reduce Council’s financial vulnerability to increasing operational costs.

 

At the OMC of 9 November 2010 Council adopted its first Climate Change Adaptation Strategy. This Strategy investigated the vulnerability and resilience of Council and the local community to changing weather patterns by developing a method to identify and evaluate the specific risks expected across the Ku-ring-gai Local Government Area (LGA) and to prioritise adaptation actions based on their ability to reduce risk (benefit) and minimise financial, social and environmental impact (cost).

 

The Draft Climate Change Policy 2015 (Attachment A2) provides a revised management framework for Council to respond to the observed and projected implications of climate change on Ku-ring-gai’s natural and built environment, community and economy.

 

The Draft Greenhouse Gas Reduction Action Plan 2015 (Attachment A3) supports the Draft Climate Change Policy 2015 by providing a mitigation response to climate change and describing how Council intends to meet its 2020 GHG emission reduction target. It outlines findings from a review of Council’s reduction targets to date; Council’s current performance against its 2020 GHG emission reduction target; Council’s future predicted GHG emissions based on current levels of activity and investment; future GHG emission scenarios (including resourcing implications); and recommended abatement activities to enable Council to achieve its 2020 GHG reduction target.

 

A review of Council’s 2010 Climate Change Adaptation Strategy is currently being reviewed. The revised Strategy will also be presented to Council later in this financial year.

Comments

 

How was the review of these documents conducted?

 

The Draft Climate Change Policy 2015 and Draft Greenhouse Gas Reduction Action Plan 2015 were informed by:

 

A review of the latest climate science and climate modelling (global, Australian and regional)

 

This involved a review of:

 

·     The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) Fifth Assessment Report (AR5), released in November 2014, which provides the latest state of knowledge on climate change. The IPCC is the leading international scientific body for the assessment of climate change.

 

·     The Bureau of Meteorology (BoM) and CSIRO’s State of the Climate 2014 report. This report provides a summary of climate observations and monitoring carried out by BoM and CSIRO in the Australian region and future climate scenarios.

 

·     The CSIRO’s Climate Change in Australia – Projections for Australia’s NRM regions -Technical Report. This Report provides an assessment of observed climate change in Australia and its causes, and details projected future changes over the 21st century. This report is presented using a unique Australian regionalisation scheme, which defines eight natural resource management (NRM) clusters, informed by logical groupings of recent past climatic conditions, biophysical factors and expected broad patterns of climate change. Further sub-division of these clusters was needed in some cases to better capture the important patterns of projected change. In light of this, five of the eight clusters were further sub-divided, creating 15 sub-clusters. The Ku-ring-gai Local Government Area (LGA) forms part of the sub-cluster East Coast (South), under the East Coast cluster.

 

·     The NSW and ACT Regional Climate Modelling (NARCliM) project, a multi-agency research partnership between the NSW and ACT governments and the Climate Change Research Centre at the University of NSW. This project has produced a suite of twelve regional climate projections for south-east Australia spanning the range of likely future changes in climate. Climate change projections are presented for the near future (2030) and far future (2070), compared to the baseline climate (1990–2009). The Ku-ring-gai Local Government Area falls under the ‘Metropolitan Sydney’ region.

 

·     The Department of Environment and Climate Change (DECCW)’s 2010 report NSW Climate Impact Profile: The impacts of climate change on the biophysical environment of New South Wales. This report describes some of the likely changes to the NSW climate and the implications of these changes for our natural ecosystems, the lands we manage, and our towns and cities. Taking into account regional differences, information is presented on the likely impacts of climate change in each of the State Plan regions of NSW. The Ku-ring-gai Local Government Area falls under the Sydney / Central Coast region.

 

 

 

Energy and water audit of our key facilities

 

In March 2013, Ironbark Sustainability conducted Level 1 and 2 (AS 3598) audits and Engeneous 5 star sustainability ratings at 15 of Council’s key facilities, to identify current ESD performance and opportunities for reducing energy and water consumption. A series of efficiency measures, totalling $992,120 were identified through these audits, which has the potential to deliver up to a 51.2% reduction in greenhouse gas emissions at these facilities (see Appendix of Attachment A2).

 

Consultant’s report

 

Council’s performance against its current GHG emission reduction target (20% by 2020 based on 2000 levels) was subject to a recent analysis by Ironbark Sustainability, in consultation with Council staff. This analysis also investigated Council’s predicted GHG emissions to 2020 under a number of different scenarios (including a business as usual scenario) to determine the most appropriate levels of abatement activity and investment required in order for Council to meet its current 2020 greenhouse gas emission reduction target.

 

Climate Change Authority Report

 

In February 2014 the Climate Change Authority (CCA) released a set of recommendations on future emission targets and trajectories for Australia in its report Reducing Australia’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions – Targets and Progress Review.  Based on the target and trajectory recommendations for Australia, a set of Council targets and trajectories have been developed.

 

Staff and Councillor briefing / consultation

 

Details of the briefing / consultation process are included in the Internal Consultation section below.

 

What is an appropriate response?

 

The continuing appropriateness of Council’s current greenhouse gas emission reduction targets was considered in light of recommended international and Australian targets and the CCA’s (2014) set of recommendations in its report Reducing Australia’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions – Targets and Progress Review.

 

At the 2009 United Nations Climate Change Conference in Copenhagen it was agreed that holding any temperature increase to below 2˚C above pre-industrial levels was needed to prevent ‘dangerous’ climate change. Warming above 2˚C increases the likelihood that the world will cross irreversible ‘tipping points’ in the climate system that results in abrupt, highly disruptive and permanent changes.

 

As the magnitude of global temperature increases is not determined by emissions in one year but by the cumulative concentration of emissions in the atmosphere limiting climate risks implies a limit to cumulative greenhouse gas emissions.

 

Consistent with the objective of limiting cumulative emissions, the IPCC in its AR5 quantified a global emissions budget as the key to avoiding global warming beyond 2˚C. The CCA uses the global emissions budget as a reference point for setting a national budget for Australia. A global emissions budget sets out the total amount of global emissions consistent with the aim of limiting warming to a specific temperature target, within a probability range.

 

The CCA used a global emissions budget of 1,700 Gt CO2-e (Kyoto multi-gases) for the period 2000–2050 as a reference point to set a national recommended emissions budget for Australia for 2013-2050 of 10,100 Mt CO2e, to provide a likely chance of limiting global warming to less than 2˚C. This emissions budget is described by a trajectory and a set of targets, equating to a 19% reduction in GHG emissions by 2020; a 40-60% reduction by 2030; and a 100% reduction by 2045, relative to 2000 levels.

 

 

Figure 2: Australian emissions budget and set of targets and trajectories (Source: CCA 2014, p9)

 

In its report, the CCA (2014) lists the following considerations as being the key factors used when formulating its target and trajectory recommendations:

 

•        What the science tells us

•        International action to reduce emissions

•        Australia's progress to date in reducing emissions

•        Australia's equitable share of emissions

•        Economic implications for Australia

•        Domestic and international opportunities for emissions reduction

 

Based on the CCA target and trajectory recommendations above, a Council emission budget for 2013-2050 has been developed (158,827 t CO2e) and a corresponding set of GHG emission reduction targets, which form the objectives of the Draft Climate Change Policy 2015.

 

Emissions (tonnes CO2-e)

 

Figure 3: Council emissions budget and set of targets and trajectories

 

Council’s current GHG emission reduction target of 20% by 2020 based on 2000 levels remains appropriate. Council’s current 2050 emissions reduction target of 90% should be revised to be 100% by 2045. An interim reduction target of 50% by 2030 should also be introduced.

 

How we are tracking against our 2020 GHG emission reduction target?

 

Council’s 2000 baseline emissions (electricity from fixed assets, electricity from street lighting and vehicles) were determined through the Greenhouse Gas Abatement Tool, developed through the ICLEI Oceania Cities of Climate Protection program. As this tool is no longer available, the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting (NGER) framework was utilised, operating under the National Greenhouse and Energy Reporting Act 2007 to develop a whole-of-Council greenhouse gas emissions profile for 2011-2012. Using this profile, Council extracted the data that aligned with the 2000 baseline data (electricity from fixed assets, electricity from street lighting and vehicles) to measure progress against its 2020 reduction target. This data represents 97% of the emissions that Council can currently measure.

 

Ironbark Sustainability’s report revealed that with current levels of activity and investment, Council’s GHG emissions (from electricity from fixed assets, electricity from street lighting and vehicles) has increased by 6% in 2012, compared to 2000 levels, as shown in the table below.

 

1999/2000

2011/12

% change 2012

Tonnes CO2-e

Fixed assets

2926

3367

15%

Fixed assets target

2340

2340

Street lighting

4664

5082

9%

Street lighting target

3732

3732

Vehicles

1,559

1290

-17%

Vehicles target

1,247

1,247

Total

9,149

9,739

6%

Total Target

7,319

7,319

 

Table 1: Comparison of Council’s emissions in 2011-2012 against its 2020 target

Following Ironbark Sustainability’s report, Council’s emissions between 2000 and 2014 were also calculated and are presented in the figures below.

 

 

Figure 4: Council's electricity emissions from fixed assets 2000-2014

 

GHG emissions from fixed assets decreased by 4% between 1999/2000 and 2013/2014 for common accounts, due to energy efficiency measures and alternative energy projects implemented across Council. However, when incorporating the emissions from new electricity accounts added between 2000 and 2014 (most notably the Ku-ring-gai Fitness and Aquatic Centre, 828 Pacific Highway and the North Turramurra and Gordon Golf Course sewer treatment plants) Council’s emissions from fixed assets were 43% higher in 2014 than they were in 2000.

 

 

Figure 5: Council’s electricity emissions from street lighting 2010-2014

 

Council emissions for street lighting have increased by 7% between 2000 and 2014. Emissions include Scope 2 and Scope 3 emissions.

 

 

Figure 6: Council's fleet emissions 2000-2014

 

Council has reduced GHG emissions from our fleet by 29% between 2000 and 2014.

 

 

 

* Emissions include electricity for Council assets, electricity for street lighting, and fleet fuel. Reporting period is for the 12 months April to March.

 

Figure 7: Council's total emissions 2000-2014

 

Council’s overall GHG emissions have increased by 10% between 2000 and 2014.

 

A significant challenge exists for Council in meeting its 2020 GHG emission reduction target in light of predicted population growth in the Local Government Area and Council’s predicted new and replacement assets.

 

Future emission scenarios

 

Council’s predicted GHG emissions in 2020 under a number of different scenarios were examined (see Attachment A3 p17-20) to determine the most appropriate and cost effective level of abatement activity and investment required in order for Council to meet its 2020 GHG emission reduction target. A comparison of the business as usual (baseline) emissions scenario with the most desirable emission scenarios are presented below:

 

 

Scenario

Emissions

1999/2000

 

(tonnes CO2-e)

Emissions

2011/12

 

(tonnes CO2-e)

Emissions

2019/20

 

(tonnes CO2-e)

% change 2020

Cumulative Electricity cost

(2013-2027)*

 

* Does not account for new or disposed assets past 2020

Scenario conditions

Extra investment required to meet 2020 emission reduction target

NPV1 of total costs (capital + electricity)

(2013-2027)*

 

* Does not account for new or disposed assets past 2020

Baseline Scenario

9,149

9,739

10,330

13%

$66,053,239

 

This takes into account:

-       Population increase

-       New and replacement assets

-       Environmental Levy and grant funding

-       Average vehicle efficiency improvements of 1% per year

-       Efficiency improvements for street lighting of 2% per year

 

NO FURTHER INVESTMENT REQUIRED BY COUNCIL

$4,989,000

$47,602,322

Scenario 3

9149

9739

8010

-12%

$53,548,743

 

This takes into account:

-       Population increase

-       New and replacement assets

-       Environmental Levy and grant funding

-       Average vehicle efficiency improvements of 1% per year

-       Re-investment of savings from actions undertaken through Environmental Levy and grant funding ($660,269)

-       Bulk street light changeover

$1,786,000

$41,041,186

Scenario 3A

9149

9739

7417

-19%

$53,548,743

 

This takes into account:

-       Population increase

-       New and replacement assets

-       Environmental Levy and grant funding

-       Average vehicle efficiency improvements of 1% per year

-       Re-investment of savings from actions undertaken through Environmental Levy and grant funding ($660,269)

-       Bulk street light changeover

-       Impacts of current Renewable Energy Target (RET) - 20% by 2020

$162,000

$41,041,186

2020 Target

7,319

7,319

7,319

 

 

 

 

1 2013-2027(15 years) and 4.6% discount rate

 

Table 2: Future GHG emission scenarios

 

Ironbark Sustainability’s analysis revealed that with current levels of activity and investment, (Baseline Scenario) Council’s GHG emissions (from electricity from fixed assets, street lighting and vehicles) are predicted to be 13% higher in 2020 based on 2000 levels. Under this scenario cumulative electricity costs are $66,053,239 for the period 2013-2027, the NPV of total costs for the period 2013-2027 is $47,602,322 and an additional $4,989,000 of investment in mitigation activities would be required for Council to meet its 2020 GHG emission reduction target.

 

Adopting Scenario 3 /3A will require the additional abatement activities of:

 

·     Re-investment of savings from actions undertaken through Environmental Levy and grant funding ($660,269 )

·     Bulk street light changeover to more energy efficient street lighting.

·     $1,786,000 of additional investment (with no Renewable Energy Target) to meet 2020 GHG emission reduction target

·     $162,000 of additional investment (if there is no substantial reduction in the Large Scale Renewable Energy Target) to meet 2020 GHG emission reduction target

 

Under Scenario 3 Council’s GHG emissions (from electricity from fixed assets, street lighting and vehicles) are predicted to be 12% lower in 2020 based on 2000 levels. Under this scenario cumulative electricity costs are $53,548,743 for the period 2013-2027 and the NPV of total costs for the period 2013-2027 is $41,041,186.

 

Under Scenario 3A Council’s GHG emissions (from electricity from fixed assets, street lighting and vehicles) are predicted to be 19% lower in 2020 based on 2000 levels. Under this scenario cumulative electricity costs are $53,548,743 for the period 2013-2027 and the NPV of total costs for the period 2013-2027 is $41,041,186.

 

It is recommended that Council adopts Scenario 3 / 3A as its GHG emission reduction pathway. The ongoing fate of the RET is crucial in determining whether Council will be required to proceed over future years with the 3 or 3A Scenario. With the current status of the RET it is recommended that Council proceeds with Scenario 3A.

 

The underlying assumptions behind the calculation of Council’s emission scenarios are provided below:

 

·     Population increase – Council provided estimates for population growth based on the Resource for Aging Population Planning 2.0 tool developed by LGNSW (seehttp://www.lgnsw.org.au/policy/ageing). Ironbark Sustainability estimated the impact of population increases for different asset types and the overall contribution given the percentage of total emissions each asset type is responsible and applied this across Council’s portfolio of assets.

·     Environmental Levy and grant funding – the impact of energy saving measures implemented through Environmental Levy and grant funding were estimated using typical cost-benefit figures for existing technologies and the expected cost-benefit figures for emerging technologies such as open-space LED lighting.

·     New and replaced assets – new assets were identified using the long term financial plan (LTFP). Energy consumption for these assets was provided by the Council officers responsible for the new assets and was based on the typical energy consumption and emissions of similar existing assets.

·     Average vehicle efficiency per year – a 1% improvement per year in vehicle energy efficiency was presumed based on guidance from Ironbark Sustainability. It is based on an average 10% improvement in vehicle emissions intensity from 2002 to 2012 reported by The Australian Government and the Federal Chamber of Automotive.

·     Street lighting efficiency improvements - the Street Lighting Improvement program (SLI program) coordinator advised that in the absence of any bulk street lighting upgrades, the expected annual improvement in energy efficiency of Ausgrid street lights is 1% to 2% per annum. These are energy efficiency improvements expected as the Ausgrid maintenance program replaces existing luminaires with more energy efficient LED lighting. An estimate on the energy savings expected from bulk street lighting upgrades was provided by Ironbark Sustainability based on their experience of energy savings achieved in numerous bulk street lighting upgrades in Victoria.

 

The more we do now the less we have to do later

 

The figure below demonstrates the required emissions profiles (targets and trajectories) under the business as usual (baseline) emissions scenario (Scenario A) and the recommended emissions scenario (Scenario C).

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 


Figure 7: Two scenarios with a Council emissions budget of 158,827 t CO2-e

 

A 13% increase in GHG emissions by 2020 equates to the need for a reduction of 78% by 2030 to meet Council’s emissions budget to 2050. A 20% decrease in GHG emissions by 2020 equates to the need for a reduction of 56% by 2030 to meet Council’s emissions budget to 2050.

 

Draft Climate Change Policy (2015) implementation activities

 

To meet the objectives of the Draft Climate Change Policy 2015, the following climate change mitigation and adaptation activities will be implemented across a number of sections of Council:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

RESPONSIBILITY AREA

ACTIVITY AREA

Environment & Sustainability

Development & Assessment

Integrated Planning, Property & Assets

Projects Operations

Strategic Projects

Engineering Services

 

Information Technology

 

Community & Recreation Services

 

Library and Cultural Services

Procurement and contracts

 

Finance

 

Open Space Operations

 

Waste Operations

 

People & Culture

Urban Planning & Heritage

 

Corporate Communications

Staff behavioural change programs

Energy efficiency and renewable energy works program for Council buildings and facilities

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Monitoring and maintenance of Council’s water reuse systems

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Community / business climate change mitigation programs

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Community / business climate change adaptation programs

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sustainability data management and reporting system

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sustainability and climate resilience provisions in planning controls

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sustainability and climate resilience building performance standards for new and refurbished assets

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sustainable design and resource efficiency integrated into capital works program

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sustainable design of parks, playgrounds and ovals

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Green infrastructure

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Flood risk management

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Energy efficient street lighting upgrades

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Energy efficient equipment / appliances / devices

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Software to enhance resource efficiency

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sustainable event management

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sustainable design of town and neighbourhood centres

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sustainable transport

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Sustainable procurement

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Financing for energy reduction / efficiency projects

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Emergency and disaster resilience management

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Fleet management

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Minimum performance standards for new or replacement outdoor lighting installations

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Community waste reduction and efficiency programs

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Council waste management programs

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Proactive engagement with State and Federal Government and other relevant agencies to influence policies and reforms that affect Council’s climate change mitigation and adaptation program

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Table 3: Climate change mitigation and adaptation activities

 

The Draft Greenhouse Gas Reduction Action Plan 2015 provides further details of the recommended abatement activities across the areas of buildings and facilities, open space, street lighting, fleet and staff engagement and education, to meet the conditions of Scenario 3 / 3A and for Council to achieve its 2020 GHG emission reduction target.

 

The revised Climate Change Adaptation Strategy 2015 will provide further details on recommended adaptation activities in order for Council to meet the Draft Climate Change Policy 2015 objective: ‘To reduce Council and the community’s vulnerability and increase its resilience to the impacts of climate change’.

 

integrated planning and reporting

 

Natural Environment

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

A community addressing and responding to the impacts of climate change and extreme weather events.

 

 

The community is effectively informed and engaged on climate change issues.

 

Council’s vulnerability to climate change is reduced

 

Deliver the Climate Wise Communities program

 

Pursue viable opportunities for a community volunteer network to respond to extreme weather events

 

Governance Matters

 

Under the NSW Local Government Act 1993, councils are required to manage the local environment with consideration to the principles of Ecologically Sustainable Development (ESD), which incorporates the Precautionary Principle. Section 7e of the Act requires ‘councils, Councillors and council employees to have regard to ESD principles in carrying out all of their responsibilities’. Due to the levels of variability associated with the rate and magnitude of changes to the climatic system and its associated impacts under different modelling scenarios, Council will adopt the Precautionary Principle in responding to climate change.

 

 

Risk Management

 

“Climate change will amplify existing risks and create new risks for natural and human systems. Risks are unevenly distributed and are generally greater for disadvantaged people and communities in countries at all levels of development.” (IPCC 2014b, p13)

 

“The precise levels of climate change sufficient to trigger abrupt and irreversible change remain uncertain, but the risk associated with crossing such thresholds increases with rising temperature. (IPCC 2014b, p13) Warming above 2˚C increases the likelihood that the world will cross these irreversible ‘tipping points’. “Two of the most fragile tipping points are believed to be the permanent melting of Arctic summer sea-ice and the Greenland Ice Sheet, which may occur between 1 and 2.5 ˚C of global warming (compared with pre-industrial levels). Crossing any of these tipping points would cause substantial regional and global consequences.” (Climate Change Authority 2014, p36)

 

The IPCC defines key risks as potentially severe impacts relevant to Article 2 of the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change, which refers to “dangerous anthropogenic interference with the climate system” and are identified based on expert judgement using the criteria: large magnitude; high probability, or irreversibility of impacts; timing of impacts; persistent vulnerability or exposure contributing to risks; or limited potential to reduce risks through adaptation or mitigation (IPCC 2014a, p12).

 

Human risks identified by the IPCC (IPCC 2014a) with high probability, severe consequences and with sufficient data to validate a high degree of confidence, and that have relevance to Ku-ring-gai, include:

 

·     Systematic risks from extreme weather events leading to a breakdown in infrastructure networks, critical services including power, water and health support;

·     Risk of mortality and morbidity during periods of extreme heat, particularly for vulnerable populations and those working outdoors;

·     Risk to food security and breakdown of food systems due to drought, fluctuations and changes in magnitude of climate and precipitation variability;

·     Risk of loss of terrestrial biodiversity, ecosystem goods and service functions

·     Risk of infrastructure overload arising from energy demand for heating and cooling;

·     Challenges to the insurance system;

·     Risks from reduced labour productivity;

·     Risk of increase in food and water borne disease.

 

“The overall risks of climate change impacts can be reduced by limiting the rate and magnitude of climate change. This will require substantial and sustained reductions in greenhouse gas emissions together with adaptation. Reducing climate change can also reduce the scale of adaptation that might be required” (IPCC 2014a).

 

The IPCC (2014a) refers to climate resilient pathways, that is, sustainable development trajectories that combine adaptation and mitigation to reduce climate change and its impacts, as a means of ensuring that effective risk management can be implemented and sustained, as depicted in the figure below:

 

Figure 8: Climate resilient pathways (Source: IPCC 2014a, p29)

 

Climate resilient pathways (in green) lead to a more resilient world through adaptive learning, increasing scientific knowledge, effective adaptation and mitigation measures, and other choices to reduce risk. Pathways that lower resilience (in red) can involve insufficient mitigation, maladaptation, failure to learn and use knowledge, and other actions that lower resilience, and they can be irreversible in terms of possible futures (IPCC 2014a, p29).

 

The inadequate resilience of communities has been witnessed across Australia with recent extreme weather events. (Climate Commission 2013) This clearly demonstrates the need for councils to provide leadership in climate change adaptation by building climate resilience into its operations and service delivery and that of their constituent communities.

 

The Attorney-General in Carroll and O’dea (2011) discussed the legal risks associated with climate change as involving responsibility to mitigate impacts, the need to take climate change into account when making decisions and the impact of climate change on national security.

 

Financial Considerations

 

Below is a figure which summarises the financial implications of adopting the emission reduction scenarios 3 and 3A, compared to the business as usual, or baseline scenario.

 

Figure 9: Financial implications of different emission reduction scenarios

 

Based on the NPV of total costs for both Scenario 3 and Scenario 3A, Council will spend $6,561,136 less in the period 2013-2027 compared to the Baseline Scenario. Cumulative electricity costs for the period 2013-2027 will also be $12,504,496 less under the Scenario 3 and Scenario 3A conditions compared to the Baseline Scenario.

 

To meet Council’s 2020 emissions reduction target, an extra investment of $162,000 is required for Scenario 3A and $1,786,000 for Scenario 3, compared to $4,989,000 for the Baseline Scenario. Hence, it is financially advantageous for Council to adopt Scenario 3 / Scenario 3A.

 

Through the recent budget process, $162,000 of general revenue was allocated to Council’s 2015-16 energy management program, representing the additional investment required for Council to achieve its 2020 GHG emissions reduction target under Scenario 3A. An additional $40,000, which represents the estimated cost savings from Environmental Levy projects implemented in 2014-2015, has also been allocated to Council’s 2015-16 energy management program, again consistent with Scenario 3A.

 

The cost savings from Environmental Levy projects will be verified on an annual basis and will represent a budget expenditure item in Council’s long term financial plan and asset management plan.

 

Setting a budget for emissions through to 2050 highlights the trade-offs involved between actions taken now and those made necessary later. In short, weaker action now imposes a greater emissions reduction task for future generations, at a greater cost. (Climate Change Authority 2014)

 

Social Considerations

 

Impacts from recent climate-related extremes, such as heat waves, droughts, floods, cyclones, and wildfires, reveal significant vulnerability and exposure of human systems to current climate variability (very high confidence). Impacts of such climate-related extremes on human systems include disruption of food production and water supply, damage to infrastructure and settlements, morbidity and mortality, and consequences for mental health and human well-being. (IPCC 2014a)

 

Environmental Considerations

 

Evidence of observed climate-change impacts is strongest and most comprehensive for natural systems. In many regions, changing precipitation or melting snow and ice are altering hydrological systems, affecting water resources in terms of quantity and quality (medium confidence). Many terrestrial, freshwater, and marine species have shifted their geographic ranges, seasonal activities, migration patterns, abundances, and species interactions in response to ongoing climate change (high confidence). Some impacts of ocean acidification on marine organisms have been attributed to human influence (medium confidence).” (IPCC 2014b, p6)

 

Community Consultation

 

The importance of addressing climate change is demonstrated in the long term objectives of Council’s Community Strategic Plan 2030, namely: an aware community able to prepare and respond to the risk to life and property from emergency events; a community empowered with knowledge, learning and information that benefits the environment; a community addressing and responding to the impacts of climate change and extreme weather events; and a community progressively reducing its consumption of resources and leading in recycling and reuse.

 

The Draft Climate Change Policy 2015 also contains community objectives, namely:

 

·     To deliver programs that enables a continued reduction in community energy use and greenhouse gas emissions.

·     To reduce Council and the community’s vulnerability and increase its resilience to the impacts of climate change.

 

It is proposed that the Draft Climate Change Policy 2015 and Draft Greenhouse Gas Reduction Action Plan 2015 be placed on public exhibition for 28 days with a further 14 days for public comment. Copies of the documents will be made available on Council’s website, at Council Chambers and at Council’s four (4) libraries. The public exhibition period will be promoted through Council’s social media platforms, including Facebook and Twitter; online e-news communications; and local news media.

 

Following the public exhibition period, a report will be brought back to Council outlining any changes and recommended amendments to the Draft Climate Change Policy 2015 and Draft Greenhouse Gas Reduction Action Plan 2015 for final endorsement.

 

Internal Consultation

 

Staff from all directorates of Council were consulted on the Draft Climate Change Policy 2015 and Draft Greenhouse Gas Reduction Action Plan 2015. Internal consultation involved:

 

·     Direct staff consultations on key activity areas, for example street lighting and building works

·     A GMD briefing / consultation on the Draft GHG Reduction Action Plan (2015) and GHG reduction targets and the proposed allocation of budget for Council’s 2015-16 energy management program

·     A staff briefing / consultation, involving managers and staff from all directorates.

 

In addition, a Councillor briefing on the Draft Climate Change Policy 2015 and Draft Greenhouse Gas Reduction Action Plan 2015 was conducted on 17 August 2015.

 

Summary

 

The warming of the climate system is unequivocal, and since the 1950s, many of the observed changes are unprecedented over decades to millennia. The atmosphere and ocean have warmed, the oceans have acidified, the amounts of snow and ice have diminished, and sea level has risen.” (IPCC 2014b, p2)

 

In Australia air and ocean temperatures have warmed, the frequency of very warm months has increased and the frequency of very cool months has declined. South-east Australia has experienced below average autumn and early winter rainfall since 1990. Mean sea level was 0.225m higher in 2012 than in 1880, the earliest year for which robust estimates are available. Ocean acidity levels have increased since the 1800s due to increased CO2 absorption from the atmosphere. (BoM and CSIRO 2014)

 

Human influence on the climate system is clear. Anthropogenic greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions have increased since the pre-industrial era, driven largely by economic and population growth, and are now higher than ever. Their effects, together with those of other anthropogenic drivers, have been detected throughout the climate system and are extremely likely to have been the dominant cause of the observed warming since the mid-20th century.“ (IPCC 2014b, p4)

 

Australian temperatures are projected to continue to warm, with more hot days and warm nights and fewer cool days and cold nights. Average rainfall in southern Australia is projected to decrease, with a likely increase in drought frequency and severity. An increase in the number and intensity of extreme rainfall events is projected for most regions. Hotter, drier weather conditions will increase the number of extreme fire-weather days as well as fire severity and intensity in southern and eastern Australia (BoM and CSIRO 2014).

 

“In recent decades, changes in climate have caused impacts on natural and human systems on all continents and across the oceans. (IPCC 2014b) “Continued emissions of greenhouse gases and rising rates and magnitudes of warming and other changes in the climate system, accompanied by ocean acidification, increase the risk of severe, pervasive, and in some cases irreversible detrimental impacts.” (IPCC 2014b, p13)

 

“Our future climate will depend on committed warming caused by past anthropogenic emissions, as well as future anthropogenic emissions and natural climate variability. (IPCC 2014b, p10) “Limiting climate change will require substantial and sustained reductions in greenhouse gas emissions which, together with adaptation, can limit climate change risks.” (IPCC 2014b, p8)

 

The Draft Climate Change Policy 2015 (Attachment A2) provides a revised management framework for Council to respond to the observed and projected implications of climate change on Ku-ring-gai’s natural and built environment, community and economy. The Draft Greenhouse Gas Reduction Action Plan 2015 (Attachment A3) supports the Draft Climate Change Policy (2015) by providing a mitigation response to climate change and describing how Council intends to meet its 2020 GHG emission reduction target.

 

The continuing appropriateness of Council’s current greenhouse gas emission reduction targets was considered in light of recommended international and Australian targets and the CCA’s (2014) set of recommendations in its report Reducing Australia’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions – Targets and Progress Review. Council’s current GHG emission reduction target of 20% by 2020 based on 2000 levels remains appropriate. Council’s current 2050 emissions reduction target of 90% should be revised to be 100% by 2045. An interim reduction target of 50% by 2030 should also be introduced.

 

With current levels of activity and investment, Council’s GHG emissions (from electricity from fixed assets, electricity from street lighting and vehicles) has increased by 6% in 2012, compared to 2000 levels. Council’s overall GHG emissions have increased by 10% between 2000 and 2014. A significant challenge therefore exists for Council in meeting its 2020 GHG emission reduction target in light of predicted population growth in the Local Government Area and Council’s predicted new and replacement assets.

 

Council’s predicted GHG emissions in 2020 under a number of different scenarios were examined (see Attachment A3 p17-20) to determine the most appropriate and cost effective level of abatement activity and investment required in order for Council to meet its 2020 GHG emission reduction target.

 

With current levels of activity and investment (the Baseline Scenario), Council’s GHG emissions (from electricity from fixed assets, street lighting and vehicles) are predicted to be 13% higher in 2020 based on 2000 levels. Under this scenario cumulative electricity costs are $66,053,239 for the period 2013-2027, the NPV of total costs for the period 2013-2027 is $47,602,322 and an additional $4,989,000 of investment in mitigation activities would be required for Council to meet its 2020 GHG emission reduction target. The desired scenarios are Scenarios 3 /3A.

 

Under Scenario 3 Council’s GHG emissions (from electricity from fixed assets, street lighting and vehicles) are predicted to be 12% lower in 2020 based on 2000 levels. Under this scenario cumulative electricity costs are $53,548,743 for the period 2013-2027 and the NPV of total costs for the period 2013-2027 is $41,041,186.

 

Under Scenario 3A Council’s GHG emissions (from electricity from fixed assets, street lighting and vehicles) are predicted to be 19% lower in 2020 based on 2000 levels. Under this scenario cumulative electricity costs are $53,548,743 for the period 2013-2027 and the NPV of total costs for the period 2013-2027 is $41,041,186.

 

The desired scenario (Scenarios 3 /3A) will require the additional abatement activities of: re-investment of savings from actions undertaken through Environmental Levy and grant funding ($660,269); bulk street light changeover to more energy efficient street lighting; and $1,786,000 of additional investment (with no Renewable Energy Target) to meet Council’s 2020 GHG emission reduction target (Scenario 3) or $162,000 of additional investment (if there is no substantial reduction in the Large Scale Renewable Energy Target) to meet Council’s 2020 GHG emission reduction target (Scenario 3A). With the current status of the RET it is recommended that Council proceeds with Scenario 3A. It is financially advantageous for Council to adopt Scenario 3 / Scenario 3A.

 

The IPCC (2014a) refers to climate resilient pathways, that is, sustainable development trajectories that combine adaptation and mitigation to reduce climate change and its impacts, as a means of ensuring that effective risk management can be implemented and sustained.

 

To meet the objectives of the Draft Climate Change Policy 2015, a number of climate change mitigation and adaptation activities will be implemented across a number of sections of Council.

 

Staff from all directorates of Council were consulted on the Draft Climate Change Policy 2015 and Draft Greenhouse Gas Reduction Action Plan 2015. It is proposed that the Draft Climate Change Policy 2015 and Draft Greenhouse Gas Reduction Action Plan 2015 be placed on public exhibition for 28 days with a further 14 days for public comment.

 

REFERENCES

 

Bureau of Meteorology and CSIRO (2014) State of the Climate 2014.

 

Carroll and O’dea Lawyers (2011)The Attorney General Speaks Out About Natural Disasters and Climate Change, School of Law, James Cook University, Thursday, 6 October 2011

 

Climate Change Authority (2014) Reducing Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions – Targets and Progress Review: Final Report.

 

Climate Commission (2013) The Angry Summer, Cool Australia.

 

CSIRO (2015a) Climate Change in Australia: East Coast South Projection Summaries

 

CSIRO (2015b) Climate Change in Australia – Projections for Australia’s NRM regions -Technical Report.

 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2014a) Climate Change 2014 Impacts, Adaptation and Vulnerability: Summary for Policy Makers, Working Group II contribution to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

 

Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (2014b) Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report: Summary for Policy Makers, Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.

 

Office of Environment and Heritage (2014) Metropolitan Sydney climate change snapshot.

 

Recommendation:

 

A.      That the Draft Climate Change Policy 2015 and Draft Greenhouse Gas Reduction Action Plan 2015 be endorsed for public exhibition.

 

B.       That the Draft Climate Change Policy 2015 and Draft Greenhouse Gas Reduction Action Plan 2015 be exhibited for a period of 28 days with a further 14 days for public comment.

 

C.       That a further report be presented to Council following the public exhibition period outlining any changes and recommended amendments to the Draft Climate Change Policy 2015 and Draft Greenhouse Gas Reduction Action Plan 2015 for final endorsement.

 

 

 

 

 

Marnie Kikken

Manager Environment & Sustainability

 

 

 

 

Antony Fabbro

Acting Director Strategy and Environment

 

 

Attachments:

A1View

Final draft - Climate Change Background Paper 2015

 

2015/226019

 

A2View

Climate Change Policy - Version 2 - Draft

 

2015/226991

 

A3View

Final draft -  Greenhouse Gas Reduction Action Plan 2015

 

2015/226020

  


APPENDIX No: 1 - Final draft - Climate Change Background Paper 2015

 

Item No: GB.2

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 2 - Climate Change Policy - Version 2 - Draft

 

Item No: GB.2

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 3 - Final draft -  Greenhouse Gas Reduction Action Plan 2015

 

Item No: GB.2

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 8 September 2015

GB.3 / 298

 

 

Item GB.3

S09625

 

30 July 2015

 

 

Gordon Golf Course Masterplan Communications and Consultation Outcomes

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

 

purpose of report:

To report the outcomes of the Communications and Consultation Program undertaken in relation to the Regional Park Masterplan for Gordon Golf Course and provide a preferred concept for the Gordon Golf Course Masterplan.

 

 

background:

Council adopted a Communications and Consultation Program on 29 July 2014. The program was implemented from August 2014 and concluded in June 2015.

 

 

comments:

Council undertook a detailed consultation program with the local and broader community. A draft concept for the Masterplan for the Gordon Golf Course has been developed based on the outcomes of the consultation with the community.

 

 

recommendation:

That Council receive and note the consultation report for the Gordon Golf Course Masterplan and that Council adopt the preferred concept for the Masterplan consisting of part golf course, recreational area, facilities and small scale residential.

 

 

 


  

Purpose of Report

To report the outcomes of the Communications and Consultation Program undertaken in relation to the Regional Park Masterplan for Gordon Golf Course and provide a preferred concept for the Gordon Golf Course Masterplan. 

 

 

Background

 

Council moved a Notice of Motion at the OMC of 30 May 2014 to prepare a Communications and Consultation Strategy to set out how all stakeholders will be engaged and contribute to the Master Planning for a Regional Park and Recreation Space at the Gordon Golf Course.

 

Council adopted the Communications and Consultation Strategy for Gordon Golf Course Master Planning Project on 29 July 2014. The program was implemented from August 2014 and concluded in June 2015.

 

Objectives of the Communications and Consultation Strategy

 

The following objectives for the communications and engagement of residents and stakeholders were met:

 

·     Engage residents and stakeholders upfront and at an early stage to identify and articulate a vision and set of values for a Regional Park

·     Establish a high degree of understanding and awareness of the master planning process across all stakeholder groups

·     Tap into local knowledge and expertise on Gordon Golf Course

·     Build upon existing community needs and aspirations from recent consultation

·     Define community priorities for open space and sporting facilities

·     Comprehensively involve our residents and other stakeholders in the decision making process for the Masterplan

·     Meet the requirements under the Community Strategic Plan for engaging and involving the community

 

Underpinning our engagement strategy with best practice principles

 

The engagement approach was robust and transparent. It ensured all community stakeholders had an opportunity for comment and input. Our approach was underpinned by two key principles:

 

1.       NSW Social Justice Principles

2.       International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) spectrum

 

The NSW Social Justice Principles of inclusion and democratic representation are:

 

·     Equity – There is fairness in decision making and prioritising and allocation of resources.

·     Access – All people have fair access to services, resources and opportunities to meet their basic needs and improve their quality of life.

·     Participation – Everyone has the maximum opportunity to genuinely participate in decisions which affect their lives.

·     Rights – Everyone’s rights are recognised and promoted.

 

The International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) spectrum illustrates:

 

·     Inform- We will keep you informed.

·     Consult- We will keep you informed, listen to and acknowledge concerns and provide feedback on how public input influenced the decision.

·     Involve - We will work with you to ensure that your concerns and aspirations are directly reflected in the alternatives developed and provide feedback on how public input influenced the decision.

·     Collaborate - We will look to you for direct advice and innovation in formulating solutions and incorporate your advice and recommendations into the decisions to the maximum extent possible.

 

Comments

 

Gordon Golf Communication and Engagement Strategy  Overview

 

Council resolved to engage and inform the community regarding the decision to transform Gordon Golf Course into a regional park.

 

The first part of the communications and engagement strategy was undertaken between August  and mid November 2014.

 

Communications methods included:

·     letters to 2655 residents/property owners in the vicinity of the golf course

·     Five articles in the Ku-ring-gai Council e-news (with approx. 7,000 subscribers)

·     Two Gordon Golf Course Masterplan e-newsletters (with 472 subscribers)

·     Use of social media (Facebook and Twitter)

·     Advertisements in Council’s corporate advertisement in the North Shore and mentions in the Mayoral Minute

·     Media releases

·     Dedicated project page on Council’s website

·     Online video about the project including information about the Masterplan project and ‘vox pops’ capturing community aspirations for a new park – the video has been viewed 585 times

 

Consultation methods included:

·     New regional park and recreation space on the Gordon Golf Course page on Council’s EngagmentHQ site (‘Haveyoursaykuringai page’)

 

Over the entire length of the project the page received 4050 visits with peak daily traffic of 322 visits. In 2014, October was the busiest month with 1986 page views and 698 visitors.

 

Two online discussion forums were set up and included:

a.       What are uses and activities that would make a great regional park and recreation space?

121 people visited the forum and 12 people contributed

 

b.       What are the issues, challenges and constraints that might impact a regional park and recreation space on Gordon Golf Course?

114 people visited the forum and 13 people contributed

 

•        Community visioning workshops

 

Two community visioning workshops (held on 27 October and 3 November 2014) were designed to start a conversation about the new regional park, identify issues and challenges, and explore future opportunities. The workshops were facilitated by Council staff.

 

The workshops ran for 90 minutes and were attended by 108 community members including residents, golfers, community leaders, and sporting representatives.  Workshop participants were asked to discuss the factors that needed to be considered as part of the master plan, and ideas and visions for the new regional park and recreation space.

 

Key outputs of the engagement 2014

 

This engagement consisted of feedback from predominantly motivated communities (opt in, self-selected) - participants consisted of affected stakeholders and interested community members e.g. neighbours, golfers, club members etc. This feedback indicated a strong desire to keep the golf course as is.

 

The online forum and community visioning workshops identified a number of issues and concerns:

 

·     scepticism about the economic benefits or need for a new regional park

·     concerns about the impact of traffic congestion, parking and access for local residents

·     commercialisation of the space – ‘no cafes, no shops, no markets’

·     impact on the environment

·     people from outside the area using the park and potential anti-social behaviour.

 

The aspirations of those workshop participants who chose to give their suggestions for a new park were as follows:

 

·     a range of sporting fields including soccer, football, athletics

·     a driving range and 12 hole golf course

·     picnic, barbecue and families amenities

·     outdoor fitness equipment

·     green space with multiple walking and bike tracks

·     performance space for drama and open-air cinema.

 

It should be noted that those opposed to the regional park chose not to be part of this part of this exercise in the workshop or made a point of saying that the golf course was all that they wanted.

 

The Communications and Engagement Strategy was extended into 2015 and a specialist consultant, StraightTalk, was engaged to provide independent facilitation and analysis. StraightTalk’s report is provided as (Attachment A1)

 

As with the previous communication and engagement, the focus was to provide multiple avenues for comment and input from the whole community.

Communications methods included:

·     Article in the Ku-ring-gai Council e-news (with approx. 7,000 subscribers)

·     Five Gordon Golf Course Masterplan E-newsletter (with 472 subscibers)

·     Use of social Media (Facebook and Twitter)

·     Ongoing use of dedicated project page on Council’s website and online video

·     Advertisements in Council’s Corporate advertisement in the North Shore Times (4 in total over the entire consultation program)

·     Media Releases (4) over the entire consultation program

 

Consultation methods included:

·     ‘Haveyoursaykuringai page’ - over the two phase the project page received 4050 visits with peak daily traffic of 322 visits. In 2015 April was the busiest month with 3036 page views and 1088 visitors.

·     Online survey (hosted on the ‘Haveyoursaykuringai’ page)  - 11 March to 25 April 2015 - 102 participants

·     Random telephone survey (undertaken by independent market research consultancy) March 2015 - 403 participants

·     Face to face meeting with Gordon Golf Club  - 7 April 2015

·     Opt in stakeholder workshop - Took place on 14 May. 48 people attended – attendees were generally in line with those who attended visioning workshops in late 2014 (i.e. residents, golfers, community leaders and sporting representatives)

·     Randomly recruited community workshop -27 attendees selected during the random telephone survey by market research consultancy

 

Online discussion forums - via the ‘haveyoursaykuringgai’ site were held focussing on the following themes:

·     Recreational facilities in Ku-ring-gai

·     Benefits of a Regional Park

·     Issues and constraints in developing regional park

·     Funding the regional park

 

Key outputs of 2015 engagement

 

The engagement can be broadly split into two groups

 

1)   Feedback received from motivated communities (opt in, self-selected). Participants consisted of affected stakeholders and interested community members e.g. neighbours, golfers, club members etc.

 

Engagement methods employed included:

•        Online survey (hosted on the ‘Haveyoursaykuringai’ page)

•        Face to face meeting with Gordon Golf Club

•        Opt in stakeholder workshop

•        Online discussion forums

 

2)       Feedback received from the broader community (randomly recruited). Those who may not be directly affected or have a direct interest.

 

Engagement methods employed included:

•        Random telephone survey undertaken by market research consultancy

•        Randomly recruited community workshop (broadly reflecting demographic makeup of Ku-ring-gai)

•        Attendees selected during the random telephone survey by market research consultancy.

 

Engagement outputs

 

1.Motivated communities

 

Feedback received from the motivated communities (opt in, self-selected) - golf course users, club members and residents living, adjoining, or near the golf course etc., - indicated concern about the proposed changes to the Golf Course and a level of cynicism about the process and motivations behind it.

 

Overall, the motivated communities were strongly in favour of retaining the golf course as is and suggested that rather than selling the golf course, Council should look at how it could be managed to be more profitable. There was little support for a regional park. When discussing a regional park or any redevelopment of the site, concerns mirrored those in previous consultation.

 

Participants indicated:

·     opposition to increased activation of the area and associated traffic, noise etc

·     concern regarding loss of access to passive green space

·     opposition to the sale of public land and concern that developing the site will be needed to fund any new facilities and this in turn will lead to more traffic and people

 

Where the motivated communities did engage with the concept of a regional park they thought a park should contain:

·     open space and walking facilities

·     cycling tracks

·     areas for barbecues and picnics

·     children's playgrounds

·     sports facilities

·     other highlighted issues were a lack of both indoor sporting facilities and sports grounds in the area.

 

2. Broader community

 

In order to understand the thoughts  and motivations of the wider community, a telephone survey was commissioned and 403 residents were contacted by an independent market research company Jetty Research.

 

The representative survey covered a number of topics as it sought to understand community opinion on leisure activities in Ku-ring-gai including Marian St Theatre and Gordon Golf Course. The following graph indicates the type of leisure activity undertaken in the last 6 months. 

 

 

Over 60% of the community indicated satisfaction with the leisure activities currently available within the LGA.

 

When asked about playing golf and Gordon Golf Course, the following statistics are relevant.

 

The majority of respondents had not played golf in the last 3 or so years (70%). Some had played golf in the last 6 months (20%) whilst a smaller number played less recently, within only the last 3 years (10%).

·     A large majority of respondents (91%) had heard of Gordon Golf Course.

·     Only 2% of respondents were members of the Gordon Golf Course.

·     10% of respondents had played golf at the Gordon Golf Course in the previous 12 months.

 

The randomly recruited workshop was more attuned to the diversity of the community and the needs of people with disabilities, children and young people, older people and young adults.  When identifying opportunities for leisure/recreational facilities they indicated:

 

·     a preference for more active recreation facilities in the area including:

·     quality bike tracks (for range of ages and activities)

·     accessible walking tracks (for a range of abilities including people with disabilities and elderly)

·     new multipurpose indoor sports facilities (which are currently lacking in Ku-ring-gai)

·     additional skate park facilities

·     additional dog off-leash areas

·     new and upgraded playground for all abilities (including those with disabilities.

·     a need for additional cultural recreational space including facilities for live entertainment (outdoor and indoor) and leasable indoor community facilities for art and cultural activities.

·     concern about funding options in terms of equity (a rate rise would be funded by everyone, even those who don't use the park); special levy (will it be used for what it is intended for; will it be well used) and user pays (restricts who could access and use facilities).

 

As a consequence of the Master Planning consultation, there were a number of issues raised by the community and the golf club.

 

The Gordon Golf Club has expressed concern about the establishment of the whole area as a regional park and with the current lease to 2018 with an option to extend to 2023, Council would need to negotiate a change in the lease or wait until 2023 for the course to be turned into a regional park.

 

The community also expressed concern about the loss of the golf course and funding for any new facilities proposed for the site.

 

Further email submissions were received following a call out by Basketball NSW that advocated for an indoor sports centre at the Gordon Golf Club site -16 in total.

 

Proposed Masterplan Concept

 

In order to accommodate the concerns of the Golf Club and the community, it is considered that a suitable option for the Masterplan for the Gordon Golf course would be to provide a reduced playing area for golf and establish part of the area as a park. To help fund these facilities, it is proposed to have part of the land set aside for 30 lot small scale residential development similar to that shown on the attached draft concept Masterplan. (Attachment A2)

 

Funding from the residential development could also be utilised for the construction of a new club house at North Turramurra. This would allow for the Gordon Golf Club members to use both facilities and play at both courses under their membership entitlements.

 

A confidential attachment (Attachment 3) proposes options for the Masterplan that take into account the future expenditure and revenue for the various options. The information is considered to be confidential as it contains commercial in confidence information relating to leases and licences and also possible revenue from property sales.

 

Council currently has a budget deficit of approximately $700,000 per annum for both Gordon and North Turramurra golf courses and with the continued trend of golf declining and loss of revenue, this is likely to increase in the future. Also, with the increased residential development around the Gordon town centre, there is a need for additional open space.

 

In the Ku-ring-gai Council area there are currently six (6) golf courses, and with the decline in golf, the private clubs are lowering their fees and to attract new members. This places additional competition on Council owned courses.

 

 

integrated planning and reporting

 

Leadership

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

L4.1 The community is informed and engaged in decision-making processes for community outcomes

 

Community engagement utilises effective and varied communication channels to reach all sections of the community.

 

Revise Engagement Policy and ensure promotion and education throughout the organisation.

 

 

Contribute to enhancing and protecting Council’s reputation and public image

 

 

Governance Matters

 

The development and subsequent delivery of the Communications and Engagement Strategy adheres to the guidelines and principles of Ku-ring-gai Council’s Consultation Policy, the International Association of Public Participation (IAP2) and NSW Social Justice Principles.

 

Risk Management

 

The outcomes of the Communications and Consultation Strategy will ensure a Masterplan for Gordon Golf Course is guided by the vision and values of the community. The failure to deliver on this strategy may have negative reputational risk for Council and deliver Masterplan outcomes not endorsed by stakeholders.

 

 

Financial Considerations

 

Council is currently subsidising golf at approximately $700,000 per annum and this is likely to increase in the future as the trend in golf continues to decline. The current contractors are experiencing difficulties with lease fee payments to Council and seeking financial relief.

 

Council has had to reduce green fees in order to attract more players. The competition from other nearby courses places additional pressure on Council’s finances.

 

The cost of maintaining a park and facilities would be less than a golf course, and would enable a greater number of people in the community to benefit from the proposed facilities.

 

Social Considerations

 

The Communications and Engagement Strategy reached a broad section of the Ku-ring-gai community. Council ensured the engagement program was inclusive, transparent and equitable to all in the community. These considerations have been factored into the outcomes.

 

 

Environmental Considerations

 

There are no environmental considerations to be addressed in the outcomes of the Communications and Engagement Strategy. However, a number of environmental issues were highlighted throughout the engagement with community, regarding any change to the use of Gordon Golf Course.

 

Community Consultation

 

The Communications and Engagement Strategy undertook an extensive program of informing and engaging residents and stakeholders in the planning and design of the master plan for Gordon Golf Course.

 

The strategy :

 

·     engaged residents and stakeholders upfront and at an early stage to identify and articulate a vision and set of values for a Regional Park

·     establish a high degree of understanding and awareness of the master planning process across all stakeholder groups

·     comprehensively involved our residents and other stakeholders in the decision making process for the Masterplan

 

What was undertaken:

 

Extensive, multi-channel communications program was implemented to inform residents and stakeholders on the master planning process.

 

 

 

A multi-model engagement process consulting with all stakeholders incorporating the following engagement activities:

 

·     4 workshops -3 opt in and 1 randomly recruited

·     400 randomly selected telephone survey of Ku-ring-gai residents

·     Have your say survey on Council’s website

·     Meetings with Gordon Golf course management and Board

 

 

Internal Consultation

 

Consultation was undertaken with the staff from Operations, Strategy & Environment, and Corporate departments in the writing of this report.

 

Summary

 

In May 2014 Council resolved to prepare a Communications and Consultation Strategy to engage the community in the master planning for a regional park and recreation space at the Gordon Golf Course, and in July 2014 Council adopted the Communications and Consultation Strategy for Gordon Golf Course Master Planning Project.

 

The program was implemented from August 2014 and concluded in June 2015. During this time Council undertook a detailed consultation program with the local and broader community.

 

A draft concept for the Masterplan for the Gordon Golf Course has been developed based on the outcomes of the consultation with the community.

 

The Gordon Golf Club has expressed concern about the establishment of the entire area as a regional park, and with the current lease to 2018 with an option to extend to 2023, Council would need to negotiate a change in the lease or wait until 2023 for the course to be turned into a regional park. Some members of the community also expressed concern about the loss of the golf course and funding for any new facilities proposed for the site.

 

In order to accommodate the concerns of the Golf Club and address community concerns, it is considered that a suitable option for the Masterplan for the Gordon Golf course would be to provide a reduced playing area for golf and establish part of the area as a park. To help fund these facilities, it is proposed to have part of the land set aside for small scale residential development similar to that shown on the attached draft concept Masterplan.

 

Funding from the residential development could also be utilised for the construction of a new club house at North Turramurra. This would allow for the Gordon Golf Club members to use both facilities under their membership entitlements.

 

This report is recommending that Council receive and note the results of the communications and engagement strategy and that the outcomes from the strategy be incorporated into the master planning process for the Gordon Golf Course.

 

 

 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

A.   That Council receive and note the outcomes of the communications and engagement strategy.

B.   That the draft Masterplan concept for the Gordon Golf Course provide for the following items:

1.   Retention of a minimum of 9 holes on the existing golf course.

2.   That an area of approximately 9 hectares be provided for recreational facilities as shown on the attached concept plan

3.   That the proposed recreational facilities include: an indoor sports centre; a sports field incorporating athletics track and field facilities; a bike path; a dog off-leash area; a children’s play area; an outdoor exercise area and general parkland.

4.   That funding for the above facilities be provided by the provision of approximately 30 single residential lots of approximately 650 square metres per lot or town houses on an area similar to that shown on the attached concept plan.

 

 

 

 

 

Virginia Leafe

Manager Corporate Communications

 

 

 

 

Janice Bevan

Director Community

 

 

 

 

Greg Piconi

Director Operations

 

 

 

Attachments:

A1View

Gordon Golf Course consultation report August 2015

 

2015/230711

 

A2View

Gordon Golf Course - Preferred masterplan option

 

2015/217631

 

A3

Gordon Golf Course - Masterplan options

 

Confidential

  


APPENDIX No: 1 - Gordon Golf Course consultation report August 2015

 

Item No: GB.3

 


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


 

PDF Creator


APPENDIX No: 2 - Gordon Golf Course - Preferred masterplan option

 

Item No: GB.3

 


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 8 September 2015

GB.4 / 351

 

 

Item GB.4

S07458

 

2 August 2015

 

 

Gordon Community Preschool - 2A Park Avenue Gordon - Renewal of Lease

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

purpose of report:

For Council to consider the granting of a 5 year lease to Gordon Community Preschool (GCP) for continued occupation at 2A Park Avenue, Gordon.

 

 

background:

Gordon Community Preschool is a non-profit community based preschool operated by a parent Board of Management. The current lease expires on 31 January 2016.

 

 

comments:

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

 

 

recommendation:

That Council grant a new 5 year lease to Gordon Community Preschool from1 February 2016 to 31 January 2021.

 

 


  

Purpose of Report

For Council to consider the granting of a 5 year lease to Gordon Community Preschool (GCP) for continued occupation at 2A Park Avenue, Gordon. 

 

 

Background

 

Gordon Community Preschool is a non-profit community based preschool operated by a parent Board of Management. The term of the current lease expires on 31 January 2016.

 

Comments

 

Council staff have been in communication with GCP during 2015 and the preschool is keen to have certainty to enable it to offer ongoing children’s services for the next 5 years. The granting of the 5 year lease will allow the preschool certainty to continue operations and take enrolments from 2016 to 2020.

 

GCP 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.

 

integrated planning and reporting

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

C1.1 An equitable and inclusive community that cares and

provides for its members.

 

 

 

C1.1.1

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

gaps in service provision.

 

C1.1.2

Access has increased for

communities that face barriers to using social services and facilities

Deliver quality children services to meet the needs of local families, including immunisation, vacation care, long day care and family day care.

Develop and implement programs that respond to community needs and

address a range of accessibility issues and alleviates social isolation.

 

 

Governance Matters

 

The property located at 2A Park Avenue Gordon is described as Lot 12 DP852087 (Attachment A1). It is zoned R4 High Density Residential and is covered by Ku-ring-gai Local Environment Plan (Local Centres) 2012.

 

A public notification period of 28 days of the proposed lease is required under section 47 of the NSW Local Government Act.

 

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

 

Risk Management

 

GCP is to procure $20 million Public Liability insurance. The preschool is to fully indemnify Council against personal and property damage on the premises. Evidence of currency is to be supplied annually to Council.

 

GCP has during the period of its occupation, met its responsibilities as a lessee and has complied with the conditions of the current lease.

 

Financial Considerations

 

The current rent payable by GCP is $16,534pa (incl. GST). This includes a 90% rental rebate.

 

GCP has agreed to pay increased rental for the first year of the term of $17,360pa, after rebate, with successive 5% yearly increase.

 

GCP has also agreed to the new rentals and term under a Heads of Agreement. (Attachment A2).

 

The projected rentals over the 5 year period are:

 

$17,360 – Year 1

$18,228 – Year 2

$19,140 – Year 3

$20,097 – Year 4

$21,102 – Year 5

 

In accordance with Council’s Policy for Management of Community and Recreation Land and Facilities,  GCP is obliged to pay Council’s legal costs, estimated at $1,500 plus GST and the one off $575 administration fee to Council, for administrative costs incurred associated with the preparation of the lease.

 

Social Considerations

 

GCP is a community based preschool providing care and education for children aged 3-5 years. Children attend the preschool for either 2 or 3 three days per week between the hours of 9.00am - 3.00pm.

 

With security of tenure for another 5 years, the preschool will be able to continue its occupation of this current site on Council’s land with no disruption to the current service.

 

Environmental Considerations

 

There are no environmental considerations associated with the granting of a new lease at this location.

 

 

Community Consultation

 

No consultation is required for the process prior to this Council report. Once Council resolves to grant the proposed lease, 28 days public notification of Council’s intention to grant the lease of the premises will occur in accordance with s 47 (1) a of the Local Government Act 1993.

 

Internal Consultation

 

Consultation has taken place between Council’s Community, Operations, and Strategy and Environment departments in the writing of this report.

 

Summary

 

Gordon Community Preschool has requested a new 5 year lease for the premises at 2A Park Avenue Gordon, until January 2021.

 

GPS provides care and education for children aged 3-5 years. Children attend the preschool for either 2 or 3 three days per week between the hours of 9.00am - 3.00pm.

 

The renewal of this lease will ensure that the preschool services will continue at the GCP for the next 5 years.

 

Recommendation:

 

A.   That Council grant a new lease to Gordon Community Preschool for a period of 5 years.

 

B.   That the lease commence from 1 February 2016 and expire on 31 January 2021.

 

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

 

D.   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

 

 

 

Attachments:

A1View

Gordon Preschool - Aerial Map 2015

 

2015/199947

 

A2View

Signed Returned Heads of Agreement - Gordon Preschool

 

2015/194150

  


APPENDIX No: 1 - Gordon Preschool - Aerial Map 2015

 

Item No: GB.4

 


APPENDIX No: 2 - Signed Returned Heads of Agreement - Gordon Preschool

 

Item No: GB.4

 


 


 


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 8 September 2015

GB.5 / 359

 

 

Item GB.5

S07471

 

2 August 2015

 

 

Lifeline Harbour to Hawkesbury Inc - 4 Park Avenue Gordon - Renewal of Licence

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

purpose of report:

For Council to consider the granting of a 5 year licence to Lifeline Harbour to Hawkesbury Inc (Lifeline) for continued occupation at 4 Park Avenue, Gordon.

 

 

background:

Lifeline 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.

 

 

comments:

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

 

 

recommendation:

That Council grants a new 5 year licence to Lifeline Harbour to Hawkesbury Inc from1 February 2016 to 31 January 2021.

 

 

 


  

Purpose of Report

For Council to consider the granting of a 5 year licence to Lifeline Harbour to Hawkesbury Inc (Lifeline) for continued occupation at 4 Park Avenue, Gordon. 

 

 

Background

 

Lifeline Harbour to Hawkesbury Inc (Lifeline) has been operating for over 24 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 term of the current licence expires on 31 January 2016.

 

Comments

 

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

 

Lifeline is keen to have certainty to enable it to offer counselling services for the next 5 years. The granting of a 5 year licence will allow Lifeline certainty to continue its operations from 2016 through to 2020.

 

integrated planning and reporting

 

Community People and Culture.

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

C1.1 An equitable and inclusive community that cares and

provides for its members.

 

 

 

C1.1.1

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

gaps in service provision.

 

C1.1.2

Access has increased for

communities that face barriers to using social services and facilities

 

C3.1.2

Volunteers are valued,

recognised and supported in providing services to the community.

 

Deliver quality children services to meet the needs of local families, including immunisation, vacation care, long day care and family day care.

 

Develop and implement programs that respond to community needs and

address a range of accessibility issues and alleviates social isolation.

 

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

 

Provide up to date demographic profile of the community.

 

Governance Matters

 

The property located at 4 Park Avenue, Gordon is described as Lot 11 DP852087 (Attachment A1).

 

A public notification period of 28 days of the proposed lease is required under section 47 of the NSW Local Government Act. It is zoned R4 High Density Residential and is covered by Ku-ring-gai Local Environment Plan Local Centres) 2012.

 

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

 

Risk Management

 

Lifeline is to procure $20 million Public Liability insurance and is to fully indemnify Council against personal and property damage on the premises. Evidence of currency is to be supplied annually to Council.

 

Lifeline has, during the period of its occupation, fulfilled their responsibilities as a licensee and has complied with the conditions of the licence.

 

Financial Considerations

 

The current licence fees payable by Lifeline is $6,286pa (incl GST). This includes a 90% rental rebate.

 

Lifeline has agreed to pay increased fees for the first year of the term of $6,600pa, (after rebate), with successive 5% yearly increase. Lifeline has agreed to the new licence fees and term under a Heads of Agreement. (Attachment A2).

 

The projected licence fees over the 5 year period are:

 

$ 6,600 – Year 1

$ 6,930 – Year 2

$ 7,276 – Year 3

$ 7,640 – Year 4

$ 8,022 – Year 5

 

In accordance with Council’s Policy for Management of Community and Recreation Land and Facilities, Lifeline is obliged to pay Council’s legal costs, estimated at $1,500 plus GST and the one off $575 administration fee to Council, for administrative costs incurred associated with the preparation of the licence.

 

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

•        Men's anger management

•        Partners in depression group

•        Emergency relief

•        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 the granting of a new licence at this location.

 

Community Consultation

 

No consultation is required for this process prior to Council resolution. Once Council resolves to grant the proposed licence, 28 days public notification of Council’s intention to grant the licence of the premises will occur, in accordance with s 47 (1) a of the Local Government Act 1993.

 

Internal Consultation

 

Consultation has taken place between Council’s Community, Operations and Strategy and Environment departments over the past several months.

 

Summary

 

Lifeline Harbour to Hawkesbury Inc has been operating for over 24 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 5 year licence until January 2021.

 

Lifeline’s presence at Gordon 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.

 

The renewal of this licence will ensure that Lifeline will continue to maintain its important services at Gordon over the next 5 years.

 

Recommendation:

A.   That Council grant a licence to Lifeline Harbour to Hawkesbury Inc. for a period of 5 years.

 

B.   That the licence commence from 1 February 2016 and expire on 31 January 2021.

 

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

 

D.    That Council authorise the affixing of the Common Seal of Council to the Licence Agreement.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael New

Property Officer Recreational Facilties

 

 

 

 

Mark Taylor

Manager Community & Recreation Services

 

 

 

 

Janice Bevan

Director Community

 

 

 

Attachments:

A1View

Lifeline Gordon - Aerial Map

 

2015/199952

 

A2View

Signed Returned Heads of Agreement - Lifeline

 

2015/220599

  


APPENDIX No: 1 - Lifeline Gordon - Aerial Map

 

Item No: GB.5

 


APPENDIX No: 2 - Signed Returned Heads of Agreement - Lifeline

 

Item No: GB.5

 


 


 

 


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 8 September 2015

GB.6 / 368

 

 

Item GB.6

S02414

 

26 August 2015

 

 

Northern Sydney Aboriginal Heritage Office - proposal for relocation to the Ku-ring-gai Wildflower Garden

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

purpose of report:

To advise Councillors of a proposal for the Northern Sydney Aboriginal Heritage Office (AHO) to relocate to the Ku-ring-gai Wildflower Garden.

 

 

background:

The AHO is a regional organisation, established in 2000, consisting of 7 member Councils. North Sydney Council is the auspice for the AHO on behalf of member councils. The primary roles of the AHO include Aboriginal sites identification and documentation, heritage site management, Aboriginal cultural education and dialogue between Indigenous and non-Indigenous communities.

 

 

comments:

Historically the AHO has been accommodated in member Council premises for approximately 3-8 year periods. The AHO has previously been housed at Warringah, Lane Cove, Willoughby and Manly Councils since its inception - an opportunity has now arisen for the AHO to be relocated to the Wildflower Garden at St Ives.

 

 

recommendation:

That Council support the relocation of Northern Sydney Aboriginal Heritage Office to the Ku-ring-gai Wildflower Garden, and that a Business Model along with an agreement, determining terms and conditions for the AHO to be accommodated at the Wildflower Garden, is developed between the AHO and Ku-ring-gai Council.

 

 

 


  

Purpose of Report

To advise Councillors of a proposal for the Northern Sydney Aboriginal Heritage Office (AHO) to relocate to the Ku-ring-gai Wildflower Garden.

 

 

Background

 

The AHO was established in 2000 with 4 partner Councils - Lane Cove, North Sydney, Warringah and Willoughby Councils. Initially these Councils employed an Aboriginal Heritage Manager who carried out a range of tasks for the Councils, for an initial period of 5 years.

 

The establishment of AHO was significant as, at that time, there was no one employed at a local government level in Australia dealing specifically with Aboriginal heritage issues.

 

In 2005 Manly joined the partnership and was followed by Ku-ring-gai Council in 2006, then Pittwater Council in 2OO7 and Armidale Dumaresq Council in 2008. City of Ryde Council was a partner from 2010 to 2015.

 

Each of the 7 current participating councils provide an annual payment of approximately $37,000 to the AHO for the provision of services and programs through the three themes of site management, education and council support.

 

Comments

 

Aboriginal Heritage Office

 

The Aboriginal Heritage Office is an award-winning initiative and a best practice example of how local government can work towards improved management and protection of Aboriginal heritage and provide cultural and environmental education to the community.

 

The main objectives of the AHO are to:

 

·     Protect Aboriginal sites and heritage in the participating council areas through the

development and implementation of site management plans, policy development and

regular monitoring of site conditions

·     Ensure that consultation and communication between all stakeholders is maintained

·     Ensure heritage site management efforts are both coordinated and effective

·     Develop and implement community education programs and events aimed at increasing

the collective knowledge of Aboriginal cultural heritage

 

The AHO also has a significant museum collection that would be a major attraction for educational and tourism purposes. The AHO museum is currently closed due to lack of exhibition space in its present location at Manly.

 

Management and Reporting Structure of the AHO

 

The AHO is supported by a Steering Committee comprising representatives from each of the 7 partner councils.

The AHO staff are employed by North Sydney Council and all human resources services, information technology requirements and day to day supervision for the AHO are also provided by North Sydney Council.

 

The Aboriginal Heritage Office employs of a number of permanent staff including the Aboriginal Heritage Office manager, an archaeologist and an education officer, a part-time volunteer co-ordinator and casual staff contracted for specific projects. There are up to 8 staff members at a time, depending on funding and grant allocations.

 

A  Memorandum of Understanding, outlining the responsibilities of the member Councils has been developed. (Attachment A1)

 

Accommodation

 

It is intended that the AHO occupy office accommodation (previous caretaker’s house) at the Wildflower Garden that will be vacant following a staff move from the Wildflower Garden to the St Ives Showground.

 

The St Ives Precinct Plan of Management allows for office space for the Precinct Co-ordinator and staff to occupy within a prominent position at the Showground, as a first point of call for visitors and community groups arriving on-site, rather than the position they currently occupy at the Wildflower Garden.

 

The staff moved to the Showground will provide a much needed presence for visitor liaison and extra security. Additionally, with the increase in major events at the Showground, and the soon to be established regional playground, it will be more efficient to have specialist staff located at the Showground rather than at the Wildflower Garden.

 

The Visitor’s Centre and school and community environmental programs will continue to operate from the Wildflower Garden.

 

Next Stages

 

This report is seeking Council support for the relocation of the AHO to the Ku-ring-gai Wildflower Garden.

 

Once there is support from Council, further discussion can continue with the project auspice North Sydney Council, and the Steering Committee of the AHO about the proposal and firm terms and conditions for the relocation can be developed.

 

Council will also engage a consultant to develop a business model for the proposal. The business model will include operating terms and conditions for the AHO, integration of cultural and environmental education programs with Council’s Strategy and Environment department and the AHO, the Australian Plant Society and other relevant community groups.

 

The next stages include:

 

·     Meeting with representatives of North Sydney Council and the AHO Steering Committee

·     Engaging a consultant to develop a business model and plan for the Ku-ring-gai Wildflower Garden

·     Finalise an agreement between Council and the AHO

 

The AHO essentially provides shared consultancy services to all member councils, and because each council contributes to the AHO, host councils provide the AHO with free accommodation, including on-costs associated with the running of the facility e.g. power, rates, waste services, building maintenance etc. This arrangement has resulted in reducing the annual contributions for each council and has made it easier to attract new members.

 

The Aboriginal Heritage Office has been hosted by the following councils:

 

Warringah Council        2000 - 2003

Lane Cove Council       2003 - 2006

Willoughby Council       2006 – 2014 (2 separate locations)

Many Council                2014 - until present

 

It should also be noted that North Sydney Council does not charge any project management or supervision fees and any support provided is considered as an in-kind contribution.

 

While there has not been a formal agreement amongst the participating councils to rotate the provision of accommodation for the AHO, it has been the practice since its inception. The Ku-ring-gai Wildflower Garden would provide an ideal location for the Aboriginal Heritage Office based on the following considerations:

 

·     central proximity to the northern Sydney region and easy access for all member councils

·     office accommodation to conduct the key administrative functions of the AHO

·     the bush setting would allow for a number of outdoor activities to be undertaken e.g. archaeological digs, bush walks, bush tucker activities,

·     access to a teaching space (Caley’s Pavilion) for education talks, presentations, performances and training,

·     exhibition space to house the AHO museum and possible space to expand the collection

·     potential to provide an independent income stream to expand the services of the AHO through fee for service programs and tourism related activities.

 

All previous facilities housing the Aboriginal Heritage Office provided limited opportunities to expand its capacity to deliver services beyond current levels.

 

The AHO, in partnership with Council, has run a number of programs at the Ku-ring-gai Wildflower Garden and considers this site as an ideal location. Many of the programs currently operated from the Ku-ring-gai Wildflower Garden are compatible with the activities of the AHO and there are significant opportunities to increase the range of activities currently offered on site.

 

Tourism and Business Potential

 

A Visitor’s Centre was established at the Wildflower Garden last year and the number of visitors to the site has almost doubled since its opening in October 2014. The tourism potential associated with the AHO and the introduction of Aboriginal programs and activities would contribute to this increase in visitation to the Wildflower Garden. The proposed business model will explore these options before an agreement is reached with the AHO.

 

Role of Local Government

 

Local government has a key role to play in safeguarding Aboriginal sites and heritage. As the people who make decisions about land and how it will be used, councils hold the future of many Aboriginal sites in their hands.

 

In valuing Aboriginal heritage, local government not only commits to preserving the past, it commits to the future by fostering communication, understanding and respect between Indigenous and non-Indigenous Australians.

 

integrated planning and reporting

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

C1.1 An equitable and inclusive community that cares and provides for its members.

 

 

 

C2.1 A harmonious community that respects, appreciates, celebrates and learns from each other and values our evolving cultural identity.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N1.1 A community empowered with knowledge, learning and information that benefits the environment

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P5.1 Ku-ring-gais heritage is protected, promoted and responsibly managed.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

E3.1 Ku-ring-gai has a range of activities and experiences that attract visitors.

 

 

L1.1 A shared long term vision for Ku-ring-gai underpins strategic collaboration, policy development and community engagement.

 

 

C1.1.3 Our community facilities are accessible and function as cultural hubs to attract a range of users

 

 

C2.1.1 Ku-ring-gai’s rich cultural diversity and creativity is celebrated through programs and events.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

N1.1.2 Increased community action that benefits the environment.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

P5.1.1 Strategies, plans and processes

are in place to effectively protect

and preserve Ku-ring-gai’s heritage assets

 

P5.1.3 Local, aboriginal and cultural

history is recognised and promoted

 

E3.1.2 Ku-ring-gai is marketed as a provider of a range of visitor activities and experiences.

 

L1.1.3 Partnerships are established with government agencies, regional and local organisations and community groups and are working to achieve Ku-ring-gai’s community outcomes.

Design and obtain the necessary approvals for a multipurpose cultural and educational centre at the Wildflower Garden.

 

Promote and support a range of cultural and nationally significant events through Council.

 

Continue to develop and deliver a series of signature events at the St Ives Showground and Wildflower Garden.

 

Promote cultural events to the whole community via Council's communication methods e.g. social media and website.

 

Develop and deliver programs, resources and education demonstration sites at the Wildflower Garden.

 

Deliver environmental resources and programs for residents.

 

Deliver environmental resources and programs for businesses.

 

Deliver environmental resources and programs for schools.

 

Deliver management actions and training to protect and manage Aboriginal heritage including actions.

 

 

 

Support Aboriginal cultural activities at the St Ives Precinct.

 

 

Facilitate opportunities for organisations to stage events

 

 

 

Pursue priority areas where partnership arrangements will provide tangible benefits to the local area.

 

Governance Matters

 

The Land is Crown Land managed by Council under the recently adopted St Ives Showground and Precinct Land Plan of Management (POM). Council retains the authority and option to approve the activities that are permitted and recommended in the POM as well as any activities that are permitted within the zoning of the land.

 

Under Council’s Principal Local Environment Plan the following outlines land use zones and related controls apply to the St Ives Showground & Precinct Lands:

 

·        Zone RE1 Public Recreation

·        Zone E2 Environmental Conservation

 

The proposed relocation of the AHO to the Wildflower Garden is consistent with the adopted POM which, under Environmental Sensitivity and Community Awareness, cites potential to integrate sustainability focus and educational facilities along with Aboriginal heritage and bush foods at the Wildflower Garden.

 

The POM also promotes potential for the existing house (offices) to be utilised for environmental education and Aboriginal cultural and heritage displays.

 

Risk Management

 

The Aboriginal Heritage Office is a joint project involving 7 northern Sydney councils - any risks associated with its operation are shared by all partner organisations.

 

North Sydney Council, as the auspice organisation, is required to coordinate and consult with member councils regarding any risk management issues. 

 

Risk assessments have been completed for key areas of work undertaken by the Aboriginal Heritage Office on behalf of all councils. Any work undertaken by the Aboriginal Heritage Office representing Ku-ring-gai Council must adhere to all relevant policies.

 

Financial Considerations

 

To date each host council has provided the Aboriginal Heritage Office with free accommodation including costs associated with the management of the facility e.g. power, rates, waste services, building maintenance etc. This arrangement has resulted in reducing the annual contributions for each council and has made it easier to attract new members.

 

The current Aboriginal Heritage Office budget does not allow for any payment of rental or outgoings and any additional charges would require a renegotiation of the Memorandum of Understanding between councils and an increase in member annual fees. Other member councils are also unlikely to consider such a request favourably, based on their contribution of providing free accommodation over many years and other in-kind supports.

 

It has been acknowledged in discussions with the AHO and North Sydney Council that a business model and plan must be developed to ensure the long term financial sustainability and growth of the office.

 

The business model will explore and may include fee for service programs and training, visitation fees, sale of Aboriginal crafts and artwork, guided tours, performances and special functions. Additional grants for both capital and specialist programs can be sought once a more permanent home is found for the Aboriginal Heritage Office.

 

If Council supports the relocation of the Aboriginal Heritage Office to the Wildflower Garden any costs associated with such a move would need to be negotiated with member councils. Costs associated with accommodating the AHO at the Wildflower Garden are considered to be minimal as this is a fully functioning administration office with the required infrastructure already provided.

 

Social Considerations

 

The Aboriginal Heritage Office is an award-winning initiative and a best practice example of how local government can work towards improved management and protection of Aboriginal heritage. The success of the partnership is reflected in the awards that have been received, including the 2001 Energy Australia Heritage Award, the 2OO8 Pride of Workmanship Rotary Award, the 2012 NSW Heritage Council's 'Heritage Heroes' Award, the 2012 North Sydney Community Award, the 2012 Building Inclusive Communities Award 2013 and 2014 Cultural Heritage Award, Clean Beaches (Keeping Australia Beautiful and the 2014 Cultural Heritage Award, Caring for Country (Keeping Australia Beautiful).

 

The AHO liaises and works closely with the Aboriginal custodians of the land, the Metropolitan Local Aboriginal Land Council (MLALC), and the Aboriginal community on Aboriginal heritage issues.

 

The development of a business model with the AHO will enable Council to partner with an organisation that already has a strong standing and high respect within the community.

 

It is anticipated that there will be significant community benefits associated with the AHO operating from the Ku-ring-gai Wildflower Garden.

 

Environmental Considerations

 

The activities of the Aboriginal Heritage Office are consistent with the St Ives Showground and Precinct Lands Plan of Management 2015.

 

The proposed relocation of the Aboriginal Heritage Office to the Ku-ring-gai Wildflower Garden will assist in managing the land in an environmentally sensitive and responsible manner and at the same time addressing the social and cultural needs of the community. One of the objectives of the AHO is to preserve natural and culturally significant areas and to raise public awareness through environmental education. The proposed uses are directed towards protecting and enhancing the natural environment and restoring areas of high ecological, cultural and aesthetic values.

 

Community Consultation

 

The accommodation requirements of the AHO have been discussed for a period time at the AHO Steering Committee meetings. It has been widely acknowledged by Council representatives attending meetings that the current site at Manly is unsuitable and a more permanent solution needs to be found. All member councils have been asked to consider possible sites for the relocation of the AHO, with a view to a more appropriate accommodation.

 

The current site at Manly only supports the administration functions of the AHO and provides minimal opportunities for visitation by outside groups, training, exhibitions, meetings and educational programs, and unfortunately the AHO museum has been closed due to the inadequacy of the space and all the exhibits have been placed in storage.

 

Meetings have been held with the manager of the Aboriginal Heritage Office and an initial meeting has also been held with North Sydney Council to discuss the possible relocation of the AHO.

 

As part of the development of a business model for the Wildflower Garden, it is anticipated that community groups, for example, the Australian Native Plants Society, that currently use the site will be consulted.

 

Internal Consultation

 

Council’s Operations and Strategy and Environment departments have been consulted in the writing of this report.

 

Summary

 

This report is seeking Council support to relocate the Northern Sydney Aboriginal Heritage Office to the Ku-ring-gai Wildflower Garden.

 

The Northern Sydney Aboriginal Heritage Office is a regional organisation consisting of 7 northern Sydney councils. It was established in 2000 to:

 

·     Protect Aboriginal sites and heritage in the participating council areas through the

development and implementation of site management plans, policy development and

regular monitoring of site conditions

·     Ensure that consultation and communication between all stakeholders is maintained

·     Ensure heritage site management efforts are both coordinated and effective

·     Develop and implement community education programs and events aimed at increasing

the collective knowledge of Aboriginal cultural heritage

 

The AHO has been housed by a number of member councils since its inception, however none of the council’s has had a bushland setting available to enable the AHO to reach its full potential.

 

There are many benefits for the Ku-ring-gai community, plus increased tourism potential should the AHO be located at the Wildflower Garden.

 

Following support from Council a detailed Business Plan and agreement will be developed for the AHO at the Wildflower Garden.

 

 

Recommendation:

1.   That Council support the relocation of the Northern Sydney Aboriginal Heritage Office to the Ku-ring-gai Wildflower Garden.

 

2.   That a Business Model, along with an agreement determining terms and conditions for the AHO to be accommodated at the Wildflower Garden, is developed between the AHO and Ku-ring-gai Council, and that the General Manager be a signatory to this agreement.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Danny Houseas

Manager Community

 

 

 

 

Mark Taylor

Manager Community & Recreation Services

 

 

 

 

Janice Bevan

Director Community

 

 

 

Attachments:

A1View

Aboriginal Heritage Office - signed MOU - North Sydney Council - Report Attachment

 

2015/230530

  


APPENDIX No: 1 - Aboriginal Heritage Office - signed MOU - North Sydney Council - Report Attachment

 

Item No: GB.6

 


 


 


 


 


 


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 8 September 2015

GB.7 / 383

 

 

Item GB.7

DA0508/14

 

29 June 2015

 

 

development application

 

 

Summary Sheet

 

Report title:

31 Tryon Road, Lindfield - Demolition of existing structures and construction of a residential flat building comprising 11 units, basement parking and landscaping works

ITEM/AGENDA NO:

GB.7

 

 

Application No:

DA0508/14

Property Details:

31 Tryon Road, Lindfield

Lot & DP No:     Lot 20 DP 3055,  Lot 21 DP 1005041 and Lot 1 DP 944071

Site area (m2):    1339m²

Zoning:               R4 High Density Residential

Ward:

Roseville

Proposal/Purpose:

To determine Development Application DA0508/14 which proposes demolition of existing structures and construction of a residential flat building comprising 11 units, basement parking and landscaping works

 

Type of Consent:

Local

Applicant:

Playoust Churcher Architects

Owner:

Allan Roy Tattersall and Cheryl Ann Tattersall

Date Lodged:

28 November 2014

Recommendation:

Approval

 

 

  

 


Purpose of Report

 

To determine Development Application No. 508/14 for the demolition of existing structures and construction of a residential flat building comprising 11 units, basement parking and landscaping works.

 

integrated planning and reporting

 

PLACES, SPACES 7 INFRASTRUCTURE

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

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

 

Applications are assessed in accordance with State and local plans

 

Assessments are of high quality, accurate and consider all relevant legislative requirements

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Issues:

-     Site isolation

-     Setbacks

-     Spatial separation

-     Submissions regarding traffic impacts

Submissions:

23

Land and Environment Court:

No

Recommendation:

Approval

 

History

 

Site

 

There is no relevant development application history.

 

Pre-DA

 

Pre0133/13                                                Pre DA meeting for demolition of the existing dwelling and construction of a 4 storey residential flat building was held on 23 November 2013. Key issues raised:

 

·     allotment size

·     heritage

·     floor space ratio

·     building height

·     site isolation

·     setbacks                                                 

 

Pre0066/14                                                Pre DA meeting for demolition of existing dwelling and construction of a 3 storey residential flat building was held on 2 July 2014. Key issues raised:

·     site isolation

·     privacy

·     heritage

 

DA History

 

28 November 2014                          The application was lodged.

12 December – 11 January 2015    The application was advertised.

13 January 2015                                       The applicant was advised of heritage issues and urban design issues which will be raised in formal correspondence.

21 January 2015                              The landscape referral received raising concerns with the BASIX certificate.

27 February 2015                                      The assessment officer emailed applicant regarding design changes to balconies.

4 March 2015                                   The applicant submits amended plans and elevations relating to the balcony.

5 March 2015                                   The assessment officer emailed the applicant with concerns regarding the proposed floor space ratio.

9 March 2015                                   The applicant submits amended plans, elevations and sections and floor space ratio calculation plan.

27 March 2015                                 The development application was reallocated to new assessment officer named in this report.

22 April 2015                                   Council wrote to the applicant and requested the following information:

-     updated stormwater management plans

-     longitudinal driveway section

-     environmental site management plan

-     geotechnical assessment

-     an amended landscape plan

-     an amended BASIX certificate

-     an amended deep soil landscape plan due to non compliance

-     to address design issues relating to the roof pitch, the front façade,  reduction in height, smaller opening to Tryon Road and change to balustrades to opaque glass.

-     amendments to the balcony on the east side along the Tryon Road frontage were resolved in the plans submitted in March it is requested this design change be included in the formally submitted amended plans

-     deletion of the entry structure

-     finish and colour details on the central bay to be amended to a recessive colour

23 April 2015                                   The applicant requests an extension of time to submit the requested information.

10 June 2015                                   Council requested an update from the applicant regarding the time frame for submitting information. Council advises that information should be submitted by 1 July 2015.

10 June 2015                                   The applicant advises of meeting with engineers the following day regarding and information would be submitted within 2 – 3 weeks.

6 July 2015                                      Council wrote to the applicant and requested additional information must be submitted by 27 July 2015 otherwise the application would be determined.

27 July 2015                                    Applicant submits amended plans and information.

7 August 2015                                  Applicant submits geotechnical report.

25 August 2015                                Applicant submits amended driveway section.

26 August 2015                                Applicant submits amended stormwater plans.

 

The Site

 

Site description

 

The site comprises three lots known as Lot 20 DP 3055, Lot 21 DP 1005041 and Lot 1 DP 944071. The site has a frontage of 24.285m to Tryon Road and a depth of 54.88m. The site is rectangular shaped, with an area of 1338m² and is located on the high side of the street.

 

The site contains a three storey dwelling, with vehicular access from Tryon Lane located to the rear. Other existing improvements include an in ground swimming pool, concrete tennis court and a brick garage.

 

The site is relatively flat and ground levels at the rear boundary are approximately 200mm lower than the front boundary.

 

Surrounding development

 

The adjoining site to the west, known as 27-29 Tryon Road, contains a single storey dwelling and a two storey aged care facility. The adjoining site to the east, known as 33 Tryon Road, contains a heritage listed Lindfield Uniting Church. The site on the opposite side of Tryon Road contains a two storey school. Development to the rear of the site includes single and two storey dwelling houses.

 

The Proposal

 

The applicant seeks consent to demolish the existing dwelling and construct a residential flat building comprising 11 units, basement parking and landscaping. The proposed works include:

 

·     demolition of existing structures including dwelling, swimming pool and tennis court

·     vehicular access from Tryon Lane, centrally located within the site providing access to the basement level

·     landscaping works including pathways, communal open space and bbq area fronting Tryon Lane

·     pedestrian access from Tryon Road.

·     a 3 storey residential flat building comprising the following:

 

 

Basement RL90.990                                           16 residential car spaces, 2 accessible spaces, 3 visitor spaces, 6 bicycle spaces, storage, garbage room, lift and stairs.

 

Ground Floor RL93.915                            4 units (2 x 2 bedroom and 2 x 3 bedroom), lift and stairs.

 

First Floor RL97.015                                4 units (3 x 3 bedroom and 1 x 2 bedroom), lift and stairs.

 

Second Floor RL100.115                                    3 units (3 x 2 bedroom) lift and stairs.

 

Consultation

 

Community

 

In accordance with Volume C Part 5 of the Ku-ring-gai Local Centres Development Control Plan, owners of surrounding properties were given notice of the application between 12 December 2014 to 11 January 2015.  Twenty-six (26) submissions were received from the following:

 

1.       Robert Boyd-Boland                                   12/15 Tryon Road, Lindfield

2.       David Hellstrom (3 submissions)                21/25 Tryon Road, Lindfield

3.       HL & WR Cooper (2)                                   17/15 Tryon Road, Lindfield

4.       Robert Oliver                                               26 Russell Avenue, Lindfield

5.       Roy E. Cook                                                 2/25 Tryon Road, Lindfield

6.       Mrs C Power                                               16/15 Tryon Road, Lindfield

7.       Emeritus Professor David Barker AM        25/9 Tryon Road, Lindfield

8.       Ian and Irma Stewart                                  14/9 Tryon Road, Lindfield

9.       So Jean Han Lee                                         23/25 Tryon Road, Lindfield

10.     W & J Macdonald                                        21/15 Tryon Road, Lindfield

11.     Celia Palmer                                               19/15 Tryon Road, Lindfield

12.     David Patten                                                14/12-18 Russell Avenue, Linfield

13.     CJ O’Brien and RJ O’Brien                         13/25 Tryon Road, Lindfield

14.     Errol Brown                                                 9/9 Tryon Road, Lindfield

15.     Evelyn Chan                                                8/25 Tryon Road, Lindfield

16.     Dianne Letham                                           18/15 Tryon Road, Lindfield

17.     Paul and Esther Chan                                 4/25 Tryon Road, Lindfield

18.     Darin Tyson-Chan                                       21/9 Tryon Road, Lindfield

19.     Rudolph Lee and Crystal Yee Wan Wong   19/25 Tryon Road, Lindfield

20.     A R Arnott                                                    4/2-6 Russell Avenue, Lindfield

21.     Frank Huh                                                   9/25 Tryon Road, Lindfield

22.     Adrian Riley                                                 5/25 Tryon Road, Lindfield

The submissions raised the following issues:

 

Concern over all building and other materials access being through the rear of site Tryon Lane

 

This is the only means of vehicle access for residents of 5-25 Tryon Road and properties on Russell Avenue

 

Tryon Lane is one way and the works will block the lane and prevent users to exit

 

The reliance upon Tryon Lane for construction vehicles is not supported. Condition 11 and 12 require a work zone within Tryon Road and an amended construction management plan to be submitted to Council.

 

The route for construction vehicles requires approach to the site via Russell Lane and egress via Tryon Lane

 

The construction management plan lodged with this Development Application is not supported. An amended construction management plan is required by Condition 11. All construction vehicles involved in the demolition, excavation and construction of the proposed development shall approach the site travelling along Pacific Highway, turning into Havilah Road, right into Lindfield Avenue, left into Tryon Road and right into the site (except the actual kerb and gutter construction in Tryon Lane which will require some restriction to traffic in the lane, residents would be notified of this at the time). Construction vehicles departing the site will travel along the same route until they reach Pacific Highway where vehicles can turn north or south at the signalised intersection.

 

The construction management report underestimates the truck movements required for demolition

 

The manoeuvring path for vehicles on site is unreasonable

 

Trucks will not be able to enter and exit the site in a forward direction

 

Condition 11 requires that a revised and detailed construction traffic management plan (CTMP) must be submitted for review by Council Engineers prior to the commencement of any works on site. The CTMP would also confirm the approach and departure routes, expected construction vehicle movements and ensure that vehicles can access the site in a safe manner.

 

All major building works should occur from Tryon Road and not Tryon Lane

 

Condition 12 requires the work zone to be provided with Tryon Road. All construction vehicles involved in the demolition, excavation and construction of the proposed development shall approach the site travelling along Pacific Highway, turning into Havilah Road, right into Lindfield Avenue, left into Tryon Road and right into the site (except of the actual kerb and gutter construction in Tryon Lane which will require some restriction to traffic in the lane, residents would be notified of this at the time). Construction vehicles departing the site will travel along the same route until they reach Pacific Hwy where vehicles can turn north or south at the signalised intersection.

 

Noise impacts from large scale machinery

 

Conditions 44 and 49 seek to minimise noise impacts upon surrounding properties. The conditions provide hours of work and noise requirements to ensure no unreasonable impacts upon the acoustic amenity of surrounding residents.

 

Safety and danger concerns for children using the ballet school at the corner of Lindfield Avenue and Tryon Lane from the truck movements

 

The proposed truck movements in the construction traffic management plan, with reliance upon Tryon Lane and Russell Avenue, is not supported. A revised construction management traffic plan is required by Condition 11.

 

Traffic impacts on the Seldon  complex at 9 - 15 Tryon Road 

 

The Seldon complex has vehicular access from Tryon Lane. As part of the recommendations of this report, construction vehicles are not permitted to use Tryon Lane. There is concern regarding the impacts upon surrounding development, Condition 12 requires a work zone to be established in Tryon Road.

 

The deep soil excavation plan indicates prevention of trucks entering the site to load soil and will therefore occur on Tryon Lane and block access for residents

 

The use of Tryon Lane by construction vehicles is not supported.

 

There is no provision for a loading bay within the development for future occupants

 

There is a loading bay provided within the basement to facilitate residents moving and would prevent the reliance upon moving trucks being parked within Tryon Lane.

 

The cycle way along Tryon Lane and Russell Lane will be largely impacted by the development and this raises safety concerns

 

The reliance upon Tryon Lane and Russell Lane for truck movements is not supported.

 

The three and two bedroom configurations are borderline in terms of size

 

The proposed size of the two and three bedrooms is compliant with the Residential Design Flat Code and Development Control Plan (Local Centres) 2013.

 

This development will result in the loss of the old building which is in excellent condition is a tragic loss to the Ku-ring-gai community

 

The property was occupied by a person of prominence and importance the Molesworth family owned the property and Maud Margaret Molesworth was an Australian Champion Women’s tennis player

 

The site is not identified as a heritage item and is not proposed to be heritage listed.

 

Objection to the building being described as two storeys when it is quite clearly a three storey building

 

The proposal is for a three storey development which replaces an existing two storey house.

 

Amended plans lodged 27 July 2015

 

The plans of the amended proposal were not notified as it would not result in any greater amenity impacts than the original proposal.

 

Within Council

 

Heritage

 

Council’s Heritage Adviser has commented on the original proposal as follows:

 

Heritage Status

 

The site is not a heritage item and in not included in a Heritage Conservation Area.  The site is within the Local Centres LEP and adopted DCP.  The zoning on the site allows residential flat buildings and the height is limited to 11.5 metres.

 

The site adjoins a State and local heritage item at 33 Tryon Road – The Lindfield Uniting Church.  There are other items within the general vicinity but none directly within the immediate vicinity.  The site is within the vicinity of HCA Area C -22.  The HCA area is a broad area including most of the land east of Nelson Road.

 

The church was identified as a potential heritage item in the 1986/87 heritage study but not listed.  It was identified as a State item in a review of Uniting Church properties in 2003 and listed on the State Heritage Register in 2008.  It was subsequently listed as a local item in the Local Centres LEP.

 

In relation to heritage the objectives in the Local Centres LEP are:

 

(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; and

(d)         to conserve Aboriginal objects and Aboriginal places of heritage significance.

 

Clause 61D (4) of the LEP requires that before granting consent to the proposed works Council must consider the effect of the works on the item, nearby items or conservation area concerned.  Clause 61D (5) allows Council to require a HIS before granting consent.

 

Heritage Impact Statement (HIS)

 

The applicant has included a well-considered HIS prepared by an experienced heritage consultant.  The report follows the Heritage Council guidelines for such a report.  It concludes:

 

“In our view the revised proposal, while allowing for viable development, provides a careful and sympathetic design response that addresses the specific nature of the heritage listed church, respects its intrinsic cultural values and preserves its heritage significance and its legibility.  Indeed, the proposal would present a contradistinctive relationship between the heritage listed church and the proposed development in which each maintains its integrity.

 

On the strength of the foregoing, we are satisfied that the pertinent consent authority, having jurisdiction over the works as proposed, would be in a position to approve such works without concern for the loss of heritage values on the property within the visual catchment area of the proposed site.  We support this contention on the strength of the observations made in this report.

 

Recommendations

 

To ensure maximum conservation of significance Rappoport also recommends the following:

 

Salvage of components, particularly interior components of the subject building which would be of potential value for use in maintaining and restoring similar period houses in the area i.e. slate tiles, Federation windows.”

 

Local Centres DCP

 

The site is subject to the heritage provision in the above DCP.  Chapter 7.3 (Part B) provides specific objectives and controls for new development in the vicinity of a heritage item.  The objectives and controls for a residential context are discussed further in the report.

 

Demolition

 

The existing dwelling on the site is a good representative example of a Federation period dwelling set on a relatively large site, with established landscaping and a tennis court.  Although not inspected as part of this assessment, the HIS states that the interiors are generally intact and in good condition. 

 

Demolition of the building is necessary to allow development of the site to the scale envisaged in the zoning.  Several other similar houses in Tryon Road were demolished for residential flat development within the last 10 years.  The evidence of the area’s built fabric and history is being lost.

 

Given the rezoning, demolition of the existing building and site elements is acceptable, provided an archival standard photographic recording of the building and site is undertaken (Condition 9). As recommended in the HIS, salvaged components from the building and specifically the interior of the building should be recycled.  A condition to this effect is included. Condition 58

 

Comment

 

The bell tower and entry in Tryon Road is the main front to the adjoining item and forms an architectural focus to the Church.  A new accessible entry and path has been constructed which links the church to the hall (at the southern end of the church building) placing more visual and functional focus on the Nelson Road frontage.  The recent extension to the kitchen area of the hall (adjoining the site) has resulted in a minimal side setback adjoining the subject site however this area is not considered to be significant and is not considered a heritage setback issue.  The functional and practical entry is now from the Nelson Road which has a much wider presentation to the streetscape.

 

Consideration against Objectives and Controls in LEP and DCP:

 

Objectives

 

1.  To conserve the heritage significance of heritage items and heritage conservation areas, including associated fabric, settings and views;

 

2.  To ensure that new development respects the heritage significance of the adjoining or nearby heritage items.

 

3.  To ensure that new development does not visually dominate a heritage items

 

4.  To ensure that new development does not reduce views from or to the heritage item from the public realm;

 

5.  To ensure that the development does not impact on the garden setting of the heritage item, particularly in terms of overshadowing the garden or causing physical impacts on important trees.

 

Comment

 

The proposed development would have minimal impact on the existing setting and views of the church from Tryon Road and minor impacts on the setting and views from Tryon Lane.  It would not impact on the Nelson Road setting.

 

The building is of a larger scale, height and footprint than the existing dwelling on the site.  The eaves line of the proposed building lines up with the gutter to the spire but it is above the roof of the nave and will dominate it to some extent.  This is largely a product of the zoning.

 

The views of the church will remain essentially the same but the view corridor from Tryon Road (west) is slightly reduced.  The western elevation is not significant.  The garden of the church is not affected by the development.

 

Controls

 

Development in the vicinity of a heritage item is to be sympathetic to the heritage item having regard to:

 

1,    Form of building including height, roofline, setbacks and building alignment;

 

i)     Proportions including door and window openings, bays, floor-to –floor ceiling heights and coursing levels;

ii)    Materials and colours;

iii)   Siting and orientation;

iv)    Setting and context; and

v)     Streetscape pattern.

 

Comment

 

The proposed development is residential and different to the community/institutional use of the church but consistent with the existing character of the site.  The predominant side setback is over 12 metres but reduces at the Tryon Road frontage as the entry and spire is close to the side boundary.

 

The height is similar to the eaves of the spire, the use of materials is more contemporary and colours are generally recessive.  However, the Tryon Road elevation proposes a light painted central bay which is considered inappropriate.  A more recessive colour is recommended or the use of face brickwork.  The proposed building is generally consistent with existing siting, orientation and streetscape pattern.

 

2.       The applicant’s HIS discussing the effect the development would have on the item, including its garden and setting, has been considered

 

Comment

 

A well- considered HIS has been submitted with the application.

 

3.  Significant views to and from heritage items are to be protected

 

Comment

 

This has been achieved.

 

4.       Development in the vicinity of a heritage item must respect the curtilage and setting of the item

 

Comment

 

This has been achieved.

 

5.    An application for development in the vicinity of a heritage item must demonstrate that the construction process will not result in damage to the heritage item or its setting.

 

Comment

 

The proposed development is on an adjoining site and generally set back around 12 metres.  Any damage to the item would be managed during the construction process and standard engineering conditions will apply.

 

Residential Context

 

In addition to the planning setbacks the following setbacks apply:

 

i)          Must have a minimum 12 metres building separation to the heritage item;

ii)         Must not exceed a façade height of 8 metres from existing ground level

iii)        Any building mass above 8 metres height must be stepped back an additional 6m from the heritage item;

iv)        Front setbacks must be more than the front setback of the adjoining item; and

v)         Any new development must have a maximum wall length of 36 metres.

 

Comment

 

The above setback controls are generally achieved apart from the verandah and balconies on the eastern side which extend beyond the building line.  It is recommended that the balconies be amended and set back in line with the façade and eastern wall of the building.  This may involve replanning of the two apartments.

 

The second floor, above the 8 metres wall height is not set back an additional 6metres as required.  The applicant considers that the non-compliance would not negatively impact on the adjoining item and is “within the spirit” of the controls.  The spirit of the control is to provide maximum physical separation where higher scale development adjoins a heritage item.  In this case the item is a church and the overall scale is larger than a residential building due to the wall and roof height. The west elevation of the church is a minor elevation as the primary elevations are the east and north.  The departure from the control is considered acceptable if all the numeric planning controls are achieved.

 

6.    Screen planting on side and rear boundaries adjoining a heritage item site is to achieve a minimum mature height of 4 metres

 

Comment

 

This is achieved.

 

7.    Front and side fences are to be no higher than the fence of the adjoining heritage item.  Front fences must be open and transparent such as timber picket of metal palisade.  Side fences are to be timber. No metal panel fencing is to be constructed on any heritage item boundary.

 

Comment

 

The proposal retains the exiting front fence with minor modifications.  This is satisfactory. 

 

The proposed new entry structure is not acceptable on heritage grounds as it visually conflicts with the lynch gate, entry and spire of the church.  It is recommended to provide a simple letter box on the front boundary.  Alternatively it could be relocated to the western side and connected via a path to the entry.

 

Preliminary conclusions and recommendations

 

Demolition of the existing house is acceptable given to the rezoning, provided archival recording is undertaken.  In addition to the standard recycling condition, interior fittings and building fabric should also recycled.

 

The proposed development is largely consistent with the rezoning and would have acceptable impacts on the adjoining heritage item.  However, a number of amendments need to be undertaken to minimise impact on the adjoining church including the following:

 

i)    Deletion of the entry structure near the Tryon Road entrance as it will visually conflict with the entry, lych gate and the spire to the church.  A simple letter box on the street frontage next to the path should be provided instead.  Alternatively, the entry could be relocated to the western side of the building and a path provided.

 

ii)   The finish and colour of the central bay on Tryon Road should be more recessive to reduce visual impacts on the church.  It is recommended it be face brick to match other elevations.

 

iii)  The balcony on the eastern side, along the Tryon Road frontage, needs to be amended.  It should not project beyond the wall line of the building.  Its location conflicts with the entry and spire of the church, which provides a strong architectural focus and the proposed balcony is only 6 metres from it.

 

It is likely amended plans will need to be provided as it is unlikely these changes could be conditioned.

 

Council’s Heritage Adviser commented on the amended proposal as follows:

 

Heritage comments on amended plans

 

The amendments made are:

 

i)    The entry structure at the Tryon Road frontage has been deleted and replaced with a low masonry letter box structure set back 1 metres from the fence.

 

ii)   The finish of the central bay of the Tryon Road elevation has been amended to face brick – Austral “Boral Blue”.  This is a recessive colour and consistent with the face brickwork of the side and rear elevations.

 

iii)  The design on the north (Tryon Road) and east side of the building has been amended by pulling back the balcony on the north and east side by 1 metres and removing the columns as shown on the original drawings.  The walls to the dining/living room at G-01, 1-01 and 2-01 have been amended as shown on the drawings in red.  These amendments result in a more balanced front elevation and remove the initial concern that this part of the building conflicts with the bell tower of the church.

 

Conclusions and recommendations

 

Given that rezoning of the site has occurred, demolition of the existing building is considered acceptable, provided standard archival recording is undertaken.  In addition to standard recycling conditions and as discussed in the applicant’s heritage report, original and significant interior fittings and building fabric should also be recycled.  Condition 58.

 

The amendments shown on the drawings, dated 27 July 2015, are satisfactory.  The proposed development is consistent with the rezoning of the site and is considered to have acceptable impacts on the adjoining heritage item.”

 

Landscaping

 

Council’s Landscape and Tree Assessment Officer commented on the revised proposal as follows:

 

          “Tree impacts

 

i)    T1 Cedrus atlantica (Atlantic Cedar) located within the site frontage is proposed to be removed. The tree is in fair condition, with a sparse canopy and signs of decline. The removal of T1 is acceptable.

ii)   T5 – T7 Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) are located within the road reserve in front of the site. The trees are proposed to be retained. The trees are in poor condition, with stem and branch defects. It is recommended they be removed. The removal of T5 – T7 is supported, subject to replacement with Lophostemon confertus (Brushbox) to continue the avenue planting within the road reserve.

iii)  Subject to standard tree protection requirements during construction, there should be no other tree impacts.

 

Landscape plan/tree replenishment

 

The submitted landscape plan is acceptable.

 

Stormwater plan

 

The proposed stormwater drainage works are acceptable.

 

BASIX

 

The development is consistent with the BASIX certificate for landscape areas.

 

Deep soil

 

The proposed development will have a deep soil landscape area of 579.2m² or 43.2%. The KLCDCP requires a minimum 40% of site area as deep soil landscape area, resulting in an excess of 43.6m².

 

Council’s calculations differ from the applicant’s. Some areas <2.0 metres wide have been included, which is inconsistent with the DCP definition. The areas included are minor and does not result in a non-compliance with the deep soil landscape area DCP control.

 

Construction traffic management plan

 

The CTMP is not supported on landscape grounds. While it is acknowledged the plan is conceptual, the proposed construction access, entry/exit points and materials store conflict with retained trees and tree protection requirements. This will prevent vehicular construction access from Tryon Road and therefore either access will be required from the rear laneway or a construction zone approval along Tryon Road is needed.

 

It is requested the submitted CTMP not be stamped or approved.

 

It is required that a detailed CTMP and on site CMP be submitted.

 

Conclusion

 

The application is acceptable on landscape grounds subject to conditions.”  Conditions 3, 11, 12, 13-17, 66 – 80 and 82.

 

Planner’s comment: The submitted construction management plan is not referenced for approval. Condition 11 requires the submission of a revised construction traffic management plan prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. The plan is required to be provided to Council for review.

 

Engineering

 

Council’s Development Engineer commented on the revised proposal as follows:

 

          Stormwater disposal

 

The subject site is relatively flat, with a moderate fall towards the eastern corner towards Tryon Lane and having site discharge directed to a new kerb and gutter.

 

The stormwater plans show the collection of all roof areas to be directed to a 20,000 Litres rainwater reuse tank located under the driveway area. The stored rainwater would be used for garden irrigation, laundry and toilet flushing.  The overflows from the rainwater tank would be directed to the bioretention system which would surcharge into the landscaped detention basin. The detention basin has been calculated to be approximately 29.3m3 of storage within a central bioretention lawn area. The OSD requirements described in Volume C Part 4B.5 of the DCP have been satisfied.

 

A revised BASIX Certificate has been submitted, with the water commitments requiring a central water tank (rainwater or stormwater) of 20,000 litres to collect runoff from at least 330m² of roof area and irrigation of 542m² of common landscaped area on the site. The rainwater retention and re-use has met the BASIX commitments, and satisfied the 50% reduction in runoff days required under Volume C Part 4B.3 of the DCP.  

 

A pump-out system, with storage capacity of 7m3, has been provided within the basement carpark to drain the driveway area of 55m2. The pump-out tank has been sized in accordance with the Local Centres DCP requirements.

 

The design has provided a proprietary gross pollutant trap (GPT) ‘Graf Platin’ 5,000 Litres rainwater tanks with inlet filters located upstream of the detention system to capture litter, debris and other pollutants prior to connection into Council’s public drainage system.  The stormwater treatment standards / targets outlined in Council’s Local Centres DCP Volume C Clause 4B.6 would be achieved by the proposed treatment train.

 

Runoff from the paved areas would be diverted to a bioretention swale prior to discharge into the OSD basin. The detention discharge control pit has also provided for a filter basket as a secondary treatment system, which is acceptable.

 

The Stormwater Management Plan & Details 10955 – C1.00/D and C1.01/D, dated 26 August 2015 and accompanying report prepared by Waddington Consulting Pty Ltd, dated 6 July 2015 are acceptable.

 

Traffic generation

 

According to the traffic generation rates nominated by The Roads & Maritime Services (RMS) ‘Guide to Traffic Generating Developments’, the development would generate approximately 6 peak hour vehicle trips for the AM and PM peak periods.

 

If discounted given the existing use for single dwelling on the site, the traffic generated would only be 5 additional vehicle trips during the peak periods. This would represent one vehicle trip every 12 minutes during the peak hours. According to the above guidelines, this is very low traffic generation and is not expected to have a significant effect on the existing road network.

 

Vehicular access and accommodation arrangements

 

The site is zoned ‘R4’ under the Local Centres LEP. The parking provisions have been determined using Ku-ring-gai Council Local Centres Development Control Plan for residential flat building. The site is located within 400m walking distance from Lindfield Railway Station. The following parking provisions have been adopted:

 

Ku-ring-gai Council Local Centres DCP  Volume A Part 7B.1-6 ‘Car Parking Rates’

 

Residential Flat Building

Parking Space Requirement

1 bedroom unit

0.7 – 1 space

2 bedroom unit

1  - 1.25 spaces

3 bedroom unit or more

1 – 2 spaces

Visitor car spaces

1 space per 4 units

 

6 x 2 bedrooms = 6 x 1 space/unit = 6 spaces

5 x 3 bedrooms = 5 x 1 space/unit = 5 spaces

11 units - visitor space/4 dwellings = 3 visitor spaces

Total parking spaces required = minimum14 spaces and maximum 21 spaces.

 

The development seeks to provide 20 off-street parking spaces, comprising 17 residents’ spaces (including 2 adaptable spaces) and 3 visitor spaces. The parking requirements have been met.

 

The adaptable parking space is to comply with AS2890.6:2009 with regard to having a minimum width of 2.4 metres plus 2.4 metres shared area. This is also referred to within the access consultant’s report.

 

The basement plan shows the visitor space doubling as a temporary services and removalist space which satisfies the minimum dimension of 3.5 metres x 6 metres.

 

Vehicular access to the car parking facility is to be provided via a new combined 6.1m wide entry / exit driveway which narrows to 3.6 metres at the entry to the basement level. The driveway clear width satisfies the requirements of Volume C Clause 2.2 of the DCP. The use of the single lane driveway and ramp is also compliant with Clause 3.2.2 of AS2890.1:2004 given that the traffic flows will be in the order of 5 peak hour vehicle movements which are significantly low for a two-way access driveway.

 

Traffic flow is also restricted to eastbound only in Tryon Lane. All traffic accessing the site will be restricted to left in/left out only.

 

The dimensions of the parking bay, ramp grades, aisle widths and driveway gradients comply with Australian Standard 2890.1 (2004) “Off-Street car parking”

 

Waste collection

 

The development allows a garbage truck to enter and depart the garbage/room recycle storage area in a forward direction. The turning manoeuvrability is suitable for the small waste collection vehicle as shown by the swept paths within the Appendix of the Traffic Report.

 

A driveway longitudinal section has been submitted which satisfies the minimum head height of 2.6m to access the basement area. The driveway grade of 20% shown for the small waste collection vehicle also complies with requirements of Volume C Part 3.4 of the Local Centres DCP.

 

The proposed 15x240L bins for waste, paper and recycling satisfies the minimum bin requirements.

 

Construction management

 

An indicative Construction Traffic Management Plan has been submitted by the traffic engineer together with a Construction Management Report, prepared by CAM Consulting. The report states that construction vehicles up to the 12.5m heavy rigid vehicles (HRV) can access the site. The swept paths have been depicted within the appendix of the traffic report. Refer to response to submission below for comment on construction vehicle routes.

 

A work zone will be created fronting the work site in Tryon Road for loading/unloading materials during the period of peak demand.

 

Submissions have been received which raised construction traffic related issues.

 

Construction vehicle routes – The specified traffic routes noted in the traffic report are not supported. The use of Middle Harbour Road, Trafalgar Ave, Russell Lane and Tryon Lane is not permitted due to the narrow lanes which would restrict heavy construction vehicle movements, heavy traffic envisaged and would also restrict entry and exit access for the nearby development.

 

As part of the CTMP approval, it will be conditioned that all construction vehicles involved in the demolition, excavation and construction of the proposed development shall approach the site travelling along Pacific Highway, turning into Havilah Road, right into Lindfield Avenue, left into Tryon Road and right into the site (except of the actual kerb and gutter construction in Tryon Lane which will require some restriction to traffic in the lane, residents would be notified of this at the time). Construction vehicles departing the site will travel along the same route until they reach Pacific Hwy where vehicles can turn north or south at the signalised intersection.

 

Based on the scale of works and expected construction vehicle movements, a detailed construction traffic management plan (CTMP) must be submitted for review by Council Engineers prior to the commencement of any works on site. The CTMP would also confirm the approach and departure routes.

 

Impacts on Council infrastructure

 

The applicant will be required to construct road shoulder and kerb and gutter in Tryon Lane. Plans can be submitted and approved prior to issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

Geotechnical investigation

 

A geotechnical site assessment has been carried out which comprised of drilling of two boreholes to depths between 5.1metres and 5.7 metres.

 

Subsurface conditions comprised fill up to a depth of 0.7 metres. Residual clay to depths of 1.5 metres and 1.3 metres to extremely weathered shale extending to depths of 2.1 metres and 2.0 metres, respectively in the boreholes was encountered. Weathered shale bedrock was encountered beneath the shaly clay from about 4.7 metres to 4.8 metres. Groundwater was measured in the boreholes at depths of 4.1 metres (1.3 hours after auger drilling) and 5.1 metres (after short period). It should be noted that bulk excavation for the basement depth will be in the order of 3.0 metres from existing surface levels proposed and therefore groundwater seepage does not appear to be an issue.

 

The geotechnical recommendations regarding excavation support, vibration monitoring, dilapidation reporting of adjoining buildings and foundation design shall be carried out during construction as specified within the report.

 

The report recommends a dilapidation report is to be submitted to include a survey of adjoining dwelling and including the church and the garage at the rear north-western boundary.

 

All other recommendations during the construction phase shall be carried out as specified within the report.  It is also recommended that further geotechnical input be required in particular groundwater monitoring, prior to commencement of bulk excavation.

 

Recommendations

 

The proposal is acceptable subject to conditions.” Conditions 8,10 -12, 31 – 40, 42, 47, 52 – 57, 60 – 64, 77 - 79, 85 – 93.

 

Building

 

Council’s Building Surveyor commented on the proposal as follows:

 

          “Class 2 & 7a building

 

Exit travel distances from 5 units (3 on 1st floor and 2 on second) appear to exceed the deemed to satisfy provisions of BCA D1.4 and therefore will require re-configuration or an alternate solution.

 

Subject to the exit travel distance issue being satisfactorily addressed, there is no objection to the proposal subject to conditions.”  Conditions 43, 48, 95, 100.

 

Planner’s comment: This issue was raised with the applicant. The applicant submitted further information from BCA vision stating the proposal was consistent with the deemed to satisfy requirements of Clause D1.4(a). Conditions 43 and 48 require compliance with relevant Australian Standards and the Building Code of Australia. The proposal is satisfactory in this regard.

 

Urban Design

 

Council’s Urban Design Consultant commented on the revised proposal as follows:

 

          “1 Context

 

The context is comprised of a mix of community and residential uses. These include a heritage listed church, a nursing home, a child care centre and a primary school. Residential flat buildings run the length of Tryon Road up until Lindfield Avenue where another church forms the termination of the street.

 

The streetscape is characterised by newer apartment buildings set back approximately 7-8m from the boundary. Street trees dominate the streetscape. The front boundary line is defined by fences and hedges.

 

The site has two street frontages, one to Tryon Lane. The laneway is generally framed by the rear elevation of residential flats that address Tryon Road and by detached single storey dwellings.

 

The proposed development is in close proximity to Lindfield Station and development of the proposals type is appropriate for the area.

 

The Uniting Church to the immediate east is a local and state listed heritage item. The adjoining site to the immediate west is owned by the Whitehall Nursing Home.

 

This is an isolated site, hemmed in between the church and the land owned by the nursing home. This should be considered in the assessment of the proposal.

 

2 Scale

 

Improvements have been made with respect to the scale of the building and the response to the context since the Pre-DA consultation. The proposal provides a built form that is compatible with other development within the immediate vicinity.

 

The top floor is sufficiently recessive to enable the form to be considered compatible with the surrounding context. A slightly deeper eave would provide a more elegant proportion to the building.

 

3 Built form

 

The proposal represents a marked improvement from the Pre-DA proposal. The bulk and scale of the proposal at the interface with the church has been reduced and the form and layout of building elements improved.

 

An apartment has been removed per floor allowing for better apartment layouts with better amenity and reduced entry corridor lengths.

 

Building depth is greater than 18 metres however each apartment has two external walls resulting in higher amenity.

 

 Building length is appropriate, given the shape of the block

 

The proportions of the building are appropriate for the scale of the street.

 

The site has two street frontages and therefore the proposal should address both appropriately. Improvements have been made that ensure the laneway frontage is addressed appropriately with larger windows than the original submission.

 

4 Density

 

The density is appropriate for the site and context.

 

5 Resource, energy and water efficiency

 

Solar access: 60% of units (9 out of the 15) All apartments are corner apartments and have good access to daylight. Given the narrow site frontage facing north and the orientation this solar access is acceptable.

 

Natural ventilation: 100% claimed. They are all corner apartments and have two frontages

 

It is noted that the BASIX Certificate indicates a performance for energy that is slightly better than what is required.

 

          6 Landscape

 

Overall the landscape is well considered and appropriate to the context Greenery once mature will soften the fence edges to the streets.

 

          7 Amenity

 

The reduction of a unit per floor provides higher amenity layouts and less space wasted on access to apartments in compliance with BCA distances from a lift. The proposed units have two external walls and therefore higher amenity due to good penetration of daylight and cross ventilation.

 

The layouts of the apartments are simple and functional.

 

The proposed units generally receive sunlight or daylight and are ventilated.

 

The units are private and provide good surveillance of the street and rear lane.

 

Storage is shown as provided within the basement and the units.

 

The number of south orientated apartments exceeds 10%; however, it is difficult to achieve a lower percentage with a small apartment floor plate and with the orientation of the site.

 

          8 Safety and security

 

The proposed units provide good surveillance of the street and the site itself. This can be improved through private entries from the street.

 

Adequate lighting should be provided to the basement car park and to the site itself – this could be conditioned as it is not appropriate to indicate this on DA plans

 

 Definition between the laneway and the site has been provided to clearly demarcate public and private space.

 

          9 Social dimensions and housing affordability

 

Adaptable apartments provided.  The mix of apartment sizes and types is appropriate for the area.

 

          10 Aesthetics

 

The proposed development provides a simple and well balanced composition of elements appropriate to the location and the adjacent heritage item.

 

There is sufficient balance between the open balustrades and solid masonry elements to break the building into smaller domestic components that also relate the scale of the adjoining church.

 

Since the proposal was originally presented at the pre-DA, significant refinement has occurred that provides for a more effective built form that appears less bulky and sits more comfortably next to the church.

 

The top floor is set back and recessive in nature. A simple suggestion for improvement would be to widen the eave overhang of the top floor to at least 1m. This would provide additional protection of the terrace, make the top floor more recessive due to the shadow cast, and provide an improved proportion given the scale of the building. An eave of this depth was indicated on the Pre-DA sketches and comment was made at that time of the desirable proportion – in recent amendments this appears to have been lost.

 

Planner’s comments – The issue of site isolation is discussed below. A lighting plan is required to be submitted (Condition 19) prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. Condition 20 requires the eaves to be a minimum 1.0 metres in width at the top storey. Subject to these conditions, the proposal is satisfactory with respect to SEPP 65.

 

Statutory Provisions

 

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979

 

This proposal is ‘Local Development’ under Part 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and requires development consent pursuant to the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan (Local Centres) 2012.

 

The Objects of the Act are:

 

(a)  to encourage:

(i)  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,

(ii)  the promotion and co-ordination of the orderly and economic use and development of land,

(iii)  the protection, provision and co-ordination of communication and utility services,

(iv)  the provision of land for public purposes,

(v)  the provision and co-ordination of community services and facilities, and

(vi)  the protection of the environment, including the protection and conservation of native animals and plants, including threatened species, populations and ecological communities, and their habitats, and

(vii)  ecologically sustainable development, and

(viii)  the provision and maintenance of affordable housing, and

(b)  to promote the sharing of the responsibility for environmental planning between the different levels of government in the State, and

(c)  to provide increased opportunity for public involvement and participation in environmental planning and assessment.

 

The proposal is consistent with the Objects of the Act in that it promotes and coordinates an orderly and economic use and development of the land which is consistent with the objectives of the zone.

 

State Environmental Planning Policies

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No.65 - Design Quality of Residential Flat Development (RFDC)

 

SEPP65 aims to improve the design quality of residential flat buildings across NSW and provides an assessment framework, the Residential Flat Design Code (RFDC), for assessing ‘good design’. 

 

Clause 50(1A) of the EPA Regulation 2000 requires the submission of a design verification statement from the building designer at lodgement of the development application. A design verification statement has been submitted by Playoust Churcher which submits the application has been designed in accordance with the design quality principles under Part 2 of SEPP 65.

 

The SEPP requires the assessment of any development application for residential flat development against 10 principles contained in Clauses 9-18 and Council is required to consider the matters contained in the publication “Residential Flat Design Code”.

 

As such, the following consideration has been given to the requirements of the SEPP and Design Code.

 

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. 

 

 

Guideline

Consistency with Guideline

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.

YES

 

 

Open Space

The area of communal open space required should generally be at least between 25% and 30%.

YES

 

 

 

The minimum private open space for each apartment at ground level is 25m2.

 

YES

 

Ground floor apartments provided with terraces in addition to landscaping. 

Planting on Structures

Medium trees (8 metres canopy diameter at maturity)

- minimum soil volume 35m³

- minimum soil depth 1 metre

- approximate soil area 6m x 6 m or equivalent

 

YES

 

The landscape plan shows a mixture of small and medium trees set amongst shrubs and ground cover. Trees are located along the boundaries and shrubs and turf confined to the areas above the basement with planting on slabs having soil depths of 600mm.

Visual Privacy

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

NO

 

The proposal is set back 3 metres from the western side boundary.  

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

 

A lift has been provided from the basement to each level of the development.

Vehicle Access

 

Generally limit the width of driveways to a maximum of six metres.

 

YES

 

No concerns are raised regarding the driveway width by Council’s engineers. 

 

Locate vehicle entries away from main pedestrian entries and on secondary frontages.

 

YES

 

The driveway entrance is located to the rear of the site from Tryon Lane with the main pedestrian entrance from Tryon Road.

PART 03

BUILDING DESIGN

Building Configuration

 

 

Apartment layout

The back of a kitchen should be no more than 8 metres from a window

YES

 

 

- 2 bedroom corner apartment 80m² + 11m² external area

- 3 bedroom apartment 124m² + 24m² external area

YES

Apartment Mix

Include a mixture of unit types for increased housing choice.

NO

 

The proposal includes: 6 x 2 bedroom and 5 x 3 bedroom units. All corner apartments.

 

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

 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.

 

YES

 

 

 

Provide ground floor apartments with access to private open space, preferably as a terrace or garden.

 

YES

 

All ground floor apartments have direct access to private open space areas which include balconies and courtyards.

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

 

Lift provides access to a maximum of 4 units.

 

Storage

In addition to kitchen cupboards and bedroom wardrobes, provide accessible storage facilities at the following rates:

 

- two-bedroom apartments 8m³

- three plus bedroom apartments 10m³

 

YES

 

 

Building Amenity

 

 

Daylight Access

Living rooms and private open spaces for at least 70 percent of apartments in a development should receive a minimum of three hours direct sunlight between 9 am and 3 pm in mid winter.

YES

 

73%

 

 

SW-SE orientation maximum 10% of units proposed.

NO

 

27%

Natural Ventilation

Building depths, which support natural ventilation typically range from 10 to 18 metres.

 

NO

Sixty percent (60%) of residential units should be naturally cross ventilated.

YES

 

100%

 

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

 

 

 

Site configuration

 

Visual privacy

 

The minimum separation distances between residential buildings required by the RFDC are as follows:

 

·     12m between habitable rooms/balconies

·     9m between habitable rooms/balconies and non-habitable rooms

·     6m between non-habitable rooms

 

The proposal is set back 6.4 metres from the adjoining dwelling to the west and does not satisfy the required separation distance. The proposal is set back 3.0 metres from the western boundary. The purpose of the control is to provide spatial separation between built form which is consistent with the scale of development. The site has a maximum height of 11.5 metres as does the adjoining site at 29 Tryon Road, being only three storeys in height.

 

The proposal contains bedrooms and kitchens with openings in the western elevation. The kitchens are located on the corner of the building and orientated so that the sinks do not face the side boundaries.  Given the use of the rooms and the proposed landscape screening along the side boundaries, the reduced spatial separation does not result in any significant loss of visual privacy to the adjoining property and does not unreasonable burden the future development of the adjoining site.

 

Building configuration

 

Apartment mix

 

The control requires a range of apartment sizes and types to be provided within the development. The proposal includes 6 x 2 bedroom units and 5 x 3 bedroom units. All apartments are corner apartments and have a range of sizes.

 

The proposal does not include provision of any 1 bedroom units. It is considered what is proposed is in response to market demands, particularly in Lindfield which has experienced a lot of multi unit developments over recent years. In recent approvals, the mixed use development at 43 Lindfield Avenue comprised 33 units consisting of 15 x 1 bedroom, 3 x 2 bedroom and 15 x 3 bedroom and the residential flat building at 15 – 17 Havilah Road comprised 40 units consisting of 10 x 1 bedroom, 24 x 2 bedroom and 6 x 3 bedroom units. Given the size of the proposed development, the absence of 1 bedroom units is not considered detrimental. Council’s Urban Design Consultant considers the proposed mix of apartment sizes and types appropriate for the area.

 

Building amenity

 

Daylight access

 

The control seeks to limit single aspect apartments with a southerly aspect (SW-SE) to a maximum of 10% of the total units proposed. The proposal results in three apartments having a southerly aspect which equates to 27% of apartments proposed. The purpose of this control is to ensure adequate daylight amenity to apartments. The proposal has been considered acceptable by Council’s Urban Design Consultant who indicates it is difficult to achieve a lower percentage with a small apartment floor plate and with the orientation of the site.

 

Natural ventilation

 

The control indicates building depths which support natural ventilation range between 10 to 18 metres. The proposed building depth is greater than 18 metres. However, the proposal has been designed so that each apartment benefits from two external walls and therefore 100% natural ventilation is provided to the entire development. The purpose for limiting building depth is to support natural ventilation, given the proposal achieves 100% natural ventilation the building length is acceptable.

 

Draft State Environmental Planning Policy No. 65 - Design Quality of Residential Flat Development

 

The draft SEPP was on exhibition from 23 September 2014 to 31 October 2014. The SEPP 2015 was gazetted on 19 June 2015 and takes effect on 17 July 2015. The development application was lodged on 28 November 2015 and the transitional arrangements of the SEPP specify that development applications lodged before 19 June 2015 are subject to the version of the SEPP in force prior to 19 June 2015. The development has been considered under SEPP 65 above.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land

 

The provisions of SEPP 55 require Council to consider the potential for a site to be contaminated. The subject site has a history of residential use and, as such, it is unlikely to contain any contamination and further investigation is not warranted in this case.

 

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

 

A BASIX certificate has been submitted with the application (Certificate No. 584774M_02 dated 23 July 2015). The proposal satisfies the SEPP requirements. (Condition 80)

 

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.

 

Local Content

 

Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan (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 objectives for the R4 High Density Residential Zone are:

 

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

·     To provide a variety of housing types within a high density residential environment.

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

·     To provide for high density residential housing close to public transport, services and employment opportunities.

 

The zone objectives for the zones in the standard instrument are generic and do not attempt to influence planning outcomes, they simply reflect the types of development that are permissible in the zone. The development is consistent with the objectives of the R4 High Density Residential Zone.

 

Development standards:

 

Development standard

Proposed

Complies

Building height:  11.5m

11.1m

YES

Minimum street frontage: 24m

24.285m

YES

Floor space ratio:  0.8:1

0.79:1

YES

Minimum allotment size: 1200m2

1338m²

YES

 

5.9 Preservation of trees or vegetation:

 

Clause 5.9 requires that a person must not ringbark, cut down, top, lop, remove, injure or wilfully destroy any tree without the authority conferred by a development consent or permit. Council’s Landscape Officer has advised that the proposed tree removal is acceptable.

 

5.10 Heritage conservation

 

The objectives of the 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.

 

The application has been considered by Council’s Heritage Advisor who considers the proposal acceptable. The proposal achieves an appropriate relationship with the adjoining heritage item and the development is considered to be a sympathetic to the character of the item. The development maintains the views and setting of the heritage item and is consistent with the provisions of Clause 5.10.

 

6.1 Earthworks

 

The objectives of the clause are as follows:

 

(a)      to ensure that earthworks for which development consent is required will not have a detrimental impact on environmental functions and processes, neighbouring uses, cultural or heritage items or features of the surrounding land,

(b)      to allow earthworks of a minor nature without requiring separate development consent.

 

The application proposes excavation for the purposes of the basement car parking. The proposed excavation is unlikely to disrupt or have any detrimental effect on the drainage patterns and soil stability in the locality. The proposal has been submitted by a geotechnical report. The excavation is to facilitate the redevelopment of the land. The proposed excavation does not result in any adverse impacts upon the amenity of adjoining properties. The proposal is considered satisfactory with respect of Clause 6.1 Earthworks.

 

 

 

6.5 Site requirements for multi dwelling housing and residential flat buildings

 

The objectives of the Clause are as follows:

 

(a)      to provide site requirements for development for the purposes of multi dwelling housing and residential flat buildings so as to provide for the orderly and economic development of residential land while maintaining the local character, and

(b)      to ensure that lot sizes and dimensions of medium and high density residential sites allow for generous landscaped areas and setbacks to ensure the amenity of adjoining properties and to support the desired future character of those areas.

 

Subclause (2) requires sites to be at least 1200m² and where the site has an area less than 1800m², a 24 metres street frontage for the erection of a residential flat building. The site has an area of 1338m² and a width of 24.285 metres. The site dimensions in meeting the minimum requirements achieves compliance with the required landscape area and setbacks to ensure the amenity of adjoining properties is not adversely affected and the proposal is consistent with the desired future character of Lindfield Town Centre.

 

Policy Provisions

 

Ku-ring-gai Development Control Plan (Local Centres) 2012

 

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

Lot 12 DP 1188210 has a frontage of 22.86 metres and does not meet the 24 metre standard

NO

A lot size less than that required by KLEP (Local Centres) 2012

Lot 12 DP 1188210 has a site area of 763.8m² and does not meet the 1200m² standard

NO

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.

9.5m basement

11.9m building

NO

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

YES

Side setback areas behind the building line are not to be used for driveways or vehicular access into the building.

Driveway centrally located and does not encroach within side setbacks

YES

Driveways must be set back a minimum of 6m from the side boundary within the street setback to allow for deep soil planting.

Proposed driveway is not located in the street setback.

YES

Rear setback 6 metres

8.1m to terrace 11.3m to building

YES

Basements must not encroach into the street, side and rear setbacks.

9.5m basement setback from front setback

NO

Ground floor terraces and courtyards must have a minimum setback of 8m from the street boundary

8m

YES

Ground floor terraces and courtyards must have a minimum setback of 4m from the side and rear boundaries

3.0m (units G02 & G03)

NO

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

 

 

 

 

 

6.4m from west

6.4m from west

 

6m

 

 

 

 

 

 

NO

NO

 

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%

YES

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

41.5%

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

 

1201-1800m2 / 1 per 350m2 of site area

 

The site area is 1339m2. A minimum of 4 trees capable with a mature height of at least 13m are required. 4 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

7B.1 – Car Parking Provision

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 not entirely located under the building footprint

NO

The basement car park must not project more than 1m above existing ground level to the floor level of the storey immediately above.

846mm

YES

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: 0.7-1 spaces

Two bedroom:1-1.25 spaces

Three bedroom:1-2 spaces

The development is required to provide minimum 16 spaces. In the basement of the development 17 resident parking spaces have been provided.

 

 

YES

Condition 34

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

3 visitor parking spaces have been provided.

YES

One visitor car space is to be provided with a tap to make provision for on-site car washing

A car washing bay has not been nominated on the plans but is required by condition.

 

YES

Condition 21

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.

Compliant space within basement that does not interfere with vehicles entering or existing

YES

7B.2 Bicycle Parking Provision

A minimum of 1 bicycle space per 5 units shall be provided within the residential car park area

6 bicycle parking area provided

 

 

YES

 

Condition 35

A minimum of 1 bicycle space per 10 units shall be provided for visitors in the visitor car park area

6 bicycle parking area provided

 

 

YES

Condition 35

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

More than 40m2 of the  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

Behind building line

YES

Shared facilities such as BBQs, shade structures, play equipment and seating are to be provided in the communal open space

Rear north-eastern corner communal open space contains bbq area

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::

- 12m2 – 2 bedroom apartment

-    15m2 – 3 bedroom or larger apartment

 

 

2 bedroom min. 15.9m2

3 bedroom min. 21.8m2

 

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.

Planter boxes used at ground floor. Fencing 1.5m height with 500mm masonry planter.

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

73%

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.

None proposed

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

Given the orientation, the northern elevation of the existing dwelling at 29 Tryon Road will maintain compliant solar access.

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

Roof overhang and awnings 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

100%

YES

At least 25% of kitchens are to be immediately adjacent to an operable window

8 / 11 = 72%

(G01, 101 and 201)

YES

Cross ventilation is not to be dependant 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

NO

The width of dual aspect apartments over 15m deep must be 4m or greater to avoid deep narrow apartment layouts

All corner apartments

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  2 and 3 bedroom apartments is proposed

        NO

Two bedroom apartments are to have a minimum floor area of 70m2

90.6m2 min.

YES

Three bedroom apartments are to have a minimum floor area of 95m2

98.5m2 min.

YES

A mix of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom apartments are to be provided on the ground level

A mix of  2 and 3 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

2 adaptable apartments have been provided

 

 

YES

Condition 28

At least 70% of apartments in the development are to be visitable

All apartments capable of being visitable.

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

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 entry path is readily visible from the street

YES

Buildings with facades over 18m long must have multiple entries.

 

16m

YES

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 entry to the building is identified by pathway and recess at the ground floor level.

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 awning.

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 and are orientated 90 degrees to the street alignment.

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.

 

The access report states pedestrian access to the development is by means of a continuous path of travel from Tryon Road

 

 

        YES

Conditions 27 and  83

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.

         

 

All common circulation areas have natural lighting and ventilation. All corridors are short in length and provide clear sight lines.

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 4 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 facades have areas of less than 81m2.

YES

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:

 

1.   The façade is recessed to an adequate depth and width to appear as distinctive bays or wings

2.   The recess is common area with landscaping which includes at least one medium tree with an 8m canopy diameter at maturity

<36m

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

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

The balconies do not 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

The site is subject to a height limit of 11.1m and the building has a height of 3 storeys

YES

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.

<0.9m

YES

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.

 

 

 

 

Retaining walls adequate setbacks 

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.

60%

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).

 

The top storey is set back on all sides

YES

The upper storeys of residential buildings are to be articulated with differentiated roof forms, maisonettes or mezzanine penthouses and the like.

 

The roof eaves should be increased. This is required by condition.

 

 

YES

Condition 20

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 have been integrated into the design of the building. No plant equipment, chimneys, vent stacks, water storage, communication devices and signage is located on the roof.

YES

Roof design must respond to solar access, for example, by using eaves and skillion roofs.

 

The eaves of the 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.

 

No lightweight pergolas, privacy screens or planters are located on the roof.

YES

7C.14 – Internal ceiling heights

The minimum ceiling height for a habitable room shall be 2.4m

2.7m min.

YES

The minimum ceiling height for a non-habitable room shall be 2.25m

2.7m 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 frosted glass balustrades.

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:

-     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.

Drying yard  proposed adjacent to eastern side boundary

YES

External air clothes drying areas must be screened from public and common open space areas.

External drying area proposed

YES

Where space is provided in common areas clothes lines are to be provided.

 

Clothes lines are not provided

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.

The proposal retains the existing front fence which has a masonry plinth and timber palisades. The proposal introduces a new gate and fills in the existing centrally pedestrian gate to match the existing fence.

YES

Fences and walls must step down and follow the natural contours of the site.

 

Fences reflect the topography of the site.

YES

Hedges and shrub planting on the front boundary are to have a maximum height of 1.2m.

 

No hedge planting on front boundary.

YES

All fencing must be designed to highlight entrances, and be compatible with buildings, letterboxes and garbage storage areas.

 

Proposal includes front pedestrian gate

YES

External finishes for fencing must be robust and graffiti resistant.

 

Proposal retains existing front fence.

N/A

 

Part 3A.1 Land Amalgamation

 

The controls require sites to be amalgamated to avoid isolating an adjoining site. Particularly, the potential redevelopment of the adjoining site in accordance with its zoning must not be compromised. Lot amalgamation is to avoid creating allotments which have a frontage less than those required by the KLEP, a site area less than those required by the KLEP and is not to result in a highly constrained site. A highly constrained site is determined to be a lot where heritage, Riparian or biodiversity values significantly reduce the development potential of the lot.

 

The adjoining site 29 Tryon Road (Lot 12 DP 1188210) is zoned R4 High Density Residential and has a frontage of 22.86 metres and a site area of 763.8m². The site presently contains a single storey dwelling house. The site does not meet the minimum allotment size of 1200m² or the minimum frontage of 24 metres to permit multi dwelling development.

 

Council’s records indicate that the lot to the north of 29 Tryon Road (Lot 11 DP 1188210) contains an aged care facility that recently underwent a $4.1 million refurbishment. It is considered unlikely, that this facility would be demolished in order to facilitate a residential flat building development and it is considered the proposal results in the site isolation of Lot 12 DP 1188210. The site is not considered to be highly constrained as per the definition above.

 

Control 6 indicates where a development proposal results in an isolated site, the applicant must demonstrate the following:

 

i)    Negotiations between the owners of the lots have commenced prior to the lodgement of the development proposal. Where a satisfactory result cannot be achieved the development proposal should include details of the negotiations, demonstrating that a reasonable offer has been made to the owner of the isolated site; and

ii)   Both the isolated site and the development site can be orderly and economically developed in accordance with the provisions of KLEP (Local Centres) 2012 and DCP, including:

-      achieving an appropriate urban form for the location, and

-      having an acceptable level of amenity.

 

The applicant has submitted a written offer to the owner of 29 Tryon Road, dated 25 October 2014. This was subsequent to a discussion undertaken on 7 October 2014. The offer was based upon an independent valuation report prepared by Blue Quadrant Pty Ltd.

 

Under Development Application DA0491/11 alterations and additions, landscaping and boundary adjustment to the existing aged care facility were approved 13 November 2011. Lot 11 and Lot 12 within DP118821 were created on 12 November 2013. Previously, the properties were two (2) allotments being Lots 1 and 2 in DP548814 and are known as 27-29 Tryon Road, Lindfield. The use of the land for an aged care facility known as “Whitehall Nursing Home” (with this use commencing in 1969) and a single detached residential dwelling (believed to be constructed prior to 1945).  

 

The development consent created a boundary adjustment which re-aligned the rear boundary of Lot 2 (29 Tryon Road). The boundary was moved approximately 3 metres in a northerly direction so as to regularise the legal title with the location of the existing boundary fencing. As an outcome, Lot 1 (27 Tryon Road) increased in size from 2,173.83m² to 2,247.2m² and Lot 2 (29 Tryon Road) decreased in size from 836.1m² to 763.88m².

 

The applicant has submitted a sketch proposal regarding the development of Lot 12 for the purposes of multi dwelling development. The concept design (Attachment 8) provides for three multi-dwellings, one storey in scale with driveway access from Tryon Road, consisting of 1 x 1 bedroom, 1 x 2 bedroom and 1 x 3 bedroom dwellings.

 

In accordance with Control 6, it is necessary for the applicant to demonstrate that the isolated site can be developed in an orderly and economic manner in accordance with the provisions of KLEP (Local Centres) 2012 and the DCP, including achieving an appropriate urban form for the location and having an acceptable level of amenity.

 

The site is zoned R4 High Density Residential under the KLEP. The minimum allotment size is 1200m² and 24 metres frontage. The future development of this site for the purposes of multi dwelling housing would be non-compliant with the development standard of Clause 6.5 (2)(a) requirements for multi dwelling housing and residential flat buildings as the site has a frontage of 22.86 metres and a site area of 763.8m². The application would need to be supported by a Clause 4.6 Exceptions to development standards variation request. The merits of the variation would be considered at the time an application is lodged.

 

The site is subject to a maximum height of 11.5 metres and a maximum FSR of 0.8:1 (GFA). The concept design provided proposes a FSR of 0.29:1, is single storey in scale, which is less than the permitted 11.5 metres. The site is capable of accommodating an addition two storeys which would increase the floor space ratio. Consideration of the concept design has been made against the provisions of Part 6 multi dwelling housing of KDCP (Local Centres).

 

Part 6 Multi Dwelling Housing

 

This Part of the DCP is divided into sections which relate to site design, access and parking and building sustainability. The table below outlines the key controls relevant for consideration of the concept design:

 

 

CONTROL

PROPOSED

COMPIANCE

PART 6A SITE DESIGN

6A.2 Building Setbacks

Front – 10m

10.3m

YES

Side – min. 3m  

3.0m

YES

Rear  -  6m

4.0m

YES

 

Control 9 allows encroachment of ground floor courtyard walls to secondary frontages

6A.3 Building Separation

3m between non habitable

6m between habitable and non habitable

3m side setback to building and 4.0m to private open space. 

YES

 

6A.4 Site coverage

35%

35%

YES

6A.5 Deep Soil Landscaping

40%

47.5%

YES

Part 6B Parking and Access

Driveways setback 3m from side boundary

Min 6m from western boundary

YES

Car parking 4.5 spaces

7 spaces provided.

YES

Part 6C Building Design and Sustainability

Part 6C.2 Private Open Space

 

 

Private Open space 25m², 4m width and directly accessible from living area

25m²

YES

Part 6 C.3 Solar Access

 

 

Each dwelling solar access for 3 hours to living area between 9 – 3pm

The orientation of 29 Tryon Road is such that the front of the property faces north. With appropriate design the site would be capable of meeting the solar access requirement.

 

YES

Part C6.11 Visual Privacy

 

 

Designed to ensure privacy

Given the provided setbacks, existing and proposed buildings adjoining the site, a floor layout is capable of being achieved which has an acceptable privacy outcome.

YES

 

Consideration of site isolation extends beyond the concept diagrams that detail how an isolated allotment maybe developed. The circumstance in which the potentially isolated allotment has come about also requires consideration.

 

The Land & Environment Court has dealt with numerous developments involving a potentially isolated allotment being created and, as a consequence, developed three planning principles that can be used to help determine the acceptability or otherwise of a potentially isolated allotment.

 

The first and most relevant of the planning principles of the Land & Environment Court was established in Melissa Grech V Auburn Council [2004] NSWLEC 40.

 

In that matter, the Court established three principles that should apply to any assessment involving a potentially isolated allotment as follows:

 

….Firstly, where a property will be isolated by a proposed development and that property cannot satisfy the minimum lot requirements then negotiations between the owners of the properties should commence at an early stage and prior to the lodgement of the development application.

 

Secondly, and where no satisfactory result is achieved from the negotiations, the development application should include details of the negotiations between the owners of the properties. These details should include offers to the owner of the isolated property. A reasonable offer, for the purposes of determining the development application and addressing the planning implications of an isolated lot, is to be based on at least one recent independent valuation and may include other reasonable expenses likely to be incurred by the owner of the isolated property in the sale of the property.

 

Thirdly, the level of negotiation and any offers made for the isolated site are matters that can be given weight in the consideration of the development application. The amount of weight will depend on the level of negotiation and whether offers are deemed reasonable or unreasonable, and relevant planning requirements and the provisions of S79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979……

 

In the case of the subject application:

 

(i)         The applicant has provided evidence that negotiations with the owner of 29 Tryon Road to acquire that property commenced in October 2014. The development application was lodged on 28 November 2014. Whilst this was not well in advance of the lodgement date of the DA, the response from the adjoining owner indicated that the property would be used in conjunction with the aged care facility.

 

It is considered that with regard to the first planning principle mentioned above that negotiation to acquire 29 Tryon Road did not technically occur early on and well before the lodgement of the subject Development Application. However, it is evident that the owner of 29 Tryon Road has considered the future development of this site, independent of 31 Tryon Road.

 

(ii)        The applicant has submitted a valuation report by Blue Quadrant Pty Ltd. The offers made are consistent with the valuation provided in the valuation report. Accordingly, it is considered, with regard to the second of the planning principles, that a reasonable and acceptable offer has been made to acquire 29 Tryon Road. 

 

(iii)       The documentation provided by the applicant demonstrates that negotiations for the purchase of 29 Tryon Road took place and that a reasonable and acceptable offer had been made. The purchase prices offered were consistent with the  valuation.

 

Nothing within the planning principle or Council’s planning controls demands that an agreement to acquire a potentially isolated allotment be reached. Importantly, such a position would confer a distinct commercial advantage to the owners of 29 Tryon Road or any other land owner that has land which allows for a higher density of development, subject to amalgamation. It would also prevent the owners of 31 Tryon Road undertaking development which is permitted within the zone at a higher density use.

 

The second of the Land & Environment Court cases that established a planning principle concerning isolated allotments was Cornerstone Property Group V Warringah Council 2004 NSWLEC 189. That case considered the instance of a potentially isolated allotment and expanded on the principle established in the Grech case. Importantly, that principle established considerations where site isolation would result as a consequence of development and that no planning controls or mechanisms for dealing with potentially isolated sites existed within the relevant consent authority’s planning controls. Both the KLEP (Local Centres) and KDCP (Local Centres) include controls for dealing with potentially isolated allotments as well as undersized allotments for multi-unit housing. The applicant has demonstrated with concept designs that an appropriate form of development could be carried out upon 29 Tryon Road.

 

The third Land & Environment Court case which dealt with the issue of an isolated allotment was Karavellas V Sutherland Shire Council 2004 NSWLEC 251. As is the case with the second planning principle, the circumstances of that case were different to that proposed in this instance, as the subject Council’s applicable planning controls compelled amalgamation, through an amalgamation strategy / plan. Such a strategy does not exist in this instance, other than minimum lot and frontage size for medium density development.

 

It is acknowledged that in that case the Court considered the matter as to what extent of any the carrying of the development on the development site would compromise the ability of the potentially isolated allotment to be developed in a manner consistent with the otherwise prevailing development controls and standards. This has been considered and demonstrated within the submitted concept for 29 Tryon Road. However, importantly this site has a distinct relationship with the adjoining aged care development and alternative development options exist in so far as this site being consolidated and becoming part of the aged care facility. It is noted that 27 and 29 Tryon Road are identified as being owned by the same company.

 

If this development application were to be approved by Council, it will result in the isolation of the adjoining property at 29 Tryon Road, Lindfield.  The applicant has made a reasonable offer to acquire this site which has been rejected. The site is zoned for the purpose of multi-unit residential development. The applicant has demonstrated, through a concept design for the adjoining property, that development can still occur, despite the site isolation. 

 

Part 7A.1 Building setbacks

 

The control requires a minimum street setback of 10 metres. The proposed basement encroaches with a 9.5 metres setback. At and above ground the building is compliant with a 11.9 metres setback. The basement encroachment is confined to a 5.8m² component of the basement, with the remainder of the basement set back a compliant 10.2 metres.

 

Control 12 permits encroachments within the required setbacks and allows for ground floor terraces and courtyards to have a minimum setback of 4 metres from the side and rear boundaries. The courtyards of apartments G02 and G03 are set back 3.0 metres from the western side boundary and do not comply with the permitted encroachment. The two terraces of G04 are set back 3.4 metres from the eastern side boundary and do not comply.

 

The objectives of the control is to ensure the built form is softened by landscaping, ensuring adequate space between sites to enable effecting landscaping and tree planting and adequate separation between buildings to alleviate amenity impacts. The proposal is acceptable for the following reasons:

 

-     the proposal achieves a compliant deep soil landscape area

-     the proposal achieves an acceptable landscape outcome for the site which includes effective landscaping and tree planting

-     the proposal does not result in any significant adverse impacts upon the amenity of adjoining properties

-     the terrace associated with G02 contains a planter box along the western elevation to provide additional landscape screening and maintain visual privacy to 29 Tryon Road

-     the rear terrace associated with G03 does not align with any habitable rooms

-     the terraces associated with G04 do not align with any openings in the adjoining properties. The windows within the western elevation of the church are frosted thereby further alleviating any privacy impacts.

 

Part 7A.2 Building separation

 

The minimum separation distances between residential buildings required by the control  are as follows:

 

·     12m between habitable rooms/balconies

·     9m between habitable rooms/balconies and non-habitable rooms

·     6m between non-habitable rooms

 

The proposal is set back 6.4 metres from the adjoining dwelling to the west and does not satisfy the required the separation distance. The proposal is setback 3.0 metres from the western boundary. The purpose of the control is to provide spatial separation between built form which is consistent with the scale of development. The site has a maximum height of 11.5 metres as does the adjoining site at 29 Tryon Road, being only three storeys.

 

The proposal contains bedrooms and kitchens, with openings in the western elevation. The kitchens are located on the corner of the building and orientated so that the sinks do not face the side boundaries.  It is considered, given the use of the rooms and the proposed landscape screening along the side boundaries the reduced spatial separation is acceptable.

 

Part 7B.1 Car parking provision

 

The control C-2 requires basement car parking to be consolidated under building footprints. The proposed basement is predominantly located beneath the building footprint however, the proposed basement does encroach within the required setbacks. The basement non compliance is acceptable on merit for the reasons discussed above under building setbacks.

 

The proposal is required to provide a car washing bay within the basement. The proposal does not show a tap but scope exists for a visitor space to be utilised as a car washing bay. Condition 21 requires a car washing bay to be provided. Subject to this, the proposal is compliant and acceptable.

 

Part C.5 Apartment depth and width

 

The purpose of this control is to facilitate natural ventilation to developments. The proposal achieves 100% natural ventilation and for the reasons discussed above, the proposal is acceptable.

 

Part C.6 Apartment mix and sizes

 

The control requires a range of apartment sizes and types to be provided within the development. Control C3 requires a mix of 1, 2 and 3 bedroom apartments. The proposal includes 6 x 2 bedroom units and 5 x 3 bedroom units. All apartments are corner apartments and have a range of size.

 

The proposal does not include provision of any 1 bedroom units. It is considered what is proposed is in response to market demands, particularly in Lindfield which has experienced a lot of multi unit developments over recent years. In recent approvals, the mixed use development at 43 Lindfield Avenue comprised 33 units consisting of 15 x 1 bedroom, 3 x 2 bedroom and 15 x 3 bedroom and the residential flat building at 15 – 17 Havilah Road comprised 40 units consisting of 10 x 1 bedroom, 24 x 2 bedroom and 6 x 3 bedroom units. Given the size of the proposed development, the absence of 1 bedroom units is not considered detrimental. The proposal is consistent with the control objectives in providing for housing choice, providing both 2 and 3 bedroom units on the ground floor, provides for increase housing choice for seniors or people with disabilities and providing for housing that caters for different household requirements now and in future. The provision of 3 bedroom units is more suited to families and those down sizing.

 

7C.13 Top storey design and roof forms

 

Council’s Urban Design Consultant has recommended the eave overhang to the top floor be widened to at least 1 metres. This would provide for additional protection of the terraces, make the top floor more recessive due to the shadow cast and provide an improved proportion given the scale of the building. Condition 20 is recommended requiring the widening of the eave.

 

Section 94 Plan

 

The development attracts a section 94 contribution of $263,629.21 which is required to be paid prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate (Condition 41).

 

Australian Standard for Demolition - Clause 92(1)(b)

 

Clause 92(1)(b) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Regulations 2000 requires the consent authority to consider the provisions of Australian Standard AS 2601-1991: The demolition of structures. The demolition of the existing structures will be carried out in accordance with a construction/demolition management plan, and this will be required to be submitted prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate. Conditions to this effect are included in the recommendation section of this report. Conditions 11 and 48.

 

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 proposal is considered to be an acceptable development which does not result in any unreasonable impacts upon adjoining properties or the streetscape. The site is suitable for the proposed development and this has been demonstrated in the above assessment.

 

Public Interest

 

The public interest is best served by the consistent application of the requirements of the relevant Environmental Planning Instruments and by Council ensuring that any adverse effects on the surrounding area and the environment are minimised. The proposal has been assessed against the relevant environmental planning instruments and is deemed to be acceptable. Accordingly, the proposal is recommended for approval. 

 

Conclusion

 

This application has been assessed under the heads of consideration of Section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and all relevant instruments and policies. The proposal is considered to be generally consistent with the relevant Council statutory and policy controls. Where strict compliance has not been achieved, the proposal has been considered with respect of the control outcomes and supported on merit.

 

The proposal is considered to be generally consistent with the relevant Council statutory and policy controls. Where strict compliance has not been achieved, the proposal has been considered with respect of the control outcomes and supported on merit. Accordingly, the application is recommended for approval.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

THAT Council as the consent authority, grant consent to Development Application No. 0506/14 for demolition of existing structures and construction of a residential flat building comprising 11 units, basement parking and landscaping works on land at 31 Tryon Road, Lindfield, 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

DA100-A Site Analysis Plan, Site Context and Street Elevation

Playoust Churcher Architects

24/11/14

DA101-A Site-Roof Plan

Playoust Churcher Architects

24/11/14

DA102-A Basement Plan

Playoust Churcher Architects

24/11/14

DA103-C Ground Floor Plan

Playoust Churcher Architects

15/7/15

DA104-C First Floor Plan

Playoust Churcher Architects

15/7/15

DA105-C Second Floor Plan

Playoust Churcher Architects

15/7/15

DA106-A Demolition and Excavation Plan

Playoust Churcher Architects

24/11/14

DA107-C Floor Space Plans, Deep Soil and Site Coverage Plans

Playoust Churcher Architects

15/7/15

DA108-A Communal, Private and Opens pace plan

Playoust Churcher Architects

24/11/14

DA109-A Adaptable, Visitable Plan and Pre & Post Adaptable Plan

Playoust Churcher Architects

24/11/14

DA200-D Elevations

Playoust Churcher Architects

15/7/15

DA201-C West Elevation and Section1

Playoust Churcher Architects

15/7/15

DA202-A Sections

Playoust Churcher Architects

24/11/14

LPDA 15-170/1-E Landscape Plan

Conzept Landscape Architects

20/07/15

LPDA 15-170/2-B Landscape Details

Conzept Landscape Architects

(04/11/14) July 2015

10955-C1.00-D Stormwater Management Plan

Waddington Consulting Pty Ltd

26.08.15

10955-C1.01-D Stormwater Details

Waddington Consulting Pty Ltd

26.08.15

C15079-C01 Revision B Driveway Layout

CAM Consulting

20/08/15

C15079-C02 Revision B Driveway Long Section

CAM Consulting

20/08/15

 

Document(s)

Dated

Colours and finishes schedule FB01 Revision A prepared by Playoust Churcher Architects

November 2014 

Basix certificate No. (584774M_02)

23 July 2015

Arboricultural Impact Assessment prepared by Urban Forestry Australia

November 2014

Statement of Heritage Impact (Job No.2206) prepared by Rapport Pty Ltd

November 2014

Access Report (AN14-203550 20141127DAR_LP) prepared by Philip Chun Access Pty Ltd

27 November 2014

Waste Management Plan prepared by B. Churcher of Playoust Churcher Architects

20 November 2014

Traffic and Parking Report (ref 14065) prepared by Terraffic Pty Ltd

27 November 2014

Geotechnical Report (Ref:27642Srpt2Rev1) prepared by JK Geotechnics

7 August 2015

Stormwater Management Plan - Revision C prepared by Waddington Consulting Pty Ltd

2 July 2015

Design Compliance Assessment (ref P14136(4)) prepared by BCA Vision

26 November 2014

Design Compliance Assessment (ref P14136(4)) prepared by BCA Vision

17 August 2015

 

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

 

2.    Inconsistency between documents

 

In the event of any inconsistency between conditions of this consent and the drawings/documents referred to above, the conditions of this consent prevail.

 

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

 

3.     Approved landscape plans

 

Landscape works shall be carried out in accordance with the following landscape plan(s), listed below and endorsed with Council’s stamp, except where amended by other conditions of this consent:

 

Plan no.

Drawn by

Dated

LPDA 15-170/1 Issue E LPDA 15-170/2 Issue B

Conzept

20/07/2015 04/11/2014

 

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

 

4.     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:

 

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 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 Tryon Road and Tryon Lane 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.

 

9.     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.

 

10.   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:

 

-   No.33 Tryon Road

-   No 22-29 Tryon Road, including the garage at the north-western boundary

 

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.

 

11.   Construction and traffic management plan

 

The applicant must submit to Council a Construction Traffic Management Plan (TMP), which is to be approved prior to the commencement of any works on site.

 

The plan is to consist of a report with Traffic Control Plans attached.

 

The report is to contain commitments which must be followed by the demolition and excavation contractor, builder, owner and subcontractors.  The TMP applies to all persons associated with demolition, excavation and construction of the development.

 

The report is to contain construction vehicle routes for approach and departure to and from all directions. All construction vehicles involved in the demolition, excavation and construction of the proposed development shall approach the site travelling along Pacific Highway, turning into Havilah Road, right into Lindfield Avenue, left into Tryon Road and right into the site (except the actual kerb and gutter construction in Tryon Lane which will require some restriction to traffic in the lane, residents would be notified of this at the time). Construction vehicles departing the site will travel along the same route until they reach Pacific Highway where vehicles can turn north or south at the signalised intersection.

 

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 a 12.5 metres long heavy rigid vehicle and if required for demolition and excavation stages a 19.0 metres long articulated vehicle are to be shown.

 

The Traffic Control Plans are to be prepared by a qualified person (red card holder).  One must be provided for each of the following stages of the works:

 

·      demolition

·      excavation

·      concrete pour

·      construction of vehicular crossing and reinstatement of footpath

·      traffic control for vehicles reversing into or out of the site.

 

Traffic controllers must be in place at the site entry and exit points to control heavy vehicle movements in order to maintain the safety of pedestrians and other road users. 

 

When a satisfactory TMP is received, a letter of approval will be issued with conditions attached.  Traffic management at the site must comply with the approved TMP as well as any conditions in the letter issued by Council.  Council’s Rangers will be patrolling the site regularly and fines will be issued for any non-compliance with this condition.

 

Reason:       To ensure that appropriate measures have been considered during all phases of the construction process in a manner that maintains the environmental amenity and ensures the ongoing safety and protection of people.

 

12.   Work zone

 

A works zone shall be provided along the site frontage in Tryon Road. The applicant must make a written application to the Ku-ring-gai Local Traffic Committee to install the work zone. Work zones are provided specifically for the set down and pick up of materials and not for the parking of private vehicles associated with the site. Work zones will generally not be approved where there is sufficient space on-site for the setting down and picking up of goods being taken to or from a construction site.

 

If the work zone is approved by the Local Traffic Committee, the applicant must obtain a written copy of the related resolution from the Ku-ring-gai Local Traffic Committee and submit this to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to commencement of any works on site.

 

Where approval of the work zone is resolved by the Committee, the necessary work zone signage shall be installed (at the cost of the applicant) and the adopted fee paid prior to commencement of any works on site. At the expiration of the work zone approval, the applicant is required to remove the work zone signs and reinstate any previous signs at their expense.

 

In the event the work 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 work 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.

 

13.   Tree protection fencing

 

To preserve the following tree/s, no work shall commence until the area beneath their canopy is fenced off at the specified radius from the trunk/s to prevent any activities, storage or the disposal of materials within the fenced area.  The fence/s shall be maintained intact until the completion of all demolition/building work on site.

 

 

Tree/Location

Radius from trunk

T2 Fagus sylvatica ‘purpureum’ (Purple Copper Beech) Adjacent to Tryon Rd site frontage

Front boundary, 5.0m elsewhere

T3 Parrotia persica (Persian Ironwood) Adjacent to western site corner

Front boundary, 5.0m elsewhere

T8 Lophostemon confertus (Brush Box) Tryon Rd nature strip

Top of kerb, edge of path, 8.0m elsewhere

 

Reason:         To protect existing trees during the construction phase.

 

14.   Tree protective fencing type galvanised mesh

 

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

 

15.   Tree protection signage

 

Prior to works commencing, tree protection signage is to be attached to each tree protection zone, displayed in a prominent position and the sign repeated at 10 metres intervals or closer where the fence changes direction.  Each sign shall contain in a clearly legible form, the following information:

 

Tree protection zone.

 

-     this fence has been installed to prevent damage to the trees and their growing environment both above and below ground and access is restricted

-     any encroachment not previously approved within the tree protection zone shall be the subject of an arborist's report

-     the arborist's report shall provide proof that no other alternative is available

-     the Arborist's report shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority for further consultation with Council

-     the name, address, and telephone number of the developer

 

Reason:         To protect existing trees during the construction phase.

 

16.   Tree protection mulching

 

Prior to works commencing and throughout construction, the area of the tree protection zone is to be mulched to a depth of 100mm with composted organic material being 75% Eucalyptus leaf litter and 25% wood.

 

Reason:         To protect existing trees during the construction phase.

 

17.   Tree 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.

 

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 Environment Protection Authority 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, commercial premises 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 surrounding occupants 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 and commercial occupants during the construction process.

 

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

 

19.   Lighting plan

 

A lighting plan demonstrating clear pedestrian access for the basement and ground floor shall be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

Reason:         To ensure safe access throughout the site.

 

20.   Eave overhang

 

The eave overhang of the top storey roof is to be widen to have a minimum of 1.0 metres depth and maximum depth of 1.5 metres from the external wall of the top storey. Amended plans and specifications are to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

Reason:         To improve the proportion and scale of the building.

 

21.   Car washing bay

 

A car wash bay is required to be provided within the basement. The visitor/temporary service parking space shown on drawing DA102-A prepared by Playoust Churcher and dated 24/11/14 shall be provided with a tap and associated drainage and identified as the car wash bay within the development. Amended plans and specifications are to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

 

Reason:         To provide a car wash bay for occupants.

 

22.   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.

 

23.   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.

 

24.   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.

 

25.   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.

 

26.   External service pipes and the like prohibited

 

Proposed water pipes, waste pipes, stack work, duct work, mechanical ventilation plant and the like must be located within the building.  Details confirming compliance with this condition must be shown on construction certificate plans and detailed with construction certificate specifications.  Required external vents or vent pipes on the roof or above the eaves must be shown on construction certificate plans and detailed with construction certificate specifications.  External vents or roof vent pipes must not be visible from any place unless detailed upon development consent plans.  Where there is any proposal to fit external service pipes or the like this must be detailed in an amended development (S96) application and submitted to Council for determination.

 

Vent pipes required by Sydney Water must not be placed on the front elevation of the building or front roof elevation.  The applicant, owner and builder must protect the appearance of the building from the public place and the appearance of the streetscape by elimination of all external services excluding vent pipes required by Sydney Water and those detailed upon development consent plans.

 

Reason:         To protect the streetscape and the integrity of the approved development.

 

27.   Access for people with disabilities (residential)

 

Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that access for people with disabilities to and from and between the public domain, residential units and all common open space areas is provided. Consideration must be given to the means of dignified and equitable access.

 

Compliant access provisions for people with disabilities shall be clearly shown on the  plans submitted with the Construction Certificate.  All details shall be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate. All details shall be prepared in consideration of the Disability Discrimination Act, and the relevant provisions of AS1428.1, AS1428.2, AS1428.4 and AS 1735.12.

 

Reason:         To ensure the provision of equitable and dignified access for all people in accordance with disability discrimination legislation and relevant Australian Standards.

 

28.   Adaptable units

 

Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the nominated adaptable units within the development application, [G03 and 103], are designed as adaptable housing in accordance with the provisions of Australian Standard AS4299-1995: Adaptable Housing.

 

Note:              Evidence from an appropriately qualified professional demonstrating compliance with this control is to be submitted to and approved by the Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

Reason:          Disabled access & amenity.

 

29.   Noise from plant in residential zone

 

Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate an acoustic design report shall be prepared by an appropriately qualified acoustic consultant identifying all mechanical ventilation equipment and other noise generating plant including, but not limited to car park and garbage room exhaust, roller shutter doors, air conditioners and lifts proposed as part of the development. The report shall provide acoustic design detailing and recommendations to address any potential noise impacts to ensure 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 (LA90, 15 min) level during the day when measured at the nearest adjoining property boundary and shall not be audible within a habitable room in any residential premises between the hours of 10.00pm and 7.00am. 

 

Reason:         To comply with best practice standards for residential acoustic amenity.

 

30.   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.

 

31.   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.

 

32.   Basement car parking details

 

Prior to issue of the Construction Certificate, certified parking layout plan(s) to scale showing all aspects of the vehicle access and accommodation arrangements must be submitted to and approved by the Certifying Authority. A qualified civil/traffic engineer must review the proposed vehicle access and accommodation layout and provide written certification on the plans that:

 

-     all parking space dimensions, driveway and aisle widths, driveway grades, transitions, circulation ramps, blind aisle situations and other trafficked areas comply with Australian Standard 2890.1 - 2004 “Off-street car parking”

-     a clear height clearance of 2.6 metres (Volume C Part 3.4 of the 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

-     the vehicle access and accommodation arrangements are to be constructed and marked in accordance with the certified plans

 

Reason:         To ensure that parking spaces are in accordance with the approved development.

 

33.   Vehicular access and garaging

 

Driveways and vehicular access ramps must be designed not to scrape the underside of cars. In all respects, the proposed vehicle access and accommodation arrangements must be designed and constructed to comply with Australian Standard 2890.1 - 2004 “Off-Street car parking”. Details are to be provided to and approved by the Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate.

 

Reason:         To ensure that parking spaces are in accordance with the approved development.

 

34.   Car parking allocation

 

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

 

Resident car spaces

16

Visitor spaces

3

Total spaces

19

 

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.

 

35.   Number of bicycle spaces

 

The basement car park shall be adapted to provide five (5) bicycle spaces in accordance with 7B.2 Bicycle Parking Provision of Development Control Plan (Local Centres) 2013. 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.

 

36.   Design of works in public road (Roads Act approval)

 

Prior to issue of the Construction Certificate, the Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that  engineering plans and specifications prepared by a qualified consulting engineer have been approved by Council’s Development Engineer. The plans to be assessed must be to a detail suitable for construction issue purposes and must detail the following infrastructure works required in Tryon Lane:

 

-   Detailed design of the road shoulder and kerb and gutter

 

Development consent does not give approval to these works in the road reserve.  The applicant must obtain a separate approval under sections 138 and 139 of The Roads Act 1993 for the works in the road reserve required as part of the development. The Construction Certificate must not be issued, and these works must not proceed until Council has issued a formal written approval under the Roads Act 1993.

 

The required plans and specifications are to be designed in accordance with the General Specification for the Construction of Road and Drainage Works in Ku-ring-gai Council, dated November 2004. The drawings must detail existing utility services and trees affected by the works, erosion control requirements and traffic management requirements during the course of works.  Survey must be undertaken as required. Traffic management is to be certified on the drawings as being in accordance with the documents SAA HB81.1 - 1996 - Field Guide for Traffic Control at Works on Roads - Part 1 and RTA Traffic Control at Work Sites (1998). Construction of the works must proceed only in accordance with any conditions attached to the Roads Act approval issued by Council.

 

A minimum of three (3) weeks will be required for Council to assess the Roads Act application. Early submission of the Roads Act application is recommended to avoid delays in obtaining a Construction Certificate. An engineering assessment and inspection fee (set out in Council’s adopted fees and charges) is payable and Council will withhold any consent and approved plans until full payment of the correct fees. Plans and specifications must be marked to the attention of Council’s Development Engineers. In addition, a copy of this condition must be provided, together with a covering letter stating the full address of the property and the accompanying DA number.

 

Reason:         To ensure that the plans are suitable for construction purposes.

 

37.   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.

 

38.   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.

 

39.   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):

 

40.   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.

 

41.   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

$137,527.59

Local recreation and cultural facilities;  Local social facilities

$20,695.50

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

$24,151.69

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

$81,254.43

Total:

$263,629.21

 

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:

 

42.   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.

 

43.   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.

 

44.   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 onthe spot fines being issued.

 

Reason:          To ensure reasonable standards of amenity for occupants of neighbouring properties.

 

45.   Vibration

 

Vibration emitted from activities associated with the demolition, excavation, construction and fit-out of buildings and associated infrastructure shall satisfy the values referenced in Table 2.2 of the Environment Protection Authority Assessing Vibration - a Technical Guideline.

 

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

 

46.   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.

 

47.   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.

 

48.   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.

 

49.   Construction noise

 

During excavation, demolition and construction phases, noise generated from the site shall be controlled in accordance with best practice objectives of AS 2436-2010 and NSW Environment Protection Authority Interim Construction Noise Guidelines and the recommendations of the approved noise and vibration management plan.

 

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

 

50.   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.

 

51.   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.

 

52.   Post-construction dilapidation report

 

The applicant shall engage a suitably qualified person to prepare a post construction dilapidation report at the completion of the construction works. This report is to ascertain whether the construction works created any structural damage to adjoining buildings, infrastructure and roads. The report is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority. In ascertaining whether adverse structural damage has occurred to adjoining buildings, infrastructure and roads, the Principal Certifying Authority must:

 

-     compare the post-construction dilapidation report with the pre-construction dilapidation report

-     have written confirmation from the relevant authority that there is no adverse structural damage to their infrastructure and roads.

 

A copy of this report is to be forwarded to Council at the completion of the construction works.

 

Reason:         Management of records.

 

53.   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 Assessment prepared by JK Geotechnics Ref. 27642Srpt2 Rev 1 dated 7 August 2015. 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.

 

54.   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.

 

55.   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.

 

56.   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.

 

57.   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.

 

58.   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 building materials.  All material to be recycled must be kept in good order:

 

Interior components of the building such as doors, windows, fireplace surrounds timber mouldings and decorative elements that can be reasonably salvaged such as skirtings, architraves, balustrades, stairs and fittings.

 

Reason:         To facilitate recycling of materials.

 

59.   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.

 

60.   Maintenance period for works in public road

 

A maintenance period of six (6) months applies to all work in the public road reserve carried out by the applicant - after the works have been completed to the satisfaction of Ku-ring-gai Council. In that maintenance period, the applicant shall be liable for any section of the public infrastructure work which fails to perform in the designed manner, or as would reasonably be expected under the operating conditions. The maintenance period shall commence once the applicant receives a formal letter from Council stating that the works involving public infrastructure have been completed satisfactorily.

 

Reason:         To protect public infrastructure.

 

61.   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.

 

62.   Road repairs necessitated by excavation and construction works

 

It is highly likely that damage will be caused to the roadway at or near the subject site as a result of the construction (or demolition or excavation) works.  The applicant, owner and builder (and demolition or excavation contractor as appropriate) will be held responsible for repair of such damage, regardless of the Infrastructure Restorations Fee paid (this fee is to cover wear and tear on Council's wider road network due to heavy vehicle traffic, not actual major damage). 

 

Section 102(1) of the Roads Act states “A person who causes damage to a public road is liable to pay to the appropriate roads authority the cost incurred by that authority in making good the damage.”

 

Council will notify when road repairs are needed, and if they are not carried out within 48 hours, then Council will proceed with the repairs, and will invoice the applicant, owner and relevant contractor for the balance.

 

Reason:         To protect public infrastructure.

 

63.   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.

 

64.   Erosion control

 

Temporary sediment and erosion control and measures are to be installed prior to the commencement of any works on the site. These measures must be maintained in working order during construction works up to completion. All sediment traps must be cleared on a regular basis and after each major storm and/or as directed by the Principal Certifying Authority and Council officers.

 

Reason:         To protect the environment from erosion and sedimentation.

 

65.   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.

 

66.   Arborist’s report

 

The tree/s to be retained shall be inspected, monitored and treated by a qualified Arborist during and after completion of development works to ensure their long term survival.  Regular inspections and documentation from the Arborist to the Principal Certifying Authority are required at the following times or phases of work:

 

Tree/Location

Time of inspection

T2 Fagus sylvatica ‘purpureum’ (Purple Copper Beech) Adjacent to Tryon Rd site frontage

* Immediately prior to the commencement of ANY works on site. * Certification of correct installation of tree protection measures as per the consent conditions. * At four monthly intervals during construction * At the completion of all works on site.

T3 Parrotia persica (Persian Ironwood) Adjacent to western site corner

 

T8 Lophostemon confertus (Brush Box) Tryon Rd nature strip

 

 

Reason:         To ensure protection of existing trees.

 

67.   Treatment of tree roots

 

If tree roots are severed for the purposes of constructing the approved works, they shall be cut cleanly by hand, by an experienced AQF3 Arborist/Horticulturist. All pruning works shall be undertaken as specified in Australian Standard 4373-2007 - Pruning of Amenity Trees.

 

Reason:         To protect existing trees.

 

68.   Cutting of tree roots

 

No tree roots of 30mm or greater in diameter located within the specified radius of the trunk/s of the following tree/s shall be severed or injured in the process of any works during the construction period.  All pruning works shall be undertaken as specified in Australian Standard 4373-2007 - Pruning of Amenity Trees:

 

Tree/Location

Radius from trunk

T2 Fagus sylvatica ‘purpureum’ (Purple Copper Beech) Adjacent to Tryon Rd site frontage

5.0m

T3 Parrotia persica (Persian Ironwood) Adjacent to western site corner

5.0m

T8 Lophostemon confertus (Brush Box) Tryon Rd nature strip

10.0m

 

Reason:         To protect existing trees.

 

69.   Approved tree works

 

Approval is given for the following works to be undertaken to trees on the site:

 

Tree/Location

Approved tree works

Cedrus atlantica (Atlantic Cedar) Front garden

Removal

T5 - T7 Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) Tryon Rd nature strip

Removal

 

Removal or pruning of any other tree on the site is not approved, excluding species exempt under Council’s Tree Preservation policies.

 

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

 

70.   Hand excavation

 

All excavation within the specified radius of the trunk/s of the following tree/s shall be hand dug:

 

Tree/Location

Radius from trunk

T2 Fagus sylvatica ‘purpureum’ (Purple Copper Beech) Adjacent to Tryon Rd site frontage

5.0m

T3 Parrotia persica (Persian Ironwood) Adjacent to western site corner

5.0m

T8 Lophostemon confertus (Brush Box) Tryon Rd nature strip

10.0m

 

Reason:         To protect existing trees.

 

71.   Thrust boring

 

Excavation for the installation of any services within the specified radius of the trunk/s of the following tree/s shall utilise the thrust boring method.  Thrust boring shall be carried out at least 600mm beneath natural ground level to minimise damage to tree/s root system:

 

Tree/Location

Radius from trunk

T2 Fagus sylvatica ‘purpureum’ (Purple Copper Beech) Adjacent to Tryon Rd site frontage

5.0m

T3 Parrotia persica (Persian Ironwood) Adjacent to western site corner

5.0m

T8 Lophostemon confertus (Brush Box) Tryon Rd nature strip

8.0m

 

Reason:         To protect existing trees.

 

72.   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.

 

73.   Tree planting on nature strip

 

The following tree species shall be planted, at no cost to Council, in the nature strip fronting the property along (enter street).  The tree/s used shall be a minimum 25 litres container size specimen/s:

 

Tree/Species

Quantity

Location

Lophostemon confertus (Brush Box)

1

Tryon Rd nature strip to continue avenue planting

 

Reason:          To provide appropriate landscaping within the streetscape.

 

74.   Tree removal on nature strip

 

Following removal of T5-T7 Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) from Council's nature strip, the nature strip shall be rehabilitated to the satisfaction of Council’s Landscape Assessment Officer at no cost to Council.

 

Reason:         To protect the streetscape.

 

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.   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.

 

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.

 

 

Conditions to be satisfied prior to the issue of an Occupation Certificate:

 

79.   Easement for waste collection

 

Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, an easement for waste collection is to be created under Section 88B of the Conveyancing Act 1919. This is to permit legal access for Council, Council’s contractors and their vehicles over the subject property for the purpose of collecting waste from the property.  The terms of the easement are to be generally in accordance with Council’s draft terms for an easement for waste collection and shall be to the satisfaction of Council’s Development Engineer.

 

Reason:         To permit legal access for Council, Council’s contractors and their vehicles over the subject site for waste collection.

 

80.   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. 584774M_02 and dated 23 July 2015 have been complied with.

 

Reason:         Statutory requirement.

 

81.   Mechanical ventilation

 

Following completion, installation and testing of all the mechanical ventilation systems and other noise generating plant, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied of the following prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate:

 

1.       The installation and performance of the mechanical ventilation systems complies with:

 

-     The Building Code of Australia

-     Australian Standard AS1668

-     Australian Standard AS3666 where applicable

 

2.       The operation of the mechanical ventilation systems and other noise generating plant in isolation or in association with other equipment will not be audible within a habitable room in any residential premises between the hours of 10.00pm and 7.00am. The operation of the equipment outside these restricted hours shall emit a noise level of not greater than 5dB(A) above background when measured at the nearest adjoining residential boundary. The background (LA90, 15 min) level is to be determined without the source noise present.

 

Note:              Written confirmation from an acoustic engineer that the development achieves the above requirements is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

 

Reason:         To protect the amenity of surrounding properties.

 

82.   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.

 

83.   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.

 

84.   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 Council’s Local Centres DCP Volume C Part4R.9). 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.

 

85.   Provision of copy of OSD designs if Council is not the PCA

 

Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the following must be provided to Council’s Development Engineer:

 

-     A copy of the approved Construction Certificate stormwater detention/retention design for the site

-     A copy of any works-as-executed drawings required by this consent

-     The Engineer’s certification of the as-built system.

 

Reason:         For Council to maintain its database of as-constructed on-site stormwater detention systems.

 

86.   Certification of drainage works

 

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

 

-     the stormwater drainage works have been satisfactorily completed in accordance with the approved Construction Certificate drainage plans

-     the minimum retention and on-site detention storage volume requirements of BASIX and Council’s Local Centres DCP Volume C Part 4B.5 respectively, have been achieved

-     retained water is connected and available for use

-     basement and subsoil areas are able to drain via a pump/sump system installed in accordance with AS3500.3 and Council’s Local Centres DCP Volume C Part 4R.6

-     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.

 

87.   WAE plans for stormwater management and disposal

 

Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, a registered surveyor must provide a works as executed survey of the completed stormwater drainage and management systems. The survey must be submitted to and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate. The survey must indicate:

 

-     as built (reduced) surface and invert levels for all drainage pits

-     gradients of drainage lines, materials and dimensions

-     as built (reduced) level(s) at the approved point of discharge to the public drainage system

-     as built location and internal dimensions of all detention and retention structures on  the property (in plan view) and horizontal distances to nearest adjacent boundaries and structures on site

-     the achieved storage volumes of the installed retention and detention storages and derivative calculations

-     as built locations of all access pits and grates in the detention and retention system(s), including dimensions:

·     the size of the orifice or control fitted to any on-site detention system

·     dimensions of the discharge control pit and access grates

·     the maximum depth of storage possible over the outlet control

·     top water levels of storage areas and indicative RL’s through the overland flow path in the event of blockage of the on-site detention system

 

The works as executed plan(s) must show the as built details above in comparison to those shown on the drainage plans approved with the Construction Certificate prior to commencement of works. All relevant levels and details indicated must be marked in red on a copy of the Principal Certifying Authority stamped construction certificate stormwater plans.

 

Reason:         To protect the environment.

 

88.   Basement pump-out maintenance

 

Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that a maintenance regime has been prepared for the basement stormwater pump-out system.

 

Note:              A maintenance regime specifying that the system is to be regularly inspected     and checked by qualified practitioners is to be prepared by a suitable qualified professional and provided to the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

Reason:         To protect the environment.

 

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 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 Council’s Local Centres DCP Volume C Part 4R.9). 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.   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.

 

91.   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" and the Seniors Living State Environment Planning Policy 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”,

-    The Seniors Living SEPP  (as last amended) for accessible parking spaces,

-    2.6 metres height clearance for waste collection trucks (refer DCP 40) 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.

 

92.   Reinstatement of redundant crossings and completion of infrastructure works

 

Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority must be satisfied that he or she has received a signed inspection form from Council which states that the following works in the road reserve have been completed:

 

-     new concrete driveway crossing in accordance with levels and specifications issued by Council

-     removal of all redundant driveway crossings and kerb laybacks (or sections thereof) and reinstatement of these areas to footpath, turfed verge and upright kerb and gutter (reinstatement works to match surrounding adjacent infrastructure with respect to integration of levels and materials)

-     full repair and resealing of any road surface damaged during construction

-     full replacement of damaged sections of grass verge to match existing

 

This inspection may not be carried out by the Private Certifier because restoration of Council property outside the boundary of the site is not a matter listed in Clause 161 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

 

All works must be completed in accordance with the General Specification for the Construction of Road and Drainage Works in Ku-ring-gai Council, dated November 2004. The Occupation Certificate must not be issued until all damaged public infrastructure caused as a result of construction works on the subject site (including damage caused by, but not limited to, delivery vehicles, waste collection, contractors, sub-contractors, concrete vehicles) is fully repaired to the satisfaction of Council. Repair works shall be at no cost to Council.

 

Reason:         To protect the streetscape.

 

93.   Infrastructure repair

 

Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority must be satisfied that any damaged public infrastructure caused as a result of construction works (including damage caused by, but not limited to, delivery vehicles, waste collection, contractors, sub-contractors, concrete vehicles) is fully repaired to the satisfaction of Council Development Engineer and at no cost to Council.

 

Reason:         To protect public infrastructure.

 

94.   Mechanical ventilation

 

Prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that all mechanical ventilation systems are installed in accordance with Part F4.5 of the Building Code of Australia and comply with Australian Standards AS1668.2 and AS3666 Microbial Control of Air Handling and Water Systems of Building.

 

Reason:        To ensure adequate levels of health and amenity to the occupants of the building.

 

95.   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:

 

96.   Outdoor lighting

 

At all times for the life of the approved development, all outdoor lighting shall not detrimentally impact upon the amenity of other premises and adjacent dwellings and shall comply with, where relevant, AS/NZ1158.3: 2005 Pedestrian Area (Category P) Lighting and AS4282: 1997 Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting.

 

Reason:         To protect the amenity of surrounding properties.

 

97.   No door restricting internal waste collection in basement

 

At all times, the basement garbage storage and collection area is to be accessible by Council’s Waste Collection Services. No doors, grilles, gates or other devices shall be provided in any location which would prevent this service. Where a gate, door or the like is to be erected, unimpeded access to the garbage collection point is to be provided by other means through written agreement with Council’s Waste Collection Services.

 

Reason:         To facilitate access to the garbage collection point.

 

98.   Noise control - plant and machinery

 

All noise generating equipment associated with mechanical ventilation systems, plant and machinery shall be located and/or soundproofed so the equipment is not audible within a habitable room in any residential premises between the hours of 10.00pm and 7am. The operation of the equipment outside these restricted hours shall emit a noise level of not greater than 5dB(A) above the background when measured at the nearest adjoining boundary. The background (LA90, 15 min) level is to be determined without the source noise present. 

 

Reason:         To protect the amenity of surrounding residents.

 

99.   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.

 

100. Annual Fire Safety Statement

 

Each 12 months after the installation of essential fire or other safety measures, the owner of a building must cause the Council to be given an Annual Fire Safety Statement for the building. In addition a copy of the statement must be given to the NSW Fire Commissioner and a copy displayed prominently in the building.

 

Reason:        To ensure statutory maintenance of essential fire safety measures.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Kimberley Kavwenje

Executive Assessment Officer

 

 

 

 

Shaun Garland

Team Leader Development Assessment South

 

 

 

 

Corrie Swanepoel

Manager Development Assessment Services

 

 

 

 

Michael Miocic

Director Development & Regulation

 

 

Attachments:

A1View

Location Sketch

 

2015/225870

 

A2View

Zoning Extract

 

2015/225867

 

A3View

Survey

 

2014/301836

 

A4View

Amended Architectural Plans

 

2015/197991

 

A5View

Basement plan

 

2014/302061

 

A6View

Site and roof plan

 

2014/302060

 

A7View

Landscape plans

 

2015/197948

 

A8View

Concept plans for 29 Tryon Road, Lindfield

 

2014/301774

  


APPENDIX No: 1 - Location Sketch

 

Item No: GB.7

 


APPENDIX No: 2 - Zoning Extract

 

Item No: GB.7

 


APPENDIX No: 3 - Survey

 

Item No: GB.7

 


APPENDIX No: 4 - Amended Architectural Plans

 

Item No: GB.7

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 5 - Basement plan

 

Item No: GB.7

 


APPENDIX No: 6 - Site and roof plan

 

Item No: GB.7

 


APPENDIX No: 7 - Landscape plans

 

Item No: GB.7

 


 


APPENDIX No: 8 - Concept plans for 29 Tryon Road, Lindfield

 

Item No: GB.7

 


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 8 September 2015

GB.8 / 473

 

 

Item GB.8

DA0078/15

 

17 August 2015

 

 

development application

 

 

Summary Sheet

 

Report title:

49-51 Boomerang Street, Turramurra - Torrens Title subdivision of one lot into two lots.

ITEM/AGENDA NO:

GB.8

 

 

Application No:

DA0078/15

Property Details:

49-51 Boomerang Street, Turramurra

Lot & DP No: Lot 1 DP 20144        

Site area (m2): 2,288m2         

Zoning: Residential 2(c)

Ward:

Wahroonga

Proposal/Purpose:

Torrens title subdivision of one lot into two lots

 

Type of Consent:

Local

Applicant:

DL Long and JC Long

C/-Vaughan Milligan Development Consultants P/L

Owner:

DL Long and JC Long

Date Lodged:

17 March 2015

Recommendation:

Approval

 

 

  

 


Purpose of Report

 

The purpose of this report is for full Council to determine DA0078/15 as the proposed development is a two lot Torrens title subdivision where the land contains endangered ecological species (Blue Gum High Forest).

 

integrated planning and reporting

 

PLACES, SPACES & INFRASTRUCTURE

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

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

Applications are assessed in accordance with State and local plans

Assessments are of a high quality, accurate and consider all relevant legislative requirements

 

 

Executive Summary

 

Issues

N/A

Submissions

None

Land & Environment Court

N/A

 

Recommendation

Approval

 

 

LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS:

 

 

Zoning at lodgement

Residential 2(c) (current zoning: R2)

Permissible under

KPSO

Relevant legislation

SEPP 55

SREP 20 – Hawkesbury Nepean River

KPSO

Draft KLEP 2013

Section 94 – Development Contribution Plan

DCP 55 Notification

Integrated Development

 

No

 

History

 

Site

 

The site has been historically used for residential purposes. The site was previously zoned “Residential 2(c)” under the provisions of the Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance (KPSO). On 2 April 2015, Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 was gazetted, rezoning the site to “R2 – Low Density Residential”.

 

Pre-DA

 

There was no Pre DA for this application.

 

DA History

 

17 March 2015

The Development Application was lodged.

 

 

25 March 2015

The Development Application was notified to owners of surrounding properties for 14 days.

 

 

13 May 2015

A letter was sent to the applicant requesting additional information regarding:

-driveway crossover

-tree impacts

 

 

3   June 2015

A further assessment letter was issued to the applicant relating to:

-biodiversity significance

 

 

5 June 2015

Amended plans and additional information was received from the applicant.

 

 

9 July 2015

Council requested additional information regarding:

-Sewer plan

 

 

4 August 2015

The applicant submitted the requested sewer plan.

 

 

 

The Site

 

Site description

 

Visual character study category:

1920-1945

Easements/rights of way:

Yes – drainage (along rear boundary)

Heritage item:

No

Heritage conservation area:

No

In the vicinity of a heritage item:

No

Bush fire prone land:

No

Endangered species:

Yes – Blue Gum High Forest (BGHF)

Urban bushland:

No

Contaminated land:

No

 

The site is identified as Lot 1 within Deposited Plan 20144 and is referred to as No. 49-51 Boomerang Street, Turramurra. The site is located on the north-eastern corner of Boomerang Street and Turramurra Avenue. It is regular in shape and has a total area of 2288m2, with a frontage of approximately 26m to Boomerang Street and a depth of 84 to 90.5m. The site falls gradually to the north-west corner of the site, with a total cross fall of approximately 3.5m.

 

The site currently contains a brick dwelling house and attached garage. The site contains a number of trees, including species composition characteristic of the Blue Gum High Forest (BGHF) plant community.

 

Surrounding development

 

The predominant character of the surrounding development is of one and two storey dwellings on large landscaped allotments. Adjoining the site to the north and east are two separate allotments containing single residential dwellings and landscaping.

 

The Proposal

 

The applicant seeks development consent to:

 

·     Subdivide the site into two Torrens title lots, being:

Lot 1 – 1077m2

Lot 2 – 1211m2

·     Subdivision work including new driveway crossing and sewer main extension

·     Remove 2 trees from within the site

·     The existing dwelling on the proposed Lot 1 will remain

 

Consultation

 

Community

 

In accordance with the notification requirements of Ku-ring-gai Council’s Notification Development Control Plan 55, owners of surrounding properties were given notice of the application. No submissions were received.

 

Within Council

 

Landscaping

 

Council’s Landscape and Tree Assessment Officer commented on the proposal as follows:

 

“Tree impacts

 

Two trees are proposed to be removed to accommodate the proposed vehicular crossover from Turramurra Ave, being T3 Pittosporum undulatum (Native Daphne) and T38 Callistemon salignus (Willow Bottlebrush). The removal of the two trees is accepted.

 

The proposed dwelling footprint encroaches within the TPZ of T29 Eucalyptus saligna (Sydney Blue Gum) which is identified as being of biodiversity significance within KLEP2015 mapping. An amended arboricultural assessment has identified the potential building encroachment based from the indicative building footprint as being less than 10% and therefore considered minor when assessed agfainst AS4970-2009. T29 has been identified by the arborist as having low to moderate significance, however the species is consistent with the critically endangered Blue Gum High Forest plant community and T29 has been mapped and identified as being part of the BGHF plant community. Its significance therefore is considered to be higher than that assessed by the arborist. The defects identified by the arborist as a result of previous storm damage are noted. Further structural testing will be necessary (as per the arborist’s recommendations).

 

Landscape plan/tree replenishment

 

Not required for subdivision.

 

Stormwater plan

 

The site drains to Turramurra Ave adjacent to the building footprint.

 

BASIX

 

Not required.

 

Driveway crossover location

 

The location of the driveway crossover is acceptable on landscape grounds.

 

Proposed dwelling footprint (Lot 2)

 

There is a high number of BGHF trees located on and adjacent to the site, that influence the development envelope on site, however, the applicant has demonstrated (Drawing 12710 subdivision detail 11/12/14) that a viable building footprint could be accommodated without adversely affecting the BGHF trees.

 

Conclusion

 

The application is acceptable on landscape grounds subject to conditions”.

 

Engineering

 

Council’s Development Engineer commented on the proposal as follows:

 

“The applicant has submitted amended plans showing works required to provide vehicular access to the new lot.  The plans are satisfactory and may be stamped and listed in Condition 1.  Approval under the Roads Act is required for the driveway crossing and lowering of the footpath. 

 

There does not seem to be a need for a Construction Certificate, since the only works required for the issue of the Subdivision Certificate are the construction of the driveway crossing and a sewer main extension. 

 

The recommended conditions allow for the driveway plans to be approved by Council’s Director Operations prior to the commencement of the works and for the works to be completed prior to issue of the Subdivision Certificate. 

 

There are no engineering objections to the proposed subdivision”.

 

Ecology

 

Council’s Ecological Assessment Officer commented on the proposal as follows:

 

During the site inspection the vegetation was inspected to determine the presence/ absence of native plant communities. The vegetation onsite was determined to be representative of Blue Gum High Forest (BGHF) listed as a Critically Endangered Ecological Community (CEEC) under the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995.  Native ground covers were sparse to absent due to past clearing and the establishment of exotic lawn

 

Environmental controls

 

The native vegetation within the rear of the site has been mapped as “biodiversity significance” under the KLEP 2014.

 

Impacts of the proposal

The proposal does not propose the removal of any trees that comprise part of the onsite Blue Gum High Forest or from the area of land mapped as “biodiversity significance”.

 

Conclusion

 

The application is acceptable on ecological grounds, no ecological conditions are warranted.

 

Outside Council

 

The application did not require any external referrals.

 

Statutory Provisions

 

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act)

 

The proposal is “Local Development” under Part 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 (EP&A Act) and requires development consent.

 

The provisions of Section 79C(1) of the EP&A Act determine the matters for consideration in assessing a development application as stated below:

 

(a)  The provisions of:

(i)         any environmental planning instrument, and

(ii)        any proposed instrument that is our has been the subject of public consultation under this Act and that has been notified to the consent authority (unless the Director General has notified the consent authority that the making of the proposed instrument has been deferred indefinitely or has not been approved), and

(iii)       any development control plan; and

(iv)       any planning agreement that has been entered into under section 93F, or any drat planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under section 93F, and 

(v)        the regulation s(to the extent that they prescribe matters for the purposes of this paragraph), and

(vi)       any coastal zone management plan (within the meaning of the Coastal Protection Act 1979), that apply to the land to which the development application relates.

(b)  the likely impacts of that development, including environmental impacts on both the natural and built environments, and social and economic impact in the locality,

(c)  the suitability of the site for the development,

(d)  any submissions made in accordance with this Act or the regulations,

(e)  the public interest.

 

The relevant provisions of environmental planning instruments, proposed instruments and DCPs are addressed in the following sections of this report. The likely impacts, suitability of the site and public interest are also addressed below and the submissions received have previously been addressed.  

 

State Environmental Planning Policies

 

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land (SEPP 55)

 

The provisions of SEPP 55 require Council to consider the potential for a site to be contaminated. The subject site has a history of residential use and, as such, it is unlikely to contain any contamination and further investigation is not warranted in this case.

 

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 – Hawkesbury-Nepean River (SREP 20)

 

SREP 20 applies to land within the catchment of the Hawkesbury Nepean River.  The general aim of the plan is to ensure that development and future land uses within the catchment are considered in a regional context. The plan includes strategies for the assessment of development in relation to water quality and quantity, scenic quality, aquaculture, recreation and tourism.  The proposed development is considered to achieve the relevant aims under this Policy.

 

Local Content (LEP, KPSO, etc)

 

Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance (KPSO)

 

The KPSO is a planning scheme ordinance originally made under the Local Government 1919 (LG Act) and transferred from the LG Act under Schedule 6 of the EP&A Act as transitional arrangements that continue to be in force.

 

Like an Environmental Planning Instrument (EPI) made under Part 3 of the EP&A Act, the KPSO also performs the purpose of environmental planning within each LGA. This report has considered the following provisions of the KPSO:

 

Zoning and permissibility:

 

The site is zoned Residential 2(c) in the KPSO. The proposed land subdivision is permissible with consent under Clause 23 of the KPSO. Clause 25H of the KPSO specifically applies to subdivision in the residential zones and states that land may be subdivided, but only with development consent.

 

The following clauses are deemed relevant to the proposal:

 

Schedule 9 aims and objectives for residential zones:

 

The development: (i) provides satisfactory levels of solar access & privacy to surrounding properties; (ii) is of a bulk, scale and design, characteristic of the area; (iii) maintains adequate levels of soft landscaping; (iv) provides suitable egress/ingress for vehicles; and (v) maintains the landscape quality of the municipality. Consequently, the aims and objectives for residential development as outlined by Schedule 9 have been satisfied.

 

The proposed development meets the zone objectives as it facilitates additional housing in the locality and the housing is capable of being compatible with the built character of the low density residential environment.

 

The numerical requirement of subdivision, when compared with the proposal, is summarised in the table below:

 

Development standards

 

Minimum Allotment Size Clause 25H

 

Development standard

Proposed

Complies

Site area:  2288m2

Subdivision for dwelling houses

 

 

Site area: 930m²

Lot 1: 1077m²

Lot 2: 1211m2

YES

YES

Frontage: 18m

Lot 1: 26m (to Boomerang St)

Lot 2: 47.11m (to Turramurra Ave)

YES

YES

 

The proposed subdivision/boundary adjustment complies with the minimum allotment size development standard set out in the KPSO.

 

Heritage /conservation areas:

 

The subject site is not heritage listed nor does it fall within an existing or draft heritage conservation area.

 

Part D: Areas of Biodiversity Significance

 

Clause 61L of the KPSO requires Council to consider:

 

(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 fauna, flora 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 appropriate measures proposed to avoid, minimise or mitigate the impacts of the development, and

 

(c)      any opportunity to restore or enhance remnant vegetation, habitat and

biodiversity corridors.

 

Council’s Ecological Assessment Officer and Landscape and Tree Assessment Officer have assessed the proposal’s impact on the biodiversity significance of the site and found it to be satisfactory.

 

Clause 38B – Services

 

Clause 38B states that consent must not be issued to the carrying out of development on land unless access to a water supply, drainage and a sewerage system will be available. The site is connected to the sewer system and reticulated water is provided. 

 

Draft Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2013

 

The Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 was gazetted by the Minister for Planning on 5 March 2015, coming into operation on 2 April 2015. The purpose of the LEP is to replace the KPSO with in LEP version consistent with the Department of Planning’s standard template.

 

The effect of the LEP on this application is somewhat limited as a consequence of Clause 1.8 which states:

 

1.8A Savings provision relating to development applications

 

If a development application has been made before the commencement of this Plan in relation to land which this Plan applies and the application has not been finally determined before that commencement, the application must be determined as if this Plan has not commenced.

 

Note: However, under Division 4B of Part 2 of the Act, a development application may be made for consent to carry out development that may only be carried out if the environmental planning instrument applying to the relevant development is appropriately amended or if a new instrument, including an appropriate principal environmental planning instrument, is made, and the consent authority may consider the application. The Division requires public notice of the development application and the draft environmental planning instrument allowing the development at the same time, or as closely together as is practicable.    

 

The effect of this is that, as the application was made prior to the gazettal of the LEP, it is to be determined as if the LEP had not commenced, thus deferring assessment of the application to the KPSO.

 

However, the Court of Appeal has ruled that despite Clause 1.8A, it is necessary to consider the development against draft instruments as at the time the application was lodged, it was a prescribed matter for consideration.

 

When exhibited, the draft Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2013 essentially sought to convert the controls of the KPSO into a format and structure consistent with the Department of Planning and Infrastructure’s Standard Instrument template. 

 

Zoning and permissibility:

 

The site is proposed to be zoned R2 – Low Density Residential in the draft LEP. The proposed land subdivision is permissible with consent under clause 2.6 of the Draft KLEP 2013.

 

Residential zone objectives:

 

·     to provide for the housing needs of the community within a low density residential environment

 

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

 

·     to provide housing that is compatible with the existing environmental and built character of Ku-ring-gai 

 

The development is consistent with the objectives of the zone in that it facilitates additional housing in the locality and the housing is capable of being compatible with the built character of the low density residential environment.

 

Draft Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2013 (Draft KLEP)

 

The Draft KLEP seeks to replace the KPSO by bringing the principal planning instrument of the Local Government Area (LGA) in line with the standard instrument. The DKLEP was exhibited from 25 March 2013 to 6 May 2013 and Gazetted on 2 April 2015. The particular aims of the draft LEP are to guide the future development of land and the management of environmental, social, economic, heritage and cultural resources within Ku-ring-gai.

 

The subject site is located within an area identified on the statutory maps and as such the Draft KLEP forms an area of consideration for the assessment of this application. This assessment report has considered the following provisions of the Draft KLEP:

 

Land use table

 

Under the Draft KLEP the site would be zoned R2 Low Density Residential. It is considered that the proposal would not contradict the following draft objectives and development standards:

 

4.1 Minimum subdivision lot size

 

(1)      The objectives of this clause are as follows:

 

(a)      to ensure that lot sizes and dimensions are able to accommodate

development consistent with relevant development controls,

(b)      to ensure that lot sizes and dimensions allow development to be sited to protect natural or cultural features including heritage items, remnant vegetation, habitat and waterways, and provide for generous landscaping to support the amenity of adjoining properties and the desired character of the area.

(c)      to ensure that subdivision of low density residential sites reflects and

reinforces the predominant subdivision pattern of the area,

 

(2)      This clause applies to a subdivision of any land shown on the Lot Size Map that requires development consent and that is carried out after the commencement of this Plan.

 

(3)      The size of any lot resulting from a subdivision of land to which this clause applies is not to be less than the minimum size shown on the Lot Size Map in relation to that land.

 

(3A)   In addition to subclause (3), development consent must not be granted for the subdivision of land to create a lot on which the erection of a dwelling house is permissible if the subdivision would result in a lot that is less than 18 metres wide at 12 metres from the street frontage of the lot.

 

(3B)   If under Schedule 1 the erection of a dual occupancy (detached) is permissible on a lot, development consent may, despite subclauses (3) and (3A), be granted for the subdivision of that lot if a dual occupancy (detached) has been erected on that lot and the lot has an area of not less than 550m2.

 

(3C)   Despite subclauses (3) and (3A), development consent must not be granted for the subdivision of land to create a lot on which the erection of multi dwelling housing or a residential flat building is permissible unless the subdivision would result in the creation of a lot with any dimension not less than 23 metres.

 

(4)      This clause does not apply in relation to the subdivision of individual lots in a strata plan or community title scheme.

 

(4A)   Despite subclause (3), if a lot is a battleaxe lot, or other lot with an access handle, the area of the access handle is not to be included when calculating the size of the lot for the purpose of this clause.

 

Clause 4.1 Minimum subdivision lot size

 

The proposal meets the objectives of the clause.  The proposed allotment sizes exceed the specified minimum lot size of 930m² as per Clause 4.1(3) and the frontage of both allotments meets the minimum dimension of 18 metres in width at 12 metres from the street frontage of the lot as required under Clause 4.1(3A).  Clauses 4.1(3B), 4.1(3C), (4) and 4(A) do not apply.

 

It is noted that the applicant has submitted an indicative dwelling outline of 332m2 for proposed Lot 2 to demonstrate that that the allotment can be developed in accordance with the development standards.  The proposal therefore meets the requirements of the Draft LEP.

 

Clause 5.9 Preservation of trees or vegetation

 

The proposal involves the removal of two trees. Council’s Landscape and Tree Assessment Officer has no objection to this.

 

Clause 5.10 Heritage conservation

 

The site is not a heritage item nor is it located within a heritage conservation area.

 

Clause 6.1 Acid sulphate soils

 

The works are unlikely to lower the water table. As such, no further investigation is considered necessary.

 

Clause 6.3 Biodiversity protection

 

The ‘Natural Resources – Biodiversity Map’ prepared under the KPSO (LEP No. 218) identifies the site as containing an area of biodiversity significance. This area contains Blue Gum High Forest. Council’s Tree and Landscape Assessment Officer and Ecological Assessment Officer are satisfied the proposed development will have no adverse impact on this biodiversity significant vegetation.

 

Clause 6.5 Stormwater and water sensitive urban design

 

The objective of this clause is to avoid or minimise the adverse impact of urban stormwater on the land on which development is to be carried out, adjoining properties, native bushland, waterways and groundwater systems. The consent authority must be satisfied that:

(a)  water sensitive urban design principles are incorporated into the design of the development, and

(b)  riparian, stormwater and flooding measures are integrated, and

(c)  the stormwater management system includes all reasonable management actions to avoid any adverse impacts on the land to which the development is to be carried out, adjoining properties, native bushland, waterways and groundwater systems, and

(d)  if a potential adverse environmental impact cannot be feasibly avoided, the development minimises and mitigates the adverse impacts of stormwater runoff on adjoining properties, native bushland, waterways and groundwater systems. 

 

Council’s Development Engineer has no objection to the proposal, based on the above considerations.

 

Policy Provisions

 

Development Control Plan No. 40 - Construction and Demolition Waste Management

 

The key objectives of this DCP are to encourage building design and construction techniques which will minimise waste generation, implement the principles of the waste hierarchy of avoiding, reusing and recycling building and construction materials, and commercial waste, minimise the environmental impacts of waste, promote the principles of ecologically sustainable development, meet Council's responsibilities in relation to the Northern Sydney Regional Waste Plan and assist in achieving the Federal and State Government's waste minimisation targets.

 

A waste management plan, demonstrating compliance with the requirements of the DCP, has been submitted and is acceptable.

 

Development Control Plan 47 - Water Management

 

Council’s Development Engineer has assessed the proposal against DCP 47 and is satisfied that it meets the objectives and is acceptable, subject to conditions.

 

Section 94 Development Contributions Plan 2010

 

The development attracts a section 94 contribution of $28,681.23 which is required to be paid prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate (Condition 6).

 

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 satisfactory.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

A.   That Council, as the consent authority, grant development consent to DA0078/15 for Torrens title subdivision of one lot to create two lots on land at 49-51 Boomerang Street, Turramurra 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

Subdivision detail

12710 sheet 1 issues 1 and 2

C.M.S. Surveyors P/L

11/12/14

Driveway crossing works plan

110336 DW1 issue A

Stormcivil

29.05.2015

 

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 OR CONSTRUCTION:

 

3.       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.

 

4.       Design of works in public road

 

Prior to the commencement of works, engineering plans for the new driveway crossing and associated lowering of the footpath shall be approved by Council's Director Operations under the Roads Act 1993.

 

An engineering assessment and inspection fee is payable.  Plans must be submitted to Council, marked to the attention of Council's Development Engineers, and a copy of this condition provided, together with a covering letter stating the address of the property and the DA number. 

 

Reason:       To ensure that 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):

 

5.       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.

 

6.    Section 94 development contributions - other than identified centres (For DAs        determined on or after 19 December 2010).

 

This development is subject to a development contribution calculated in accordance with Ku-ring-gai Contributions Plan 2010, being a s94 Contributions Plan in effect under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, as follows:

 

Section 94 Development Contributions - Non-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

 

 

$24,490.20

 

Local recreational and cultural, Local social facilities

 

 

$4,191.03

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

TOTAL CONTRIBUTIONS

 

 

$28,681.23

 

 

 

 

 

 

The contribution shall be paid to Council prior to the issue of any Construction Certificate, Linen Plan, Certificate of Subdivision or Occupation Certificate whichever comes first in accordance with Ku-ring-gai Contributions Plan 2010.

 

The contributions specified above are subject to indexation and may vary at the time of payment in accordance with Ku-ring-gai Contributions Plan 2010 to reflect changes in the consumer price index and housing price index.  Prior to payment, please contact Council directly to verify the current payable contributions.

 

Copies of Council’s Contribution Plans can be viewed at Council Chambers, 818 Pacific Hwy Gordon or on Council’s website at www.kmc.nsw.gov.au.

 

Notwithstanding the total above, in accordance with the s94E Direction issued by the Minister for Planning dated 3 March 2011, for so long as it remains legally in force, the maximum amount payable for the subject development application shall be $20,000 x 2= $40,000.

 

Reason:       To ensure the provision, extension or augmentation of the Key Community Infrastructure identified in Ku-ring-gai Contributions Plan 2010 that will, or is likely to be, required as a consequence of the development.

 

 

CONDITIONS TO BE SATISFIED DURING THE DEMOLITION, EXCAVATION AND CONSTRUCTION PHASES:

 

7.     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.

 

8.     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.

 

9.     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.

 

10.   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.

 

11.   Maintenance period for works in public road

 

A maintenance period of six (6) months applies to all work in the public road reserve carried out by the applicant - after the works have been completed to the satisfaction of Ku-ring-gai Council. In that maintenance period, the applicant shall be liable for any section of the public infrastructure work which fails to perform in the designed manner, or as would reasonably be expected under the operating conditions. The maintenance period shall commence once the applicant receives a formal letter from Council stating that the works involving public infrastructure have been completed satisfactorily.

 

Reason:         To protect public infrastructure.

 

12.   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.

 

13.   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.

 

14.   Erosion control

 

Temporary sediment and erosion control and measures are to be installed prior to the commencement of any works on the site. These measures must be maintained in working order during construction works up to completion. All sediment traps must be cleared on a regular basis and after each major storm and/or as directed by the Principal Certifying Authority and Council officers.

 

Reason:         To protect the environment from erosion and sedimentation.

 

15.   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.

 

16.   Trees on nature strip

 

Removal/pruning of the following tree/s from Council's nature strip to permit vehicular access shall be undertaken at no cost to Council by an experienced tree removal contractor/arborist holding public liability insurance amounting to a minimum cover of $20,000,000:

 

Tree/Location

Approved tree works

T3 Pittosporum undulatum (Native Daphne) Turramurra Ave nature strip

Removal

T38 Callistemon salignus (Willow Bottlebrush) Turramurra Ave nature strip

Removal

 

Reason:         To ensure protection of existing trees.

 

17.   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 AQF3 Arborist/Horticulturist. All pruning works shall be undertaken as specified in Australian Standard 4373-2007 - Pruning of Amenity Trees.

 

 

Tree/Location

Tree works

T1 Melia azedarach (White Cedar) Adjacent to western site boundary

Root pruning

T4 Macadamia tetraphylla (Macadamia) Adjacent to western site boundary

Root pruning

 

Reason:         To protect the environment.

 

18.   Approved tree works

 

Approval is given for the following works to be undertaken to the following trees:

 

Tree/Location

Approved tree works

T3 Pittosporum undulatum (Native Daphne) Turramurra Ave nature strip

Removal

T38 Callistemon salignus (Willow Bottlebrush) Turramurra Ave nature strip

Removal

 

Removal or pruning of any other tree on the site is not approved, excluding species exempt under Council’s Tree Preservation Order.

 

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

 

19.   Hand excavation

 

All excavation within the specified radius of the trunk/s of the following tree/s shall be hand dug:

 

Tree/Location

Radius from Trunk

T1 Melia azedarach (White Cedar) Adjacent to western site boundary

4.0m

T4 Macadamia tetraphylla (Macadamia) Adjacent to western site boundary

4.0m

 

Reason:         To protect existing trees.

 

20.   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.

 

21.   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.

 

22.   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 A SUBDIVISION CERTIFICATE:

 

23.   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.

 

24.   Requirements of public authorities for connection to services

 

Prior to the issue of the Subdivision Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the applicant has complied with the requirements of any public authorities (e.g. Energy Australia, Sydney Water, Telstra Australia, AGL, etc) in regard to the connection, relocation and/or adjustment of the services affected by the proposed subdivision. All costs related to the relocation, adjustment or support of services are the responsibility of the applicant.

 

Note:              Details of compliance with the requirements of any relevant public authorities are to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority.

 

Reason:         To ensure that services are available to the allotments of land.

 

25.   Construction of works in public road

 

Prior issue of the Subdivision Certificate all road, footpath and/or drainage works in the public road must be completed in full, inspected and approved by Council. The applicant’s designing engineer is to provide certification upon completion that the works were constructed in accordance with the Council approved drawings.  This certification shall be provided prior to release of the linen plan/issue of the Subdivision Certificate. The completed works are to be approved by Council’s Development Engineer prior to release of the linen plan/issue of the Subdivision Certificate.

 

Reason:         To ensure completion of all road, footpath and/or drainage works in the public road.

 

26.   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.

 

27.   Submission of 88b instrument

 

If required, 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 six (6) 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.

 

28.   Submission of plans of subdivision (Torrens Title)

 

For endorsement of the subdivision certificate, the applicant shall submit an original plan of subdivision plus 6 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 lodgement

b)         the 88B instrument (if required) plus 6 copies

c)         all surveyor’s and/or consulting engineers’ certification(s) required under this subdivision consent

d)         The Section 73 (Sydney Water) Compliance Certificate for the subdivision.

e)         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.

 

29.   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.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Amy Bentley

Senior Assessment Officer

 

 

 

 

Selwyn Segall

Team Leader - Development Assessment North

 

 

 

 

Corrie Swanepoel

Manager Development Assessment Services

 

 

 

 

Michael Miocic

Director Development & Regulation

 

 

Attachments:

A1View

Location Map

 

2015/230206

 

A2View

Zoning Map

 

2015/230190

 

A3View

Subdivision Plan

 

2015/177429

  


APPENDIX No: 1 - Location Map

 

Item No: GB.8

 


APPENDIX No: 2 - Zoning Map

 

Item No: GB.8

 


APPENDIX No: 3 - Subdivision Plan

 

Item No: GB.8

 


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 8 September 2015

GB.9 / 497

 

 

Item GB.9

S10749

 

30 July 2015

 

 

Lindfield Community Hub Preferred Option

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

purpose of report:

Present a comprehensive assessment of the 4 (four) exhibited illustrative development options for the Lindfield Community Hub site, and recommend a preferred option for Council adoption.

 

 

background:

At the Ordinary Meeting of Council 11 November 2014 Council adopted the following criteria to be used for the assessment of the adopted development Options 1, 2, 3, and 4:

·     Public & Stakeholder responses;

·     Project Costs;

·     Financial Feasibility;

·     Project Objectives;

·     Traffic & Transport;

·     Community Facilities Review;

·     Specialist Council Staff Review;

·     Project Working Group (PWG) approval; and

·     Full Council Approval.

 

 

comments:

Four illustrative master plan options were prepared and exhibited during the period 21 March 2015 and 14 May 2015; the community and all key stakeholders were extensively consulted during this period. At the same time Council has procured a number of independent consultants to assess the options against the adopted criteria.

This report presents a comprehensive assessment of the four options with the view to recommending a preferred option.

 

 

recommendation:

It is recommended that Council adopt Option 2 (as exhibited) as the preferred option for the Lindfield Community Hub subject to further refinements or adjustments that may necessary to address any concerns or issues raised by the private sector prior during market sounding.

 

 

 


  

Purpose of Report

Present a comprehensive assessment of the 4 (four) exhibited illustrative development options for the Lindfield Community Hub site, and recommend a preferred option for Council adoption.

 

 

Background

 

Planning for this site commenced in 2012 following an announcement by the NSW Government that it intended to build a multi-storey commuter car park on Council’s land at Woodford Lane, Lindfield. Since that time there has been extensive reporting to Council with respect to negotiations with Transport for NSW, land reclassification, community facilities, land acquisition, master planning, probity matters and road closures.

 

The full list of council reports which pertain to the Lindfield Hub project have been set out below for reference:

 

1.   OMC – 26 June 2012 – GB.9 - Council Car Park – Woodford Lane, Lindfield – Reclassification

2.   OMC – 26 February 2013 – GB.16 - Woodford Lane, Lindfield Commuter Car Park

3.   Missing final report for reclassification

4.   OMC – 28 May 2013 – GB.10 - Lindfield Community Hub and commuter Car Park – Next Steps

5.   OMC – 30 July 2013 – GB.5 – Proposed Reclassification of 1B Beaconsfield Parade and 19 Drovers Way, Lindfield (Woodford Lane Car Park) to Operational Land Following the Exhibition and Public Hearing Process

6.   OMC – 12 November 2013 – C.1 - Potential Property Acquisition – Lindfield

7.   OMC - 10 December 2013 - GB.19 - Lindfield Village Green - Tryon Road - Project Update

8.   OMC – 24 June 2014 – C.1 - Property Acquisition -  Lindfield

9.   OMC – 9 September 2014 – GB.4 – Lindfield Community Hub – Woodford Lane – Report on Progress

10. OMC - 11 November 2014 – GB.7 – Lindfield Community Hub – Probity Matters

11. OMC – 25 November 2014 – GB.8 – Lindfield Community Hub – Probity Management Plan

12. OMC – 9 December 2014 – Tender No. RFT22/2014 – Lindfield Community Hub – Tender For Consultants to Prepare Illustrative Development Options and Master Plan

13. OMC – 21 April 2015 – GB.5 – Compulsory Acquisition of Roads - Lindfield

 

At the Ordinary Meeting of Council 9 September 2014 a report was put to Council seeking approval of three preferred land use scenarios for the Lindfield Community Hub as the basis for engaging architectural consultants to prepare illustrative concept designs for public engagement and exhibition. At that meeting it was resolved (in part) that Council:

 

A.   Adopts the following land use scenarios as the basis for preparing illustrative concept plans for community consultation and further technical assessment:

 

·     Option A (the same as Option 1 version 3) - Community facilities with secondary/specialty retail and residential; a new park; and three storey height limit.

·     Option B (the same as option 3b version 3 and 5% contingency) - Community facilities with major retail/secondary/specialty retail as well as residential; a new park; and seven storey height limit.

·     Option C (the same as option 4 version 3) - Community facilities with residential only; a new park; and five storey height limit.

·     Option D (the same as option 5 p536) – full line supermarket (4,200sqm) with community facility, secondary/speciality retail, additional car spaces and no residential accommodation, new park on retail podium; and three storey height limit.

 

B.   Adopts the preliminary project programme as follows:

 

·     Advertise tender for design services and assess tender, Sept-Nov 2014

·     Report to Council preferred tender, Dec 2014

·     Preparation of 3 concept options, Jan-Feb 2015

·     Exhibition and community workshops, February 2015

·     Assessment of options, March 2015

·     Report to Council - preferred concept plan for exhibition, April 2015

·     Consultant – preparation of draft illustrative master plan, Apr-May 2015

·     Public Exhibition and information sessions, June 2015

·     Assessment of public submissions, July 2015

·     Report to Council – final master plan and planning proposal, August 2015

 

This report completes resolutions A and B as above.

 

At the Ordinary Meeting of Council 11 November 2014 a report was put to Council addressing a number of issues raised by Council’s probity consultant in relation to the Lindfield Community Hub master plan. At that meeting it was resolved (in part) as follows:

 

C.   That Council utilises the following criteria for the assessment of the adopted development options A, B, C and D:

 

·      public response to options as determined by on-line and face-to-face survey responses, public comments during workshops and information sessions; and public submissions during exhibition;

·      a cost review of each option by Council’s quantity surveyor consultant;

·      a financial feasibility analysis of the options by Council’s land economist consultant;

·      a review by Council’s traffic consultant;

·      a review by Council’s community facilities consultant;

·      an officer review of each option against the objectives of the project as set out in the project brief;

·      a review by specialist Council staff including engineers, traffic, landscape, urban design among others;

·      project Working Group (PWG) approval of preferred preliminary option; and

·      full Council approval of preferred illustrative master plan

 

This report completes resolution C as above.

 

 

 

Comments

 

Four illustrative master plan options were prepared and exhibited during the period 21 March 2015 and 14 May 2015; the community and all key stakeholders were extensively consulted during this period (refer details under Community Consultation in this report). A summary of the exhibited options has been provided below and full details of the four options can be viewed at Attachment A1-Exhibited Development Options

 

Option 1 - Key Components

                                                                           Figure 1: Option 1 - Plan

 

 

Figure 2: Option 1 –                        Figure 3: Option 1 – 3-D View

Development Statistics

 

 

Option 2 - Key Components

                                                                                                Figure 4: Option 2 - Plan

 

Figure 5: Option 2 –                             Figure 6: Option 2 – 3-D View

Development Statistics

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Option 3 - Key Components`

 

 

Figure 7: Option 3 - Plan

 

Figure 8: Option 3 –               Figure 9: Option 3 – 3-D View

Development Statistics

 

 

 

 

 

 

Option 4 - Key Components

 

Figure 10: Option 4 - Plan

 

 

 

 

Figure 11: Option 4 –                            Figure 12: Option 4 – 3-D View

Development Statistics

 

 

 

 

1.       Assessment of Exhibited Master Plan Options

 

This report seeks to provide a comprehensive assessment of the site against the criteria adopted by Council in November 2014, with the view to recommending a preferred option to Council, the criteria are:

 

·     Public & Stakeholder responses;

·     Project Costs;

·     Financial Feasibility;

·     Project Objectives;

·     Traffic & Transport;

·     Community Facilities Review;

·     Specialist Council Staff Review;

·     Project Working Group (PWG) approval; and

·     Full Council Approval.

 

Each option is ranked 1 through to 4 with 4 being the highest score and 1 being the lowest score. The scores are colour coded for legibility; green (score of 4); brown (score of 3); orange (score of 2); and red (score of 1).

 

1.1   Public and Stakeholder Responses

 

Responses to the exhibited options are addressed under three components:

 

-     On-line survey results;

-     Community workshop results; and

-     Public Submissions.

 

CRED community planning was engaged to manage the community engagement programme for the Lindfield Hub project and to report on the results. The full engagement outcomes report by CRED can be viewed at Attachment A2: Lindfield Community Hub, Community Engagement Outcomes Report by Cred consultants.

 

1.1.1  On-line survey results

 

An online survey was conducted between 21 March 2015 and 14 May 2015, in which 63% of respondents showed a preference for Option 4, and the rest for Option 2. Option 4 precludes residential uses and has a maximum building height of 3 storeys. Results indicate residents want a new and larger supermarket with a range of high quality shops.

 

The main reasons respondents said they would visit the Lindfield Community Hub were as follows:

 

-     Community facilities and classes;

-     Relaxing and meeting up with people;

-     Convenient parking and supermarket;

-     Library;

-     Restaurants and cafes;

-     Retail and shops;

-     Bringing children to the park/play centre;

-     Walking home from work and the station, through the Hub.

 

1.1.2  Community workshop results

 

An opt-in community workshop was planned but subsequently cancelled due to lack of interest. A recruited workshop was held on 9 May 2015, where 78% of people showed a clear preference for Option 2, and 18% preferred Option 4, the remaining 4% preferred options 1 and 2.

 

1.1.3  Public Submissions

 

There were two written submissions to Council one from Support Lindfield, a local community group, and the second from the 2nd and 3rd Lindfield Scouts Group

 

1.1.3.1   Scouts Australia: 2nd and 3rd Lindfield Scouts Group Submission

 

The submission from Scouts indicated support for the Lindfield Hub redevelopment project and expressed a preference of options 2 and 4 over the other options.  The group also expressed an interest in relocating to the new community hub building; this matter is discussed further later in this report. The full Scouts submission is provided in Attachment A3: Scouts Submission, 2nd and 3rd Lindfield Scouts Group, 08 May 2015.

 

1.1.3.2   Support Lindfield Submission

 

Support Lindfield made a detailed submission which claims to be on behalf of 600 members who have contributed over the last two and a half years. Support Lindfield also state they have over 20,000 flyers distributed and 750 people attending community forums.

 

A summary of the conclusions of the Support Lindfield submission are as follows:

 

-     The community are supportive of a community hub;

-     Options 2 and 4 most closely align with the community’s preferences;

-     Option 2 is the preferred option with some modifications (increase the supermarket size to 3,600sqm and amount of specialty retail to 2,100sqm);

-     In relation to options 1 and 3 the community did not prefer these as there was too little retail; and

-     The community did not identify retention of existing trees as a high priority particularly where they would restrict the creation of high quality public spaces and retail floor space.

 

The Support Lindfield submission notes that the community is willing to compromise on a number of matters:

 

-     Height of buildings;

-     Inclusions of apartments in the development for commercial viability;

-     Some increases in local traffic;

-     pedestrian link over the highway;

-     environmental (existing trees).

 

The Support Lindfield submission notes that the community is not willing to compromise on:

 

-     Public spaces and places must be included;

-     A supermarket with a mix of speciality shops;

-     Community focused – enhances sense of community;

-     Car parking – must cater for all uses including commuters;

-     Inspiring design that the community can be proud of.

 

The full Support Lindfield submission can be viewed under Attachment A4: Support Lindfield, Submission to Ku-ring-gal Council on Lindfield Community Hub, 08 May 2015.

 

In summary, the submissions from Scouts NSW and Support Lindfield showed a clear preference for options 2 and 4 due to their outstanding public benefits, clear distinction of public and private domain, and their ability to activate the local area.

 

 

Criteria

Option 1

 

Option 2

Option 3

Option 4

Public Submissions

1

4

1

4

 

1.1.3.3   Summary Public Engagement Results

 

The overall public engagement results show that Options 2 and 4 are equally favoured by the public. Option 2 provides for a good mix of uses including community hub building, park, mid-range supermarket, boutique retail and residential components, providing a much-needed boost to the local community and the local economy. Option 4 provides for a large-scale supermarket, which was highly desired by the community. Option 1 proposes a small-scale supermarket which is not in line with community aspirations. Option 3 has no supermarket and no central focus, neither of which are in line with community aspirations.

 

The results of the assessment has been summarised in the table below.

 

 

Criteria

Option 1

 

Option 2

Option 3

Option 4

Online Survey

1

3

1

4

Community Workshop

1

4

1

3

Public Submissions

1

4

1

4

Total

3

11

3

11

 

1.2   Project Cost

 

MBM Quantity Surveyors were engaged to prepare a preliminary budget estimate for the project. This report entitled Lindfield Community Hub Budget Estimate - Preliminary Estimate Report dated 15 April 2015, is provided in full under Attachment A5: Lindfield Community Hub, Budget Estimate, Preliminary Estimate Report, 15 April 2015.

 

MBM have prepared indicative budget estimate for each of the proposed development options (1, 2, 3 & 4) for Lindfield Community Hub to be used for preliminary feasibility purposes. The total estimated cost of each option is set out in the Table below.

 

Table 1: Cost Estimate of Options Summary, by MBM

 

Option 2 is the most expensive option, at a preliminary estimate of $101.3 million dollars as it is the most complex in terms of construction and proposes the greatest range of uses; Option 3 is the second most expensive, at $92 million, because it has a large number of residential apartments which have higher construction and fit-out costs when compared to other uses. Options 4 and 1 are the lowest cost options at $74.6 million and $65.7 Million respectively.

 

RLB Quantity Surveyors were subsequently engaged to undertake a peer review of the MBM report; the peer review paper considers the following issues:

 

-     Strategic advice;

-     Review of items/rates;

-     Library and Community facilities allowances; and

-     Park and Town Centre allowances.

 

The full report by RLB is available in Attachment A6: Peer Review of MBM Cost Estimate by RLB, 25 May, 2015.

 

RLB’s peer review identified the following issues:

 

-     The rates provided by MBM for the construction and fit-out costs of the new community buildings are significantly below similar bench marks for a high quality facility.

-     The rates provided by MBM for the new parkland and public domain areas are considerably lower than similar bench marks for a high quality parks and public domain areas.

 

As a result of the peer review RLB recommend an overall increase in the construction costs of the options of between $11-12 million.

 

In summary, a review of the projects costs shows us that Option 1 incurs the lowest cost and therefore the lowest cash risk whilst Option 2 incurs the highest cost, and is also the most complex in terms of the proposed mix of uses, therefore representing the higher levels of development risk.

 

 

Criteria

Option 1

 

Option 2

Option 3

Option 4

Project Cost

4

1

2

3

 

1.3   Economic Feasibility

 

Based on the MBM and RLB findings, Jones Lang LaSalle (JLL) were engaged to further refine the economic feasibility analysis of the options: The full report can be viewed at Confidential Attachment A7: Addendum No. 2 Feasibility Analysis of Exhibited Options 1-4 Prepared by SJB Urban, by JLL, dated 21 July 2015.

 

Provided below is a summary of the scenarios JLL have undertaken analysis on:

 

-     Option 1 - 3 Storey, Community facilities + library, speciality retail, mini-major retail, residential (32 units), car parking including 240 commuter spaces

-     Option 2 - 7 Storey, Community facilities + library, speciality retail, major retail, commercial, residential (105 units) car parking including 240 commuter spaces

-     Option 3 - 5 Storey, Community facilities + library, speciality retail, commercial, residential (120 dwellings), car parking including 240 commuter spaces

-     Option 4 - 3 Storey, Community facilities + library, speciality retail, major retail, car parking including 240 commuter spaces

 

 

Table 2: Breakdown of floor space and car parking, exhibited options 1-4, by JLL

 

JLL has various key assumptions and limitations including but not limited to:

 

-     Equity injection to the project $13.19million from collected s.94 contributions as at April 2015.

-     Equity injection to the project $16.8million from the State Government of NSW for the construction of the commuter car park (subject to agreement from TFNSW).

-     No income is derived from the community uses or car parking.

 

JLL’s observations from the above financial analysis are summarised below.

 

-     Option 1 - Provides a poor financial outcome of based on significant ‘community costs’ (including associated car parking) with smaller income producing uses.

-     Option 2 - Provides an indicative ‘break-even option’ given the provision of residential and major retail uses.

-     Option 3 - Presents the most viable option given the quantum of residential.

-     Option 4 - Provides a poor financial outcome based on the lack of residential which support the options viability. The major retail also assumes constrained trade based on the assumption that there will be no right turn lane from Pacific Highway to Beaconsfield Parade.

 

In summary, Option 3 presents the most financially rewarding proposition for Council with option 2 also ’break-even’ proposition (including a small margin for error, delay or change of project scope).

 

 

Criteria

Option 1

 

Option 2

Option 3

Option 4

Economic Feasibility

1

3

4

2

 

1.4   Project Objectives

 

A comprehensive assessment of the options was carried out by council staff, against the project objectives. The full assessment table can be viewed at Attachment A8: Lindfield Community Hub, Assessment of Options Against Objectives, April 2015.   

 

A summary of the assessment under the broad project objective headings is given below:

 

1.4.1        The Village

 

A modern urban village, like a traditional village, provides a range of opportunities for people to live, work, shop and pursue leisure and cultural interests in the one location. Social interaction is also a key component of a village:

 

-     Option 3 comprises 70% of its floor space as residential apartments and lacks the critical retail mass to create a place where residents could complete most of their shopping in one location

-     Option 4 lacks residential apartments which are a critical part of a village as they provide multiple benefits in terms of people living in an area, caring for an area, ‘eyes on the street’ for safety and people movements. The total amount of retail (7,000sqm) in option 4 is also of concern particularly in terms of impacts on existing traders nearby on the Pacific Highway and impact on road network.

-     Options 1 and 2 both provide a balanced range of uses that would have the potential to create a vibrant local hub.

-     The key differences between option 1 & 2 is the proposed building scale and the amount of retail floor space, the communities preference in this regard will be determined through the survey results.

-     As discussed above, 7 storey buildings are compatible with the idea of an urban village, particularly given the planning context in which properties to the west/south-west of the site are zoned for 5 storey apartment buildings.

-     The proposed building scale and the amount of retail floor space are considered further in relation to financial feasibility and market demand.

 

Options 1 and 2 are considered to have the best potential to meet the objective of creating a village; option 3 is considered to have the least potential.

 

 

Criteria

Option 1

 

Option 2

Option 3

Option 4

The Village

4

4

1

2

 

1.4.2        The Attraction

 

The development options explore a range of opportunities to create a place which will attract people to the area as well as make it easy for people to visit when arriving by car, on foot or by bicycle. It is important to note that the facilities are planned to cater for local residents living in the southern part of Ku-ring-gai LGA; it is not intended to create a place that will necessarily attract people from the broader region.

 

-     All options offer local attractions and facilities in the form of a new park, town square, branch library and community centre;

-     Option 1 provides a limited retail offer and as a result the attraction is likely to be limited. The benefit of this is that it may offer a supportive role to existing traders on the Pacific Highway;

-     Option 2 provides a strong retail offer that is likely to draw people from the local catchment (southern part of LGA);

-     Option 3 offers limited facilities to attract people above and beyond the proposed community infrastructure;

-     Option 4 provides a very large retail offer which has the potential to attract too many people – traffic modelling suggests the number of visitors by car is likely to exceed the capacity of the local road network.

 

Options 1 and 2 are considered to have the best potential to meet the objective of creating an attraction, while option 4 may be too large for the context.

 

 

Criteria

Option 1

 

Option 2

Option 3

Option 4

The Attraction

3

4

1

2

 

1.4.3  The Canopy

 

All options to a greater or lesser extent have responded to this objective. Option 1 and 3 clearly provide the best outcome in terms of deep soil and tree protection.

 

All options propose significant new tree planting within the new streets and parks that would, over the medium, term result in a canopy cover greater than the existing situation

 

 

Criteria

Option 1

 

Option 2

Option 3

Option 4

The Canopy

3

1

4

2

 

 

1.4.4  The Environment

 

Overall sustainability is achieved through eliminating the need for multiple trips as the hub becomes a ‘one stop’ destination.

 

All options have proposed green technologies explored to achieve Council’s energy targets:

 

-     Green technology in buildings;

-     Orientation of residential to maximise solar and cross ventilation;

-     Stormwater storage and re-use.

 

The heat island effect of the site would be reduced due to the proposed parkland and tree canopy.

 

 

Criteria

Option 1

 

Option 2

Option 3

Option 4

The Environment

4

4

4

4

 

1.4.5  Connectivity

 

Generally, all options are designed to be well-connected with respect to pedestrians, cyclists and vehicles, with good access to public transport and cycle routes. The sloping site poses connectivity challenges however these challenges have been dealt with in a similar manner in all options. All options improve significantly on the existing conditions.

 

 

Criteria

Option 1

 

Option 2

Option 3

Option 4

Connectivity

4

4

4

4

 

1.4.6  Accessibility

 

The site has accessibility issues due to the steep fall of the site (approximately 9m from the eastern end to the western end of the site). All options have been designed with universal access principles in mind and are therefore more or less equal in this regard. All options improve significantly on existing conditions.

 

 

Criteria

Option 1

 

Option 2

Option 3

Option 4

Accessibility

4

4

4

4

 

1.4.7  Safety/Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED)

 

All options propose to comply with CPTED principles and will have good lighting to all of the public spaces. Options 1, 2 and 3 have a mix of residential and retail uses that allows for passive surveillance of the site during all times of the day and night. However, Option 4 does not have residential uses which mean that the site has little or no surveillance during night time.

 

 

Criteria

Option 1

 

Option 2

Option 3

Option 4

Safety/CPTED

4

4

4

1

 

1.5     Traffic and Transport Review

 

A traffic and transport review of the 4 options was conducted by Transport consultants engaged by Council (Peopletrans). The full report can be viewed at Attachment A9: Lindfield Community Hub, Concept Design Options, Transport Review, by Peopletrans, August 2015.

 

The assessment criteria used by the consultants are as follows:

 

·     Pedestrians;

-     Pedestrian accessibility to, from and through the site

-     Pedestrian accessibility within the site

·     Cyclists;

-     Cyclist accessibility to, from and through the site

-     End of Trip Facilities

·     Public Transport Integration (Trains & Buses);

·     General Traffic Accessibility;

-     Intersection Operation

-     Car Parking

-     Loading

·     Safety.

 

In summary, the report made the following conclusions and recommendations:

 

·     The assessment found it was challenging to choose an outright preferred option as there were positive and negative elements of each.

·     The scale and type of development of SJB Option 4 would have an unacceptable traffic impact on the surrounding road network and would have to be scaled back significantly if it were to be given any further consideration in the context of the other 3 options.

·     The elements that could be compared equitably related primarily to the road network configuration, number of car parking stations and the location of the car park accesses.

·     There were elements that were identified as part of the Lindfield Transport Model Network Study 2013/14 which was not identified on any of the SJB option layouts including the following:

 

-      The need to maintain kiss & ride parking on Woodford Lane (accessed to and from the south);

-      The need for a community bus stop located near the community facilities;

-      The importance of Woodford Lane as a public domain/shared zone street including a contra-flow cycle lane providing a safer link across the Pacific Highway from the proposed future traffic signals at Strickland Avenue.

 

In summary, options 1, 2 and 3 were deemed acceptable from a traffic and transport point of view. Option 4, however, due to its large supermarket component, would have an unacceptable traffic impact on the surrounding road network.

 

 

Criteria

Option 1

 

Option 2

Option 3

Option 4

Traffic & Transport

4

4

4

2

 

1.6     Community Facilities Review

 

Elton Consulting were first commissioned by Ku-ring-gai Council in 2013 to undertake a study of community facilities in Lindfield and the southern parts of the LGA; the completed study, entitled Lindfield Community Facilities Study, 2014, provides objectives and guidelines to guide Council in the planning, design and delivery of new community facilities in the Lindfield Local Centre.

 

Elton Consulting were recently re-engaged to undertake an assessment of the four exhibited options to determine how each of the options rate against the original objectives and guidelines; the report can be viewed at Attachment A10: Lindfield Community Hub Review of Concept Design Options (Community Facilities), 06 May 2015; by Elton Consulting. A summary of the findings is set out below.

 

Two options received significantly higher scores in the assessment – Option 2 and Option 3, with Option 2 being the highest scoring option. Option 4 was the lowest scoring option. The assessment findings are summarised below.

 

Option 2 scored a total of 47/50 and rated well against all criteria. The proposed facility would have a strong public presence (with both the community centre and library achieving ground floor access), prominent entries and strong physical and visual open space connections. The option also includes a reasonable quantity of residential and retail uses which would assist to activate the site; revitalise the Lindfield Local Centre and contribute to public safety through passive surveillance.

 

Option 3 scored a total of 43/50 and rated well against most criteria. The facility design would also result a prominent facility with at grade entries for both the library and community centre. With the majority of the library below ground level, the positioning of the facility foyer (a critical connection between the library and community centre) may be somewhat restricted and may compromise connections between the facility components. This option proposes the highest number of residential dwellings as well as commercial space, which would assist to activate the site and improve public safety through passive surveillance.

 

Option 1 received a score of 31/50. The facility is located on a prominent corner of the site however it would have a lower profile or public presence with the main entry located to the south and only small entry to the main, Bent street frontage. The option proposes only a small number of dwellings and small retail component, limiting the option’s potential to achieve an activated site and contribute to the revitalisation of the Local Centre. Opportunities for the provision of contained open space for the community facility are limited. In addition, this option also represents a missed opportunity to incorporate the adjacent scout hall into the new community hub (though this cannot be guaranteed in any option, as it is subject to the outcome of negotiations with Lindfield Scouts).

 

Option 4 was the lowest scoring option with a total score of 22/50. The proposed level change between Bent Street and the site would result in a facility with little public presence and a lack of connection to the local centre, compromising its potential to be a key community focal point and gathering space. The lack of other land-uses limits the potential to achieve a highly utilised, activated site. The park and facility would also lack public surveillance. This option does not realise the potential of the site. This option also represents a missed opportunity to incorporate the adjacent scout hall into the new community hub.

 

A summary of the assessment is contained in the table below:

 

 

Criteria

Option 1

 

Option 2

Option 3

Option 4

Community Facilities Review

2

4

3

1

 

1.7     Council Staff Workshop

 

A workshop involving 18 specialist Council staff was held on 22 June 2015 to seek input and feedback on each development option and to assess each option individually in order to determine a preferred option. The full staff workshop notes are included in Attachment A11: Lindfield Community Hub, Staff Assessment Workshop Summary June, 2015.  

 

In summary, the staff unanimously agreed that option 2 was the preferred option for the site, owing to its variety in land uses, presence of a mid-range supermarket and clear distinction of public and private spaces. Option 4 was gauged as second-best, as it provided a large-scale supermarket, in line with community aspiration. Option 1 was ruled out because it had a low development potential, proposed a small-scale supermarket (which went against community aspiration) and was financially unviable. Option 3 had no clarity between public and private spaces and was excessive in its residential component.

 

A numeric summary of the assessment is provided in the table below.

 

 

Criteria

Option 1

 

Option 2

Option 3

Option 4

Staff Workshop

1

4

1

3

 

1.8     Project Control Group (PCG) Approval of Preferred Option

 

A PCG meeting was held on 5 August 2015 where an update of the Lindfield Hub project was provided by council staff and PBS consultants. It was generally agreed that Option 2 would be the preferred option for the site. To view the full minutes of this PCG meeting, please refer to Attachment A12:  Local Centres – Major Projects, PCG Meeting Minutes, 5 August 2015.      

 

2.       Summary of Assessment

 

The assessment of the master plan options has been summarised in the table below.

 

 

Criteria

Option 1

Option 2

Option 3

 

Option 4

Public Engagement  (online survey, community workshop and public submissions)

3

11

3

11

Estimated project

Cost

4

1

2

3

Economic Feasibility

1

3

4

2

Traffic & Transport

4

4

4

2

Community Facilities Review

2

4

3

1

Project Objective - Village

4

4

1

2

Project Objective - Attraction

3

4

1

2

Project Objective - Canopy

3

1

4

2

Project Objective - Environment

4

4

4

4

Project Objective - Connectivity

4

4

4

4

Project Objective - Accessibility

4

4

4

4

Project Objective - Safety/CPTED

4

4

4

1

Council Staff Workshop

1

4

1

3

TOTAL SCORE

 

42

52

39

41

 

The assessment deems Option 2 as a clear preference with a score of 52/60 or 87%. Option 1, 3 and 4 are ranked as less preferred with scores of between 39/60 and 42/60 or 65% to 70%.

 

3.       Next Steps – Market Sounding

 

Councillors were briefed on 4 August 2015 by staff and consultants advising that a market sounding process was about to commence. As per an email sent to councillors on the dated 27  August 2015, the process commenced on 31 August 2015 and is expected to run for 3 weeks.

 

The market sounding phase involves informal discussions conducted with selected private sector participants to determine the private sector’s reaction to Council’s preferred option. This is referred to as a ‘market sounding’ and the feedback from this process will inform the preferred option which may then need to be refined or adjusted to address any concerns or issues raised by the private sector.  In addition, it will provide Council with market based feedback on the Council’s preferred Option 2. This feedback will then enable Councillors to make an informed decision having regard to both the community consultation and consultation (albeit limited) with the private sector. No part consulted in this process has any rights or advantage over any other parties if and when Council seeks formal market interest in the project.

 

As Councillors were advised, two options are being used in the market sounding process:

 

·     Option 2 because it has been assessed as the preferred option based on Council’s criteria; and

·     Option 4 because the community’s preferences were equally weighted between Options 2 and 4.

 

It is proposed to report the results of the market sounding process to full Council at OMC 6 October 2015.

 

4.       Recommendation - Preferred Option

 

Based on the comprehensive assessment presented in this report, it is recommended that Council adopt Option 2 as the preferred option. However, Council is to be mindful that modifications to this option may be required prior to the EOI process, based on feedback and interest received from the private sector during the market sounding meetings.

 

As Councillors were advised at the briefing on 4 August 2015 consultants have identified that:

 

·     the private sector is unlikely to be attracted to Option 4 as it lacks residential uses to make the project profitable; and

·     the private sector is likely to be attracted to Option 2 although it is likely there will be a desire to increase the residential component of the project through increased height.

 

integrated planning and reporting

 

Places, Spaces and Infrastructure - P4 Revitalisation of our centres

 

Community, People and Culture - C4 Healthy lifestyles

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

 

A range of well planned, clean and safe neighbourhoods and public spaces designed with a strong sense of identity and place.

P4.1.1

Plans to revitalise local centres are being progressively implemented and achieve quality design outcomes in collaboration with key agencies, landholders and the community.

 

P4.1.4

An improvement plan for Lindfield centre is being progressively implemented in collaboration with owners, businesses and state agencies.

 

Implement a place management approach for the local centre improvements to coordinate works and achieve quality outcomes.

 

Engage with relevant stakeholders to establish timing, extent and partnership opportunities.

 

Undertake due diligence and undertake project scope.

 

Identify and engage with the key stakeholders.

 

A healthy, safe, and diverse community that respects our history, and celebrates our differences in a vibrant culture of learning.

C4.1.2

New and enhanced open space and recreational facilities have been delivered to increase community use and enjoyment.

 

 

 

Undertake acquisitions for new parks.

 

Undertake assessment and identify locations for new parks

 

Complete the design for identified parks and include design principles which facilitate passive recreation activities.

 

Construct parks at identified locations and include design principles which facilitate passive recreation activities

 

Governance Matters

 

The following set of governance documents are currently being prepared, or are completed, for the Lindfield Community Hub Project. These documents are intended to guide the day-to-day management of the project, including the market sounding phase and the EOI phase. They are:

 

·     Governance Structure;

·     Probity Management Framework;

·     Probity Plan & Market Sounding Probity Protocol;

·     Scope Management Plan;

·     Communications Strategy;

·     Project Decision Making Framework; and

·     Probity Protocol - Separation of Planning Powers.

 

Probity Management Framework

 

The Probity Framework is required to ensure that each aspect of the process is, and is seen to be, open and transparent, that any conflict of interest is avoided, pecuniary interests declared and that all aspects of the project process complies with relevant legislation.

 

The Probity Framework includes documentation of the relationship between parties involved in the project, including the independence of any parties engaged by Council to undertake any relevant consulting, be it financial, market and economic analysis, or any other relevant assignment for the project.

 

The Probity Framework includes details on the probity fundamentals in accordance with the Independent Commission Against Corruption’s probity advising guidance material as well as key areas and controls to be implemented during the project to ensure that these principles are met. This document was reported to Council on 25 November 2015.

 

Governance Structure

 

The governance structure for the Lindfield Community Hub sets out the hierarchy of decision making bodies and their roles and responsibilities.

 

This document is complete and attached to this report in Attachment A13: Governance Structure, Lindfield Community Hub, GMD Approved and it is recommended that Council adopt this plan.

 

Probity Plan & Market Sounding Probity Protocol

 

This document supports the Probity Management Framework and provides more specific on roles and responsibilities as well as identifying key probity risks. The plan also includes a probity protocol for the market sounding phase of the Lindfield Community Hub project.

 

Council has engaged consultants to undertake market sounding with selected developers on its behalf for the Project. This will involve face to face meetings with developers to determine the level of interest in the Project. The Market Sounding Probity Protocol is for use by Council and its consultants and sets out the probity requirements for the market sounding process to ensure that probity is maintained, that industry members are confident that they can participate fully in the knowledge that proprietary information will be protected and that commercially valuable information is kept confidential.

 

This document is complete and attached to this report at Attachment A14: Lindfield Community Hub Probity Plan & Protocol (Market Sounding) by PBS, August 2015 and it is recommended that Council adopt the Plan and Protocol as attached.

 

Probity Protocol - Separation of Planning Powers

 

The purpose of this Protocol is to formalise a framework for the assessment of the rezoning and development applications, and other related applications, where Council has a land use regulator role and the value of the development warrants consideration by the JRPP ($5 million).

The Protocol is intended to address probity issues arising from Council’s roles as an assessment authority (subject to the role of the JRPP), as a current land owner but also taking into consideration circumstances whereby Council has previously resolved its preferred outcome for the site (such as through master planning initiatives).  

 

This document is currently under preparation and may be reported to Council in the near future.

 

Project Decision Making Framework

 

This document provides a framework to facilitate the effective management all levels of decisions associated with the Lindfield Community Hub Project. The application of this framework will provide an effective and transparent basis for prudent decision making in all aspects of the project.  The process is iterative in nature, requiring decision based on quantifiable data resulting in a transparent and auditable process.

 

This document is complete and attached to this report in Attachment A15:  Lindfield Community Hub, Decision Making Framework, by PBS, 25 August 2015 and it is recommended that Council adopt the Framework as attached to this report.

 

Scope Management Plan

 

This document is currently under preparation and will be reported to Council in the near future.

 

Communications Strategy

 

This document is currently under preparation and will be reported to Council in the near future.

 

RISK MANAGEMENT

 

The following set of risk related documents are currently being prepared, or are completed, for the Lindfield Community Hub Project:

 

·     Risk Management Plan;

·     Risk Management Matrix;

·     Due diligence report.

 

Risk Management Plan

 

This document provides a framework for the effective management of all levels of risk associated with the Lindfield Community Hub Project Centre project; application of the plan will provide an effective basis for prudent decision making in all aspects of the project.

 

This document will achieve this by defining the following:

 

·     Defining the project objectives and scope of risk management activities;

·     Definitions of major risk sources and the criteria used to rate them;

·     The process that will be/has been adopted by the Project Control Group (PCG) to identify, analyse, evaluate, and treat risks (risk assessment) during the project;

·     How reporting on risk status, and changes to risk status, will be undertaken within the project;

·     Establish a sound framework for communicating risk management activities with all project stakeholders; and

·     Define the roles and responsibilities for the management of risk;

 

Risk within this project will be managed using the standards and procedures set out in AS/NZ ISO 31000:2009 – Risk Management – Principals and Guidelines.

 

This document is complete and attached to this report in Attachment A16:  Lindfield Community Hub, Risk Management Plan, by PBS, July 2015 and it is recommended that Council adopt this Plan.

 

Risk Management Matrix

 

A project-specific Risk Management Matrix is currently being prepared in conjunction with Council’s risk officer. The details of this Plan will be reported to Council once finalised.

 

Due Diligence Report

 

A comprehensive due diligence checklist has been prepared and staff are currently seeking all information for Council owned land within the site area of the Lindfield Community Hub. Once compiled the completed report will be reported to Council. The list of items includes the following items:

 

·     a section 149 certificate for the land;

·     a diagram for the land from a recognised sewerage authority that purports to show the location of the authority’s sewer in relation to the land;

·     a copy of the title search for the lot;

·     a copy of a plan for the land issued by the LPI;

·     a copy of all deeds, dealings and other instruments lodged or registered as shown on the title search for the land that creates an easement, profit à prendre, restriction on the use of land or positive covenant that burdens or benefits the land;

·     a survey report that discloses: any encroachment onto any adjoining land by any building or structure other than a dividing fence, and any encroachment onto the Transfer Land by any building or structure on any adjoining land other than a dividing fence;

·     if the land is subject to any adverse affectations, information on those affectations;

·     if there is any matter in relation to any building or structure on the land that is included in the sale of the land that would justify the making of any upgrading or demolition order, information on that matter;

·     any building certificates that have been issued in relation to a building or structure on the land;

·     if the land is burdened by a positive covenant imposed under Division 4 of Part 6 to the Conveyancing Act 1919, information on whether any amount is payable under section 88F of that Act in respect of the land, and

·     if the land is subject to an annual charge for the provision of coastal protection services under the Local Government Act 1993, a section 603 certificate in respect of that land;

·     Geotechnical Survey and bore holes;

·     Topographic and boundary survey (including encroachments as above);

·     Environmental Assessment (contamination): Phase 1 and 2;

·     Arboriculture Study;

·     Flora and fauna study.

 

Financial Considerations

 

As reported earlier in this report the preferred option (Option 2) has been assessed by Council’s consultants Jones Lang LaSalle as providing for a ‘breakeven’ financial outcome for Council given the level of provision of residential and major retail uses. Their advice is that this as an acceptable basis on which to move forward with the project at this stage.

 

The financial model for this project includes a contingency sum available to fund some additional community works which might include, and subject to Council resolution:

 

·     A pedestrian bridge over the Pacific Highway and associated land acquisition;

·     Land purchases by negotiation for road widening identified in the Lindfield Traffic Study, 2014;

·     Land purchases by negotiation for a new pedestrian access way connecting Woodford Lane and the Pacific Highway;

·     Land purchases by negotiation and/or works costs associated with incorporating AUSGRID and/or Lindfield Scouts within the development site.

 

The costs of these items are as yet unquantified (except for the bridge which was reported to Council at OMC 9 September 2014 with an estimated cost of $2.7-4.6 million in 2014 dollars) however it is considered highly unlikely that all these elements will be funded within the contingency allocated.

 

Council may need to seek additional development yield from the project for what it might see as important additional works. Alternatively Council may need to find other funding sources however it is noted that the latter course of action is not consistent with Council’s adopted Resourcing Strategy.

 

Updates on these matters will be reported to Council as costs are quantified and priorities identified.

 

Social Considerations

 

Council, as part of the Delivery Program 2013-2017 and Operational Plan 2013-2014, seeks to revitalise the Lindfield local centre to improve the vitality and liveability. The key objective of the project is to create a vibrant community hub for Lindfield incorporating a new branch library and community centre, town centre park, commuter and community parking with other uses such as retail and residential spaces. Council envisages this to be a rare opportunity to create a precinct which will be a valuable asset to the residents of Lindfield and the wider community to gather in a quality urban environment.

 

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

 

As noted above a comprehensive due diligence checklist has been prepared and staff are currently seeking all information for Council owned land within the site area of the Lindfield Community Hub. The list of items includes the environmental considerations such as a geotechnical survey, environmental assessments (contamination), an arboriculture study and a flora and fauna study.

 

Community Consultation

 

1.       Stakeholder Consultation

 

There are a number of key stakeholders for this project including: Lindfield 2nd 3rd Scouts Group; Transport for NSW (TFNSW); AUSGRID; and the Ku-ring-gai Youth Development Services (KYDS).

 

Below is an update on discussions with these groups; these matters brought to Councillor’s attention at briefing 4 August 2014.

 

1.1     Lindfield 2nd 3rd Scouts Group

 

Lindfield 2nd 3rd Scouts occupy a hall located at 1A Beaconsfield Parade, Lindfield (Lot 2 of DP184154; Lot c of DP 399995; and Lot A of 327729). The property is owned by the Boy Scouts Association.

 

In May 2015 Lindfield 2nd 3rd Scouts made a submission to Council following the exhibition of the Lindfield Community Hub options; in their submission the Group expressed interest in relocating from their current building into the proposed community hub building. The Group see a strong synergy between their activities and the proposed activities within the hub.

 

The preferred option (Option 2) envisaged the potential of utilising the Scouts’ land as part of the community hub project as shown in Figure 13 below. It can be seen that the Scouts’ land is proposed to accommodate residential uses.

 

Figure 13: Option 2 showing location of Scouts land

 

Since receiving the submission, Council officers and consultants have met with representative of Lindfield Scouts to gain further insight into their requirements. The meetings have been positive, and discussions have indicated that Scouts position is as follows:

 

·     Scouts are supportive of the community hub project;

·     Scouts have not yet made a decision to relocate and this would be dependent on ongoing talks with Council;

·     There are three levels of Scouts management (National, branch and local) that must approve the possible relocation, any of which can refuse the offer to relocate;

·     Scouts will not consider a relocation offer that provides any lesser accommodation than they currently enjoy.

·     Scouts may wish to allow for expansion room to allow for the possible relocation of Scouts regional office into a new facility with them;

·     They have considered alternate locations nominated by Council off the site however they find the locations are not acceptable due to space constraints and/or distance from the rail station;

·     Scouts have prepared a sketch that outlines their current and future spatial needs;

·     Scouts Lindfield wish to enter into a Memorandum of Understanding with Council. This would allow them to seek approval from the various levels of the organisation prior to commencing detailed negotiations with Council;

·     The Group has constituted a sub-committee to advance discussions with Council to relocate into the community hub; and

·     If for whatever reason Scouts are to stay in their current hall, their main interest is in ensuring that community hub project does not adversely impact their operation.

 

Given the time frame for an agreement between Council and Scouts is likely to take between 6-12 months, the inclusion of the Scouts’ land within the preferred option at this stage of the project has been identified as a significant project risk. The multiple levels of approval across the Scouts organisation also add considerable uncertainty. If Council is of a mind to adopt preferred Option 2 for this project as a result of this report the next step will be to advertise an Expression of Interest (EOI) to the private sector seeking financial offers. Consultants engaged by Council to assist with the EOI have advised not to include the Scouts’ land as part of this process so that tenderers have high levels of certainty. However, the consultants have advised that the potential for the Scouts land to be included and the status of engagement with Scouts (e.g. Memorandum of Understanding between Scouts and Council) be fully described in the EOI so that tenderers responses can accommodate this potentiality via alternate proposals.

 

It is important to be clear that this does not mean Lindfield Scouts will not be included in the project in the future. Option 2 (if adopted) will be the preferred master plan option and Council staff and consultants will continue to work with representatives of Lindfield Scouts to facilitate this outcome.

 

In terms of the proposed compulsory acquisition of Drovers Way; Scouts have expressed concern that their trailer access to the rear of the Scouts Hall will be impeded by the closure. Scouts have therefore requested that the road be only partly closed in order that their trailer access may be left unimpeded. The merits or purported rights of Scouts on this issue are not discussed or conceded here.

 

1.2     Transport for NSW (TfNSW)

 

In May 2012 the NSW Government announced by media release it will build a new commuter car park comprising 240 new spaces in Lindfield. Since that time, and in accordance with Council resolutions, staff have worked in close liaison with representatives from TFNSW to resolve the location and number of commuter car parking in Lindfield through the two Lindfield projects – the Village Green and the Community Hub.

 

Given the stage of planning for the two projects TFNSW has suggested that Council submit a formal proposal to the Assistant Deputy Secretary - Planning Division of Transport for NSW for the Minister’s approval as the basis for commencing negotiations and completing an agreement between the parties for the delivery of 240 commuter car spaces in Lindfield local centre. The proposal will cover two key aspects:

 

·     The proposed location or spatial arrangement of the commuter car parking

·     The estimated cost of the car parking

 

A proposal is currently under preparation and will be reported to Council in the near future.

 

1.3     AUSGRID

 

An AUSGRID substation is located at 1 Beaconsfield Parade, Lindfield (Lot 1 of DP184042), adjoining the Scouts land. The property is owned by the AUSGRID.

 

The preferred option (Option 2) envisaged the potential of utilising the AUSGRID land as part of the community hub project as shown in Figure 14. It can be seen that the AUSGRID land is proposed to accommodate residential uses.

 

Figure 14: Option 2 showing location of Scouts land

 

Several meetings have been held to date between representatives of AUSGRID, Council staff and Council-appointed consultants. AUSGRID have verbally indicated that they may be willing to move from their current location and into one of the basement levels of the community hub building, provided they are remunerated at market rate for their land and a new substation is built within the development. AUSGRID have a standard procedure with respect to sale of their land and change of premises; the final agreement will be determined by AUSGRID’s property section in discussions with Council staff. This approach is not unusual for a development of this scale, though it is as yet unquantified, and may be a project risk.

 

Staff and consultants will continue to meet with representatives of AUSGRID and as discussions progress the outcomes will be reported to Council. Further work will also be undertaken to determine the financial implications and risk profile for the project.

 

1.4     Ku-ring-gai Youth Development Services (KYDS)

 

At OMC 11 November 2014 Council resolved to “relocate the Ku-ring-gai Youth Development Service (KYDS) service within the proposed Lindfield community hub (upon completion of the facility) and that the new facility provide purpose-built rooms to be designed in consultation with representatives of KYDS to meet their specific requirements”.

 

Since that time two meetings have been held with representatives of KYDS to discuss the proposed relocation of the service to the new community hub building once constructed. Council’s architect (SJB) attended the second meeting to understand the spatial needs.

 

KYDS have since written to Council (Refer Attachment A17:  Letter from KYDS to Council dated 26 June, 2015) setting out their preferred location – which is within the hub building – and their likely space and functional requirements post-2017. Current planning assumes replacement of similar space to what KYDS currently occupy, albeit, of course, new and purpose-built. Any additional space requirements or an alternate location are a matter for Council at a future point in time.

 

2.       Community Consultation

 

Council started the conversation with the local community on the opportunities and vision for the Lindfield Community Hub in early 2014 by creating the ‘Activate Lindfield’ initiative. Since that time 692 residents, business owners and other interested stakeholders have signed-up to the Activate Lindfield e-newsletter.

 

In late 2014 Council established a web page for the project; this is continually updated as new information comes to hand such as Council reports and consultant reports.

 

In April 2015 flyers were sent by post to 8,032 residents in Lindfield, Roseville and Killara to announce the upcoming exhibition commencing in April 2015. Council also produced a brochure for residents to take home from the exhibition to assist with completing the on-line survey.

 

The public exhibition went for eight weeks from Saturday 21 March to Friday 8 May 2015 with a further extension to Thursday 14 May 2014. During this time the community, invited to provide feedback on the four options; there were numerous ways residents could ask questions and provide feedback on the designs:

 

·     Attend the exhibition launch event which was held on Saturday 21 March;

·     Complete a Lindfield Community Hub survey on-line;

·     Visit the mobile exhibition space at Council’s Woodford Lane car park where Council staff were available to talk about the designs at the following times:

-     8am - 11am on Tuesdays

-     11am – 2pm on Wednesdays

-     3pm – 6pm on Thursdays

-     An option was also provided for groups of six or more, to make an appointment for another time

·     Register to attend a workshop;

·     Complete a printed survey which was available at Council’s Customer Service Centre at 818 Pacific Highway Gordon during business hours;

·     Mail a submission to Ku-ring-gai Council Locked Bag 1056 Pymble NSW 2073; or

·     Join a discussion using one of the online “Have Your Say” tools which include 'Q&A', 'online forum' and 'Submit comment direct to Council'.

 

The following table summarises the engagement method and number of people involved.

 

Consultation method

Respondent group

Number 

Exhibition launch

General community

200

Mobile exhibition space

General Community

36 attended to discuss project with staff over 8 weeks

Lindfield Community Hub Survey

General community

206 responses

1 x Lindfield Community Hub opt-in workshop

Local residents and businesses

Cancelled due to

low registration

1 x Lindfield Community Hub recruited workshop

Recruited (via telephone) local residents randomly selected and representative of a broad range of age groups, genders, and cultural backgrounds

28 participants

On-line questions via “Have Your Say”

General Community

9 questions via the website. Responses were provided by Council staff

Submissions to Council

General Community

2 submissions

Web site traffic

General Community

1035 unique visits & 794 active visitors

 

Internal Consultation

 

Internal consultation for this project is prescribed by the Governance structure for this project as follows:

·    Ku-ring-gai Council / Elected Officials;

·    Executive Steering Committee (GMD);

·    Project Sponsor - Director Strategy and Environment;

·    Project Manager - Team Leader Urban Design;

·    Project Control Group (PCG) (meetings are currently held bi-monthly);

·    Project Working Group (PWG);

·    Tender Review Committee.

 

Summary

 

Four illustrative master plan options for the Lindfield Community Hub were exhibited by Council during the period 21 March 2015 and 14 May 2015.

 

A thorough assessment of the exhibited options is now complete. The assessment process has deemed Option 2 as the preferred option for a wide variety of reasons, financial and traffic considerations being of primary significance.

 

Council’s consultants have commenced a market sounding process based on options 2 and 4, these being the most favoured by the community. A clear idea as to the private sector’s view on the options will emerge from this process; the feedback and recommendations from the market sounding process will be reported to Council at OMC 6th October 2015. Further refinements to Option 2 may be required prior to Council advertising an Expression of Interest.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That Council:

 

A.       Adopt Option 2 (as exhibited) as the preferred option for the Lindfield Community Hub subject to further refinements or adjustments that may necessary to address any concerns or issues raised by the private sector prior during market sounding;

B.       Adopt the Governance Structure for the Lindfield Community Hub as attached to this report;

C.       Adopt the Probity Plan & Market Sounding Probity Protocol for the Lindfield Community Hub as attached to this report;

D.       Adopt the Project Decision Making Framework for the Lindfield Community Hub as attached to this report; and

E.       Adopt the Risk Management Plan for the Lindfield Community Hub as attached to this report.

F.       That staff report back to council advising on the results of the market sounding and on any recommended refinements to the preferred option prior to advertising an Expression of Interest.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Bill Royal

Team Leader Urban Design

 

 

 

 

Sarah Koshy

Senior Urban Designer

 

 

 

 

Antony Fabbro

Manager Urban & Heritage Planning - Strategy and Environment

 

 

 

Attachments:

A1View

Exhibited Development Options

 

2015/068839

 

A2View

Activate Lindfield, Lindfield Hub, Community Engagement Outcomes Report by Cred Consultants

 

2015/150732

 

A3View

Scouts Submission, 2nd and 3rd Lindfield Scouts Group, 08 May 2015

 

2015/116977

 

A4View

Activate Lindfield, Submission to Ku-ring-gal Council on Lindfield Community Hub, 08 May 2015.

 

Click here to open

 

A5View

Lindfield Community Hub, Budget Estimate, Preliminary Estimate Report, 15 April 2015

 

2015/091591

 

A6View

Peer Review of MBM Cost Estimate, 25 May 2015

 

2015/128532

 

A7View

Addendum No. 2 Feasibility Analysis of Exhibited Options 1-4 Prepared by SJB Urban, by JLL, dated 21 July 2015

 

Confidential

 

A8View

Lindfield Community Hub, Assessment of Options Against Objectives, April 2015.

 

2015/226972

 

A9View

Lindfield Community Hub, Concept Design Options, Transport Review, by Peopletrans, August 2015

 

2015/200303

 

A10View

Lindfield Community Hub Review of Concept Design Options (Community Facilities), 06 May 2015; by Elton Consulting

 

2015/111423

 

A11View

Lindfield Community Hub, Staff Assessment Workshop Summary, June 2015

 

2015/226999

 

A12View

Local Centres – Major Projects, PCG Meeting Minutes, 05 Aug 2015

 

2015/227007

 

A13View

Governance Structure, Lindfield Community Hub, GMD Approved

 

2015/225042

 

A14View

Lindfield Community Hub Probity Plan & Protocol (Market Sounding) by PBS, August 2015

 

2015/224857

 

A15View

Lindfield Community Hub, Decision Making Framework, by PBS, 25 August 2015

 

2015/225012

 

A16View

Lindfield Community Hub, Risk Management Plan, by PBS, July 2015

 

2015/224958

 

A17View

Letter from KYDS to Council dated 26 June 2015

 

2015/226144

  


APPENDIX No: 1 - Exhibited Development Options

 

Item No: GB.9

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 2 - Activate Lindfield, Lindfield Hub, Community Engagement Outcomes Report by Cred Consultants

 

Item No: GB.9

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 3 - Scouts Submission, 2nd and 3rd Lindfield Scouts Group, 08 May 2015

 

Item No: GB.9

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 5 - Lindfield Community Hub, Budget Estimate, Preliminary Estimate Report, 15 April 2015

 

Item No: GB.9

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 6 - Peer Review of MBM Cost Estimate, 25 May 2015

 

Item No: GB.9

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 8 - Lindfield Community Hub, Assessment of Options Against Objectives, April 2015.

 

Item No: GB.9

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 9 - Lindfield Community Hub, Concept Design Options, Transport Review, by Peopletrans, August 2015

 

Item No: GB.9

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 10 - Lindfield Community Hub Review of Concept Design Options (Community Facilities), 06 May 2015; by Elton Consulting

 

Item No: GB.9

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 11 - Lindfield Community Hub, Staff Assessment Workshop Summary, June 2015

 

Item No: GB.9

 


 


 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 12 - Local Centres – Major Projects, PCG Meeting Minutes, 05 Aug 2015

 

Item No: GB.9

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 13 - Governance Structure, Lindfield Community Hub, GMD Approved

 

Item No: GB.9

 


 


APPENDIX No: 14 - Lindfield Community Hub, Plan & Protocol (Market sounding)  by PBS, August 2015

 

Item No: GB.9

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 15 - Lindfield Community Hub, Decision Making Framework, by PBS, 25 August 2015

 

Item No: GB.9

 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 16 - Lindfield Community Hub, Risk Management Plan, by PBS, July 2015

 

Item No: GB.9

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 17 - Letter from KYDS to Council dated 26 June 2015

 

Item No: GB.9

 


 


 


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 8 September 2015

GB.10 / 727

 

 

Item GB.10

S10066

 

31 July 2015

 

 

Heritage Listing - 28 Cook Road Killara

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

purpose of report:

To have Council consider 28 Cook Road, Killara as a potential heritage item under the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015.

 

 

background:

On 21 April 2015 Council resolved to make an interim heritage order over 28 Cook Road, Killara. On 24 April 2015 the interim heritage order came into effect.

 

 

comments:

A heritage assessment has been prepared for the local heritage listing of 28 Cook Road, Killara.

 

 

recommendation:

That a planning proposal be prepared to list 28 Cook Road, Killara as an item of local heritage significance under KLEP 2015.

 

 

 


  

Purpose of Report

To have Council consider 28 Cook Road, Killara as a potential heritage item under the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015.

 

 

Background

 

On 21 April 2015 Council resolved to make an interim heritage order over 28 Cook Road, Killara. On 24 April 2015 the interim heritage order came into effect. The IHO provided Council with time to undertake further historical research of the property to establish if it warrants a formal heritage listing.

 

Under the conditions of the Interim Heritage Order, which will lapse on 24 October 2015 (and the property will no longer be protected as a heritage item), unless Council passes a resolution that places the item on the heritage schedule of the KLEP 2015 to protect and manage the item or it nominates the item for inclusion on the State Heritage Register.

 

Comments

 

An independent heritage assessment of 28 Cook Road Killara (Lot 3, DP 516966) has been undertaken by the heritage consultants Conroy Heritage Planning and found it is of local heritage significance and should be included as a heritage item under Schedule 5 and on the heritage map of the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 (KLEP 2015).

 

A heritage item is a place, which may include built structures, landscapes, moveable objects and relics, that have recognised cultural significance. In NSW, heritage items of local significance are assessed against 7 criteria:

 

a)   Historical significance – an item is important in the course, or pattern, of the cultural or natural history of the local area;

b)   Historical association significance – an item has strong or special association with the life or works of a person, or group of persons, of importance to the local area’s cultural or natural history;

c)   Aesthetic significance – an item is important in demonstrating aesthetic characteristics and/or a high degree of creative or technical achievement in the local area;

d)   Social significance – an item has a strong or special association with a particular community or cultural group in the local area, for social, cultural or spiritual reasons;

e)   Technical/research significance – an item has potential to yield information that will contribute to an understanding of the local area scientific, cultural or natural history;

f)    Rarity – an item possesses uncommon, rare or endangered aspects of the local area’s cultural or natural history; and

g)   Representativeness - an item is important in demonstrating the principal characteristics of a class of the local area’s cultural or natural places; or cultural or natural environments.

 

28 Cook Road, Killara fulfils all seven criteria for heritage significance. In particular, it has historical and architectural significance to Ku-ring-gai. A heritage assessment for 28 Cook Road, Killara can be found at Attachment 1 and the completed State Heritage Inventory form at Attachment 2.

 

History and significance of 28 Cook Road, Killara

 

The property at 28 Cook Road Killara, known as Glen Brae, was constructed in 1904 by Robert Baker, a retired orchardist. Robert Baker’s parents, William and Jane Baker were among the earliest European settlers in the district. Robert Baker spent his adult life working the land in Killara. He erected Glen Brae as a place to live out his years of retirement from farming life. The building is a very rare and surviving example of a dwelling in the Ku-ring-gai LGA that provides evidence of the historically significant transition of the area from the semi-rural cultural landscape of the nineteenth century, to the emergent pattern of suburban development that came to dominate the twentieth century.

 

Its built form is consistent with the traditional Australian ‘farmhouse’, in particular it has simple floor plan and wide verandahs, beneath a simple and prominent roof form.  It is also significant because it is a late example of the farmhouse style, while also exhibiting the principal characteristics of the Federation bungalow style.

 

The property exterior and interior are substantially intact with alterations to the main building being minor and not impacting on the overall significance of Glen Brae. The attention to detail of the interior and external finishes of this property are high. Examples include the original fireplaces with intact tiling and marble mantles (unique to each room), the joinery throughout and the range of pressed metal ceilings that have retained original details such as leaf-patterned covers over the joins in the cornice-sheets in the corners of each room.

 

The property setting to Cook Road, while altered, retains the open character and is evocative of the rural garden, allowing the original setting of the house to continue to be interpreted from the public domain. 

 

Condition of 28 Cook Road, Killara

 

The property at 28 Cook Road, Killara appears to be in very good condition throughout with only minor settlement cracking. The property had been occupied as a family home prior to the sale in March 2014. The sale photos show a well maintained house and garden. When the property was inspected at the end of May 2015 the house was still in good condition, however, the pool and garden showed some signs of neglect. Some damage had occurred to the north-east corner gutter but this was repairable. 

 

Given the cultural significance of 28 Cook Road, Killara as a heritage place to Ku-ring-gai it is recommended a planning proposal be prepared to include it in the KLEP 2015 as a heritage item under Schedule 5 and on the heritage map.

 

integrated planning and reporting

 

Theme 3: Places, Spaces and Infrastructure

 

 

 

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

Ku-ring-gai’s heritage is protected, promoted and responsibly managed.

 

Strategies, plans and processes are in place to effectively protect and preserve Ku-ring-gai’s heritage assets.

Identify gaps in existing strategies and plans.

 

 

Governance Matters

 

This report addresses the first stage in obtaining a gateway for a Planning Proposal which seeks to list an item of local heritage significance under an amendment to the KLEP 2015.

 

If the planning proposal is supported by the Department, the draft plan will be placed on exhibition seeking further State agency and stakeholder feedback prior to being reported back to Council.

 

The process for the preparation and implementation of planning proposals is governed by the provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.

 

Council will seek the plan-making delegation under Section 23 of the EP&A Act to finalise the Planning Proposal. This involves Council taking on the Director General’s function under s59(1) of the Act in liaising with the Parliamentary Counsel’s Office (PCO) to draft the required local environmental plan to give effect to the Planning Proposal as well the Minister’s function under s59(2) of the Act in making the Plan.

 

Risk Management

 

There is a community expectation that places of heritage significance within the Ku-ring-gai Council LGA will be identified and protected. There is a strategic risk of damaging the reputation of Council if these culturally significant places are not identified and considered for protection.

 

Financial Considerations

 

The cost of preparing this report is covered by the Ku-ring-gai draft Principal Local Environmental Plan - Urban Planning & Heritage Budget – Strategy and Environment Department.

 

Social Considerations

 

The identification and protection of Ku-ring-gai’s heritage places contributes to the ongoing conservation of Ku-ring-gai’s community valued historic landscape and garden suburbs

 

Environmental Considerations

 

The retention and conservation of heritage places has an important role in protecting the environment. The environmental sustainability benefits afforded by the retention of heritage places includes the substantial reduction in building demolition and new construction waste, and the conservation of embodied energy in the existing buildings.

 

 

Community Consultation

 

As part of making the Interim Heritage Order for the site, the IHO was published in the NSW Government Gazette. The property owners and the NSW Heritage Council were notified, along with a public notice placed in the North Shore Times on 1 May 2015.

 

The affected property owners will be notified of this report going to council and will be further notified and have the opportunity to provide feedback during the formal exhibition period.

 

Should the Planning Proposal receive a favourable Gateway Determination, it will be exhibited in accordance with the Department’s Gateway Determination requirements and with explanatory heritage information. This will involve appropriate notification and receipt of submissions on the draft plan from the relevant State agencies and the general community and a further report back to Council.

 

Internal Consultation

 

Consultation with relevant Departments of Council has taken place in preparing this report, in particular, Development and Regulation. In addition, Council’s Heritage Reference Committee has reviewed the proposed heritage item.

 

Summary

 

An independent heritage study to assess the heritage significance of 28 Cook Road Killara has found that the property is of local heritage significance. The purpose of this report is to have Council consider the inclusion of 28 Cook Road ,Killara as a potential heritage item under the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

A.       That Council proceed to prepare a planning proposal to amend KLEP 2015 to include:

 

·     28 Cook Road Killara (Lot 3, DP 516966) as a potential heritage item in Schedule 5 and on the Heritage Map.

 

B.       That the Planning Proposal be forwarded to the Department of Planning and Environment for a Gateway Determination in accordance with the provisions of the EP&A Act and Regulations.

 

C.       That in order to facilitate an expedient gateway determination, the NSW Heritage Office be consulted prior to submitting the Planning Proposal to the Department of Planning and Environment. Should comments not be received within 21 days, the planning proposal is to be submitted regardless.

 

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

 

E.       That upon receipt of a Gateway Determination, the exhibition and consultation process is carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 and with the Gateway Determination requirements.

 

F.       That a report be brought back to Council at the conclusion of the exhibition period.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Andreana Kennedy

Heritage Specialist Planner

 

 

 

 

Antony Fabbro

Acting Director Strategy and Environment

 

 

Attachments:

A1View

Heritage assessment of 28 Cook Road Killara

 

2015/226165

 

A2View

State Heritage Inventory form - 28 Cook Road Killara

 

2015/226169

  


APPENDIX No: 1 - Heritage assessment of 28 Cook Road Killara

 

Item No: GB.10

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 2 - State Heritage Inventory form - 28 Cook Road Killara

 

Item No: GB.10

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 8 September 2015

GB.11 / 884

 

 

Item GB.11

S10453

 

24 August 2015

 

 

Consideration of Submissions on the Planning Proposal to heritage list 6 Caithness Street, Killara and 51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

purpose of report:

For Council to consider the submissions received during the public exhibition of the planning proposal to heritage list 6 Caithness Street, Killara and 5 Warrangi Street, Turramurra.

 

 

background:

On 14 July 2015 Council considered a report on submissions to a planning proposal to amend KLEP 2015 and heritage list 5 properties. Two properties:

·     6 Caithness Street, Killara and

·     51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra

were deferred from that decision for a Councillor briefing.

The planning proposal was placed on public exhibition between 24 April 2015 and 22 May 2015.

 

 

comments:

A total of 8 submissions were received during the public exhibition of the planning proposal with regards to 6 Caithness Street and 51 Warrangi Street. A councillor briefing was held on 17 August 2015.

 

 

recommendation:

That Council take no further action on the heritage listing for 6 Caithness Street, Killara and 51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra.

 

 

 


  

Purpose of Report

For Council to consider the submissions received during the public exhibition of the planning proposal to heritage list 6 Caithness Street, Killara and 5 Warrangi Street, Turramurra.

 

 

Background

 

Council at its meeting held on 26 November 2013 resolved to remove a number of potential heritage items from the Heritage Map and Schedule 5 of the then draft KLEP 2013, and defer them for further investigation and re-exhibition.

 

Council engaged the services of a Heritage Consultant, Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners Pty Ltd, to conduct an independent detailed assessment of the heritage significance of 14 of the deferred properties. The heritage report is included at Attachment A2. The report by Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners Pty Ltd recommended the listing of 6 Caithness Street and 51 Warrangi Street.

 

Council at its meeting held on 25 November 2014 considered a report on the heritage assessment by Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners on 14 of the deferred properties and resolved the following:

 

A.   That a planning proposal be prepared , in accordance with Section 55 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 to amend the Draft Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2014 to include the following properties on Schedule 5 and on the Heritage Map as  heritage items of local significance:

 

i.    51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra (Lot 1 DP580008)

ii.   4-6 Neringah Avenue South, Wahroonga (Lot 55  and 56 DP2666)

iii.  88 Fox Valley Road, Wahroonga (Lot 15 DP568694)

iv.  12 Bobbin Head Road, Pymble (Lot 1 DP200728)

v.   6 Caithness Street, Killara (Lot 6 DP14824)

 

B.   That the planning proposal be submitted to the Department of Planning and Infrastructure for a Gateway Determination in accordance with Section 56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

 

C.   That in order to facilitate a more timely Gateway Determination, the NSW Heritage Office be consulted prior to submitting the planning proposal to the Department of Planning and Environment. Should comments not be received within 21 days, the planning proposal is to be submitted regardless.

 

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

E.   That upon receipt of a Gateway Determination, the exhibition and consultation process is carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and with the Gateway Determination requirements.

 

F.   That a report be brought back to Council at the conclusion of the exhibition period.

 

G.   That Council take no further action on the heritage listing for the following properties:

 

i.    59 Warrangi Street, Turramurra (Lot 1 DP215730)

ii.   6 Munderah Street, Wahroonga (Lot 2 DP552850)

iii.  10 Munderah Street, Wahroonga (Lot 1 DP216542)

iv.  66 Pentecost Avenue, Pymble (Lot B DP103589)

v.   60-62 Pentecost Avenue, Pymble (Lot 1 and 2 Sec DP13451)

vi.  33 Grandview Street, Pymble (Lot 2 DP228015)

vii. 8 Braeside, Wahroonga (Lot 2 DP52186)

viii.     8-10 Neringah Avenue South, Wahroonga (Lot 54 DP2666 and Lot 2 DP585805)

ix.  35 Springdale Road, East Killara

 

Council at its meeting of 2 February 2015 resolved to place an Interim Heritage Order under Section 25 of the NSW Heritage Act 1977 on 6 Caithness Street, Killara. The Interim Heritage Order was published in the NSW Government Gazette on 6 February 2015.

 

On 3 February 2015, the planning proposal was referred to the Heritage Division of the NSW Office and Environment and Heritage (OEH) for comment prior to submitting to the NSW Department of Planning and Environment for a Gateway Determination. The OEH submission outlined that there were no objections to the listing of the proposed 5 items.  A copy of the planning proposal and appendices is included as Attachments A1 – A7.

 

The NSW Department of Planning and Environment issued a Gateway Determination under Section 56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 on 10 April 2015 (Attachment A8).

 

The planning proposal was placed on public exhibition in accordance with the requirements of the Gateway Determination from Friday 24 April 2015 to Friday 22 May 2015.

 

Council at its meeting of 14 July 2015 resolved to make the Plan under delegated authority to include 12 Bobbin Head Road, Pymble and 88 Fox Valley Road, Wahroonga in Schedule 5 and on the Heritage Map of KLEP 2015.

 

At the Council meeting of 28 July 2015, Council resolved;

 

E.   That Council defers any decision in regards to 6 Caithness Street and 51 Warrangi Street for a Council briefing from a Heritage expert.

 

Comments

 

On 17 August 2015 a briefing was held with Councillors to brief them on this matter.

 

A heritage item is a place, which may include built structures, landscapes, moveable objects and relics, that has recognised cultural significance. In NSW, heritage items of local significance are assessed against 7 criteria:

 

a)   Historical significance – an item is important in the course, or pattern, of the cultural or natural history of the local area;

b)   Historical association significance – an item has strong or special association with the life or works of a person, or group of persons, of importance to the local area’s cultural or natural history;

c)   Aesthetic significance – an item is important in demonstrating aesthetic characteristics and/or a high degree of creative or technical achievement in the local area;

d)   Social significance – an item has a strong or special association with a particular community or cultural group in the local area, for social, cultural or spiritual reasons;

e)   Technical/research significance – an item has potential to yield information that will contribute to an understanding of the local area scientific, cultural or natural history;

f)    Rarity – an item possesses uncommon, rare or endangered aspects of the local area’s cultural or natural history; and

g)   Representativeness - an item is important in demonstrating the principal characteristics of a class of the local area’s cultural or natural places; or cultural or natural environments.

 

Items are not excluded from the heritage schedule solely because they share similar characteristics to items already represented. Items do not need to be significant in all of these criteria, many have significance in only 1 or 2 of the criteria.

 

As a result of the public exhibition of the planning proposal, a total of 8 submissions were received with regards to 6 Caithness Street and 51 Warrangi Street:

 

Property

Submissions received in support of heritage listing

Submissions received not in support of heritage listing

6 Caithness Street, Killara

5

2

51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra

0

1

 

A summary of the public submissions along with a detailed comment and assessment is included at Attachment A9.

 

The purpose of the public exhibition is to facilitate public participation in the planning process. The submissions along with the original assessment were analysed to form this report’s recommendation. The key findings of the analysis of the submissions against the original assessment is provided below.

 

6 Caithness Street, Killara

 

The Inter-war bungalow at 6 Caithness Street, Killara was assessed at having significance for its aesthetic contribution and its historical association with the architect Donald Esplin and a former president of the Killara Golf Club, T.K. Smith.

 

The Architect Esplin designed some 400 buildings. 3 of his buildings are recognized as heritage places under Ku-ring-gai Council’s LEPs:

 

·     9 Yarabah Avenue, Gordon;

·     22 Hastings Road, Warrawee; and

·     26 Billyard Avenue Warrawee.

 

Submissions were received both in support and against the heritage listing. Those in support of the listing commented on the aesthetic value and historical association significance. Those against the listing highlighted the loss of aesthetic significance and the unsympathetic changes that occurred to the property. This was supported by an independent heritage assessment by NBRS + Partners which challenged the assessment of aesthetic significance.

 

It should be noted that recent changes to the house, being those in the last 12 months, are considered to be reversible. Consistent with the principles of the Burra Charter, there is extensive knowledge of the form, nature and appearance of the original elements that were changed such that it would be appropriate to replace the new aluminium window and glass balustrade with appropriate replicas to those found in historic house photos. These recent changes are not the reason for not pursuing the heritage listing of 6 Caithness Street Killara.

 

The proposed listing and submissions have been further reviewed and it is recommended the listing not proceed for the following reasons:

 

1.       While Esplin was a significant architect this is not a remarkable example of his work nor is it a particularly remarkable example of the Inter-war bungalow style:

 

This view was supported by Council’s heritage advisor and the report by NBRS + Partners. Other fine examples of Esplin’s bungalow work include the famed ‘Esplin Bungalow’ located at 11 Cranbrook Avenue, Cremorne. This house is cited in numerous architectural texts and by the AIA as an early and highly accomplished Californian bungalow. Another fine example of his more modest bungalow work is 44-46 Lang Road , known as Forster and Braelin. Constructed for politician and timber merchant, Sir Allen Taylor and his wife Lady Adele Taylor, the dwelling is a substantial, though conservative, early Inter-war Californian bungalow style house whose design intent has not been compromised by rendering or changes to the garden setting.

 

Additionally, according to the description of 6 Caithness Street contained within the book Donald Thomas Esplin, Sydney Architect, His Life and Work (Irving and Irving 2008) “the verandah supports are conceived as a three-bay ensemble of Tuscan columns ….in  a classical design motif typically favoured more by Mould than by Esplin”. The inference being the aesthetic is more that of Mould than Esplin. Based on the association with Esplin it is not recommended to list 6 Caithness Street, Killara.

 

2.       While T.K. Smith was a valued member of Killara Golf Club his short mid-term presidency was unremarkable with no significant events or changes occurring at the club over this short presidency. An adequate comparison with the six earlier presidents has not been provided. The historical association with T.K. Smith is not considered significant

 

The assessment by Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners Pty Ltd described T.K. Smith as an early president when in fact his presidency was not until 1946, nearly 50 years since the club began. The Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners Pty Ltd assessment failed to undertake a comparison between T.K. Smith and the other presidents to obtain an understanding of what being a significant president of the club may entail. The following is a comparison of the terms and significant events for the preceding presidents, and the immediately following president to T.K. Smith:

 

 

 

 

Charles Danvers

1899-1901

First president (Lindfield)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

J George Edwards

1902-1910

Moved course  to Killara – known as the father of Killara

 

 

 

 

Henry Braddon

1911

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Charles E Graham

1912-1928

War years, expansion

William Maschwitz

1929-1935

New clubhouse

 

 

 

 

 

 

Frederick Greaves

1936-1945

War years

 

 

 

T. Keith Smith

1946-1947

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

John F. Fenwick

1948-1951

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

The historical association with T.K. Smith is not considered a convincing reason for including 6 Caithness Street as a heritage item.

 

3.       The dramatic and significant change in setting from single dwellings to 5 storey apartments has resulted in a loss of amenity to the residents of 2, 4 and 6 Caithness Street and a loss of setting to any potential heritage item:

 

The properties at 2, 4 and 6 Caithness Street were conceived as bungalows surrounded by single dwellings with established gardens in a suburban setting. The reality on the ground today is these houses are wedged between 5 storey apartments directly to their north and to the west. There is no longer any private open space in the backyards of these properties. More specifically relating to the garden setting of 6 Caithness Street, the garden no longer has a central path to the front door originating from a small garden gate on the street as depicted in early photos and on the 1943 aerial. The gate is long gone, so to the northern portion of the front fence. The central path has also been diverted, with the current path to the front door sweeping from the driveway. The sense of arrival and the symmetrical layout of the garden in response to the symmetrical house has been altered.

 

It is recommended that 6 Caithness Street, Killara not proceed as a heritage item.

 

51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra

 

The house at 51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra, known as Andover, was recommended for listing as a representative example of the Georgian Revival style designed by prominent architect William Rae Laurie.

 

The one submission for this property argued against the listing based upon the unsubstantiated evidence that the house was designed by William Rae Laurie. This argument is not supported as historical evidence supports Laurie’s association with the design project. The independent heritage assessment attached to the submission argued the house has undergone both significant and unsympathetic change and was not significant.

 

The 1936 building application describes the house as a two storey brick dwelling of 7 rooms with a garage. The built  Andover was a two storey house with strong Georgian Revival overtones. It was a face brick structure set under a high pitched roof with a small attached hipped roof projection containing maid’s accommodation. Today, the face brick is painted. The front (south) and western façade exhibit regular and repetitive fenestration. All elevations with the exception of the east façade have multi-paned windows, with the upper level windows of the west and south façade and some lower windows of the north facade having louvered shutters.

 

The house front does not address the street nor is it easily visible from Warrangi Street. The primary façade faces 49 Warrangi Street (neighbour to the south). Extensions have been made to the east and west of this primary façade. The list of changes are as follows:

 

·     Single storey two car garage to western frontage visible from street.

·     Skillion addition to eastern frontage spanning width of house.

·     Modification of ground floor loggia on north elevation with later enclosed verandah addition.

·     Enclosure of first floor loggia and division into separate rooms.

·     Internal modifications to planning including changed door locations, and division and use of rooms.

·     Blanking off of original windows and doors due to additions including ground floor windows that were on the Warrangi Street elevation.

·     New bathroom fitout. Kitchen has been relocated from the original house into a more recent wing extension.

·     Painting of original face brickwork.

·     Re-roofing with concrete tiles

 

It is recommended the listing not proceed due to the considerable change that has occurred to the building since its original design and construction. The simple and restrained architecture that characterises the Inter-war Georgian Revival style seems absent following the accretion of unsympathetic extensions that has occurred over the years. The original form is still legible but the additions have obscured some important architectural features such as some original windows and doors.

 

The alteration of the interior is substantial with only some fabric retained such as the fireplace in the front lounge and based upon 2009 real estate photos, the original staircase appears to also still be in place. An aesthetically pleasing and key architectural feature that has been retained is the brick detailed, arched main entrance.  This doorway is evidence of the high level of architectural thought, design detail and craftsmanship that would have gone into Andover when it was originally built.

 

It is the high quality of some of the remaining architectural detailing, such as the feature entrance, which make the decision as to whether Andover retains its design integrity a difficult one. The recent unsympathetic works such as the enclosing of loggias and verandahs, building in exterior doors and windows, building a two car garage on the street frontage, relocating the kitchen and repurposing several rooms all contribute to compromising the design integrity. Andover was conceived and originally built as a well resolved and commodiously designed two-storey Inter-war Georgian Revival style home of only 7 rooms. It is the cumulative impact of small changes and the accretion of additions that has eroded the significance of Andover as a house representative of the Georgian Revival style.

 

Under the NSW Guidelines, a reason for exclusion under Criterion C is the loss of “design or technical integrity”. Therefore it is recommended that 51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra not proceed as a heritage item.

 

integrated planning and reporting

 

Theme 3: Places, Spaces and Infrastructure

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

P5.1 Ku-ring-gai’s heritage is protected, promoted and responsibly managed

 

P5.1.1 Strategies, plans and processes are in place to effectively protect and preserve Ku-ring-gai’s heritage assets

Identifying gaps in existing strategies and plans

 

 

Governance Matters

 

The process for the preparation and implementation of planning proposals is set out in provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and the Local Government Act 1993 (where relevant).

 

Risk Management

 

There is a community expectation that places of heritage significance within Ku-ring-gai Council local government area will be identified and protected. There is a strategic risk of damaging the reputation of Council if these culturally significant places are not identified and considered for protection.

 

Financial Considerations

 

The costs associated with this matter are covered by the Strategy and Environment Department, Urban Planning and Heritage Planning budget.

 

Social Considerations

 

The identification and protection of Ku-ring-gai’s heritage places contributes to the ongoing conservation of Ku-ring-gai’s community valued historic landscape and garden suburbs.

 

Environmental Considerations

 

Council is responsible for the identification and management of Ku-ring-gai’s local environmental heritage. Consideration of this matter will assist Council in meeting this requirement.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Community Consultation

 

Community consultation for the planning proposal is consistent with the prescribed consultation guidelines in the NSW Department of Planning and Environment’s document “A guide to preparing Local Environmental Plans” (April 2013).

 

Community consultation was conducted as per the requirements outlined in the Gateway Determination issued by the Department of Planning and Environment.

 

The public exhibition of the planning proposal included the following:

 

·     Notification in the North Shore Times;

·     Notification on Council’s website;

·     Notification in writing to the affected and adjoining land owners.

 

During the exhibition period, the following material was available for inspection:

 

·     Planning proposal;

·     Gateway Determination;

·     Heritage report by Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners;

·     Council resolution of 25 November 2014;

·     Proposed heritage maps;

·     Heritage inventory sheets;

·     Submission from Heritage Division, Office of Environment and Heritage;

·     Interim Heritage Order 6 Caithness Street, Killara.

 

Internal Consultation

 

As part of the assessment of submissions the relevant internal sections of Council have been consulted, including Urban Planning and Heritage and Development and Regulation, including Council’s heritage advisor.

 

Councillors were given a briefing on the 17 August 2015 by Council’s heritage staff for 6 Caithness Street, Killara  and 51 Warrangi  Street, Turramurra.

 

Summary

 

On 10 April 2015 the Department of Planning and Environment issued a Gateway Determination under Section 56 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 for the planning proposal to heritage list 5 properties in Turramurra, Wahroonga, Pymble and Killara.

 

The planning proposal was placed on public exhibition between 24 April 2015 and 22 May 2015. 16 submissions were received during the public exhibition of the planning proposal.

 

Council at its meeting of 14 July 2015 resolved to make the Plan under delegated authority to include 12 Bobbin Head Road, Pymble and 88 Fox Valley Road, Wahroonga in Schedule 5 and on the Heritage Map of KLEP 2015. At the Council meeting of 28 July 2015 the minute was amended to defer any decision in regards to 6 Caithness Street and 51 Warrangi Street to allow for a Councillor briefing from a heritage expert.

 

A Councillor briefing was held on 17 August 2015 for 6 Caithness Street, Killara and 51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra.

 

It is recommended that Council not proceed with the heritage listing of 6 Caithness Street, Killara and 51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

A.       That Council not proceed with the Plan to include 6 Caithness Street Killara and 51 Warrangi Street, Turramurra in Schedule 5 and on the Heritage map of KLEP 2015.

 

B.       That those who made a submission be notified of Council’s resolution.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Alexandra Plumb

Urban Planner

 

 

 

 

Andreana Kennedy

Heritage Specialist Planner

 

 

 

 

Craige Wyse

Team Leader Urban Planning

 

 

 

 

Antony Fabbro

Acting Director Strategy and Environment

 

 

Attachments:

A1View

Planning Proposal - Amend KLEP 2015 to include 5 heritage items in Turramurra, Wahroonga, Pymble and Killara

 

2015/090449

 

A2View

Planning Proposal - Appendix A - Review of 14 Draft and Potential Heritage Items by Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners 2014

 

2014/319496

 

A3View

Planning Proposal - Appendix B- Council Resolution 25 November 2014

 

2014/319433

 

A4View

Planning Proposal - Appendix C - Heritage Map Sheets

 

2015/098351

 

A5View

Planning Proposal - Appendix D - Heritage Inventory Sheets

 

2014/313507

 

A6View

Planning Proposal - Appendix E - Office of Environment and Heritage comments regarding planning proposal to amend KLEP 2015 to include additional heritage items

 

2015/053548

 

A7View

Planning Proposal - Appendix F - Interim Heritage Order 6 Caithness Street, Killara

 

2015/042719

 

A8View

Gateway Determination - Planning Proposal to Heritage List 5 Properties

 

2015/088817

 

A9View

Summary of submssions

 

2015/229818

  


APPENDIX No: 1 - Planning Proposal - Amend KLEP 2015 to include 5 heritage items in Turramurra, Wahroonga, Pymble and Killara

 

Item No: GB.11

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 2 - Planning Proposal - Appendix A - Review of 14 Draft and Potential Heritage Items by Clive Lucas Stapleton and Partners 2014

 

Item No: GB.11

 

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 3 - Planning Proposal - Appendix B- Council Resolution 25 November 2014

 

Item No: GB.11

 


 


APPENDIX No: 4 - Planning Proposal - Appendix C - Heritage Map Sheets

 

Item No: GB.11

 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 5 - Planning Proposal - Appendix D - Heritage Inventory Sheets

 

Item No: GB.11

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 6 - Planning Proposal - Appendix E - Office of Environment and Heritage comments regarding planning proposal to amend KLEP 2015 to include additional heritage items

 

Item No: GB.11

 


 


APPENDIX No: 7 - Planning Proposal - Appendix F - Interim Heritage Order 6 Caithness Street, Killara

 

Item No: GB.11

 


 


APPENDIX No: 8 - Gateway Determination - Planning Proposal to Heritage List 5 Properties

 

Item No: GB.11

 


 


 


 


APPENDIX No: 9 - Summary of submssions

 

Item No: GB.11

 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 8 September 2015

GB.12 / 1161

 

 

Item GB.12

S03552/14

 

23 July 2015

 

 

Adshel Infrastructure Technology Upgrade proposal

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

purpose of report:

To consider and endorse support for the Adshel Technology upgrade proposal.

 

 

background:

In November 2004, Council entered a 15 year contract with Adshel to install advertising and non-advertising bus shelters in the Ku-ring-gai LGA. 

Since 2004, the media sector has experienced a change in this environment by the introduction of digital format.

Adshel has approached Council with a request to upgrade the technology used in current advertising bus shelter light boxes with selected sites for digital and scrolling format.

 

 

comments:

In the rollout of Advertising Structures in 2004-2006, a DA was not required under the relevant SEPP, as road reserves were unzoned under the Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance (KPSO).

The KPSO was replaced by the KLEP 2015 which came into effect on 2 April 2015.  SEPP 64 would apply to this signage as the change in format is a significant change and would be deemed to be new signage.  

Under Part 3 of SEPP 64, a DA would be required with Council as the consent authority.

 

 

recommendation:

That Council support the proposal to upgrade advertising at various locations on bus shelter light boxes with digital and scrolling format and provide owner’s consent to the submission of a Development Application on the terms set out in this report.

 

 

 


  

Purpose of Report

To consider and endorse support for the Adshel Technology upgrade proposal.

 

 

Background

 

In November 2004, Council entered into a 15 year contract with Adshel to install advertising and non-advertising bus shelters in the Ku-ring-gai LGA. 

Under the contract, Council granted Adshel the exclusive right to procure advertising attached to bus shelter infrastructure. In return for this license, Adshel designed, supplied and installed bus shelters in the Ku-ring-gai LGA. Adshel provided ongoing cleaning and maintenance services of the infrastructure, with a guarantee net revenue payment to Council.  Council has since purchased additional shelters, and utilises Adshel’s maintenance contractors by Agreement to optimise expenses for cleaning and maintenance.

Since 2004, the out-of-home media sector has experienced a change in this environment by the introduction of a digital format. This format has been launched across transport and retail sectors, and is now being extended to the traditional (poster) roadside market.

This traditional (poster) roadside market is static which is placing pressure on the advertiser funded street furniture model that Council benefits from.  To protect future investment in community infrastructure and income streams for its partners, Adshel has utilised its parent company to launch its digital network roadside strategy for Australia and has invited Ku-ring-gai Council to be a launch partner.

 

As a launch partner, Adshel has approached Council with a request to upgrade the technology used in current advertising bus shelter light boxes with digital and scrolling format at selected sites.

 

Comments

 

The Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance (KPSO) was replaced by the Ku-ring-gai LEP 2015 which came into effect on 2 April 2015. The process for approval has changed and locations of this technology format are limited by zoning changes.  In the rollout of Advertising Structures in 2004-2006, a Development Application (DA) was not required under SEPP 64, as road reserves were unzoned under the KPSO.

Advice from Council’s Strategy and Environment Department indicate:

·      SEPP 64 would apply to this signage as the change in format from posters to electronic illuminated advertising signage is a significant change and would be deemed to be new signage.

·      Under Part 3 of SEPP 64, a DA would be required for the new electronic signage, with Council as the consent authority.  There are no provisions under SEPP 64, ISEPP, Codes SEPP or the KLEP that would deem it exempt development.

·      Under clause 10 of SEPP 64 the advertisements would be permissible on the roads that are in a business zone or zoned SP2. However they are prohibited on land that is in an Heritage Conservation Area (HCA), open space or zoned residential.

·      For existing advertising shelters in a HCA, before the zoning, the prohibition would not apply and would only apply for the change to electronic advertisements.

 

Transport Corridor Outdoor Advertising and Signage Guidelines

 

The NSW Department of Planning and Environment has worked closely with Transport for NSW (TfNSW), the Road and Maritime Services (RMS) and Outdoor Media Association (OMA), of which Adshel is a member, on amendments to the Transport Corridor Outdoor Advertising and Signage Guidelines, assessing Development Applications under SEPP 64, July 2007 to include criteria for the use of new technology in electronic signs. 

 

The Department has approved roadside digital signage installations in NSW based on the draft guidelines and has formally communicated to the OMA that this will continue as the document waits gazetting.  A copy of the guidelines from NSW Department of Planning and Environment is attached as Attachment A1.

 

Details from Adshel of the launch roll-out; unit technology, proposed upgrade sites and benefits are attached and are Confidential Attachment A2 which is a document prepared by Adshel.

 

The current contract only permits static advertising although the contract did provide scope for the introduction of new technology and change is subject to Council’s approval. Council officers consider that varying the existing contract to allow scrolling and digital advertising represents an enhancement of the current commercial rights conferred onto Adshel pursuant to the contract. On Council’s part, there is a responsibility to consider commercial propositions of this manner in a transparent, fair, and proper manner. The most objective manner for Council to ensure that this occurs is to obtain an independent valuation assessment of the proposal and to conduct negotiations strictly in accordance with the expert valuation advice provided. The valuation will address the entirety of the proposal including the level of investment proposed by Adshel and the corresponding commercial benefit.

 

This report seeks Council’s approval to progress the application process and endorse the General Manager as the delegated authority to conclude future negotiations with Adshel in relation to securing a fair market return for the variation of the contract. Any commercial outcome will be based on the valuation advice Council receives from its expert independent valuer.

 

Adshel is seeking Council’s concurrence to this proposal in order to lodge a Development Application and enable a roll out of the digital advertising in the metropolitan area by December 2015.

 

It is not intended to engage a valuer if Council does not provide owner’s consent to the submission of a Development Application.

 


 

 

integrated planning and reporting

 

Theme - Places, Spaces and Infrastructure

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

Standards are developed to improve the condition and functionality of existing and new assets.

 

A prioritised program of improvements to facilities is being implemented

 

Implement an improvement program for the maintenance, renewal and upgrade of Council's buildings and report on progress

 

 

Theme – Leadership and Governance -  L2 Financial capacity and sustainability

 

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

Council rigorously manages its financial resources and assets to maximise service delivery

 

Council maintains and improves its long term financial position and performance

Continue to analyse opportunities to expand the revenue base of Council

 

 

Governance Matters

 

Under Section 18 of the Shelter Specification within the Contract, introduction of new technology solutions to replace static advertising panels at suitable locations was permitted subject to Council’s approval. 

 

Confidential attachments to this report are considered to confidential in accordance with Section 10A (2) (ii) of The Local Government Act 1993 as they are considered to contain commercial in confidence information.

 

The independent valuation process proposed by Council will also ensure appropriate probity and transparency considerations are addressed.

 

Risk Management

 

There is no financial risk associated with the upgrade as Adshel will fully fund the upgrade and is independent of the guaranteed net payment under the contract.

 

Adshel will adhere to the requirements of the RMS key criteria as specified for digital roadside that have been established in the draft Transport Corridor Outdoor Advertising and Signage Guidelines to mitigate risk to drivers. Of importance, the criteria includes, that the creative must not otherwise unreasonably dazzle or distract drivers and be within luminance levels, dwell time limits, while animation and sequential messaging is not permitted.

 

Subject to Council resolution, the appropriate legal documentation to vary and revise the contract will be undertaken by Council’s solicitors.

 

Financial Considerations

 

If endorsed, and subject to Development Application approval, Adshel will fully fund the upgrade. Additional financial considerations and benefits are considered in the Confidential Attachment A2.

 

The independent valuation advice will also guide Council on the revised commercial terms that should apply pursuant the contract.

 

Social Considerations

 

There are no external changes required to the shelter to facilitate a digital and scrolling format, only internal changes to the light box, therefore there is no loss in shelter space for commuters. Works will be undertaken by Adshel as part of business-as-usual activity which ensures no disruption to commuters during the roll-out.

 

Environmental Considerations

 

Adshel’s chosen supplier is an industry leader in the provision of LCD units for outdoor use. There patented software self-monitors to optimise luminance and cooling based on environmental conditions, working to reduce power consumption.

 

Community Consultation

 

Community consultation is not required as the proposal seeks to upgrade the technology used in the current illuminated advertising bus shelter light boxes that exist and permits introduction of new technology solutions to replace static advertising panels under the contract.

 

Community notification will be included as part of the process required for Development Applications.

 

Internal Consultation

 

Operations has consulted with Development and Regulation as well as Strategy & Environment Departments to obtain advice on the changes relating to the approval process and zoning changes resulting from the KLEP 2015 coming into effect in April 2015, as well as the protocol and policy for dealing with commercial propositions entailing the variation of existing contractual terms.

 

Summary

In November 2004, Council entered into a 15 year contract with Adshel to install advertising and non-advertising bus shelters in the Ku-ring-gai LGA. 

Adshel has approached Council with a request to upgrade the technology used in current advertising bus shelter light boxes with digital and scrolling format at selected sites.

This proposal is a means to protect future investment in community infrastructure and income streams that fund the street furniture, including their cleaning and maintenance. 

The Ku-ring-gai LEP 2015 came into effect on 2 April 2015, require a DA Under Part 3 of SEPP 64, for the new electronic signage, with Council as the consent authority.  While under clause 10 of SEPP 64 the advertisements would be permissible on the roads that are in a business zone or zoned SP2. They are prohibited on land in an HCA, open space or zoned residential.

The NSW Department of Planning and Environment Department has approved roadside digital signage installations in NSW based on the draft Transport Corridor Outdoor Advertising and Signage guidelines and has formally communicated to the Outdoor Media Association, of which Adshel is a member, that this will continue as the document waits gazetting

 

Adshel will adhere to the requirements of the RMS key criteria as specified for digital roadside advertising that have been established in the draft Transport Corridor Outdoor Advertising and Signage Guidelines.

 

This format has been launched across transport and retail sectors, and is now being extended to the traditional (poster) roadside market

 

Implementation results in negligible social, environmental or financial impacts, to the commuters and Council. Adshel have offered an additional benefit to Council as outlined in the confidential attachment.

 

Council’s approval is sought to progress the application process and endorse the General Manager as the delegated authority to conclude commercial negotiations with Adshel in relation to securing a market return for varying the contract. Any negotiations reached will be based on the valuation advice that Council receives from an independent valuer.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

A.   That Council support the proposal to upgrade advertising at various locations on bus shelter light boxes with digital and scrolling format and provide owner’s consent to the submission of a Development Application.

 

B.   That the General Manager or his delegate be authorised to negotiate Council’s requirements in relation to the contract including the revised commercial terms recommended in the independent valuation.

 

C.   That Council authorises the Mayor and General Manager to execute all associated documentation in respect of the contract.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Greg Piconi

Director Operations

 

 

 

 

Ian Taylor

Manager Engineering Operations

 

 

Attachments:

A1View

NSW Department of Planning and Environment - Advice - Signage Guidelines

 

2015/191660

 

A2

Adshel Infrastructure Development Proposal

 

Confidential

  


APPENDIX No: 1 - NSW Department of Planning and Environment - Advice - Signage Guidelines

 

Item No: GB.12

 


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 8 September 2015

GB.13 / 1168

 

 

Item GB.13

S10628

 

27 August 2015

 

 

Tender NSROC - Road Surfacing, Patching, and associated Works - 2015 to 2017

 

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

 

purpose of report:

To seek Council's approval to accept the Northern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (NSROC) tender for the schedule of rates for supply; supply and delivery; and supply, delivery and laying of asphaltic concrete, including associated road profiling and heavy patching and other work items for the period 2015/2016 and 2016/2017.

 

 

background:

Tenders for the supply, supply and delivery and supply, delivery and laying of asphaltic concrete were called by NSROC on behalf of all member Councils. Submissions for these services for 2015/2016 and 2016/2017 closed on 4 June 2015.

 

 

comments:

Tender documents were received from twelve (12) companies. Significant delay was encountered due to clarification of information requested and provided.

 

 

recommendation:

That Council accepts the tenderers identified in Confidential Attachment A1 to supply; supply and delivery; and supply, delivery and laying of asphaltic concrete, including associated road profiling and heavy patching and other work items for the period 2015/2016 and 2016/2017.

 

 

 


  

Purpose of Report

To seek Council's approval to accept the Northern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (NSROC) tender for the schedule of rates for supply; supply and delivery; and supply, delivery and laying of asphaltic concrete, including associated road profiling and heavy patching and other work items for the period 2015/2016 and 2016/2017.

 

 

Background

 

Tenders for the supply, supply and delivery; and supply, delivery and laying of asphaltic concrete including the associated road profiling and heavy patching works were called by the Northern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (NSROC) for the periods 2015/2016 and 2016/2017. The tender closed 4 June 2015.

 

Although the tender was called by NSROC, each Council will enter into individual contracts with the successful tenderer(s).

 

Tenders, in no particular order, were received from the following twelve (12) companies:

 

Bitpuave (Boral Asphalt) Pty Ltd

Downer Edi Works Pty Ltd;

Kizan Pty Ltd (t/as A J Paving);

Stateline Asphalt Pty Ltd

CW Concrete Pty Ltd

SRS (Sami) Road Services Pty Ltd;

Roadworx Pty Ltd;

Ozpave (Aust) Pty Ltd;

Bernipave Pty Ltd

D&M Excavations & Asphalting;

J & M Schembri Pty Ltd;

State Asphalt Pty Ltd

 

It should be noted that the order of the above list of tenderers does not necessarily correspond to the order of the list of tenderers named from A to L in the confidential attachment (for the purposes of identifying the recommended tenderers).

 

Comments

 

Confidential Attachment A1 provides comments on the following tender components to:

 

·     supply, supply and delivery;

·     supply, delivery and laying of asphaltic concrete including the associated road profiling

·     thin wearing or intermediate surfacing

·     bitumen crack sealing of road pavement

 

Governance Matters

 

Tenders were called in accordance with Section 55 of the Local Government Act and Tendering Regulations.

 

The attachments are considered to be confidential in accordance with Section 10A (2)(d)(ii) of The Local Government Act 1993 as they are considered to contain commercial in confidence information.

 

In accordance with Paragraph 3.18 of the Division of Local Government Tendering Guidelines, NSW State Government Memorandum 2007-1 Public Disclosure of Information Arising from NSW Government Tenders and Contracts, and Part 3 Division 5 of the Government Information (Public Access Act) 2009 (“GIPA”), once the contract is effective the name of the successful tenderers and other relevant information will be published on Council’s website in the Contract Register. In addition, in accordance with Clause 179 of the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005, unsuccessful tenderers will also be notified once the contract is effective.

 

The confidential attachments to this report also include:

 

·        Tender Evaluation Panel’s minutes (Attachment A2),

·        Evaluation of comparison and supply (Attachment A3)

 

Risk Management

 

Risks relate to supply of poor quality material and this is covered by the specification. As such, recovery methods are included in the contract if a supplier is not able to comply in accordance with the specification. The tender process has been reviewed by members of Northern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (NSROC).

 

Financial Considerations

 

The rates submitted will be utilised to undertake the majority of works under the 2015/2016 and 2016/2017 Road Pavement Program for local and regional roads which has been adopted by Council.

 

Social Considerations

 

Not applicable.

 

Environmental Considerations

 

Environmental measures are included in the contract specification.

 

Community Consultation

 

Consultation has taken place with other Council members of Northern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (NSROC) for the preparation of the tender.

 

Internal Consultation

 

Consultation has taken place with staff from the Corporate Department.

 

Summary

 

Tenders for the supply, supply and delivery; and supply, delivery and laying of asphaltic concrete including the associated road profiling and heavy patching works were called by the Northern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (NSROC) for the periods 2015/2016 and 2016/2017. The tender closed 4 June 2015.

 

A total of twelve (12) submissions applicable to Ku-ring-gai council were received and assessed by the Tender Evaluation Panel.

 

 

Recommendation:

 

A.       That the tender rates submitted by Tenderer A, Tenderer B and Tenderer L be accepted as the preferred contractors for the Supply, and Supply and Delivery of asphaltic concrete for 2015/2016 and 2016/2017.

 

B.       That the tender rates submitted by Tenderer A and Tenderer B be accepted as the preferred contractors for Profiling and Supply, Delivery and Laying of asphalt for 2015/2016 and 2016/2017.

 

C.       That the tender rates submitted by nine (9) Tenderer’s (B, C, D, G, H, I, J, K and L) be accepted as the preferred contractors for heavy patching for 2015/2016 and 2016/2017.

 

D.       That tender rates submitted for thin wearing or intermediate surfacing for 2015/2016 and 2016/2017 be rejected, and gain quotes if and when this work is required.

 

E.       That the tender rates submitted for bituminous crack sealing of road pavement 2015/2016 and 2016/2017 be rejected, and gain quotes if and when this work is required.

 

F.       That the tender rates submitted by five (5) Tenderer’s (C, D, E, G and H) be accepted as the preferred contractors for shoulder construction works for 2015/2016 and 2016/2017.

 

G.       That authority be given to the Mayor and General Manager to affix the Common Seal of Council to the instrument for the Contract for the for supply; supply and delivery; and supply, delivery and laying of asphaltic concrete, including associated road profiling and heavy patching and other work items for the period 2015/2016 and 2016/2017.

 

 

 

 

Stephen Wandel

Asset and Pavement Engineer

 

 

Ian Taylor

Manager Engineering Operations

 

 

 

 

Greg Piconi

Director Operations

 

 

 

 

Attachments:

A1

Report evaluation comments and recommendations

 

Confidential

 

A2

Tender Evaluation Committee - Minutes

 

Confidential

 

A3

Comparison of Supply and Delivery

 

Confidential

   


 

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 8 September 2015

NM.1 / 1172

 

 

Item NM.1

TM1/07

 

31 August 2015

 

 

Notice of Motion

 

 

Clearway St Ives

 

  

 

Notice of Motion from Councillor Berlioz dated 31 August 2015

 

RMS is proposing a clearway through St Ives 7 days a week. A net 52 public car spaces will be lost. The clearway hours proposed will severely impact on the survival of the retail strip shops located between Stanley Street and Rosedale Road. 

 

The St Ives small businesses on the southern side of Mona Vale Road provide the only retail and commercial businesses choice to the St Ives community, services to the local and wider community and they rely heavily on passing trade. A vital part of their business depends on weekend trade.

 

In the last 12 months three of these retailers have invested heavily in opening new businesses or expanding. Other long-standing businesses of 40 years prove their valued contribution to the community. 

 

The RMS proposal for St Ives is for clearways to operate Monday to Friday 6am to 10am and 3pm to 7pm in both directions.

 

Saturday and Sunday 9am to 6pm both directions with the exception of Stanley Street to Porter’s Lane which will operate from 2pm to 6pm.

 

In contrast, clearways on roads with similar or heavier traffic volumes (RMS 2012) Pacific Highway through Ku-ring-gai, Boundary Road through French’s Forest and Roseville Chase, Warringah Road through Beacon Hill, Penshurst Street through Chatswood only apply on one side either morning or evening and they do not apply on weekends.

 

A weekend clearway has recently been put in place for Victoria Road Rozelle. However, Victoria Road carries 30% more vehicles than Mona Vale Road.  Further, in the case of Victoria Road Rozelle which loses 44 cars due to the clearway, RMS is spending $1.267M for to make up for the loss of car parking.

 

The traffic volumes and speeds on Mona Vale Road St Ives do not warrant a weekend clearway through the shopping strip between Stanley Street and Porter’s Lane.

 

I move that council write urgently to RMS including a copy of this Notice of Motion and that council:

 

·    Request withdrawal of any weekend clearway on Mona Vale Road from Stanley Street to Porter’s Lane.

 

·    Send copy of the letter to MP for Davidson Jonathan O’Dea and the Minister for Roads, Maritime and Freight, Duncan Gay

 

 

 

Recommendation:

 

That the above Notice of Motion as printed be adopted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Councillor Christiane Berlioz

Councillor for St Ives Ward