Agenda of Ordinary Meeting of Council

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

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 6 October 2015	GB.7 / 244

Item GB.7	DA0582/14
	23 April 2015

development application

Summary Sheet

Report title:	1 to 3 Nulla Nulla Street - Demolish Existing Structures and Construct a Multi-Dwelling Housing Development comprising 15 Townhouses, Basement Parking and Landscape Works
ITEM/AGENDA NO:	GB.7

Application No:	DA0582/14
Property Details:	1 to 3 Nulla Nulla Street, Turramurra NSW 2074 Lot & DP No: Lot 1 DP 17642 (No. 1 Area: 797m²) Lot 5 DP 17642 (No. 3 Area: 2466m²) Site area (m²): 3,254m²(excluding 239m²access handle) Zoning: R3 Medium density residential
Ward:	Wahroonga
Proposal/Purpose:	To determine Development Application No. DA0582/14 for the demolition of two dwellings and the construction of multi dwelling housing, comprising 15 townhouses, basement parking and landscape works.
Type of Consent:	Local
Applicant:	Mackenzie Architects International
Owner:	Mrs LM Arthur (1 Nulla Nulla Street) Mr AI Topfer & Mrs S Topfer (3 Nulla Nulla Street)
Date Lodged:	19 December 2014
Recommendation:	Approval

Purpose of Report

To determine Development Application No. DA0582/14 for the demolition of two dwellings and the construction of a multi dwelling housing development, comprising 15 townhouses, basement parking and landscape works.

integrated planning and reporting

Places, Spaces & Infrastructure

Community Strategic Plan Long Term Objective

Delivery Program

Term Achievement

Operational Plan

Task

P3.1 The built environment delivers attractive, interactive and sustainable living and working environments.

A high standard of design quality and building environmental performance is achieved in new development

Assessment of applications is consistent with Council’s adopted LEPs and DCPs.

Executive Summary

Issues: Minimum street frontage

Submissions: 19 submissions received

Land & Environment Court: N/A

Recommendation: Approval

History

Site

Council’s records indicate that the site has historically been used for residential purposes.

Pre-DA

There was no Pre-DA consultation.

DA History

19 December 2014

Application lodged

16 January 2015 to 16 February 2015

The application was notified to neighbouring property owners for a period of 30 days. 19 submissions were received.

13 May 2015

A letter was sent to the applicant advising of outstanding issues relating to:

Building Code of Australia

- Provision of sanitary compartment in basement;

Planning

- submission of Clause 4.6 exception to development standard for minimum street frontage

- solar access to principal private open space

- dwelling depth, width and room size

- building articulation

- top storey design for Building B

- external air clothes drying facilities

- updated access report

Urban Design

- basement car park ventilation stacks

- front fence details

- air conditioning units

- inaccuracies on the plans

Landscaping

- amended BASIX

- Deep soil landscaping

23 June 2015

Amended plans and additional information was received from the applicant.

22 July 2014

A letter was sent to the applicant advising of remaining outstanding issues relating to:

Urban Design

- inaccuracies on the landscaping plans

- cavity walls for subterranean units

- courtyard walls at Building A

Landscaping

- deep soil landscaping

- inaccuracies on the landscaping plans

29 July 2015

Amended plans and additional information was received from the applicant.

13 August 2015

A letter was sent to the applicant advising of remaining outstanding issues relating to:

Landscaping

- deep soil landscaping

- inaccuracies on the landscaping plans

- courtyard fencing

18 August 2015

Amended plans and additional information was received from the applicant.

The Site

Site description

The site is located on the southern side of Nulla Nulla Steet, to the east of its intersection with Turramurra Avenue.

The site comprises two allotments with a combined frontage of 21.33m to Nulla Nulla Street and a depth of 128.35m. The rear lot is a battle-axe lot with a 72m access handle and contains a tennis court, swimming pool, two storey dwelling and a separate 50m long pedestrian access handle which terminates at Turramurra Avenue and comprises an area of 2,466 m². The front lot contains a single storey dwelling, detached carport within the street setback and comprises an area of 797m². The combined site area is 3,254m²(including the access handle).

The site is located 550m from Turramurra Railway Station.

Surrounding development

The subject site is located within a corridor of land zoned R3 Medium Density Residential (R3). It has an eastern interface with land zoned R2 Low Density Residential (R2) located two blocks to the east at No.11, No.15 and No.17 Nulla Nulla Street. These properties comprise single storey and two storey dwellings with generous street setbacks and formal gardens. The western side of the site is zoned R4 High Density Residential (R4). A residential flat building (RFB) adjoins the site at No. 7 to No. 11 Turramurra Avenue and is the first RFB on the eastern side of Turramurra Avenue. The western side of Turramurra Avenue is zoned R4 and is experiencing significant urban consolidation with a number of recently competed RFBs.

The site represents a transition in density between the R4 and R2 zones.

The Proposal

The proposal involves the demolition of the two existing dwelling houses and the construction of fifteen, two and three storey townhouses, associated basement car parking and landscaping.

The applicant is seeking consent for the following:

· Demolition of all existing buildings and structures, and site preparation works;

· Construction of 15 townhouse dwellings split between 3 buildings:

- Building A 3 x two storey townhouses with roof terrace fronting Nulla Nulla Street;

- Building B 3 x three storey townhouses with attic space;

- Building C 3 x two storey townhouses with roof terrace; and

- Building D 3 x two storey townhouses with roof terrace.

· Three split levels of basement car parking for 34 vehicles to accessed via Nulla Nulla Street;

· Removal of identified on-site trees and significant new tree planting and landscaping of the site; and

· A landscaped pedestrian path to Turramurra Avenue.

Consultation

Community

In accordance with the Local Centres DCP, owners of surrounding properties were given notice of the application. In response, submissions from the following were received:

1. Mrs F Thiele & Mr F Thiele- 22/7-11 Turramurra Avenue, Turramurra

2. Mr R J & Mrs K M Morrison -21/7-11 Turramurra Avenue, Turramurra

3. Mr M Davies -Level 25, 2 Park Street, Sydney

4. Mr C G Middleton-PO Box 178, Turramurra

5. Mr E A & Mrs D M Blom-PO Box 642, Turramurra

6. Mrs L M Logaraj-15 Nulla Nulla Street, Turramurra

7. Mr D Shinde-17/7-11 Turramurra Avenue, Turramurra

8. Mr A Farzanfar-23/7-11 Turramurra Avenue, Turramurra

9. Mr J & Mrs D Colvin-3/1 Turramurra Avenue, Turramurra

10. Mrs N C A E Aubrey-4/1 Turramurra Avenue, Turramurra

11. Mr C Qing & Ms J Liu -11/7-11 Turramurra Avenue, Turramurra

12. Mr A C & Mrs M M McDougall-16/7-11 Turramurra Avenue, Turramurra

13. Mrs R Skilbeck-5/7-11 Turramurra Avenue, Turramurra

14. Dr J J & Mrs K M Lowke -6/7-11 Turramurra Avenue, Turramurra

15. Mrs J M Check-3 Moir Place, Green Point

16. Mrs J Crawford-30 Ku-Ring-Gai Avenue, Turramurra

17. Mr G Sideridis- 11 Nulla Nulla Street, Turramurra

18. Mrs S M McNee - PO Box 468, Turramurra

19. Mr I & Mrs A Nieuwland-4/7-11 Turramurra Avenue, Turramurra

Minimum lot frontage for multi-dwelling housing

The site has a lot frontage of 21.335m and does not satisfy the 30m development standard for multi dwelling housing established under Clause 6.5(2) of the Local Centres LEP. The requested variation to the street frontage development standard submitted by the applicant in accordance with Clause 4.6 of the Local Centres LEP is supported.

The reduced lot frontage has not resulted in any significant non-compliances that would suggest the development would result in a development with poor amenity for future residents and the surrounding area. The site benefits from a separate 4.57m wide pedestrian access handle terminating at Turramurra Avenue and will serve as an important line of travel for residents accessing the local centre of Turramurra and the railway station.

The proposed lot configuration will not affect future site amalgamation and redevelopment of adjoining R4 land to the west of the site at No. 3 to 5 Turramurra Avenue or R3 land to the east at No. 5 to 9 Nulla Nulla Street. Any future development at No. 5 Nulla Nulla Street (battle axe block) will rely on a site amalgamation with No. 7 Turramurra Avenue and/or No. 9 Turramurra Avenue.

Building design, streetscape and overdevelopment of the site

The development proposal satisfies all the development standards relating to building bulk, height and landscaping, resulting in an appropriate development for the locality, consistent with the R3 medium density zoning.

Car parking, manoeuvring and access

Council’s Development Engineer has not raised concerns regarding vehicle access, driveway or the basement car parking design.

Traffic generation during construction and during operation

Councils’ Development Engineer has not raised any concerns regarding the potential for the development to generate significant amounts of traffic. Furthermore, 27 car spaces are required in accordance with the Local Centres DCP and the proposal provides 34 off-street car spaces. Accordingly, it would be unreasonable for Council to request additional off-street car parking beyond what is provided.

A construction traffic management plan will be required to be implemented during construction and has been recommended (Condition 11). In addition, a construction works zone will be required along the site frontage. This will assist in minimising impacts in relation to vehicle sight lines, general road safety and conflicts with construction related vehicles (Condition 12).

Inadequate tree retention

Council’s Landscape Assessment Officer has not raised concerns regarding tree retention at the site. The proposal involves the retention of approximately 35 trees and the provision of 10 new canopy replenishment trees to be located within the front, side, rear and along the pedestrian access handle and this is acceptable.

The site does contain vegetation identified as an area of biodiversity significance under the Local Centres LEP. An Eucalyptus punctata (Grey Gum) is located within the street setback. This species is characteristic of the Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest and is an Endangered Ecological Community protected under Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995. The proposal does not propose removal of this tree and conditions are recommended to ensure its protection during construction (Conditions 14, 22 and 64).

Overshadowing

The proposal will not result in less than 3 hours of solar access to the living rooms and principal private open space of adjoining properties during midwinter between 9am and 3pm on June 21. The proposal therefore complies with the Local Centres DCP solar access control.

Visual and acoustic privacy

The potential for unreasonable overlooking resulting from the development is mitigated by compliant front, side and rear setbacks and adequate building separation within the site. In addition, living areas and private open space are designed to face the front of each building and are not orientated to side boundaries.

The periphery of the site will be in common ownership, allowing for uniform planting along the side and rear boundaries to form a visual screen which will soften the built form from adjoining properties. To minimise overlooking of the principal private open space at No. 4/1 Turramurra Avenue, the window to Bedroom No. 2 at Townhouse No.13 (Building E) was amended by the applicant to a highlight window.

Construction noise will be managed via a condition requiring a noise and vibration management plan to be prepared in accordance with AS 2436-2010 and the Office of Environment and Heritage Interim Construction Noise Guidelines to ensure minimal impacts for sensitive receptors (Condition 18).

Conditions 33, 34 and 73 are recommended to ensure ongoing noise management of air conditioning units and other plant at the site.

View loss

The development proposal will not result in significant view loss, noting there are no

iconic or significant views across the subject site. Further, the proposal complies with the

height, FSR, setbacks and landscaping controls of the Local Centres LEP and DCP.

Communal open space

The proposal provides 235m²of communal space with a minimum dimension of 8m. This communal space does not satisfy the Local Centres DCP control but is sufficient given the allocation of common area for planting and the over provision of private open space that will ensure a high level of amenity.

Roof top terraces

The proposed roof top terraces areas do not exceed the 11.5m building height development standard and provide a high level of residential amenity in terms of solar access. They do not result in unreasonable privacy impacts, noting the terrace areas are orientated internally within the development site, have adequate building separation and adequate setbacks (3m) to the side boundaries.

Excavation impact

Council’s Development Engineer did not raise any concerns regarding the excavation impact. Conditions requiring dilapidation surveys in order to document the baseline structural condition of neighbouring dwellings are recommended as contingency against damage caused during excavation and construction (Condition 9 and 10).

Property devaluation

The devaluation of property is not a consideration under Section 79C (1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

Within Council

Engineering

Council’s Development Engineer commented on the proposal as follows:

“Stormwater disposal

It is proposed to have the site discharge directed to the existing kerb inlet pit in Nulla Nulla Street via a 150mm diameter pipe.

The stormwater plans submitted detail a system which complies with Council’s Local Centres DCP in relation to on-site detention and retention, water quality and discharge from the site. The stormwater plans shows a combined on-site detention and retention tank comprising 62m³and 20,000 Litres (L) of storage, respectively, located within the Building A basement and accessed externally from the landscaped area within the street setback.

The rainwater retention and re-use (OSD tanks) meet the BASIX commitments, and satisfied the 50% reduction in runoff days required under Volume C Part 4B.3 of the Local Centres DCP. The results confirm that a 15,000L rainwater tank will reduce site runoff days by 89%. The sizing of the on-site detention volume has also satisfied the requirements described in Volume C Part 4B.5 of the Local Centres DCP with an offset of 10% allowed for rainwater re-use. The design of the OSD system also provides a freeboard of 700 millimetres (mm) from the top water level to the habitable finished floor levels of the development which is more than adequate.

A pump-out system with storage capacity of 4.4m³has been provided within the basement carpark to drain the driveway area only. It has been designed to have the rising main discharge to the water quality chamber within the OSD tank. Refer to discussion below regarding tanked basement construction.

The BASIX commitments are for re-use of stored rainwater for irrigation of 983m²of common landscaped areas. The stormwater report also suggests the collected water will be reused for laundry and toilet flushing. A central rainwater tank of 15m³is proposed which satisfies the water commitments.

Water quality measures using MUSIC Modelling have been implemented into the design. The applicant has provided a proprietary pollution chamber Stormwater360 ‘StormFilter’ located within the OSD tank prior to connection into Councils public drainage system which is an acceptable and effective measure for nutrient reduction. The results of the post-development nutrient control measures have been achieved when compared to the stormwater treatment standards / targets outlined in Volume C Part 4B.6 of the Local Centres DCP.

Traffic generation

According to the traffic generation rates nominated by The Roads & Maritime Services (RMS) ‘Guide to Traffic Generating Developments’, the development would generate 8 additional peak hour vehicle trips which would represent one vehicle trip every 7.5 minutes during the peak hour. According to the above guidelines the vehicle trips are relatively minor. The increase in traffic flows in Nulla Nulla Street is not expected to have a significant effect on traffic flows or on the operation of the intersection with the arterial road network.

Vehicle access and accommodation arrangements

The site is zoned R3 under the Local Centres LEP. The parking provisions have been determined using the Local Centres DCP for multi-dwelling housing. The site is located greater than 400m walking distance from the Turramurra Railway Station. The following parking provisions have been adopted:

Volume C Part 2R.2 ‘Car Parking Rates’ Local Centres DCP

*Multi Dwelling Housing*	*Parking Space Requirement*
1 bedroom unit	1 space per unit
2 bedroom unit	1.25 space per unit
3 bedroom unit	1.5 spaces per unit
Visitor car spaces	1 space per 4 units

15 x 3 bedrooms = 15 x 1.5 spaces/unit = 23 spaces

15 dwellings - visitor space/4 dwellings = 4 visitor spaces

Total parking spaces required = 27 spaces

The development proposes 34 off-street parking spaces, comprising 29 residents’ spaces (includes 2 adaptable space) and 5 visitor spaces.

Vehicular access to the car parking facility is to be provided via a new 6.1m wide entry / exit driveway crossing which narrows internally from the ramp down to 5.0m at the basement entry level. The driveway clear width satisfies the requirements of Volume C Part 2.2 of the Local Centres DCP.

A temporary service space can be provided which can be shared with the dedicated loading bay. The minimum dimension of 3.5m x 6m has been satisfied and provides adequate manoeuvring for a service/removalist vehicle and easily accessible by Council’s waste collection vehicle.

The driveway gradients comply with Australian Standard 2890.1 (2004) “Off-Street car parking” as do the dimensions of the parking bay, ramp grades and aisle widths. The adaptable parking space width also complies with AS2890.6 (2009).

A driveway longitudinal section has been shown on the engineering plan which satisfies Council’s Standard High Level vehicular crossing profile.

Waste collection

The development allows a garbage truck to enter and depart the garbage/room recycle storage area in a forward direction. The driveway grades and turning manoeuvrability are suitable for the small waste collection vehicle.

A clear head height of 2.6m has been provided to access the basement area as indicated on the driveway longitudinal section plan. The section plan also indicates approximately 3m clearance over the travel path of the waste service vehicle.

The proposed 38x240L bins for waste, paper and recycling satisfies the minimum bin requirements.

The requirements as per Volume C Part 3.4 of the Local Centres DCP have been satisfied.

Construction management

An indicative construction traffic management plan (CTMP) has been discussed within the traffic report which is acceptable for DA purposes. 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’s Engineers prior to the commencement of any works on site.

The CTMP would also need to show turning path diagrams demonstrating how construction vehicles for all stages of development will turn into the site. A swept path diagram has been shown within the appendix of the traffic report for the demolition and excavation works indicating that only medium rigid trucks are to access the site. For tree protection purposes, the use of the existing driveway and crossing for construction access is encouraged.

The submitted Construction Traffic Management Plan shows a Work Zone along the site frontage and has been proposed. Parking restrictions currently exist between 7am to 10am Monday to Friday along the site frontage and also opposite the site. These restrictions will need to be changed to ‘No Stopping’ for the duration of the construction period. The Work Zone and Parking Restriction would need to be approved by Council’s Traffic Section (Condition 12).

Geotechnical investigation

A desktop study of previous geotechnical investigations carried out in the immediate vicinities has been used. The boreholes for those investigations encountered shallow fill over very stiff to hard clayey soils, varying in depth from 6m to 9m, then underlain by deeply weathered shale. The report suggests that groundwater was encountered at depth of about 3m to 6m with the proposed depths of basement excavation of up to 8m. Given that groundwater was encountered, it is conditioned that the basement is to be fully tanked to prevent unnecessary subsurface or groundwater extraction as per the requirement of Volume C Part 2.3.4 of the Local Centres DCP.

The report suggests a dilapidation report is to be submitted to include a survey of adjoining dwelling to the east and west.

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 to groundwater monitoring,

Recommendation

The application is acceptable, subject to conditions.”

Building

Council’s Building Surveyor commented on the proposal as follows:

“The building class is categorised as a Class 2 dwelling with Class 7a basement carpark.

The proposed building design complies in general with the Building Code of Australia (BCA) requirements.”

Health

Council’s Environmental Health Officer commented on the proposal as follows:

“The application is acceptable, subject to conditions.

Note: it may be prudent to give consideration to an advisory note/condition drawing attention to the need to give consideration to the location and installation of individual unit air conditioners within the development and the potential impact that they might have on adjoining allotments within the subject development.”

Planners comment: Air conditioning condensers are to be located within two basement areas where ceiling heights exceed 3m to ensure there is adequate ventilation space. Conditions are recommended to ensure they remain in the basement and do not impact on the amenity of neighbouring properties (Conditions 33, 34 and 73).

Landscaping

Council’s Landscape Assessment Officer commented on the proposal as follows:

“Tree impacts

A total of 78 trees are to be removed for the proposed development and 35 trees are to be retained, most of which are located within the pedestrian access handle. Most of the trees to be removed (65) are Alnus jorullensis (Evergreen Alder) which are exempt under the Tree Preservation Order, with the remaining 13 trees having low to moderate landscape value.

No objections are raised to the proposed tree removal.

To preserve T2 – Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) and T4 – Eucalyptus punctata (Grey Gum) the plans have been amended to delete the front brick fence.

The new driveway is within the footprint of the existing driveway, however it will be approximately 200mm lower than existing levels. The impacts are within acceptable limits in relation to T4 – Eucalyptus punctata (Grey Gum). Conditions are recommended to preserve T4 (Conditions 14, 22 and 64).

Deep soil landscaping (DSL)

The amended DSL plan indicates a deep soil area of 1210.4 m²or 40.17% which is compliant with Part 6A.5 of the Local Centres DCP.

The landscape plan is to be amended to reflect the latest deep soil plan. A condition has been recommended to address this issue (Condition 20).

Landscape plan

The planting detailed on the landscape plan is acceptable except for some minor changes in relation to deep soil requirements.

In accordance with Part 6A.5 of the Local Centres DCP, the development will replenish the site with 10 new canopy trees.

A condition has been recommended to address changes to the landscape plan (Condition 20).

Communal open space (COS)

The principal COS between Building C and D provides an area of approximately 235m²with a minimum dimension of 8 metres which complies with Part 6C.1 Control 3 of the Local Centres DCP. The principal communal open space provided is acceptable in relation to amenity and usability.

BASIX

The BASIX certificate indicates that 90m² of indigenous or native planting is required. The landscape plan satisfactorily addresses this issue.

Stormwater

A condition is recommended to amend the stormwater plan to preserve Trees 4, 34, 35, 36, 37 & 38. This issue has been confirmed with Councils’ Development Engineer (Condition 22).

Access report

The access issues have been satisfactorily addressed

Conclusion

The application is acceptable, subject to conditions.”

Urban design

Council's Urban Design Consultant reviewed the application against the provisions of State Environmental Planning Policy No 65-Design Quality of Residential Flat Development (SEPP65) and provided the following comments:

Principle 1 - Context

“Good design responds and contributes to its context. Context can be defined as the key natural and built features of an area. Responding to context involves identifying the desirable elements of a location’s current character or, in the case of precincts undergoing a transition, the desired future character as stated in planning and design policies. New buildings will thereby contribute to the quality and identity of the area.

While is acknowledged that the proposal triggers SEPP 65 due to the 3-storey element (Building B) of the proposal and the Class 2 characterisation of the building under the BCA . The proposal must be considered as 'multi dwelling housing' and that the greater standards of Local Centres DCP Part 6 must be upheld. Borrowing lesser standards from the Residential Flat Design Code to justify non-compliances is not considered to be appropriate. The proposal must be considered as townhouse development, so it should be assessed as such.

The site is a transition site between recently constructed residential flat development to the west (corner of Nulla Nulla Street and Turramurra Avenue), an existing townhouse development to the south-west, and R3 zoned properties adjacent to the east.

The amalgamation of 1 and 3 Nulla Nulla Street results in a long narrow allotment that achieves significantly less (approximately 30%) than the 30 metre required street frontage.

Analysis of the surrounding subdivision pattern and location of the R3 zone tends to dictate the likely amalgamation scenarios. In this case, the proposed amalgamation is the most logical and likely arrangement due to the depth of the street block, resultant battle-axe allotments, and subsequent boundary alignments. It is difficult to see how an alternative rational site configuration could be achieved.

Streetscape address: The three dwellings addressing Nulla Nulla Street (Building A) do not propose front entries. Rather, there is a shared entry path along the western boundary (consistent with the Multi-dwelling housing section of the Local Centres DCP) that leads to the townhouse entries at the rear of Building.

The proposal’s response to its context is satisfactory.

Principle 2 – Scale

SEPP 65: Good design provides an appropriate scale in terms of the bulk and height that suits the scale of the street and the surrounding buildings. Establishing an appropriate scale requires a considered response to the scale of existing development. In precincts undergoing transition proposed bulk and height needs to achieve the scale identified for the desired future character of the area.

Scale is generally satisfactory being consistent with the permitted building height and Floor Space Ratio (FSR) for the site.

The proposed building typology is consistent with R3 townhouse typology and has broken down the building envelope into 5 separate buildings across the site.

The proposal’s response to scale is satisfactory.

Principle 3 - Built form

Good design achieves an appropriate built form for a site and the building’s purpose, in terms of building alignments, proportions, building type and the manipulation of building elements. Appropriate built form defines the public domain, contributes to the character of streetscapes and parks, including their views and vistas, and provides internal amenity and outlook.

The eastern and western facades have been amended, with building elements (secondary windows and hoods) that successfully punctuate the wall planes that previously had no openings and inadequate articulation and provide a desirable outlook from the residential flat building to the west and future medium density development to the east. Sill heights of windows proposed in Building E Townhouse 13 Bed 2 are to ensure that privacy is retained to the neighbouring townhouse.

Townhouses with partial subterranean levels have been amended to incorporate retention walls on elevations which have an interface with bare earth to minimise water damage and minimise reliance on just waterproofing.

These amendments satisfactorily resolve all outstanding issues.

The proposal’s response to built form is now satisfactory.

Principle 4 - Density

Good design has a density appropriate for a site and its context, in terms of floor space yields (or number of units or residents). Appropriate densities are sustainable and consistent with the existing density in an area or, in precincts undergoing a transition, are consistent with the stated desired future density. Sustainable densities respond to the regional context, availability of infrastructure, public transport, community facilities and environmental quality.

The proposed density is within the permitted FSR development standard.

Opportunities to increase landscaping within common areas have been maximised to ensure the landscape is consistently maintained across the site so that achieving visual privacy, a landscape outlook, and the desired landscape setting is not dependent on individual residents maintaining private landscape areas.

The proposal’s response to density is acceptable.

Principle 5 - Resources, energy and water efficiency

Good design makes efficient use of natural resources, energy and water throughout its full life cycle, including construction. Sustainability is integral to the design process. Aspects include demolition of existing structures, recycling of materials, selection of appropriate and sustainable materials, adaptability and reuse of buildings, layouts and built form, passive solar design principles, efficient appliances and mechanical services, soil zones for vegetation and reuse of water.

There are no materials currently onsite that appear to be proposed for onsite re-use, however, the materials palette does include face brickwork which achieves a robust, long lasting and generally maintenance free finish that is supported and consistent with Volume C, Building Design and Sustainability Part 3.7 of the Local Centres DCP.

Airconditioning units are to be integrated into the design and will be located within the basement.

Clothes drying areas have not been nominated; however, a condition has been recommended that they are provided for each townhouse (Condition 26).

The proposal’s response to resources, energy and water efficiency is acceptable.

Principle 6 - Landscape

Good design recognises that together landscape and buildings operate as an integrated and sustainable system, resulting in greater aesthetic quality and amenity for both occupants and the adjoining public domain. Landscape design builds on the existing site’s natural and cultural features in responsible and creative ways. It enhances the development’s natural environmental performance by co-ordinating water and soil management, solar access, micro-climate, tree canopy and habitat values. It contributes to the positive image and contextual fit of development through respect for streetscape and neighbourhood character, or desired future character. Landscape design should optimise useability, privacy and social opportunity, equitable access and respect for neighbours’ amenity, and provide for practical establishment and long term management.

The proposed landscape character is generally acceptable. The dominant outlook will eventually consist of established tree canopies in a leafy surround. These assist greatly in screening from the neighbouring lower density R2 zone to the east.

Retention of the Eucalyptus punctata (Grey Gum) in the Nulla Nulla Street frontage is supported and retains the distinct established landscape character of the street.

The proposal’s response to landscape is acceptable.

Principle 7 - Amenity

Good design provides amenity through the physical, spatial and environmental quality of a development. Optimising amenity requires appropriate room dimensions and shapes, access to sunlight, natural ventilation, visual and acoustic privacy, storage, indoor and outdoor space, efficient layouts, and service areas, outlook and ease of access for all age groups and degrees of mobility.

The subterranean units have been sufficiently addressed by providing an additional external retaining wall to components thus affected. It is acknowledged that overall amenity is generally satisfactory.

The proposal’s response to amenity is acceptable.

Principle 8 - Safety and Security

Good design optimises safety and security, both internal to the development and for the public domain. This is achieved by maximising overlooking of public and communal spaces while maintaining internal privacy, avoiding dark and non-visible areas, maximising activity on streets, providing clear, safe access points, providing quality public spaces that cater for desired recreational uses, providing lighting appropriate to the location and desired activities, and clear definition between public and private spaces.

The proposal’s response to safety and security is acceptable.

Principle 9 - Social dimensions

SEPP 65 : Good design responds to the social context and needs of the local community in terms of lifestyles, affordability and access to social facilities. New developments should optimise the provision of housing to suit the social mix and needs in the neighbourhood, or, in the case of precincts undergoing transition, provide for the desired future community.

The proposal’s response to social dimensions is satisfactory.

Planning Comment:

The proposal has provided eleven visitable townhouses and two accessible townhouses which satisfies Volume A, Part 6C.6 ‘dwelling mix’ and Volume C, Part 2.1 ‘equitable access’ of the Local Centres DCP. An amended access report has been provided and demonstrates how the above townhouses will satisfy the Local Centres DCP and relevant legislation.

Principle 10 - Aesthetics

SEPP 65: Quality aesthetics require the appropriate composition of building elements, textures, materials and colours and reflect the use, internal design and structure of the development. Aesthetics should respond to the environment and context, particularly to desirable elements of the existing streetscape or, in precincts undergoing transition, contribute to the desired future character of the area.

The issue regarding articulation of the eastern and western facade design has been satisfactorily resolved. The proposed aesthetic is satisfactory and will make a positive contribution to changing urban character of Nulla Nulla Street and Turramurra.

The materials selection and colour palette presents a contemporary aesthetic that is expressed through the architectural language of the built form that creates a clear narrative of the proposed development.

The proposal’s response to aesthetics is acceptable.”

Statutory Provisions

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act)

The proposal is “Local Development” under Part 4 of the 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 or 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 draft planning agreement that a developer has offered to enter into under section 93F, and

(v) the regulations (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 impacts 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, DCPs, the regulations and policies 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.

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 proposal is considered to achieve the relevant aims under this policy on the basis of the proposal not being located within close proximity to a waterway and Council’s Development Engineer has not raised any objections regarding stormwater drainage.

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 - Remediation of Land (SEPP 55)

The provisions of SEPP 55 require consideration of the potential for a site to be contaminated. The site has a history of residential use and is unlikely to be contaminated. Further investigation is not warranted.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004 (BASIX)

An amended BASIX certificate was submitted with the amended plans. The application documentation is consistent with the commitments identified in the BASIX certificates.

State Environmental Planning Policy No 65-Design Quality of Residential Flat Development (SEPP65)

SEPP 65 applies typically to high density residential flat developments. The objective of the controls are to ensure residential flat developments are of a quality design and provide high quality amenity to the future residents and those surrounding.

The development application being considered by Council has been lodged, and designed as a multi dwelling development pursuant of the Local Centres LEP and its supporting DCP.

Within SEPP 65, a residential flat development is in part, defined as:

….a building that comprises or includes:

(a) 3 or more storeys (not including levels below ground level provided for car parking or storage, or both, that protrude less than 1.2m above ground level), and

(b) 4 or more self-contained dwellings (whether or not the building includes uses for other purposes, such as shops)….

The development proposed is 3 storeys and contains more than 4 dwellings, satisfying parts A and B of the definition.

The development is therefore, for the purposes of SEPP 65 defined as a residential flat building and the Policy applies.

Clause 50(1A) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000 requires that an application made to Council for a residential flat development as defined by SEPP 65 be accompanied by a design verification statement that the designing architect has incorporated through the designing process of the project, the design principals of the SEPP and that the designing architect is a qualified designer. Council has been provided with the necessary design verification statement.

The application therefore satisfies this requirement of SEPP 65.

The proposal has been assessed by Council’s Urban Design Consultant against the ten design quality principles under SEPP65 and it is concluded that the proposal, subject to conditions, is satisfactory in this regard.

Residential Flat Design Code Compliance Table

Pursuant to Clause 30(2) of SEPP 65, in determining a development application for a residential flat building, the consent authority is to take into consideration the Residential Flat Design Code (RFDC). The following table is an assessment of the proposal against the guidelines provided in the RFDC.

PART 02 SITE DESIGN
Site Configuration
*Deep Soil Zones*	A minimum of 25 percent of the open space area of a site should be a deep soil zone; more is desirable. Exceptions may be made in urban areas where sites are built out and there is no capacity for water infiltration. In these instances, stormwater treatment measures must be integrated with the design of the residential flat building.	YES
*Fences + walls*	Define the edges between public and private land to provide privacy and security and contribute positively to the public domain.	YES
*Open Space*	The area of communal open space required should generally be at least between 25 and 30 percent of the site area. Larger sites and brown field sites may have potential for more than 30 percent.	YES
	The minimum recommended area of private open space for each apartment at ground level or similar space on a structure, such as on a podium or car park, is 25m².	YES
*Orientation*	Optimise solar access, contribute positively to desired streetscape character, support landscape design with consolidated open space areas, protect amenity of existing development and improve thermal efficiency.	YES
*Stormwater management*	Minimise impact on the health and amenity of natural waterways, preserve existing topographic and natural features and minimise the discharge of sediment and other pollutants to the stormwater drainage system.	YES
*Safety*	Carry out a formal crime risk assessment for all residential developments of more than 20 new dwellings.	YES
	Ensure Residential flat developments are safe and secure for residents and visitors.	YES
*Visual Privacy*	up to four storeys/12 metres - 12 metres between habitable rooms/balconies - 9 metres between habitable/balconies and non-habitable rooms - 6 metres between non-habitable rooms five to eight storeys/up to 25 metres - 18 metres between habitable rooms/balconies - 13 metres between habitable/balconies and non-habitable rooms - 9 metres between non-habitable rooms	YES
*Building Entry*	Create entrances which provide a desirable residential identity, provide clear orientation for visitors and contribute positively to the streetscape and building façade design.	YES
*Parking*	Provide adequate parking for occupants, visitors and disabled.	YES
*Pedestrian Access*	Identify the access requirements from the street or car parking area to the apartment entrance.	YES
	Follow the accessibility standard set out in Australian Standard AS 1428 (parts 1 and 2), as a minimum. Provide barrier free access to at least 20 percent of dwellings in the development.	YES
PART 03 BUILDING DESIGN
Building Configuration
*Apartment layout*	Single-aspect apartments should be limited in depth to 8 metres from a window.	YES
	The back of a kitchen should be no more than 8 metres from a window.	YES
	The width of cross-over or cross-through apartments over 15 metres deep should be 4 metres or greater to avoid deep narrow apartment layouts.	YES
	If Council chooses to standardise apartment sizes, a range of sizes that do not exclude affordable housing should be used. As a guide, the Affordable Housing Service suggest the following minimum apartment sizes, which can contribute to housing affordability: (apartment size is only one factor influencing affordability) - 1 bedroom apartment 50m² - 2 bedroom apartment 70m² - 3 bedroom apartment 95m²	YES
*Apartment Mix*	Include a mixture of unit types for increased housing choice.	YES
*Balconies*	Provide primary balconies for all apartments with a minimum depth of 2 metres. Developments which seek to vary from the minimum standards must demonstrate that negative impacts from the context-noise, wind – can be satisfactorily mitigated with design solutions.	YES
*Ceiling Heights*	The following recommended minimum dimensions are measured from finished floor level (FFL) to finished ceiling level (FCL). - in residential flat buildings or other residential floors in mixed use buildings: - in general, 2.7 metres minimum for all habitable rooms on all floors, 2.4 metres is the preferred minimum for all non-habitable rooms, however 2.25m is permitted.	YES
*Ground Floor Apartments*	Optimise the number of ground floor apartments with separate entries and consider requiring an appropriate percentage of accessible units. This relates to the desired streetscape and topography of the site.	YES
	Provide ground floor apartments with access to private open space, preferably as a terrace or garden.	YES
*Internal Circulation*	In general, where units are arranged off a double-loaded corridor, the number of units accessible from a single core/corridor should be limited to eight.	YES
*Storage*	In addition to kitchen cupboards and bedroom wardrobes, provide accessible storage facilities at the following rates: - studio apartments 6m³ - one-bedroom apartments 6m³ - two-bedroom apartments 8m³ - three plus bedroom apartments 10m³	YES
Building Amenity
*Acoustic Privacy*	Ensure a high level of amenity by protecting the privacy of residents within apartments and private open space	YES
*Daylight Access*	Living rooms and private open spaces for at least 70% of apartments in a development should receive a minimum of three hours direct sunlight between 9am and 3pm in mid-winter.	YES
	Limit the number of single-aspect apartments with a southerly aspect (SW-SE) to a maximum of 10% of the total units proposed.	YES
*Natural Ventilation*	Building depths, which support natural ventilation typically, range from 10 to 18 metres.	YES
	Sixty percent (60%) of residential units should be naturally cross ventilated.	YES
	Twenty five percent (25%) of kitchens within a development should have access to natural ventilation.	YES
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

Draft State Environmental Planning Policy No 65—Design Quality of Residential Flat Development (Draft SEPP 65)

On 23 September 2014, the Department of Planning and Environment exhibited the proposed changes to SEPP 65 which includes the replacement of the RFDC with an Apartment Design Guideline.

These amendments have been considered in the assessment of the application. The proposal is considered to be generally consistent with draft SEPP 65 and the draft Apartment Design Guideline which is mostly reflected in the RFDC.

LOCAL Provisions

Ku-ring-gai LEP (Local Centres) 2012 (Local Centres LEP)

Part 1:Preliminary

Clause 1.2: Aims of plan

(a) to establish a hierarchy of centres for Ku-ring-gai,

(b) to guide the future development of land and the management of environmental, social, economic, heritage and cultural resources in Ku-ring-gai for the benefit of present and future generations,

(c) to facilitate the development of the centres to enhance Ku-ring-gai’s economic role and cater to the retail and commercial needs of the local community,

(d) to provide a variety of housing choice within and adjacent to the centres,

(e) to protect, enhance and sustainably manage the biodiversity, natural ecosystems, water resources and ecological processes within the catchments of Ku-ring-gai,

(f) to recognise, protect and conserve Ku-ring-gai’s indigenous and non-indigenous cultural heritage,

(g) to encourage a diversity of employment in Ku-ring-gai,

(h) to achieve land use relationships that promote the efficient use of infrastructure,

(i) to facilitate good management of public assets and promote opportunities for social, cultural and community activities,

(j) to protect the character of low density residential areas, and the special aesthetic values of land in the Ku-ring-gai area.

The proposed development has been considered against the aims set out under this clause of Local Centres LEP. For the reasons outlined within this report, the proposed development has been found to be acceptable in all relevant respects.

Part 2: Permitted or permissible development

The site is located within the ‘R3 Medium Density Residential’ zoning.

The objectives of the R3 Medium Density Residential zone are as follows:

· To provide for the housing needs of the community within a medium density residential environment.

• To provide a variety of housing types within a medium density residential environment.

• To enable other land uses that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents.

• To provide a transition between low density residential housing and higher density forms of development.

The proposed development is permissible with consent within the ‘R3 Medium Density Residential’ zoning and satisfies the objectives for this zone.

Part 4: Principal development standards

Development standard	Proposed	Complies
Site area: 3,024m²
Cl. 4.3 Height of buildings 11.5m (max)	<11.5m	YES
Cl. 4.4 FSR 0.8:1	0.64:1	YES

Part 5: Miscellaneous provisions

Clause 5.9 Preservation of trees or vegetation

Councils Landscape Assessment Officer has given consideration to the objective of this clause which involves preserving the amenity of the area and biodiversity values of the vegetation on site. The proposal seeks to retain 35 trees in line with the objectives of this clause. It is proposed to remove 78 trees of which, 65 are Alnus jorullensis (Evergreen Alder) which are exempt under the Tree Preservation Order and the remaining 13 trees have low to moderate landscape value. Accordingly, there are no objections to the proposed tree removal.

Part 6: Additional local provisions

Clause 6.1 Earthworks

The proposal involves a large amount of excavation to construct the basement podium. The excavation plan has demonstrated that the works will not affect adjoining properties and will not have a detrimental impact on the site and its surrounding environment.

Clause 6.2 Storm water and water sensitive urban design

Council’s Development Engineer has given consideration to the objective of this clause which seeks to minimise the adverse impacts of urban water on the site and within the catchment. The stormwater design corporates a combined onsite detention and retention tank (OSD) to manage water quality and control discharge volumes and frequency. The proposal also incorporates a pollution chamber and stormwater filter within the OSD to measure and reduce the release of nutrients into the Hawkesbury Nepean River catchment. The proposal is satisfactory in this regard.

Clause 6.5: Site requirements for multi dwelling housing and residential flat buildings

Development standard

Proposed

Complies

Cl. 6.5 Site area 1,200m² (min)

3,024m²(Excluding access handle)

YES

Cl. 6.5 Street frontage

Site area >1,800m² = 30m (min)

21.33m

The proposal does not satisfy the Local Centres LEP street frontage development standard of 30m for multi dwelling sites greater than 1800m², the site has a frontage of 21.33m. A clause 4.6 variation request has been lodged in support of the 29% variation to the standard. A detailed assessment is included below.

Clause 4.6 Exceptions to development standards (Site requirements for multi dwelling housing and residential flat buildings):

Clause 4.6 seeks to provide an appropriate degree of flexibility in applying certain development standards to particular development, the premise being to achieve better outcome for and from development by allowing flexibility in particular circumstances.

As shown in the above table, the site falls short of the minimum frontage standard for multi dwelling housing on allotments more than 1,800m², which is 30m. Having regard to the object and purpose of Clause 4.6, the applicant has sought to exercise its provisions in order for the proposed development to proceed.

Within Clause 4.6 is a ‘test’ in which any variation sought to a development standard is to be considered and assessed against. The relevant sections of Clause 4.6 are:

…(2) Development consent may, subject to this clause, be granted for development even though the development would contravene a development standard imposed by this or any other environmental planning instrument. However, this clause does not apply to a development standard that is expressly excluded from the operation of the clause.

(3) Development consent must not be granted for development that contravenes a development standard unless the consent authority has considered a written request from the applicant that seeks to justify the contravention of the development standard by demonstrating:

(a) that compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstance of the case, and

(b) that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard.

(4) Development consent must not be granted for development that contravenes a development standard unless:

(a) the consent authority is satisfied that:

(i) the applicant’s written request has adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated by subclause (3), and

(ii) the proposed development will be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives for development within the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out, and

(b) the concurrence of the Director-General has been obtained.

The frontage of the site fails to satisfy the minimum width required of 30m, with 21.33m, representing a variation to the development standard of 8.67m or 29%.

The applicant has demonstrated through a written submission (refer to Attachment A4) that the development, with albeit a marginally decreased frontage can meet all the requirements under the Local Centres LEP and DCP with regard to FSR, height, landscaping, deep soil and setbacks. The 8.67m shortfall does not prevent the site from being developed in an orderly or economic manner.

With regard to the applicants’ written request, the following assessment has been carried out:

1. Demonstrate that there are sufficient environmental planning grounds to justify contravening the development standard.

The applicant has provided the following arguments to justify why compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary:

· “The subject site is 3,024m²(excluding the access handle) meeting the minimum site area requirement of 1200m² for multi dwelling housing contained in clause 6.5(2) of the Local Centres LEP.

· The development proposal confirms a suitable multi dwelling housing development can be accommodated on the allotment in accordance with the building height and FSR development standards and planning controls contained in the Local Centres DCP.

· The proposed development meets the site coverage and deep soil landscape area development controls, and the proposed landscape works contribute to the landscape setting of the site.

· The proposed site amalgamation for the multi-dwelling housing development is acceptable and consolidation with 5 Nulla Nulla Street to achieve a 30m frontage is not necessary noting the configuration of the adjoining allotments ensures a suitable consolidation pattern with 5– 7 Nulla Nulla Street, Turramurra can be achieved”.

The applicant has demonstrated that the development, even with the decreased frontage can easily meet all the requirements of the Local Centres LEP and DCP with regard to FSR, height, landscaping deep soil and setbacks. The 8.67m shortfall does not prevent the site from being developed in an orderly or economic manner.

The proposal will maintain the existing established character of the locality in terms of bulk and scale, three two-storey townhouses fronting the street is considered an appropriate scale for the site and its context.

2. The applicant’s written variation request has adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated and the proposed development will be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the particular standard and the objectives for development within the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out.

There are sufficient environmental planning grounds to allow the variation to the street frontage, particularly when the proposal is assessed against the objectives of Clause 6.5, which are:

(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 landscape areas and setbacks to ensure the amenity to adjoining properties and to support the desired future character of those areas.

The applicant has provided the following arguments to justify why the proposal meets the objectives of the site requirements for multi dwelling housing based on the following:

· “The development proposal confirms the street frontage is adequate for the multi dwelling housing development meeting the height, floor area, site coverage and deep soil landscape area controls with access to basement parking.

· The proposed development and configuration of the adjoining allotments confirms the proposal is an orderly and economic use of the subject site.

· The development proposal meets the deep soil landscape area and setback controls, and the proposed landscape works ensure the building will be viewed within a landscape setting”.

The applicant has provided an adequate written request with justification to vary the development standard. The applicant has argued that the development is in the public interest as variation results in no material environmental impact. Further to this, it has also been submitted that the development satisfies the fundamental development controls of height, FSR, setback and deep soil.

3. The Applicant’s clause 4.6 variation request has adequately addressed the matters required to be demonstrated and the proposed development will be in the public interest because it is consistent with the objectives of the particular standard and the objectives for development within the zone in which the development is proposed to be carried out.

The applicant has provided an adequate written request with justification to vary the development standard. The applicant has demonstrated that the development is in the public interest in that it maintains the objectives of the clause, as discussed above.

4. Assessment against R3 medium density zone objectives

The objectives of the R3 zoning are:

· To provide for the housing needs of the community within a medium density residential environment.

· To provide a variety of housing types within a medium density residential environment.

· To enable other land uses that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents.

· To provide a transition between low density residential housing and higher density forms of development.

The proposal has a built form which is compatible with the medium density residential environment of the area and the land to be developed. The proposal provides for the housing needs of the community through a multi dwelling development and represents an appropriate scale with the adjoining R2 land to the east.

5. The concurrence of the Director-General has been obtained

Under Planning Circular PS08-003 issued 9 May 2008:

Notification of assumed concurrence of the Director-General under clause 4.6(4) (and the former clause 24(4)) of the Standard Instrument

(1) Under clause 64 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, council is notified that it may assume the Director-General’s concurrence for exceptions to development standards, subject to paragraphs (2) and (3), in respect of all applications made under:

(a) clause 4.6 (or the former clause 24, or any future amended version of this clause) of the Standard Instrument (Local Environmental Plans) Order 2006, or

(b) any other clause that is based on a substantially similar format and has a substantially similar effect to the clause described in (1)(a),

where such a clause is adopted in an environmental planning instrument to provide for exceptions to development standards.

Accordingly, concurrence is assumed as the Local Centres LEP has adopted Clause 4.6 of the Standard Instrument.

For the reasons discussed and in satisfying the ‘test’ of Cl. 4.6 of the LEP, the frontage variation to the minimum site frontage development standard is supported.

Clause 6.3 Biodiversity protection

The site does contain vegetation identified as an area of ‘biodiversity significance’ under the Local Centres LEP. The tree is a Eucalyptus punctata (Grey Gum) and is located within the street setback. This species is characteristic of the Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest and is an Endangered Ecological Community protected under Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995, however, the proposal does not involve its removal and conditions have been recommended by Councils Landscape Assessment Officer to ensure its protection during construction (Conditions 14, 22 and 64).

Policy Provisions (DCPs, Council policies, strategies and management plans)

Ku-ring-gai Local Centres Development Control Plan

Volume A

Clause 1A.5: General aims of the DCP

The general aims of the DCP are:

· the establishment of a future character for the local centres;

· provision of high quality public domain areas;

· provision of a range of building types;

· provision of high quality urban and architectural design;

· assurance of a good relationship between development and the public domain and local landscape qualities;

· assurance of a high level of residential amenity in building design;

· promotion of principles of ecologically sustainable development;

· provision of equitable access;

· promotion of increased use of public transport, walking and cycling;

· provision of measures and outcomes to ensure appropriate control of traffic;

· recognition of heritage items and heritage conservation areas;

· promotion and support of biodiversity conservation, riparian restoration and ecological integrity;

· assurance of the long term survival of native and exotic tree and vegetation cover

· the appropriate management of risks related to flooding, bushfire and land contamination; and

· the allowance for public participation through the notification process.

The proposed development has been assessed against these aims and is found to be acceptable in all relevant respects.

Part 2: Site analysis

A site analysis which identifies the existing characteristics of the site and the surrounding area has been provided as part of the development application. The site analysis is considered to satisfy the objectives of this part of the Local Centres DCP.

COMPLIANCE TABLE
Development control	Proposed		Complies
Volume A
Part 6 Multi Dwelling Housing Controls
Part 6A Site Design
6A.1 Site layout
Site layout to respond to site analysis	Site analysis provided	YES
Any dwelling with a frontage to the street must address the street	Three townhouses have frontage to, and address, the street	YES
Minimum of one dwelling to address the street	Three townhouses face the street	YES
Minimise hard surface to maximise landscaping	Hard surface kept to minimum	YES
Long straight driveways will not be permitted. Buildings and fences to be staggered	Short straight driveway proposed	YES
Provide single pedestrian entry from street level	Two pedestrian entries provided at street level from Turramurra Avenue and Nulla Nulla Street	YES
Layout to be based on figure 6A.1-2	Site layout does reflect the recommended layout	YES
6A.2 Building setbacks
10m from primary street boundary (min)	12m	YES
Parallel to prevailing building line	Parallel to building line	YES
3m side setback from any side boundary (min)	3m	YES
Driveways set back 3m from side boundary (min) to allow for deep soil planting	0.2m	NO (refer to discussion below)
Setback areas not be used for at grade parking	No at grade parking	N/A
6m rear setback (min)	6m	YES
Basement areas must meet the street and rear setback requirements and be a minimum of 3m from any side boundary	Rear: 6m Street: 12m Side: 0.2m to 3m	YES YES NO (refer to discussion below)
Ground floor private terraces/courtyards must have: 8m setback from street boundary (min) 3m setback from side boundary (min) 4m setback from rear boundary (min)	8m No private terraces/courtyards provided in side setback area 4m	YES N/A YES
Ground floor side setback encroachment by private terraces/courtyards only if deep soil planting requirements are met.	No private terraces/courtyards provided in side setback area.	N/A
15% (max) of the total area of any street setback is to be occupied by private terraces/courtyards.	13%	YES
6A.3 Building separation
The minimum separation between residential buildings on the development site and the adjoining sites must comply with the following: Up to 2^nd Storey: i) 3m between non habitable rooms ii) 6m between rooms/balconies in all other cases 3^rd Storey: i) 12m between habitable rooms/balconies ii) 7m between habitable rooms/balcony and non-habitable room iii) 3m between non-habitable rooms	>8m >8m N/A 8m N/A		YES YES N/A YES N/A
6A.4 Site coverage
Maximum site coverage of 40% for townhouses	38%		YES
6A.5 Deep soil landscaping
Multi-unit dwelling development must have deep soil landscaping of 40% (min)	40%		YES
Lots with the following sizes are to support a minimum number of tall trees capable of attaining a mature height of 13m on shale transitional soil or 10m on sandstone derived soils: 1200m²or less: 1 per 400m²of site area 1201-1800m² : 1 per 350m²of site area 1801m² or more: 1 per 300m² of site area	10 canopy trees		YES
At least 50% of all tree plantings are to be locally occurring trees and spread around the site.	>50%		YES
Part 6B Access and Parking
6B.1 Vehicle Access
Driveway located 3m (min) from side boundary and separated by a continuous landscaped verge & screen planting	Driveway located 0.2mm from boundary		NO (refer to discussion below)
One driveway (max)	Only one driveway is proposed		YES
Driveway designed to avoid straight, long gun barrel appearance by use of landscaping and variations in alignment	Driveway design avoids long gun barrel appearance		YES
On-site vehicle turning areas designed to permit turning in a single reversing movement	Vehicle turning areas allow turning in a single reversing movement		YES
On-site vehicle turning areas must be located within the basement or concealed from the view of the public domain	Turning areas located in the basement		YES
If provided in basement, waste and recycling room to be 2.6m ceiling height (min) along path of travel from street to residential waste collection and manoeuvring area and kept free of overhead ducts, services and other obstructions	>2.6m ceiling height along path of travel		YES
6B.2 Car parking provision
Basement car parking must be consolidated under building footprint	Basement consolidated under building footprint		YES
The basement car park must not project more than 1m above existing ground level to the floor level of the storey immediately above	Maximum 900mm projection		YES
Wherever possible, direct access must be provided from basement car parks to entry	Direct access provided from basement car parks to entry		YES
Car parking spaces, circulation areas, roadways and ramps are to comply with AS2890.1	Council’s Senior Development Engineer is satisfied that compliance is achieved		YES
Car parking rates: (Volume C Part 2R.2) 1 bedroom unit: 1 space 2 bedroom unit: min. multiple of 1.25 spaces per unit 3 bedroom unit: min. multiple of 1.5 spaces per unit	The development proposes 15 dwellings, each containing 3 bedrooms. Therefore: 15 x 1.5 spaces/unit = 23 spaces. 29 spaces are proposed		YES
Visitor parking: 1 space per 4 units 1 space to be adaptable by complying with dimensional and locational requirements of AS2890.6. One space to be provided with tap to make provision for on-site car washing	5 visitor spaces Council’s Senior Development Engineer is satisfied that compliance is achieved Car wash space has been provided		YES YES YES
Clearly signposted space for temporary parking of service and removalist vehicles with min. dimension of 3.5m x 6m and min. manoeuvring area 7m wide (where not provided, one of visitor spaces may be used if it meets these dimensions)	Temporary service/car wash space provided which satisfies minimum dimensions.		YES
6B.3 Bicycle parking provision
Where basement parking is provided: 1 bicycle parking space per 5 units (or part thereof) for residents within residential car park area; and 1 bicycle parking space (in the form of a bicycle rail) per 10 units (or part thereof) for visitors within visitor car park area	Sufficient bicycle parking spaces have been provided and are convenient to the street.		YES
Part 6C. Building Design and Sustainability
6C.1 Communal open space
Communal open space must be provided where more than 10 dwellings are proposed that do not address the street and must be 8% of the site area with a minimum dimension of 8m. 242m²of communal open space required	235m²		NO (refer to discussion below)
6C.2 Private open space
Multi-dwelling housing development must provide a minimum (internal dimension) 35m² of private open space per dwelling at ground floor, and must ensure: i) a single space of minimum 25m² with a minimum internal dimension of 4m and direct access from a living area of the dwelling; and ii) the remaining spaces must have a minimum internal dimension of 2m	>25m²and 4m min dimension 2m		YES YES
Primary private open space is to have direct access from the main living areas	All primary private open space areas have direct access from main living area		YES
Private open space (outdoor) for ground floor dwellings is to be differentiated from common areas by: i) Change in level and/or: ii) screen planting such as hedges or shrubs and/or; iii) fence/wall to max height of 1.8m. Any solid wall component to have max 1.2m height with 30% transparent component on top. Gate to be provided from common area	Landscape plan indicates fence to define the line of private open space.		YES
6C.3 Solar access
Dwellings must receive min 3 hours direct sunlight to at least one living room & primary private open space between 9am - 3pm on 21^st June	All townhouses receive 3 hours of direct sunlight to one living room. Townhouses 4, 7 and 14 do not receive 3 hours of direct sunlight to principal private open space.		YES NO (refer to discussion below)
Min. 3 hours between 9am – 3pm on 21^st June to living areas and principal portion of private open space of existing residential flat buildings and multi-dwelling housing on adjoining lots and residential development in adjoining lower density zones	3 hours of sunlight retained		YES
Overshadowing must not compromise the development potential of the adjoining under-developed site(s)	Adjoining undeveloped sites will not be affected with more than 3 hours of overshadowing.		YES
All development must utilise shading and glare control	Eaves, window hoods and general roof form will provide shade to the majority of windows to habitable rooms		YES
6C.4 Natural ventilation
All habitable rooms are to have windows or doors that can be opened and closed	All habitable rooms have windows or doors that can be opened and closed		YES
All dwellings must have natural cross ventilation	All dwellings have natural cross ventilation		YES
At least 25% of all kitchens are to be immediately adjacent to an operable window	26% of kitchens immediately adjacent to an operable window		YES
All habitable rooms are to be naturally ventilated without relying solely on lightwells or skylights	All habitable rooms are naturally ventilated without relying solely on lightwells or skylights		YES
6C.5 Dwelling depth, width and room size
Maximum internal plan depth of a dwelling is to be 14m from glass line to glass line	Block A: 14.7m (1^st floor) Block B: 14m (2^nd floor) Block C: 14m (2^nd floor) Block D: 11m (1^st floor) Block E: 11m (1^st floor)		NO (refer to discussion below) YES YES YES YES
Each dwelling must have 4m dimension (min)	Block A: 5m Block B: 5m Block C: 4.8m Block D: 6.6m Block E: 6.6m		YES YES YES YES YES
Living areas must have 4m internal plan dimension (min)	Block A: 4.7m Block B: 4.7m Block C: 4.7m Block D: 4m Block E: 4.3m		YES YES YES YES YES
Multi-dwelling housing with two bedrooms must have a minimum internal plan dimension of 3m (excl. wardrobe space) in all bedrooms	All dwellings have three bedrooms		N/A
Multi-dwelling housing with three or more bedrooms are to have at least two bedrooms with a minimum internal plan dimension of 3m (excluding wardrobe space)	All dwellings have bedrooms with a minimum internal plan dimension greater than 3m (excl wardrobes)		YES
Built in wardrobes are to be provided: i) to all studio apartments; ii) to all bedrooms in one and two bedroom apartments iii) to at least two bedrooms in apartments of three or more bedrooms	Built in wardrobes are provided in every bedroom.		YES
6C.6 Dwelling mix
All multi-dwelling housing developments must contain at least one dwelling for each 10 dwellings (or part thereof) designed as adaptable housing in accordance with the provisions of AS4299-1995: Adaptable Housing Class C	Townhouse 10 and 11 are designed as adaptable housing.		YES
6C.7 Building entries
The entry path is to be directly accessible and visible from the street	Entry paths are directly accessible and visible from Turramurra Avenue and Nulla Nulla Street		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	Building entries are articulated with a recessed pathway and entry arbor for clear identification		YES
All entries must be well lit and designed to avoid any concealment or entrapment areas	The entry and communal area do not contain concealment or entrapment areas.		YES
All light spill is prohibited	Light spill is contained by canopies and awnings		YES
6C.8 Building facades
Building length is not to exceed 36m	<15m		YES
All building facades must be modulated and articulated with wall planes varying in depth by not less than 0.3m. Where external walls are longer than 12m, the building alignment must be stepped by a minimum 0.6m articulation (projection or indentation) in the façade.	The proposed building is sufficiently modulated and articulated in its facades		YES
Building facades must be designed to respond to solar access by using solar protection elements such as eaves and louvres as environmental controls	Design incorporates sufficient solar protection elements such as eaves, window hoods and louvres		YES
All building elements including shading devices and awnings must be coordinated and integrated within the overall façade design	All shading devices and awnings coordinated and integrated within overall façade design		YES
Where individual air conditioning units are used, they must not be located on the building façade or on balconies or terraces	Air conditioning plant are to be located in the basement		YES
Balconies that run the full length of the building façade are not permitted	Balconies to Townhouses 1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8 and 9 run the full length of the northern façade		NO (refer discussion below)
Balconies must not project more than 1.2m from the outermost wall of the building façade	1m		YES
Blade walls are not to be the sole element used to provide articulation	Sufficient articulation and recessing of the balconies has been used in-conjunction with blade walls.		YES
6C.9 Top storey design and roof forms
Where a third storey is proposed, the gross floor area of the top storey must not exceed 60% of the gross floor area of the storey immediately below it	Blocks A,C,D,E and F all two storey Block B:36%		N/A YES
Where the third storey is not incorporated into the roof form, it must be set back from the outer wall of the floor below on all sides	Blocks A,C,D,E and F all two storey Block B: Not sufficiently setback from the outer walls on eastern, western and southern boundary		N/A NO (refer to discussion below)
Attics are permissible subject to being within a hipped or gable roof where the maximum roof pitch is 35^0.They are to be designed to fit within the building envelope(with the exception of dormer windows) and are not to increase the bulk and height of the roof	No attics are proposed		N/A
Service elements must be integrated into the overall design of the roof so as not to be visible from the public domain or any surrounding development	Service elements are integrated into the overall design of the roof		YES
Roof design must respond to solar access by using eaves or skillion roofs	Design responds to solar access allowing sun to penetrate deep into the lot.		YES
Roof forms are to be modulated or broken	Modulated roof form		YES
Solar panels to be integrated into the roof line (where provided)	Solar panels are not proposed		YES
6C.10 Internal ceiling heights
Ceiling height for habitable room: 2.7m min	<2.7m		YES
Ceiling height for non-habitable room: 2.25m min	<3m		YES
6C.11 Visual privacy
Buildings must be designed to ensure privacy	Building designed to ensure privacy		YES
Continuous transparent balustrades are not permitted to balconies/terraces	Masonry walls (800mm high) incorporated into facade and louvres to ensure there are no continuous transparent balustrades		YES
Screening between dwellings must be integrated with the overall building design	Screening integrated into the overall building design		YES
Landscaped screening must be provided to adjoining sites	Landscaped screening is to be provided to adjoining sites		YES
6C.12 Storage
Storage space must be provided at the following minimum volumes: 10m³ for two bedroom dwellings 12m³ for dwellings with three or more bedrooms	>12m³		YES
50% of storage space to be provided within the dwelling. Remaining storage located outside the dwelling to be specifically allocated to the relevant dwellings	Storage provision complies		YES
6C.13 External air clothes drying facilities
Provide one external air clothes drying area for each dwelling	Clothes drying area provided for each townhouse		YES
External air clothes drying area must be screened from public areas and common areas	Screened with fencing		YES
6C.14 Fencing
Front fences and walls (to public street) and side fences in the street setback must not be higher than: i) 0.9m closed construction (masonry, lapped and capped timber or brushwood fences) ii) 1.2m open style construction (open paling and picket fencing) Closed front fences with a max height of 1.8m and set back 2m from the front boundary will be considered where the site fronts a busy road.	Turramurra Avenue pedestrian frontage: 1.2m high open metal pailing fence with 1.4m high columns on boundary at Turramurra Avenue. Nulla Nulla Street: A Low rise variable .3m to 1.7m high private courtyard retaining wall extends from the driveway to the western side setback and is 8m from the street boundary		YES YES
Fences and walls must be stepped down and follow the natural contours of the site	Fences and walls are stepped to follow natural contours of site		YES
Hedges and shrub planting no higher than 1.2m along entire front boundary	No hedges and shrub plantings are proposed at front boundary		YES
All fences to highlight entrances, and be compatible with buildings, letterboxes and garbage storage areas	Fences highlight entrances and are compatible with building and structures		YES
External finishes must be robust and graffiti resistant	External finishes considered suitable		YES
VOLUME B
PART 2 Site Design For Water Management
Assessed by Council’s Development Engineer in relation to the Local Centres LEP clause 6.2 relating to Stormwater and water sensitive urban design and the Local Centres DCP and found to be satisfactory.			YES
VOLUME C
PART 1 Site Design
1.1 General
The development must respond to site attributes as identified in the site analysis	Site analysis provided		YES
Must demonstrate how the proposal responds to the site and contextual attributes	Site analysis demonstrates adequately how the application has responded to the site and contextual attributes		YES
1.2 Earthworks and Slope
Development must demonstrate consideration of site topography, drainage, soil landscapes, flora, fauna and bushfire hazard	Consideration of site topography has been provided		YES
Development must be accommodated within the natural slope of the land	Design accommodates the slope of the site		YES
Development is to minimise earthworks on steeply sloping sites Sites with a slope in excess of 15% may require certification from a geotechnical engineer as to the stability of the slope in regards to the proposed design	4% slope on site		N/A
Minimum 600mm width is required between retaining walls to provide adequate soil area and depth to ensure that they do not read as a single level change and for the viability of landscaping	Assessed by Council’s Landscape Officer and found to be satisfactory		YES
Existing ground level is to be maintained for a distance of 2m from any boundary	Assessed by Council’s Landscape Officer and found to be satisfactory		YES
Fill and excavation are not permitted within sensitive environments	Not applicable		N/A
Retaining walls, excavated and filled areas shall be located and constructed to have no adverse impact on: i) Structures to be retained on the site ii) Structures on adjacent public or private land iii) Trees to be retained onsite or on adjoining sites	No adverse impact		YES
Excavated and filled areas are to be constructed so as not to redirect or concentrate stormwater or surface runoff onto adjoining properties	Assessed and found to be satisfactory		YES
Design of proposal must consider the impacts of altered subsurface/groundwater flows or direction on groundwater dependent ecosystems or species	Assessed and found to be satisfactory		YES
1.3 Landscape Design
Assessed by Council’s Senior Landscape Assessment Officer and found to be satisfactory			YES
PART 2 Access and Parking
2.1 Equitable Access
Applications are to demonstrate how access to and within the development meets the requirements of the Disability Discrimination Act 1992 (DDA)	Application has provided an Access Report demonstrating that the application meets the requirements of the DDA		YES
At least 70% of the dwellings in medium density residential development are to be ‘visitable’.	73% (11/15)		YES
2.2 Vehicle Access, 2.3 Basement Car Parking, 2.4 Visitor Parking, 2.5 Parking For People With A Disability, 2.6 Pedestrian Movement Within Car Parks, 2.7 Bicycle Parking and Facilities
Assessed by Council’s Development Engineer and found to be satisfactory			YES
PART 3 Building Design and Sustainability
3.3 Building Services
All applicants must consult with service providers	Standard consent conditions will ensure that this is undertaken		YES
Services and structures required by the providers are to be located within basements, or concealed within the façade, with appropriate access.	Standard consent conditions will ensure that this is undertaken		YES
Air conditioning units located within basements must be screened and have adequate ventilation	Air conditioner plant room to be located within basement		YES
3.4 Waste Management
All waste and recycling facilities must comply with the BCA and all relevant Australian Standards	Area designed in accordance with BCA & AS		YES
All waste and recycle to be stored within site	Garbage collection rooms have been provided		YES
Access to collection point	Unimpeded access, suitable grade, exit forward direction and level surface, clear >2.6m clearance height		YES
Storage Room to be provided and easily accessible	Storage rooms provided and easily accessible		YES
Waste 1 x 240L per 2 units: 15	15x 240L waste		YES
Co-mingled 1 x 240L per 4 units: 4	4 x 240L		YES
Recycling: 1 x 240L per 4 units: 4	4 x 240L		YES
3.5 Acoustic Privacy
Building to comply with separation requirements of DCP	Adequate design principles have been used and requirements of DCP satisfied		YES
3.6 Visual Privacy
Private open spaces and principle living spaces of the proposal and adjacent dwellings to be protected from direct or unreasonable overlooking	Overlooking has been minimised by orientating all living rooms and associated windows towards the north with adequate building separation to adjacent Townhouses and the use of highlight windows and louvres on the east and west elevations to minimise overlooking onto adjacent properties. Rooftop terrace levels are proposed for Townhouses 1 to 3 and 7 to 15. The impact of visual privacy of neighbouring occupants has been minimised by: 1. stepping the terraces in from the outer walls by 1m to 2.5m (Townhouse 1 to 12); 2. the top of the terrace slab is recessed 400-500mm below the capping layer of the outer walls with a 1.4m high balustrade; and 3. the enclosed staircases used to access the terraces also provide a 1.8m barrier preventing overlooking for all Townhouses on the eastern and western elevations. Privacy between adjoining terraces is achieved through the use of 2m high dividing walls. Further, Townhouses 13 to 15 are not stepped in on the southern elevation, it is unlikely that overlooking will occur within this section of the terrace, this portion of the terrace is likely to be used as a trafficable area and the boundary is 6m to the south. 4m of this setback is common area and will be planted out with adequate screening trees with mature heights varying from 2m to 6m. The use of the terraces is likely to be low given there are no iconic or significant views across the site.		YES
3.7 Materials, Finishes and Colours
Comprehensive details provided with application	Finishes/materials have been considered by Council’s Urban Design Consultant and assessed as being satisfactory and consistent with the character of the surrounding environment.		YES
3.8 Roof Terraces and Podiums
All roof terraces and podiums must provide appropriate building systems to make them trafficable, and to support landscaping.	Townhouses 1 to 3 and 7 to 15 have rooftop terraces and have adequate trafficable areas and capacity to support soft landscaping. Councils landscape assessment officer has assessed the terraces and raised no issues.		YES
Roof terraces and podiums are to be designed for optimum conditions for plant growth by appropriate solar access, soil mix, and the provision of water connections and drainage.	The proposed rooftop terraces have a north-south orientation and are suitable for plant growth. Councils landscape assessment officer has assessed the terraces and raised no issues.		YES
3.9 Construction, Demolition and Disposal
Waste management plan provided with application	A waste management plan was submitted as part of the proposed development. It is considered that the construction waste management plan meets the underlying objectives of waste management as required under the Local Centres DCP.		YES
PART 4 Water Management
Council’s Development Engineer has assessed the proposal against the relevant provisions of the Local Centres DCP that relate to water management. The application is considered to be acceptable in this regard, subject to conditions to be imposed.

An assessment of the variations to the design controls identified in the compliance table is provided below.

6A.2 Building setbacks- driveways and 6B.1 Vehicle access

Driveways are required to be set back a minimum of 3m from a side boundary to allow for deep soil planting. The proposed driveway is located 0.2mm from the side boundary and does not satisfy the control. However, this variation is acceptable given the adequate provision of deep soil planting throughout the site and the retention of a large grey gum within the street setback area which will help soften the built form.

6A.2 Building setbacks- basements

Basements are required to satisfy the 3m side setback to allow for deep soil landscaping on all boundaries. The basement carpark entrance is located on the eastern side boundary for 1.25m before it steps back to 3m in accordance with the control. This variation is minor and acceptable given that it does not prevent the provision of a compliant quantum of deep soil landscaping within all setback areas.

6C.1 Communal open space

Multi dwelling housing developments involving 10 or more townhouses are required to dedicate 8 percent of site area as communal open space, with a minimum dimension of 8m. To avoid the provision of multiple undersized communal areas at least one space must be a minimum of 72m² in area with a minimum dimension of 6m. Based on a site area of 3,024m² the proposal is required to provide 242m² of communal open space. The proposal provides one communal space between Buildings D and E totalling 235m²and a minimum 8m dimension. This variation is considered to be minor and acceptable given that the area is usable and likely to be used intermittently as each townhouse will have private open space in excess of the 35m² allocation requirement with north facing terraces and rooftop terraces (all accessed from living/dining rooms). In addition, the proposal provides an acceptable quantum of common area around the periphery of the site.

6C.3 Solar access

Multi housing developments are required to provide a minimum of 3 hours solar access between 9am – 3pm on 21st June to the principal portion of private open space. The proposed principal private open space for Townhouses 4, 7 and 14 (20%) are unlikely to receive 3 hours of direct solar access to their principal open space. However, this variation is acceptable given that the proposed rooftop terraces provide additional private open space for all townhouses and this is an appropriate response to the constraints of the site, the terraces have virtually unrestricted winter solar access, in combination with similarly generous ground level private open space for use at times when such solar access is not considered vital by the occupants.

6C.5 Dwelling depth, width and room size

The maximum internal plan depth of a dwelling is to be 14m from glass line to glass line. The objective of this control is to ensure adequate amenity for the occupants in terms of solar access, natural ventilation and functionality of rooms. Townhouses 1 to 3 (Building A) exceed the control by 800mm due to the provision of a ground floor bathroom as part of the visitable dwelling requirements. The townhouses are orientated to utilise the northern aspect via the location of living spaces in the northern half of the townhouse and the inactive rooms towards the south with cross ventilation achieved along the eastern elevation.

The townhouses within the development have generally been designed maximise solar access and are well within its maximum FSR, the variation proposed in this instance is considered acceptable.

6C.8 Building facades- balcony length

Balconies that run the full length of the building façade are not permitted. The objectives of this control are to integrate building elements into the overall building and to reduce apparent bulk and scale to the street. The proposed balconies to Townhouses 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 run the full length of the northern façade.

The variation is acceptable in this instance given that, when viewed in elevation, the balconies do not appear to run the full length of the façade, as they are well articulated between townhouses and the outer walls, which clad the edges of the balconies, appear to be contained within the building and are indiscernible from the street and within from the site.

6C.9 Top storey design and roof forms- third storey setback

Where a third storey is proposed it is to be limited to 60 percent of the gross floor area of the storey immediately below and set back from all outer walls of the floor below it. The intent of this control is to minimise visual bulk, provide interesting roof forms and contribute to the overall design and environmental performance of buildings. The proposed third storey for Building B is a compliant 36 percent of the storey below it, representing a much smaller storey than the control; however it is not set back from the outer walls on the eastern, western and southern boundary.

This variation is nevertheless acceptable given that the proposed roof form is typical of a three storey townhouse, the location of the staircase on the eastern and western elevation adds bulk to 4.8m of the eastern and western elevation and prevents the storey from being totally stepped in. However, this element also creates a privacy wall for the rooftop terraces and reduces overlooking into adjacent properties. The third storey is set back 7.8m from the northern elevation which faces Nulla Nulla Street, and will therefore present as a very small component of the building.

Volume B – Part 2 site design for water management

The configuration and composition of the development is considered to be consistent with the controls of Part 2 – site design for water management.

Volume C- Part 1 site design

The configuration and composition of the development is considered to be consistent with the controls of Part 1 – site design contained within the DCP.

Volume C – Part 2 access and parking

The development’s basement has been designed to satisfy the design criteria and controls as required by Part 2 of the DCP.

In addition, the application is accompanied by a detailed traffic report and analysis that demonstrates that the development will have an acceptable impact upon traffic flows and movements within the local area and that the basement allows for the necessary movements for vehicles that need to access it.

The basement is also acceptable, providing the ancillary facilities required by the DCP, including bicycle parking, adaptable car parking, car wash bay and a temporary parking space for service and removalists vehicles.

Volume C – Part 4 water management

A detailed stormwater plan has been submitted which demonstrates how stormwater generated by the development will be captured and conveyed to Council’s trunk drainage system.

Consistent with the comments of Council’s Development Engineer, the stormwater system’s design is consistent with the controls of the DCP.

Volume C – Part 5 notification controls

The proposed development has been notified in accordance with the requirements of Volume C – Part 5 of the notification controls.

Section 94 Development Contributions Plan 2010

The development attracts a section 94 contribution of $438,179.27 which is required to be paid prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate (Condition 44).

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

Approval of the application is considered to be in the public interest.

Conclusion

Having regard to the provisions of section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the proposed development is considered to be satisfactory.

Recommendation:

A. THAT Council, as the consent authority, is satisfied that the request under Clause 4.6 of Ku-ring-gai Local Centres LEP 2012 to vary the minimum street frontage development standard is well founded. Council is also satisfied that the proposed development will be in the public interest and is consistent with the objectives of the minimum site frontage development standard and the R3 Medium Density Residential zone.

B. THAT Council, as the consent authority, grant development consent to DA0582/14 for demolition of two existing dwellings and construction of a multi dwelling housing development containing 15 townhouses, landscaping and basement car parking on land at 1 to 3 Nulla Nulla Street, Turramurra, for a period of two 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
A002, Issue C, DA-Site Plan	Mackenzie Architects International	30/06/2015
A100, Issue B, DA-Carpark RL.168.000	Mackenzie Architects International	18/06/2015
A101, Issue E, DA- Ground Floor RL. 171.050	Mackenzie Architects International	12/08/2015
A102, Issue D, DA-First Floor RL. 174.100	Mackenzie Architects International	27/07/2015
A103, Issue D, DA-Second Floor RL. 177.150	Mackenzie Architects International	27/07/2015
A104, Issue C, DA-Third Floor RL. 182.200	Mackenzie Architects International	30/06/2015
A105, Issue B, DA-Fourth Floor RL. 183.250	Mackenzie Architects International	18/06/2015
A300, Issue E, DA-Elevations	Mackenzie Architects International	12/08/2015
A200, Issue C, DA-Sections	Mackenzie Architects International	30/06/2015
A600, Issue A, DA- Excavation Plan	Mackenzie Architects International	15/12/2015
LPDA 15-219/1, Issue E, Landscape Plan	Conzept Landscape Architects	12/08/2015
LPDA 15-219/2, Issue B, Landscape Details	Conzept Landscape Architects	31/07/2015
14049-DA-C1.01, Revision 02, Cover Sheet	Dawes Consulting Engineers	08/12/2015
14049-DA-C2.01, Revision 02, Concept Sediment and Erosion Control Plan	Dawes Consulting Engineers	08/12/2015
14049-DA-C2.02, Revision 02, Sediment and Erosion Details	Dawes Consulting Engineers	08/12/2015
14049-DA-C3.01, Revision 02, Concept Stormwater Management Plan- Ground Level	Dawes Consulting Engineers	08/12/2015
14049-DA-C3.02, Revision 02, Concept Stormwater Management Plan- Basement Level	Dawes Consulting Engineers	08/12/2015
14049-DA-C4.01, Revision 02, Driveway Long sections	Dawes Consulting Engineers	08/12/2015
14049-DA-C5.01, Revision 02, Driveway Long sections	Dawes Consulting Engineers	08/12/2015

Document(s)	Dated
External building materials and finishes (Mackenzie Architects International)	-
Civil Engineering and Stormwater Management Report (Dawes Consulting Engineers)	08/12/2014
Access Report of 1 Nulla Nulla Street Turramurra NSW (Obvius Access Consultants)	10/06/2015

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.	Prepared by	Dated
LPDA 15-219 / 1 Issue E and LPDA 15-219 / 2 Issue B	Conzept Concept	12/08/2015 31/07/2015

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

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

4. Asbestos works

All work involving asbestos products and materials, including asbestos-cement-sheeting (ie. Fibro), must be carried out in accordance with the guidelines for asbestos work published by WorkCover Authority of NSW.

Reason: To ensure public safety

5. Approved tree works

Prior to works commencing the following works shall be undertaken to the specified trees;

· All trees are to be clearly tagged and identified as per the arborist report prior to the removal/pruning of any tree/s on site.

· All other branches where required shall be tied back and protected during construction, under the supervision of a qualified arborist

Tree/location	Approved tree works
Tree’s 5 to 32, 41 to 44 / Eastern side boundary and within the footprint of the dwellings	Removal
Tree’s 45 to 58 / Southern rear boundary	Removal
Tree’s 59 to 70, 90 to 111 and 113 / Western side boundary and within the footprint of the dwellings	Removal

Removal or pruning of any other tree on the site is not approved, excluding species and works exempt under Council’s Tree Preservation Order.

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

6. Tree identification

Prior to works commencing the existing trees shall be numbered in accordance with the arborists report and/or the approved plans. Trees shall be clearly tagged with confirmation from the project arborist that all marked trees correspond with those shown on the approved plan.

Reason: To protect existing trees during the construction phase.

7. 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.

8. 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.

9. 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 Nulla Nulla Street over the site frontage.

· All driveway crossings and laybacks opposite the subject site.

The report must be completed by a consulting structural/civil engineer. Particular attention must be paid to accurately recording (both written and photographic) existing damaged areas on the aforementioned infrastructure so that Council is fully informed when assessing any damage to public infrastructure caused as a result of the development.

The developer may be held liable to any recent damage to public infrastructure in the vicinity of the site, where such damage is not accurately recorded by the requirements of this condition prior to the commencement of works.

Note: A written acknowledgment from Council must be obtained (attesting to this condition being appropriately satisfied) and submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the commencement of any excavation works.

Reason: To record the structural condition of public infrastructure before works commence.

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:

Address

· 1, 3, 5, 7-11 Turramurra Avenue

· 6 Ku-ring-gai Avenue

The dilapidation report must include a photographic survey of adjoining properties detailing their physical condition, both internally and externally, including such items as walls ceilings, roof and structural members. The report must be completed by a consulting structural/geotechnical engineer as determined necessary by that professional based on the excavations for the proposal and the recommendations of the submitted geotechnical report.

In the event that access for undertaking the dilapidation survey is denied by a property owner, the applicant must demonstrate in writing to the satisfaction of the Principal Certifying Authority that all reasonable steps have been taken to obtain access and advise the affected property owner of the reason for the survey and that these steps have failed.

Note: A copy of the dilapidation report is to be provided to Council prior to any excavation works been undertaken. The dilapidation report is for record keeping purposes only and may be used by an applicant or affected property owner to assist in any civil action required to resolve any dispute over damage to adjoining properties arising from works.

Reason: To record the structural condition of likely affected properties before works commence.

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.

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 metre long heavy rigid vehicle and if required for demolition and excavation stages a 19.0 metre 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. Parking restrictions (‘No Parking’ 7am - 10am Mon-Fri) currently exist along the site frontage and also opposite the site. These restrictions are require to be changed to ‘No Stopping’ for the duration of the construction period. The applicant must make a written application to the Ku-ring-gai Local Traffic Committee to install the work zone and parking restrictions. 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. Sediment controls

Prior to any work commencing on site, sediment and erosion control measures shall be installed along the contour immediately downslope of any future disturbed areas.

The form of the sediment controls to be installed on the site shall be determined by reference to the ‘NSW Department of Housing manual ‘Managing Urban Stormwater: Soils and Construction’. The erosion controls shall be maintained in an operational condition until the development activities have been completed and the site fully stabilised. Sediment shall be removed from the sediment controls following each heavy or prolonged rainfall period.

Reason: To preserve and enhance the natural environment.

14. Tree protection fencing

To preserve the following tree/s, no work shall commence until the tree protection zone 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 development work on site.

Tree/location	Radius in metres
T1 - Corymbia citriodora (Lemon Scented Gum) / Nulla Nulla nature strip	2 metres
T4 - Eucalyptus punctata (Grey Gum) / Front setback	3 metres
T34, 37 and 38 - 3 x Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) / Eastern side boundary	3 metres
T36 - Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Palm) / Eastern side boundary	3 metres

Reason: To protect existing trees during the construction phase.

15. 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.

16. 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/No access

· This fence has been installed to prevent damage to the tree/s and their growing environment both above and below ground

· The name, address, and telephone number of the developer/builder and project arborist

Reason: To protect existing trees during the construction phase.

17. Tree protection measures inspection

Upon installation of the required tree protection measures, an inspection of the site by the project arborist and/or 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 Department of Environment and Climate Change Interim Construction Noise Guidelines. The report shall be prepared in consultation with any geotechnical report that itemises equipment to be used for excavation works.

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

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

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

· the construction noise objective specified in the conditions of this consent

· the construction vibration criteria specified in the conditions of this consent

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

· noise and vibration monitoring, reporting and response procedures

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

19. Project arborist

A project Arborist shall be commissioned prior to the release of the Construction Certificate to ensure all tree protection measures are carried out in accordance with the conditions of consent.

The project arborist shall have a minimum AQF Level 5 qualification with a minimum of 5 years experience. 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 trees

20. Amendments to approved architectural and landscape plans

Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the approved plans listed below and endorsed with Council’s stamp, have been amended in accordance with the requirements of this condition as well as other conditions of this consent:

Plan no.	Prepared by	Dated
LPDA 15-219 / 1 Issue E	Conzept	12/08/2015
A101 Issue E	Mackenzie Architects	12/08/2015
A102 Issue D	Mackenzie Architects	27/07/2015
A103 Issue D	Mackenzie Architects	27/07/2015
A300 Issue E	Mackenzie Architects	12/08/2015

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

· The plan is to be amended in accordance with the approved deep soil compliance plan DA500 Issue F, dated 12/08/2015.

This includes:

i. Deletion of the brick wall along the front boundary.

ii. The front courtyards of Blocks A and D and rear courtyards of Blocks C and E are to have retaining walls to support the fencing.

iii. The eastern side of the front courtyard of Unit 15 and the rear courtyard of Unit 12 are to have retaining walls to support the fencing.

iv. The front courtyards of Blocks B, C and E and the rear courtyards of A, B and D are to have timber fencing only. (No retaining walls are required).

Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the landscape plan has been amended as required by this condition.

Note: An amended plan, prepared by a landscape architect or qualified landscape designer shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority.

Reason: To ensure adequate landscaping of the site.

21. Basement car park

Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the basement car park design incorporates ventilation stacks that are well integrated into the overall design and are separated from any dwelling openings.

Reason: To ensure the provision of natural ventilation to the basement car park.

22. Amendments to approved engineering plans

Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate, the Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the approved engineering plan(s), listed below and endorsed with Council’s stamp, have been amended in accordance with the requirements of this condition as well as other conditions of this consent:

Plan no.	Prepared by	Dated
14049-DA-C3.01 Revision 2	Dawes Consulting Engineers	08/12/14
14049-DA-C3.02 Revision 2	Dawes Consulting Engineers	08/12/14
14049-DA-C2.01 Revision 2	Dawes Consulting Engineers	08/12/14

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

i. Trees 4, 33, 34, 36, 37 and 38 are to be indicated on the plans in accordance with the approved landscape plan.

ii. To preserve Trees 33, 34, 36, 37 and 38, the stormwater pits and pipes are to be relocated in accordance with the project arborist’s recommendations.

iii. To preserve T4, the trench for the stormwater pipe is to be dug by hand and any roots greater than 50mm in diameter are to be left intact.

iv. Details in relation to tree protection measures as advised by the project arborist are to be clearly indicated on the plans.

The above amendments are required to ensure compliance with the following:

· Australian Standard 2890.1- “Off-street car parking”.

· Volume C Part 4 “Water Management” of the Local Centres Development Control Plan.

· To preserve trees protected under the Council’s Tree Preservation Order and as specified in other conditions of consent.

Note: An amended engineering plan, prepared by a qualified engineer and endorsed by the Project Arborist, shall be submitted to the Certifying Authority.

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

23. Long service levy

In accordance with Section 109F(i) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act a Construction Certificate shall not be issued until any long service levy payable under Section 34 of the Building and Construction Industry Long Service Payments Act 1986 (or where such levy is payable by instalments, the first instalment of the levy) has been paid. Council is authorised to accept payment. Where payment has been made elsewhere, proof of payment is to be provided to Council.

Reason: Statutory requirement.

24. Builder’s indemnity insurance

The applicant, builder, developer or person who does the work on this development, must arrange builder’s indemnity insurance and submit the certificate of insurance in accordance with the requirements of Part 6 of the Home Building Act 1989 to the Certifying Authority for endorsement of the plans accompanying the Construction Certificate.

It is the responsibility of the applicant, builder or developer to arrange the builder's indemnity insurance for residential building work over the value of $20,000. The builder's indemnity insurance does not apply to commercial or industrial building work or to residential work valued at less than $20,000, nor to work undertaken by persons holding an owner/builder's permit issued by the Department of Fair Trading (unless the owner/builder's property is sold within 7 years of the commencement of the work).

Reason: Statutory requirement.

25. Outdoor lighting

Prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate, the Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that all outdoor lighting will comply with AS/NZ1158.3: 1999 Pedestrian Area (Category P) Lighting and AS4282: 1997 Control of the Obtrusive Effects of Outdoor Lighting.

Note: Details demonstrating compliance with these requirements are to be submitted prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate.

Reason: To provide high quality external lighting for security without adverse affects on public amenity from excessive illumination levels.

26. 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.

27. 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.

28. 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.

29. 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, Townhouse No. 10 and No. 11 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.

30. Excavation for services

Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that no proposed underground services (ie: water, sewerage, drainage, gas or other service) unless previously approved by conditions of consent, are located within the canopy spread of any tree protected under Council’s Tree Preservation Order, located on the subject allotment and adjoining allotments.

Alternatively if underground services must be located within the canopy spread of any protected tree/s the plan shall be endorsed by the project arborist outlining any tree protection measures required. A plan detailing the routes of these services and trees protected under Council’s Tree Preservation Order shall be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority.

Reason: To ensure the protection of trees.

31. Landscape plan

Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that a landscape plan has been completed in accordance with Council’s DA Guide, relevant development control plans and the conditions of consent by a Landscape Architect or qualified Landscape Designer.

Note: The Landscape Plan must be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority.

Reason: To ensure adequate landscaping of the site.

32. Recycling and waste management

Prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, the Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that the development provides a common garbage collection/separation area sufficient in size to store all wheelie garbage bins and recycling bins provided by Council for the number of units in the development in accordance with Council’s Local Centres Development Control Plan. The garbage collection point is to be accessible by Council’s Waste Collection Services.

The responsibility for:

· the cleaning of waste rooms and waste service compartments; and

· the transfer of bins within the property, and to the collection point once the development is in use;

shall be determined when designing the system and clearly stated in the Waste Management Plan.

Note: The architectural plans are to be amended and provided to the Certifying Authority.

Reason: Environmental protection.

33. Noise from plant in residential zone

Where any form of mechanical ventilation equipment or other noise generating plant is proposed as part of the development, prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate the Certifying Authority, shall be satisfied that the operation of an individual piece of equipment or operation of equipment in combination will not exceed more than 5dB(A) above the background level during the day when measured at the site’s boundaries and shall not exceed the background level at night (10.00pm -6.00 am) when measured at the boundary of the site.

C1. Note: A certificate from an appropriately qualified acoustic engineer is to be submitted with the Construction Certificate, certifying that all mechanical ventilation equipment or other noise generating plant in isolation or in combination with other plant will comply with the above requirements.

Reason: To comply with best practice standards for residential acoustic amenity.

34. 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.

C1. Note: Architectural plans identifying the location of all plant and equipment shall be provided to the Certifying Authority.

Reason: To minimise impact on surrounding properties, improved visual appearance and amenity for locality.

35. 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.

36. 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.

37. 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.

38. Car parking allocation

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

Resident car spaces	29
Visitor spaces	5
Total spaces	34

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.

39. Number of bicycle spaces

The basement car park shall be adapted to provide 5 bicycle spaces in accordance with the Local Centres Development Control Plan. 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.

40. 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.

41. 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.

42. 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):

43. 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.

44. Section 94 Contributions - Local 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	$28,699.34
Local recreation and cultural facilities; Local social facilities	$48,385.05
Local roads, local bus facilities & local drainage facilities (new roads and road modifications)	$210,720.61
Local roads, local bus facilities & local drainage facilities (townscape, transport & pedestrian facilities)	$210,720.61
Total:	$438,179.27

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:

45. 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.

46. 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.

47. 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.

48. 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.

49. 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.

50. 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.

51. 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.

52. 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.

53. 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.

54. 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: 27950Prpt dated 28 November 2014. 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).

Note 1: It will be necessary to carry out some groundwater seepage analysis to estimate the amount of groundwater that will be disposed of. Depending on the rate of seepage, it may be necessary to either obtain a dewatering licence from the NSW Office of Water.

Note 2: The basement is to be fully tanked to prevent unnecessary subsurface or groundwater extraction as per the requirement of Volume C Part 2.3.4 of the Local Centres DCP.

Reason: To ensure the safety and protection of property.

55. 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.

56. 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.

57. Approval for rock anchors

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

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

58. 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.

59. 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.

60. 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.

61. 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.

62. 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.

63. 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.

64. Arborist’s report

The tree/s to be retained shall be inspected and monitored by an AQF Level 5 Arborist in accordance with AS4970-2009 during and after completion of development works to ensure their long term survival. Regular inspections and documentation from the project arborist to the Principal Certifying Authority are required at the following times or phases of work including date, brief description of the works inspected, and any mitigation works prescribed.

All monitoring shall be provided to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate.

Tree/location	Time of inspection
T4 - Eucalyptus punctata (Grey Gum) / Within the front setback	At the commencement of excavation works for the driveway and stormwater works within 7 metres of the trees trunk followed by weekly inspections until the completion of the subject earthworks

· All works as recommended by the project arborist are to be undertaken by an experienced arborist with a minimum AQF Level 3 qualification.

Reason: To ensure protection of existing trees.

65. Treatment of tree roots

If tree roots and branches 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 AQF Level 3 qualification. All root and branch pruning works shall be undertaken as specified in AS 4373-2007 - Pruning of Amenity Trees.

Reason: To protect existing trees.

66. No storage of materials beneath trees

No activities, storage or disposal of materials shall take place beneath the canopy of any tree protected under Council's Tree Preservation Order at any time.

Reason: To protect existing trees.

67. Removal of refuse

All builders' refuse, spoil and/or material unsuitable for use in landscape areas shall be removed from the site on completion of the building works.

Reason: To protect the environment.

68. 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.

69. 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:

70. 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.

71. Lot amalgamation

Prior to the issue of an occupation certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority is to be satisfied that Lot 1 in DP17642 and Lot 5 in DP17642 have been amalgamated and registered by NSW Land & Property Information.

Reason: To ensure orderly development of the site.

72. Compliance with BASIX Certificate

All commitments listed in each relevant BASIX Certificate for the development must be fulfilled prior to an Occupation Certificate being issued.

Reason: Statutory requirement.

73. Mechanical ventilation

Following completion, installation and testing of all the mechanical ventilation systems, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied of the following prior to the issue of any Occupation Certificate:

1. The installation and performance of the mechanical systems complies with:

· The Building Code of Australia

· Australian Standard AS1668

· Australian Standard AS3666 where applicable

2. The mechanical ventilation system in isolation and in association with other mechanical ventilation equipment, when in operation will not be audible within a habitable room in any other residential premises before 7am and after 10pm Monday to Friday and before 8am and after 10pm Saturday, Sunday and public holidays. The operation of the unit outside these restricted hours shall emit a noise level of not greater than 5dbA above the background when measured at the nearest adjoining boundary.

Note: Written confirmation from an acoustic engineer that the development achieves the above requirements is to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate.

Reason: To protect the amenity of surrounding properties.

74. Completion of landscape works

Prior to the release of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority is to be satisfied that all landscape works, including the removal of all noxious and/or environmental weed species, have been undertaken in accordance with the approved plan(s) and conditions of consent.

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

75. Accessibility

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

· the lift design and associated functions are compliant with AS 1735.12 & AS 1428.2

· the level and direction of travel, both in lifts and lift lobbies, is audible and visible

· the controls for lifts are accessible to all persons and control buttons and lettering are raised

· international symbols have been used with specifications relating to signs, symbols and size of lettering complying with AS 1428.2

· the height of lettering on signage is in accordance with AS 1428.1 - 1993

· the signs and other information indicating access and services incorporate tactile communication methods in addition to the visual methods

Reason: Disabled access & services.

76. Retention and re-use positive covenant

Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the applicant must create a positive covenant and restriction on the use of land under Section 88E of the Conveyancing Act 1919, burdening the property with the requirement to maintain the site stormwater retention and re-use facilities on the property.

The terms of the instruments are to be generally in accordance with the Council's "draft terms of Section 88B instruments for protection of retention and re-use facilities" and to the satisfaction of Council (refer to 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.

77. Provision of copy of OSD designs if Council is not the PCA

Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the following must be provided to Council’s Development Engineer:

· a copy of the approved Construction Certificate stormwater detention/retention design for the site.

· A copy of any works-as-executed drawings required by this consent.

· The Engineer’s certification of the as-built system.

Reason: For Council to maintain its database of as-constructed on-site stormwater detention systems.

78. Certification of drainage works

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

· the stormwater drainage works have been satisfactorily completed in accordance with the approved Construction Certificate drainage plans

· the minimum retention and on-site detention storage volume requirements of BASIX and 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.

79. WAE plans for stormwater management and disposal

Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, a registered surveyor must provide a works as executed survey of the completed stormwater drainage and management systems. The survey must be submitted to and approved by the Principal Certifying Authority prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate. The survey must indicate:

· as built (reduced) surface and invert levels for all drainage pits

· gradients of drainage lines, materials and dimensions

· as built (reduced) level(s) at the approved point of discharge to the public drainage system

· as built location and internal dimensions of all detention and retention structures on the property (in plan view) and horizontal distances to nearest adjacent boundaries and structures on site

· the achieved storage volumes of the installed retention and detention storages and derivative calculations

· as built locations of all access pits and grates in the detention and retention system(s), including dimensions

· the size of the orifice or control fitted to any on-site detention system

· dimensions of the discharge control pit and access grates

· the maximum depth of storage possible over the outlet control

· top water levels of storage areas and indicative RL’s through the overland flow path in the event of blockage of the on-site detention system

The works as executed plan(s) must show the as built details above in comparison to those shown on the drainage plans approved with the Construction Certificate prior to commencement of works. All relevant levels and details indicated must be marked in red on a copy of the Principal Certifying Authority stamped construction certificate stormwater plans.

Reason: To protect the environment.

80. Basement pump-out maintenance

Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the Principal Certifying Authority shall be satisfied that a maintenance regime has been prepared for the basement stormwater pump-out system.

Note: A maintenance regime specifying that the system is to be regularly inspected and checked by qualified practitioners is to be prepared by a suitable qualified professional and provided to the Principal Certifying Authority.

Reason: To protect the environment.

81. OSD positive covenant/restriction

Prior to issue of the Occupation Certificate, the applicant must create a positive covenant and restriction on the use of land under Section 88E of the Conveyancing Act 1919, burdening the owner with the requirement to maintain the on-site stormwater detention facilities on the lot.

The terms of the instruments are to be generally in accordance with the Council's "draft terms of Section 88B instrument for protection of on-site detention facilities" and to the satisfaction of Council (refer to 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 on-site detention facility, in relation to the building footprint, must be shown on a scale sketch, attached as an annexure to the request forms.

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

Reason: To protect the environment.

82. Sydney Water Section 73 Compliance Certificate

Prior to issue of an Occupation Certificate the Section 73 Sydney water Compliance Certificate must be obtained and submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority

Reason: Statutory requirement.

83. 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.

84. 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.

85. Construction of works in public road - approved plans

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

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

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

Reason: To ensure that works undertaken in the road reserve are to the satisfaction of Council.

86. 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.

87. 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.

88. 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.

Scott McInnes

Executive Assessment Officer

Selwyn Segall

Team Leader - Development Assessment North

Corrie Swanepoel

Manager Development Assessment Services

Michael Miocic

Director Development & Regulation

Attachments:	A1 View	Zoning extract	2015/193701
	A2 View	Notification & submission map	2015/193204
	A3 View	Architectural Plans	2015/242121
	A4 View	Cl. 4.6 Variation request for site requirements for multi dwelling housing	2015/159328

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 6 October 2015	GB.8 / 330

Item GB.8	DA0430/14
	19 August 2015

development application

Summary Sheet

Report title:	14 Carlotta Avenue Gordon - Torrens title subdivision of one lot into two and construction of a new dwelling
ITEM/AGENDA NO:	GB.8

Application No:	DA0430/14
Property Details:	No. 14 Carlotta Avenue, Gordon NSW 2072 Lot & DP No: Lot B & DP 365052 Site area (sqm): 1815m² Zoning: Residential 2(c2)
Ward:	Gordon
Proposal/Purpose:	Torrens title subdivision of one lot into two and construction of a new dwelling
Type of Consent:	Integrated (Water Management Act 2000)
Applicant:	Architecture Design Studio
Owner:	Mr A R El Moungged & Mrs B El Moungged
Date Lodged:	21 October 2014
Recommendation:	Refusal

Purpose of Report

To determine Development Application No.0430/14, for Torrens title subdivision of one lot into two lots and construction of a new dwelling on one of the newly created lots at 14 Carlotta Avenue, Gordon.

The application is required to be determined by full Council. Council’s attention is directed to Planning Circular PS 08-014 from the NSW Department of Planning (attached) concerning the determination by Council of Development Applications where a variation of a development standard is sought under the provisions of SEPP No. 1.

The circular requires that all development applications which involve a variation greater than 10% under the provisions of SEPP No. 1 be determined by full Council. The application involves variations greater than 10% to development standards for minimum allotment size and street frontage width under Clause 25H(3)(a) and Clause 25H(4) of the KPSO. As a consequence, the application must be determined by full Council.

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	· Significant variation to the minimum allotment size (929m²). · The smaller allotment with a narrow site width for proposed Lot 2 cannot adequately accommodate a reasonably sized dwelling. · Insufficient vehicular access and garage width opening. · Inadequate information to allow for a proper assessment of the application.
Submissions	One submission received.
Land & Environment Court	N/A
Recommendation	Refusal

LEGISLATIVE REQUIREMENTS:

Zoning at lodgement	Residential 2(c2) (zoning under KLEP 2015: E4)
Permissible under	KPSO & KLEP 2015
Relevant legislation	Water Management Act 2000 SEPP 1 – Development Standards SEPP 55 – Remediation of Land SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 SEPP (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004 KPSO Draft KLEP 2013 (now gazetted KLEP 2015) DCP 38 Residential Design Manual DCP 56 Notification Section 94 – Development Contribution Plan
Integrated Development	Yes under the Water Management Act 2000

History

Pre-DA (previous proposal)

On 3 June 2013, a Pre- DA consultation was undertaken for the construction of a detached dual occupancy development. The applicant was advised of the following key issues:

· detached dual occupancy development is prohibited development under the zoning.

· the dwelling is within the 10m riparian setback required from the bank of the watercourse that dissects the site

· the development would impact on a large Sydney Turpentine tree located at the rear of the proposed dwelling

· a qualified arborist should determine the setback of the proposed dwelling and driveway location from Sydney Turpentine tree

· information required for any future application should include an arborist’s report, Flora and Fauna Report and Vegetation Management Plan.

DA history (previous proposal)

On 17 September 2013, DA 0347/13 was lodged for a new dwelling to create a dual occupancy development and strata title subdivision. On 14 January 2014, Council refused the application for the following reasons:

· In order for the strata titled subdivision to occur, the commencement of constructing a new dwelling is required. Consequently, the development will result in creating two dwellings on one lot and will therefore constitute a dual occupancy development. Detached dual occupancy development is prohibited in accordance with KPSO. Dual occupancy development is only permissible on land highlighted on the LEP No. 200- Detached Dual Occupancy Map.

The proposed development is prohibited development under the provision of the KPSO. Council cannot support a prohibited development and as a consequence Council is not in a position to consider the merits of the proposal.

Current DA history

21 October 2014	The application was lodged.
03 November 2014	The application was notified to the owners of surrounding properties. A stop the clock letter was also sent to the applicant requesting information relating to the BASIX certificate, stormwater management plan and assessment fee for integrated development (NSW Office of Water).
05 November 2014	A referral was sent to the NSW Office of Water
17 November 2014	A submission was received from Mr D Lee and Ms N Huston from 16A Carlotta Avenue.
27 November 2014	Council received comment from the Office of Water supporting the application subject to the implementation of its General Terms of Approval (GTA’s).
18 December 2014	The applicant requested an extension of time for submitting the information requested under the stop the clock letter.
30 January 2015	A preliminary assessment letter was sent to the applicant requesting further information and amended plans. The letter outlined the key issues with the application, being: · unsatisfactory landscape plan · adverse impact to the riparian corridor · tree impacts · arborist’s report required · potential impacts to the STIF community · unclear subdivision plan · drawing inconsistencies
25 February 2015	A follow up letter was sent to the applicant regarding the additional information and plans detailed in the STC letter and preliminary assessment letter.
07 April 2015	The applicant advised that the additional information will be provided to Council by 10 April 2015.
14 April 2015	Amended plans and additional information were received.
18 June 2015	The applicant was advised that the proposal is unsatisfactory and the application would be determined using the available information.

THE SITE AND SURROUNDING AREA

The site

Zoning: Residential 2(c2) & (E4 under KLEP 2015)

Visual Character Study Category: 1920- 1945

Lot Number: B

DP Number: 365052

Area: 1815sqm

Side of Street: North

Cross Fall: From the north (rear) and south (front) to the centre of the site where the watercourse is located

Stormwater Drainage: Drainage easement located in the centre of the site

Heritage Affected: No

Integrated Development: Yes – Office of Water (Water Management Act 2000)

Bush Fire Prone Land: No

Endangered Species: Yes – Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest

Urban Bushland: No

Contaminated Land: No

Riparian land: Yes- Category 3, watercourse which includes a 3.65m wide drainage easement

Site description

The subject site is legally described as Lot B in DP 365052 and is otherwise known as 14 Carlotta Avenue, Gordon. The site is located on the northern side of Carlotta Avenue approximately 100m to the east of the intersection with Mona Vale Road, as can be seen in Figure 1, Locality Map. The site is rectangular in shape, with a frontage of 15.24m and western and eastern side boundaries of approximately 120.27m. The site has a total area of 1815m².

Figure 1: Locality Map

The site falls from the front boundary at RL101.0 down to the watercourse that dissects the site and then rises towards the rear (existing dwelling) of the site to approximately RL 102.63 which is the northern side of the existing swimming pool. The watercourse dissecting the site is known as Stoney Creek and runs from east to west. It is located approximately 20 metres from the front boundary. Stoney Creek is classified as a Category 3 watercourse under the riparian provisions contained within the KPSO. A drainage easement, which is 3.65m wide, is located within the riparian corridor. The site also contains Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest (STIF) community, which is an endangered ecological community. The STIF community is primarily located along the watercourse.

The site contains a two storey dwelling house,located approximately mid-way along the site approximately 31metres from the front boundary. Vehicular access to the dwelling is via a concrete driveway located adjacent to the western side boundary. A concrete bridge has been constructed over the watercourse to provide pedestrian and vehicular access to the dwelling.

Surrounding development

The surrounding development mainly consists of single dwelling houses, although the site is located opposite the Council’s old works depot, which has approval for an aged care facility.

Adjoining the site to the east is 16 and 16A Carlotta Avenue, Gordon which contains a strata title detached dual occupancy development approved under SEPP 53 (Metropolitan Residential Development) on 14 April 2005. The property has a total area of 1850m² with strata plan lot known as 16A Carlotta Avenue having an area of 634m² and strata plan lot known as 16 Carlotta Avenue having an area of 883m².

To the west is 12 Carlotta Avenue which contains a dwelling house. Not dissimilar to the subject site, the dwelling is located towards the rear of the site away from the sensitive areas of the STIF community and Stoney Creek riparian corridor. The total site area of 12 Carlotta Avenue is 1780m² and it is also heavily vegetated along Stoney Creek as can be seen in Figure 2, Aerial Photograph.

Figure 2: Aerial Photograph

The Proposal

The application proposes Torrens title subdivision of one lot into two lots, the construction of a two storey dwelling house and retention of the existing dwelling:

1. Lot 1: will contain the existing dwelling and will have an area of 1354.48m². Lot 1 will be a battle-axe block, with a 3.3m wide access handle providing access from Carlotta Avenue.

2. Lot 2: will contain the proposed dwelling, which will front Carlotta Avenue. Lot 2 will have a total area of 461.89m². Details of the proposed dwelling house are:

· Ground floor: single garage, kitchen, living and dining area, laundry, WC, study, terrace at the rear of the dwelling and a car space located in front of the dwelling

· First floor: master bedroom with ensuite, 3 bedrooms, bathroom, and a balcony.

Consultation

Community

In accordance with Development Control Plan No.56, owners of surrounding properties were given notice of the application. In response, one submission was received from the following:

1. D Lee & N Hutson, 16 A Carlotta Avenue, Gordon

The submission raised the following issues:

Small land component not in keeping with the area.

The proposed subdivision does not comply with the 929m² minimum allotment size and 18m lot width requirements under the KPSO. it is agreed that the proposed smaller lot is inconsistent with the subdivision pattern in the locality and will result in a significant detrimental impact.

Privacy will be compromised.

The proposed terrace and first floor balcony are elevated above ground level by 1.5m and 4.2m, respectively. The elevated terrace and balcony will afford overlooking onto the private space and balcony of the neighbouring at No. 16A Carlotta Avenue, Gordon. The proposed development will impinge on the privacy of the neighbouring property.

Light and sunlight will be compromised.

According to the applicant’s shadow diagram, the proposed dwelling will provide 4 hours of solar access to the adjoining properties, which is compliant with Council’s control.

Noise levels will be significantly increased.

The noise generated from a proposed dwelling is unlikely to result in any unreasonable acoustic impacts to neighbouring properties.

The creek will be impacted with potential flooding occurring in a number of properties adjoining the creek.

The proposed development was referred to Council’s Development Engineer who is satisfied that the development will not result in a significant impact in this regard.

Environment will change from low density to high density.

The proposed development does not comply with the objectives for subdivision in residential zones under Clause 25H(1) of the KPSO and development controls under DCP 38. It also fails to satisfy the objectives of the E4 Environmental Living zone under the KLEP 2015. The proposed subdivision and construction of a new dwelling will unduly impact upon the vegetation on site on the subdivision pattern within the locality.

Natural inhabitants of the creek (Water Dragons) and natural inhabitants of the trees (Morepork Owls) will be impacted.

The development application was referred to Council’s Ecological Assessment Officer who is satisfied that the proposal will not unduly impact upon on endangered fauna on the site.

Proposed car parking will be allocated immediately adjacent to our bedroom accommodation.

The proposed car space has nil setback to the eastern side boundary and does not allow for landscaping along the side boundary. A landscape buffer is necessary along this section of driveway to minimise amenity impacts between properties. The proposed car parking in front of the building line will likely have an adverse impact upon the streetscape and amenity of the neighbouring properties.

INTERNAL REFERRALS

Landscaping

Council’s Team leader Landscape and Ecological Assessment commented on the proposal as follows:

First referral

“Landscape plan

The landscape plan is inconsistent with the vegetation management plan in regard to treatment of the riparian area. The landscape treatment of riparian area should be consistent with the vegetation management plan.

The site is mapped as having biodiversity significance and planting selected is to be consistent with local vegetative communities as specified in the KPSO, draft KLEP and DCP 2013.The proposed planting at present does not reflect this.

The landscape plan is inconsistent with the architectural plans.

The hard copy of the landscape plan is not at a scale satisfactory for assessment and is to be provided at the full size of 1:100. There appears to be no electronic copy of this document submitted within Council’s records.

The landscape plan does not clearly indicate proposed external levels and top of wall heights, notwithstanding heights to walls in the two sections. More information is required. It is unclear whether contours represent proposed or existing levels.

Retaining walls and fill

The proposed filling of the rear of Lot 2 and construction of a retaining wall within the riparian area is not supported. The amount of fill is excessive, not compliant with Section 4.3.7 of DCP 38 and is likely to detrimentally impact the watercourse and trees.

The section through the rear of the site and to the creek does not show the existing ground line nor the creek bank and therefore does not indicate the extent of fill which appears to be at least 3.3m in depth.

Tree impacts

Retaining walls located on boundaries and within tree protection zones of trees to be retained are not supported and are not consistent with Section 4.3.7 of DCP 38.

The proposed retaining wall and fill adjacent the Syncarpia glomulifera is not supported as it is likely to compromise the stability and health of this tree.

It is unclear whether the driveway is widened near the existing remnant tree within the adjacent property. The driveway is shown to the boundary adjacent to this tree, however the survey shows the driveway slightly inside the tree protection zone of this tree within the neighbouring property. If the driveway is rebuilt there are potential impacts on the Tree Protection Zone and structural root zone of this tree.

Arborist’s report

The submitted arborist report only assesses one tree and has not assessed the impacts of the proposed dwelling and associated works on trees.

All trees retained and removed are to be identified, numbered consistent with the arborist’s report and indicated on the landscape plan. This includes trees on adjacent properties in proximity of the proposal.

Stormwater plan

The actual treatment of the stormwater outlet within the creek is unclear. It is also unclear how the outlet will be designed in conjunction with the proposed retaining wall within the riparian area.

Drawing inconsistency

The treatment of the rear yard and walls indicated to the front yard are inconsistent with the architectural plans and elevations”

Second referral

The landscape comment on the amended plans and additional information is summarised below:

“The following information or amendment is required:

Arborist assessment

The arborist assessment has not calculated the total encroachments within the Tree Protection Zone of the mature Turpentine as the encroachment percentage statement does not consider the area of the existing driveway.

As the level of encroachment may therefore be approximately 25%, the arborist is to re calculate the total of the encroachment both proposed and existing and re – consider the tree’s viability in respect of all encroachments consistent with the principles under AS 4970-20093, 3.3.3 and 3.3.4.

Where discounting the terrace as an encroachment ,the arborist is to consider the encroachment of this area within the structural root zone and also whether the soil and feeder roots retained under the proposed terrace are likely to remain viable in the long term.

There has been no comprehensive inventory or assessment of all trees on or adjacent the site. Trees proposed to be removed are not documented or assessed.

As indicated previously, an arborist’s report is to be provided by an arborist with a minimum qualification AQF5 fully assessing the health and structure and impacts of the proposed works on all trees including trees on adjacent properties within proximity of the works and including trees proposed for removal.

A site specific tree protection plan showing locations of tree protection structures is to be provided.

Landscape plan

Details of plant species locations are to be indicated on the plan.

For neighbour amenity and to compensate for the loss of vegetation in this area, the paved drying area is to be relocated and substantial screen planting adjacent the elevated terrace to the eastern boundary is necessary.

The Turpentine located on the western edge of the driveway within the adjacent property must be shown on the plans.

As previously requested, all trees retained and removed are to be identified , numbered consistent with the arborist report and indicated on the landscape plan. This includes trees on adjacent properties in proximity of the proposal. The proposed lawn to the front setback and also to the eastern side setback is not considered practical and should be replaced with planting. The landscape plan is not consistent in regards to the car space configuration with the architectural plans.

Details of terrace

Details of the proposed terrace are to be provided, illustrating that it is an elevated lightweight timber structure, (using isolated small diameter posts) as indicated in the arborist report. The terrace is to be relocated outside of the Turpentine’s structural root zone.

Driveway

Confirm on the site plan that the existing driveway and levels to the driveway within the TPZ of the Turpentine are to remain as existing.”

Ecological

Council’s Ecological Assessment Officer commented on the proposal as follows:

Ecology comments

During the site inspection, Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest (STIF) listed as an Endangered Ecological Community (EEC) under both the Threatened Species Conservation Act 1995 and under the Environmental Protection & Biodiversity Conservation Act 1999 ,was identified within the site.

The STIF community comprised of scattered canopy trees of the following species Syncapria glomilufera (Sydney Turpentine) specimens’ amongst an understorey dominated by weedy shrubs and groundcovers. The STIF community primarily occupies the vegetation on the embankment of the watercourse which passes through the middle portion of the site.

Environmental controls

The native vegetation within the site, which occurs primarily adjacent to the watercourse, has been mapped as an area of biodiversity significance under the KPSO.

The site is mapped as containing a Category 3 Riparian Corridor which occurs on the southern side of the existing dwelling. In accordance with Council’s Riparian Policy, category 3 watercourses require a 10m core riparian zone (CRZ). The proposed dwelling is within the category 3 riparian corridor.

The vegetation along the watercourse has also been mapped as category 3 watercourse under the draft KLEP 2013.

In order to construct the proposed dwelling, a large Turpentine is likely to be impacted by the proposed land filling. The proposed filling of the land does not to satisfy the riparian & biodiversity lands controls under the draft KLEP 2013. A re-design is required to ensure that no STIF is removed and that any future dwelling be located outside the STIF community.

The landscape assessment officer has requested further arboricultural assessment.

Conclusion: The application is not acceptable on ecological grounds, further arboricultural information is required as per the comments above.

Second referral

A vegetation management plan (VMP) has been prepared which addresses the required management of the area of land identified as biodiversity and riparian with regard to the proposed development. The VMP ensures that the ecological values of the biodiversity and riparian areas, as defined under KLEP 2015, are maintained and are not likely to be detrimentally affected by the proposal.

The proposed development will result in an improvement to the existing riparian and biodiversity area through the selective removal of weeds and planting of native species characteristic of STIF.

Conclusion: The application is now acceptable on ecological grounds, subject to conditions.

Planners Comment: The proposed land fill was deleted on the landscape plan (Drawing No.: LA-01 received on 14 April 2015) and the tree impact to the large Turpentine has been resolved.

Engineering

Council’s Engineering Assessment Officer commented on the proposal as follows:

“The stormwater drainage plan, Job No. 140764 Dwg. No. D01(B), D02(A) and D03(B) prepared by Australian Consulting Engineers has been reviewed. An Overland Hydraulic Report has been submitted by Australian Consulting Engineers dated February 2015. On the basis of the report the development proposal will not be subject to inundation or increase the 100 year ARI overland flow level on the neighbouring properties.

Further information is required for assessment to proceed.

· A driveway longitudinal section shall be provided starting from the street gutter to the proposed garage demonstrating that the proposed profile complies with Australian Standards 2890.1 - 2004 ‘’Off Street car parking”. The longitudinal section shall be at a recognised scale including the existing levels.

· Due to the location of the patio, a vehicle cannot exit the garage utilising the proposed driveway and turning area. Please show the turning path and manoeuvrability for a vehicle to exit the site in a forward manner. The design is to be in accordance with AS 2890.1:2004 using the B85 design template.

· Car space finished level shall be marked on the stormwater plan. Any retaining wall or kerb on the southern side if required shall be shown on all plans.

· All trees are to be indicated and numbered on the stormwater drainage plan.

· Survey detail should be incorporated into the stormwater drainage plan.”

Second referral

Comments on the amended plans and additional information is summarised below:

“The applicant has provided satisfactory water management plans and an overland flow assessment. However, the following engineering reason for refusal is identified.

Inadequate and unsatisfactory vehicular access

Particulars

The documentation does not demonstrate that the development would result in satisfactory vehicular access to either the existing residence or the new dwelling.

The width of the existing concrete driveway is between 2.0 and 2.5 metres wide (scaled from the drawings, as dimensions are not given). This is already less than recommended in AS2890.1:2004 Off street car parking (3.0 metres for a domestic driveway).

The architectural plans show the new garage wall right up to and possibly over the driveway. This will further restrict the already narrow vehicular access along the driveway to the existing dwelling.

No levels are provided of the proposed transition from the existing driveway to the new garage and car space. It appears that a section of the existing driveway would have to be reconstructed. The resulting steep gradient along the southern side of the curved section would result in unacceptable grades and transitions in front of the garage.

The width of the apron in front of the garage is insufficient for adequate manoeuvring of vehicles out of the garage and into the driveway in a forward direction.”

Planners Comment: The deficiencies discussed above form a part of the reasons for the recommendation of refusal.

OUTSIDE COUNCIL

Department of Primary Industries (Office of Water)

Under the provisions of Section 91 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the proposal is Integrated Development because it requires a Controlled Activity Approval (CAA) under the Water Management Act 2000 (WMA). Accordingly, the development was referred to the Office of Water and General Terms of Approval were provided and would be included as conditions of consent were Council to approve the application.

Statutory Provisions

State Environmental Planning Policy No 1 - Objection to Development Standards

This policy provides flexibility in the application of development standards within Planning Instruments in circumstances where strict compliance would be unreasonable or unnecessary or tend to hinder the attainment of the objects specified under Section 5(a)(1) of the Act. Clause 6 of SEPP 1 incorporates the mechanism for making of a SEPP 1 Objection and provides as follows:

Where development could, but for any development standard, be carried out under the Act, the person intending to carry out that development may make a development application in respect of that development, supported by written objection that the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case, and specify the grounds of that objection.

A SEPP 1 Objection has been submitted in respect of the non-compliances with development standards contained within Clauses 25H(3)(a) and (4) of the KPSO. An assessment of the objection is contained below under the KPSO assessment.

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 valid BASIX certificate has been submitted. The certificate demonstrates compliance with the provisions of the SEPP and adequately reflects all amendments to the application.

Sydney Regional Environmental Planning Policy (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005

SREP 2005 applies to the site as the site is located in the Sydney Harbour Catchment. The Planning Principles in Part 2 of the SREP must be considered in the preparation of environmental planning instruments, development control plans, environmental studies and master plans. The proposal is not affected by the provisions of the SREP which relate to the assessment of development applications as the site is not located in the Foreshores and Waterways Area as defined by the Foreshores and Waterways Area Map.

Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance

At the time of lodgement the Ku ring gai Planning Scheme Ordinance (KPSO) was the principal environmental planning instrument (EPI) applying to the development. Since the lodgement of the application Ku ring Local Environmental Plan 2015 (KLEP 2015) has been gazetted. There is a savings provision in this instrument that requires the KLEP 2015 to be considered as if it had not been made i.e. to be treated as a draft instrument. The application has been assessed on this basis and significant weight is given to the KLEP 2015 given that it has been gazetted and now applies to the subject site.

Zoning

The site is zoned Residential 2(c2) under the KPSO. The subdivision of the site and construction of a new dwelling is permissible with development consent.

Development standards

Development standard

Proposed

Complies

Subdivision for dwelling houses

Clause 25H (3)(a)

Minimum size allotments: 929sqm(min)

Lot 1: 1354.478sqm

Lot 2: 461.89sqm

YES

Clause 25H (4)

Street frontage: 18m (min)

Total: 15.4m

Lot 1: 3.3m (access handle)

Lot 2: 12.1m

Building height

Clause 46(2): 8m (max)

Lot 1: Existing dwelling: No architectural plans of the existing dwelling have been submitted with the application.

Lot 2: Proposed dwelling 6.4m

Unknown

YES

Built upon areas :

Clause 60C(2): 60% (max)

Lot 1: 812.68sqm

Lot 2: 277.13sqm

Lot 1: approx. 41.8% (567.3sqm)

Lot 2: 48.19% (222.6sqm)

YES

Aim and objectives for residential zones

Clause 25C and 25D of the KPSO state the aims and objectives for development in the residential zone. The proposed development does not comply with the objectives under these Clauses because it fails to encourage the orderly development of land, it does not encourage the protection of existing trees within setback areas and does not encourage safety and security of private development as it does not provide a high standard of building design and landscape design nor does it protect the environmental qualities of the area.

Heritage /conservation areas:

The subject site is not listed as a heritage item nor it is located within a heritage conservation area. There are no impacts on Aboriginal heritage.

Minimum allotment size and width

Clause 25H (3)(a) of the KPSO states that lots created for the purpose of dwelling-houses are to each have at least the area specified as the “Minimum Lot Sizes” for the relevant land on the

Dwelling-house Subdivisions Map. A minimum allotment size of 929m² is required for the proposed development. Further, Clause 25H(4) states that subdivision of land to create a lot to be used for a dwelling house must not result in an allotment with a street frontage less than 18 metres.

Proposed Lot 1 has an area of 1354.5m² and a street frontage width of 3.3m. Proposed Lot 2 has an area of 461.89m² and a street frontage width of 12.1m. Proposed Lot 1 fails to meet the minimum allotment width requirement and seeks an 81.6% variation to the standard. Proposed Lot 2 fails to provide sufficient site area and allotment width seeking variations of 50.28% and 32.7%, respectively. Accordingly, a SEPP No. 1 objection has been submitted.

The SEPP 1 Objection is assessed against 7 key questions established in the Land and Environment Court decision in Wehbe v Pittwater Council [2007] NSW LEC 827 to determine the suitability of proposed variations to development standards, as follows:

1. Whether the planning control in question is a development standard

Clause 25H(3)(a) requires a minimum site area of not less than 929sqm and Clause 25H(4) requires a minimum street frontage width of 18 metres. These controls are development standards as defined Section 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.

2. The underlying objective or purpose behind the standard

The objectives for subdivision, including minimum allotment width, in the residential zones under Clause 25H(1) of the KPSO are as follows:

a) to set minimum lot areas that reflect previous minimum lot sizes,

b) to set minimum lot areas and minimum street frontage lot widths that provide for development to occur in a garden setting by substantial setbacks to enable long-term sustainability of trees,

c) to permit the subdivision of multi-unit housing,

d) to provide for substantial common landscaped area to encourage good streetscape quality and areas for trees for each development.

Proposed Lot 2 has a site area that is substantially smaller than that of surrounding allotments with a departure of 50.28% from the standard. The development is inconsistent with the existing established lots sizes in the residential zone which typically range from 790m² to 929m² and above. The proposed subdivision will not allow a reasonably sized dwelling house to be built on the smaller lot and simultaneously provide a landscape setting and good streetscape quality that is encouraged in the Ku-ring-gai local area. The proposed dwelling is likely to have an adverse impact to the mature turpentine tree on site and the existing remnant tree within the adjacent properties. The proposed development does not satisfy the underlying objectives for subdivision in the residential zones under Clause 25H(1) of the KPSO.

The applicant has also pointed to the smaller allotment sizes of 16 and 16A Carlotta Avenue in part to support the proposed variation. These smaller lots in a strata plan are the exception in the overall subdivision pattern of the area and were approved under different legislation, being SEPP 53 (Metropolitan Residential Development) which allowed this type of development. This policy no longer applies having been repealed in 2011. The precedence set by these properties should not direct the development, particularly in this area given the site’s sensitivities with STIF and presence of the riparian corridor. The KLEP 2015 recognises these site constraints and increases the minimum allotment size for subdivision to 1500m². To accept a variation is also contrary to the objectives (b) and (c) under Clause 4.1 of the KLEP 2015, which seek to:

(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 properties and the desired character of the area;

(c) to ensure that subdivision of low density residential sites reflects and reinforces the predominant subdivision patter of the area.

3. Whether compliance with the development standard is consistent with the aims of the Policy and whether compliance hinders the attainment of the objects specified in section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the EP & A Act 1979

The aim of SEPP 1 is to:

Provide flexibility in the application of planning controls operating by virtue of development standards in circumstances where strict compliance with those standards would, in any particular case, be unreasonable or unnecessary or tend to hinder the attainment of the objectives specified in Section 5 (a) (i) and (ii) of the Act.

In this regard, the objects of Section 5 (a) (i) and (ii) of the Act are:

(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;

The proposal is contrary to the objects of Section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (EP&A Act 1979). The proposed development is inconsistent with the underlying objectives of the residential zone and the specific objectives of the minimum allotment size and width development standards. Particular concern is raised with the inconsistency of the proposal with the surrounding subdivision pattern and consequential impacts associated with the significant variation, as discussed. The subdivision will result in a significantly undersized allotment, with minimal street frontage contrary to the general character of the area. This will hinder the attainment of the Object of the Act and is contrary to Section 5(a)(i) of the (EP&A Act 1979) in that the proposal does not properly manage and conserve the natural areas of the site. In addition it does not promote the orderly development of the land particularly given the 1,500m² minimum allotment size requirement under the KLEP 2015 which is the current Environmental Planning Instrument overseeing development of the site.

4. Whether compliance with the development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case

The following is a summary of the SEPP 1 objection arguments provided by the applicant:

· The total area of the site is 1816sqm and once subdivided will create a lot size of 908.25sqmcreating a site that is non-compliant with the minimum lot size by 20.75sqm.

· The proposal gives very close compliance to the development standard and very importantly is complimentary to the adjoining residence;

· The difference between the subject development proposal and a development without a variation would not be noticeable to the pedestrians, motorists and local residents/occupants in this locality;

· The development will maintain the residential character within locality;

· The proposed development has adequate setbacks and is highly vegetated at the streetscape to maintain the landscaping vision set out by Ku-ring-gai Council for the area. Large trees will be retained in the development and proposed plantings will replace the view of the front yard to incorporate a highly vegetated image, also along the eastern side screening the neighbouring property;

· The Sydney Turpentine Ironbark forest tree species will be retained and protected.

· The proposal is considered to reasonably satisfy what might be deemed to be the underlying objective of Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance relating to development in the low residential zone.

The applicants SEPP No. 1 objection states that the degree of non-compliance with the site area standard is 20.75m² for each lot. This is incorrect and is a significant underestimation of the non-compliance with the minimum site area requirement. This is a result of the applicant simply dividing the existing site in half. As proposed on the plans submitted with the application, the site areas are those as detailed in the description of the application.

Irrespective of the above, the SEPP No. 1 objection fails to make reference or consider the objectives for subdivision and for residential zones specified under Clauses 25H (1), 25C and 25D of the KPSO.

The application also fails to comply with a number of other development controls. The proposed Lot 1 dwelling fails to meet the controls for; minimum front setback, side setbacks including the first floor setback, building height plane and usable open space. Lot 1 also fails to provide two spaces for vehicles behind the front building line and does not provide suitable vehicle access or egress with a driveway width of 2.6m.

As the application fails to meet the aims and objectives of the development standards and does not address the minimum allotment width requirement, the applicant cannot demonstrate why the variation is unreasonable and unnecessary in this instance. Consequently, Council is not in position to cannot support the proposed variations to the development standards.

5. Whether the objection is well founded

The objection is not considered to be well founded for the following reasons:

· The proposed smaller allotment is inconsistent with the character of the locality, where the allotments predominately range between 790m² to 929m² and upwards (except No. 4 and 6 Carlotta Avenue which have a site area of 696.7m²). Lot 2 will result in a general change in the overall subdivision pattern of the area, with smaller allotment of 461.89m², as compared to the prevailing allotment size in the area. This is particularly important in the context of the zoning under Ku ring gai LEP 2015, which requires a minimum allotment size of 1500m². Significant weight is given to this control as the KLEP 2015 has been gazetted and it sets the desired future character of the zone. This zone recognises the site’s environmental sensitivity, which is the response for the revised larger lot size under the KLEP 2015.

· The neighbouring dwelling and subdivision, created for dual occupancy at 16 and 16A Carlotta Avenue were approved under a different Environmental Planning Instrument, which no longer exists. Clause 58B (5) of the KPSO states that the clause 58 does not apply to subdivision created pursuant to SEPP 53. There is no standard in the KPSO stipulating minimum lot size for subdivision of dual occupancy. It should not be taken as a bench mark for lot size for the reasons noted earlier. Dual occupancy development has prohibited on the subject site since 15 July 2011.

· The proposed subdivision will not be comparable with surrounding properties. Whilst it is acknowledged that there are some undersized allotments in the area, the majority comply or are greater than the minimum standard of 929m². The proposed variation would set an undesirable precedent which would be detrimental to the character of the area. The variation is an ad-hoc deviation from the standards with no sound planning basis. As a consequence, it not considered to be an appropriate use of the dispensing power under SEPP 1.

· The proposal fails to provide for development to occur in a garden setting within substantial setbacks to enable long-term sustainability of trees and fails to provide for substantial common landscaped area to encourage good streetscape quality and areas for trees for each development.

· The proposed new dwelling was assessed against the planning controls under DCP No.38, including 9-11m front setback, side setback, 0.4:1 floor space ratio, building height plane, first floor FSR and 50sqm usable open space. The proposed garage has nil setbacks to the access handle of Lot 1 and part of the first floor bedroom (Bedroom 4) projected above the access handle. The new dwelling does not fully comply with the DCP given the smaller lot size and narrow site width. Proposed Lot 2 is inadequate to accommodate a reasonable dwelling house that is of high quality design.

· The proposed development on Lot 2 fails to demonstrate that a usable private open space can be provided as required under DCP 38, due to the slope of land and biodiversity (Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest community) and riparian affectations.

· It has not been demonstrated that the mature Turpentine trees on site and trees on the adjoining properties will be protected.

· Clause 25H (5) allows for the creation of battle-axe allotments, however, in this instance, the variation not only results in a non-compliant street frontage but also an unsatisfactory vehicular access of 2.6 metres for Lot 1. In order to provide a wider vehicular access of 3 metres that complies with the Australian Standard, a re-design would likely involve the removal of the landscaping area along the eastern side boundary or a reduction of the site width of Lot 2. The reduction of the site width of Lot 2 will further increase the non-compliance of the site width under Clause 25H (4) of the KPSO.

· The proposed undersized Lot 2 does not allow for a dwelling house development that will meet the aims and objectives of residential zones under 25 C and 25D of the KPSO, in that it does not encourage i) the protection and enhancement of the environmental qualities of Ku-ring-gai, ii) encourage orderly development of land and resources in Ku-ring-gai; and iii) a high level of residential amenity in building design for the occupants of buildings through, outdoor living and landscape design.

The SEPP 1 objection has not demonstrated that strict compliance with the standards is unreasonable and unnecessary in this instance. The applicant fails to establish that the objectives of the standards can be achieved notwithstanding the non compliances. Therefore, the proposal is contrary to the objectives of the control.

6. Whether non-compliance with the development standard raises any matter of significance for State or regional environmental planning

The non-compliance with the development standard will not raise any matters of significance for state and regional planning.

7. Whether there is a public benefit of maintaining the planning controls adopted by the environmental planning instrument

There is public benefit in maintaining the control in this instance because the variation would undermine the objectives of the controls, particularly in light of the future direction as prescribed under KLEP 2015, which sets a greater minimum allotment size. This is in recognition of the site’s environmental sensitivities with the site containing STIF and a riparian corridor.

Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015

KLEP 2015 has replaced the Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance as the principal planning instrument for the Ku-ring-gai Local Government Area. The KLEP 2015 came into effect on 2 April 2015. The gazetted instrument contains a savings provision essentially stating that any DA lodged before the commencement of the LEP and still under assessment at the date of this commencement must be determined as if the plan had not commenced.

The KLEP 2015 as the current principal planning instrument sets the future direction for planning in the Ku ring gai area. Under the KLEP 2015, a strong emphasis has been placed to the environmental significant of the subject site via the change in the zoning from Residential 2(c2) (under the KPSO) to E4 Environmental Living (under the KLEP 2015). Any future developments must ensure that it does not have an adverse impact to the ecological communities, biodiversity corridors or other significant vegetation on site and must be in keeping with the objectives and controls for the environmental zone specified under the KLEP 2015 and KDCP.

Proposed land use zone

The subject site is proposed to be zoned E4 Environmental Living and the development is permissible within this zoning. The objectives of the zone are as follows:

· to provide for low-impact residential development in areas with special ecological, scientific or aesthetic values

· to ensure that residential development does not have an adverse effect on those values

· to ensure development does not result in further fragmentation of ecological communities, biodiversity corridors or other significant vegetation or habitat

The proposed development fails to meet all the objectives of the zone because of the undersized allotment and site widths. The failure to meet the first objective results in the development failing to meet the second objective. The minimum allotment size for the subdivision of the subject site is 1500m² under the KLEP 2015. Both proposed lots fail to meet this requirement. The variation is significant, particularly for proposed Lot 2 as the shortfall 1038.11m². The proposed smaller lots are uncharacteristic of the area and result in an inappropriate development on proposed Lot 2 which fails to meet a number of key controls. Accordingly, the development fails to meet the objectives of the control.

Proposed development standards

The KLEP 2015 proposes three development standards of relevance to the subject application, as follows:

4.1 Minimum subdivision lot size

The proposal results in non-compliances with the minimum lot size of 1,500sqm and 18 metres width contained within the KLEP 2015. The objectives of Clause 4.1 of the KLEP 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

Proposed Lot 1 will have a street frontage of 3.3 metres (2.6m access handle plus 700mm setback for landscaping), and proposed Lot 2 is to have a site area of 461.89m² and a street frontage of 12.2 metres. It fails to comply with the objectives under Part 4.1 (a) and (c) of the KLEP.

Under KLEP 2015, the subject site is zoned E4 Environmental Living to ensure that any future developments will not generate a significant adverse impact to the natural or cultural features of any given site. In order to achieve this, the objectives of the E4 zone specifically refer to the lot size and dimensions of the subdivision to ensure developments are consistent with relevant development controls and the protection of the significance features on site.

The proposed subdivision will vary the 1500m² minimum allotment size standard by 69.2% or 1038.11m² (Lot 2) and 9.7% or 145.5m² (Lot 1) and is inconsistent with the established subdivision pattern of the area. The proposed dwelling is excessive in scale and does not comply with the development controls under the KLEP, including insufficient private open, building setbacks, first floor FSR, building height plane, excavation within the side setback and car parking forward of the building line. The development fails to meet to objectives under Clause 4.1 (a) and (c) of the KLEP 2015.

The proposed development is not acceptable with regard to the retention of trees on site and there is a lack of screen planting along the side boundaries. Particular concern is raised over the impact on neighbour amenity given the loss of vegetation and the impact on the landscape setting as the result of the introduction of the new dwelling. As such, the application is inconsistent with the Objective (b) of Clause 4.1 of the KLEP.

4.3 Height of buildings

The proposed dwelling complies with the 9.5 metres maximum building height development standard.

4.5 Calculation of floor space ratio and site area

Under E4 Environmental Living, for allotments less than 800m² the maximum floor space ratio is 0.4:1. The proposed development complies with the maximum FSR.

Development Control Plan No. 38 – Ku-ring-gai Residential Design Manual

Existing dwelling

The existing dwelling located on proposed Lot 1 will be retained and there are no works proposed to this dwelling. The site area will be reduced as a result of the proposed subdivision. Irrespective of whether there are any changes, an assessment against DCP 38 must be undertaken given the nature of the works. No architectural plans were submitted for this proposed lot to allow for an assessment of compliance with these provisions.

Proposed dwelling

The compliance or otherwise of the proposed dwelling proposed Lot 2 with the development controls of DCP38 are established in the following compliance table:

Development Control	Proposed	Complies
4.1 Streetscape:
Building setbacks (s.4.1.3)
Front setback: 11m (avg) -75% front elevation 9m (min) - 25% front elevation	8.5m 8.3m	NO NO
Side setback: Ground floor: 2 (min) 1^st floor: 15% site width or 2.5m, which even is greater = 2.5(min)	Nil (garage to west) 1.4m (study to east) 800mm encroached onto the access handle of lot 1 (bed 4 to west) 1.6m (master bed to east)	NO NO NO NO
Rear setback: 12m(min)	16.4m	YES
Front fences (s.4.1.5)
Height (forward of building line): 1.2m if visually transparent Height (behind building line): 1.8m (max)	No proposed fencing	N/A
4.2 Building form:
FSR (s.4.2.1) 0.4:1 (184.75m²max)	0.398:1 (183.7m²)	YES
Height of building (s.4.2.2)
2 storey (max) and 8m (site >20⁰ slope) or 7m (site <20⁰ slope)	2 storey & 6.4m	YES
Building height plane (s.4.2.3) 45⁰ from horizontal at any point 3m above boundary	1.7m at the eastern side & 3.5m at the western side	NO
First floor (s.4.2.4)
FSR: < 40% total FSR	55%	NO
Roof Line (s.4.2.6)
Roof height (5m - single storey) (3m - two⁺ storey)	2.2m	YES
Roof pitch 35⁰(max)	23⁰	YES
Built-upon area (s.4.2.7) 50% (230.9m²) (max)	Lot 1: approx. 41.8% (567.3sqm) Lot 2: 48.19% (222.6sqm)	YES YES
Unrelieved wall length (s.4.2.8) 12m for walls less than 4m in height 8m for walls more than 4m in height		YES
Solar access (4.2.11) 4h solar access to adjoining properties between 9am to 3pm	According to the submitted shadow diagram, the proposed dwelling provides 4 hrs solar access to the adjoining properties.	YES
Cut & fill (s.4.2.14)
Max cut 900mm	600mm at the rear terrace	YES
No cut or fill within side setbacks	190mm to 690mm fill at the clothes line area at the eastern elevation of the dwelling set back 200mm from the eastern boundary	NO
4.3 Open space & landscaping:
Soft landscaping area (4.3.3) 50% (230.9m²) (min)	Lot 1: approx. 58.2% Lot 2: 51.8%	YES YES
Tree replenishment (s.4.3.6) 3 Trees required	Refer to the landscape comment	YES
Landscaping cut & fill (4.3.7)
max cut or fill 500mm relative to natural ground	The plans and information submitted with the application do not provide adequate information on the construction method of the rear terrace	NO
Useable open space (s.4.3.8) Min depth 5m and min area 50m²	No useable soft open space is provided.	NO
4.4 Privacy & security:

4.5 Access & parking:
No. of car parking spaces (s.4.5.1) 2 spaces behind building line	1 single garage and 1 hard stand forward of the building line	NO
Size of car parking space (s.4.5.2) Garage: 5.4m x 3.1m Carport: 5.4m x 2.7m	Garage: 6m x 3.6m Hard stand: 5.4m 3m	YES
Driveway width (s.4.5.6) 3.5m	2.6m	NO- does not comply with the Australian Standard

Building setbacks (s.4.1.3)

Front setback

The proposed dwelling is set back 8.3m to 8.5m from the front boundary and does not comply with the required 9m front setback control under the DCP. The proposed front setback is unacceptable as it does not provide sufficient area for vehicle manoeuvrability. The proposed car space and driveway within the front setback will result in an excessive hard surface area and do not allow for the provision of soft landscaping as required under DCP No. 38. A greater turning area in the front setback would further reduce any soft landscaping, diminishing the site’s contribution to the streetscape. The proposed development will have a material impact upon the streetscape and neighbouring amenity contrary to the objectives of the control.

Side setback

The proposed garage has a nil setback to the western boundary of Lot 2 and the study is set back 1.4m to 1.6m to the eastern boundary, failing to comply with the 2m ground floor side setback control under the DCP. Part of the first floor bedroom (Bedroom 4) encroaches 800mm into the vehicle access of Lot 1. The first floor master bedroom is set back 1.6m from the eastern boundary and fails to comply with the minimum first floor side setback control of 2.5m as specified under the DCP. The inadequate side setback will not allow sufficient landscaping between the boundary and the proposed two storey dwelling, to soften its appearance when viewed from the neighbouring properties and the street. As a consequence, the development fails to meet the objectives of the control.

Building height plane (s.4.2.3)

The proposed dwelling breaches the prescribed building height plane along the western and eastern elevations by 3.5m and 1.7m, respectively. The non-compliance is unacceptable as the design of the dwelling has not incorporated appropriate measures, such as sufficient setback and a ‘stepped back’ first floor, to mitigate the bulk and scale impacts in the form of articulation of the built form. The proposed dwelling fails to comply with the minimum side setback and first floor FSR controls under the DCP. The proposed dwelling is excessive in bulk and scale on an undersized lot. This will have a significant detrimental impact when viewed from the street and neighbouring properties. The proposed dwelling fails to satisfy the objectives of the building form under Part 4.2. The dwelling will dominate the natural landscape and will be inconsistent with the existing streetscape.

First floor FSR (s.4.2.4)

The proposed first floor, floor space ratio is 55% of the total floor space and does not comply with the 40% control under the DCP. The underlying objectives of the control seek to ensure that the upper level will not have an overbearing bulk and scale impact to the neighbouring properties. The control encourages first floor to be ‘stepped back’. The proposed new dwelling is excessive and encroaches onto the driveway for proposed Lot 1. The proposed first floor has a floor space that is more than 50% of the total FSR which results in a ‘top heavy’ design contrary to the control’s objectives. This proposed design is not suitable given its non-compliance with this control, particularly on an undersized lot.

Cut & fill (s.4.2.14)

Fill of approximately 190mm to 690mm will be provided in the clothes drying area at the eastern side of the dwelling. It is set back 200mm from the eastern boundary. The fill and concrete pavement are not supported as they will prelude the provision of viable screen planting along the eastern boundary, adjacent to the elevated rear terrace, which is contrary to the control’s objective.

In addition to the above, the proposed level for the landing to the eastern side of the terrace is shown as RL98.70 on the landscape plan and RL98.19 on the architectural plan. The information provided is inconsistent to allow for an accurate assessment of any potential fill.

Useable open space (s.4.3.8)

No private open space is provided at the natural ground level in a soft landscaped setting. The private open space of the proposed dwelling is provided with a covered terrace at the northern (rear) elevation of the dwelling. The rear terrace has an area of 26m² and a depth of 3.48m. Additionally, the dimensions and combined area of the private open space areas do not comply with the minimum dimensions required by the DCP control.

Due to the numerous natural constraints affecting the site, the ability to provide usable open space area (such as an open lawn or ground paving) is restricted. However, the absence of any useable open space at a natural ground level is indicative of the inappropriateness of the proposed subdivision of this site (where the provision of such areas would further remove from the landscaped setting of the site.

Privacy and security (s.4.4)

The proposed terrace and first floor balcony are elevated 1.5m and 4.2m, respectively, above the natural ground level and are set back 1.8m from the eastern boundary. The elevated terrace and balcony will afford overlooking into the private open space and balcony of the neighbouring property at 16A Carlotta Avenue. Furthermore, there is the lack of screen planting along the eastern boundary to assist in negating any undue overlooking impacts. The proposed terrace and balcony at the rear of the new dwelling will result in unreasonable privacy impacts to No. 16A Carlotta Avenue.

Design of garages and carport, access and driveway (s.4.5)

The DCP requires two parking spaces behind the building line for the proposed dwelling. The proposal is for a single garage to the western side of the dwelling and a car space located in front of the dwelling. The application was referred to Council’s Engineer who commented that the proposed garage opening, vehicle manoeuvrability and driveway are unsatisfactory.

The proposed driveway and car space within the front setback will result in an excessive hard surface area and fail to enhance the provision of landscaping within the frontage of the site that should complement any new dwelling. The tree at the eastern side of the car space is likely to be removed due to the concrete pavement for the proposed car space. (This information is inconsistent on the landscape plan). Landscaping within the front setback of the site is to be provided to ensure the development maintains the predominant landscape characteristics of the Ku-ring-gai area, dominated by trees and shrubs. The proposed car space and garage dominate the site and would have an adverse impact on the streetscape and neighbouring properties.

Development Control Plan No. 40 – Construction and Demolition Waste Management

A waste management plan has been submitted and is deemed to be acceptable.

Development Control Plan No. 43 – Car Parking

The proposal does not comply with the on-site vehicle parking spaces required by Section 3.1 – Car Parking rates of Council’s DCP43 – Car Parking.

Development Control Plan No. 47 – Water Management

This DCP was considered in the assessment by Council’s Development Engineer and the proposal is acceptable in this regard.

Ku-ring-gai Section 94 Contribution Plan 2004-2009 – Residential Development.

Council’s Section 94 Contribution Plan requires a contribution for the provision of additional allotments with a new dwelling. However, the application is recommended for refusal.

Likely Impacts

The proposed development would have a significant detrimental impact on the local area for the reasons detailed within the report.

Suitability of the site

The site is not suitable for the proposed development for the reasons outlined in this report.

Any submissions

The submission received was considered above under “Consultation – Community above”.

Public interest

The proposed development is not in the public interest per the reasons given in the report.

Conclusion

The proposed subdivision will create an undersized allotment which does not comply with the underlying objectives of the minimum lot size and width standards. The proposed dwelling on the new allotment is excessive in size and is not integrated into the site and does not appropriately respond to its constraints.

The proposed variations have not been adequately justified under the terms of SEPP 1. The applicant has failed to demonstrate that strict compliance with the standard is unreasonable and unnecessary. The applicant has not demonstrated that the objectives of the standard are achieved nor has it been established that compliance would tend to hinder the attainment of the objects in 5(a)(i) or (ii) of the EPA Act.

Recommendation:

Pursuant to Section 80 (1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979

THAT the Council, as the consent authority, is of the opinion that the objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 - Development Standards to the minimum allotment size and street frontage standards in the Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance is not well founded. Council is also of the opinion that strict compliance with the development standard is reasonable and necessary in the circumstances of this case.

AND

THAT Council, as the consent authority, refuse development consent to Development Application No 0430/14 for Torrens title subdivision of one lot into two lots and construction of a new dwelling on land at 14 Carlotta Avenue, Gordon, as shown on plan A000, A101, A102, A103, A104, A105, A106, A107, A201, A202, A301 and A401 prepared by ADS Architecture Design Studio Pty Ltd and received at Council on 14 April 2015; and LA-01 (Landscape plan) prepared by 24 GRP Landscape and received by Council on 14 April 2015 for the following reasons:

1. The application fails to comply with Clause 25H (3)(a) and (4) of the Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance (KPSO). The variation to the street frontage development standard equate to 81.6% (lot 1) and 32.7% (lot 2) and a 50.28% (lot 2) variation to the allotment size development standard in the KPSO.

Particulars

a) The proposed undersize lot does not allow a dwelling house development that will meet the aims and objectives of residential zones under 25 C and 25D of the KPSO, in that it does not encourage i) the protection and enhancement of the environmental qualities of Ku-ring-gai, ii) encourage orderly development of land and resources in Ku-ring-gai; and iii) a high level of residential amenity in building design for the occupants of buildings through, outdoor living and landscape design.

b) The new dwelling does not fully comply with the DCP given the smaller lot size and narrow site width. The proposed Lot 2 is inadequate to facilitate a reasonable dwelling house that is of high quality urban design and architecture.

2. The proposed development does not comply with the 1500m² minimum subdivision lot size and site width; and is inconsistent with the objective of the E4 Environmental Living zone of Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015.

Particulars

a) Significant weight is given to this control as the KLEP 2015 has been gazetted and it sets the future expectations of the zone. This zone recognises the site’s environmental sensitivity, which reflects the revised larger lot size under the KLEP 2015. The E4 Environmental Living zone seeks to protect from fragmentation of the special ecological communities and biodiversity corridors located at the site.

3. Inadequate and unsatisfactory vehicular access

The application provides insufficient documentation and does not demonstrate that the development would result in satisfactory vehicular access to either the existing residence or the new dwelling.

Particulars

a) The width of the existing concrete driveway is between 2.0 and 2.6 metres wide (scaled from the drawings, as dimensions are not given). It does not comply with the width of 3.0 metres for a domestic driveway as recommended in AS2890.1:2004- Off street car parking.

b) The architectural plans show the new garage wall right up to and possibly over the driveway. This will further restrict the already narrow vehicular access along the driveway to the existing dwelling.

c) No levels are provided of the proposed transition from the existing driveway to the new garage and car space. It appears that a section of the existing driveway would have to be reconstructed. The resulting steep gradient along the southern side of the curved section would result in unacceptable grades and transitions in front of the garage.

d) The width of the apron in front of the garage is insufficient for adequate manoeuvring of vehicles out of the garage and into the driveway in a forward direction.

4. Non-compliances with the planning controls under DCP 38

The proposed dwelling fails to comply with the planning controls under DCP 38, including front setback, side setback, building height plane, first floor FSR, privacy and 50m² usable open space. The proposal has not demonstrated that the smaller allotment with narrow site width on proposed Lot 2 can adequately accommodate a reasonable sized dwelling and can comply with key DCP 38 provisions nor meet the relevant objectives set out in the DCP.

Particulars

a) The proposed dwelling is set back 8.3m to 8.5m from the front boundary and does not comply with the required 9m front setbacks control under the DCP.

b) The proposed car space and driveway within the front setback will result in an excessive hard surface area and do not allow the provision of soft landscaping as required under DCP No. 38.

c) The proposed garage has a nil setback to the western boundary of Lot 2 and the study is set back 1.4m to 1.6m from the eastern boundary and fail to comply with the 2m ground floor side setback control under the DCP 38. Part of the proposed first floor bedroom (Bedroom 4) encroaches onto the vehicle access of Lot 1 by 800mm and the first floor master bedroom is set back 1.6m from the eastern boundary. The first floor side setbacks for Lot 2 fails to comply with the minimum first floor side setback control of 2.5m as specified in the DCP. The inadequate side setback will not allow sufficient landscaping between boundary and building to soften the visual appearance of the development from the neighbouring properties and the street.

d) The proposed dwelling breaches the prescribed building height plane along the western and eastern elevations by 3.5m and 1.7m, respectively. In combination with the non-compliant front setback, the proposed dwelling is excessive in bulk and scale on an undersized lot. This will have a visual amenity impact when viewed from the street and neighbouring properties. The proposed dwelling also fails to satisfy the objectives of the building form controls under Part 4.2. in that the proposed development will dominate the natural landscape and existing streetscape.

e) The proposed floor space ratio comprises 55% of the total floor space and does not comply with the 40% control under the DCP. The proposed new dwelling is excessive and encroaches onto the driveway for proposed Lot 1. The proposed first floor results in a ‘top heavy’ design contrary to the control’s objectives. This proposed design is not suitable given its non-compliance with this control, particularly on an undersized lot.

f) The proposed terrace and first floor balcony are elevated 1.5m and 4.2m, respectively, above the natural ground levels and are set back 1.8m from the eastern boundary. The elevated terrace and balcony will afford overlooking of the private open space and balcony of the neighbouring property of 16 Carlotta Avenue. Further, there is the lack of screen planting along the eastern boundary to assist in negating overlooking impacts. The proposed terrace and balcony at the rear of the new dwelling will result in unreasonable privacy impacts to neighbouring property No. 16A Carlotta Avenue.

g) Fill of approximately 190mm to 690mm high will be carried out along the eastern elevation of the dwelling but is set back 200mm from the eastern boundary. This fill and concrete pavement will preclude the provision of viable screen planting along the eastern boundary, adjacent to the elevated rear terrace. This contrary to the objectives of the controls that seeks to protect reasonable neighbour amenity and visual privacy.

5. Inadequate private open space

Section 4.3.8 – Usable Open Space of Council’s DCP 38 requires at least one usable private open space area with a minimum depth of 5 metres and a minimum area of 50m² be provided to the new dwelling. The proposed development does not provide sufficient usable private open space to the new dwelling.

Particulars

a) The proposed private open space is to be provided within a terrace with a maximum depth of 3.48 metres (1.52 metres less than the required minimum) and a combined total area of 26m², (24m² less than the required minimum). No usable private open space is provided at natural ground level.

b) The absence of any usable private open space at natural ground level and the considerable shortfall in unusable private open space is indicative of the inappropriateness of the proposed subdivision of this site. The provision of such areas would further remove from the landscaped setting of the biodiversity (Sydney Turpentine Ironbark Forest Community) and vegetation within the riparian protection zone at the rear portion of the Lot 2.

6. Inadequate arborist report

The proposed development will result in adverse impacts on trees.

Particulars

a) The arborist’s assessment has not calculated the total encroachments within the Tree Protection Zone of the mature Turpentine as the encroachment percentage statement does not consider the area of the existing driveway. As the level of encroachment may therefore be approximately 25%, the arborist fails to calculate the totality of the encroachment both proposed and existing and to consider properly the tree’s viability in respect of all encroachments and consistent with the principles under AS 4970-20093, 3.3.3 and 3.3.4.

b) Where discounting the terrace as an encroachment, the arborist has failed to consider the encroachment of this area within the structural root zone and also whether the soil and feeder roots retained under the proposed terrace are likely to remain viable in the long term.

c) There has been no comprehensive inventory or assessment of all trees on or adjacent the site. Trees proposed to be removed are not documented or assessed.

d) It has not been demonstrated that the arborist has a minimum qualification AQF5 to fully assess the health and structure and impacts of the proposed works on all trees including trees on adjacent properties within proximity of the works and including trees proposed for removal.

e) A site specific tree protection plan showing locations of tree protection structures has not been provided.

7. Insufficient and inaccurate plan information

Insufficient landscape plan and information have been submitted to allow Council to undertake a comprehensive assessment of the application.

Particulars

a) Details of plant species locations have not been indicated on the plan.

b) To minimise impacts on trees, the applicant should relocate the paved drying area and provide substantial screen planting adjacent the elevated terrace to the eastern boundary.

c) The Turpentine located on the western edge of the driveway has not been shown within the adjacent property.

d) All trees to be retained and removed have not been identified or numbered consistently with the arborist report and have not been indicated on the landscape plan. This should also have included the trees on adjacent properties in proximity of the proposal.

e) The proposed lawn areas within the front setback and to the eastern side setback are not practical and should be replaced with planting.

f) The landscape plan is not consistent in regard to the car space configuration on the architectural plans.

g) Details of the proposed terrace are to be provided, illustrating that it is an elevated lightweight timber structure, (using isolated small diameter posts) as indicated in the arborist report. The terrace is to be relocated outside of the Turpentine’s Structural Root Zone.

h) It is not clear on the site plan that the existing driveway and levels to the driveway within the TPZ of the Turpentine are to remain as existing.

i) The proposed level for the landing at the eastern side of the terrace is shown as RL98.70 on the landscape plan and RL98.19 on the architecture plan. The information provided is inconsistent to allow for an accurate assessment of any potential fill.

j) Plans of the existing dwelling have not been provided to determine impacts of the subdivision.

Bonnie Yue

Development Assessment Officer

Shaun Garland

Team Leader Development Assessment South

Corrie Swanepoel

Manager Development Assessment Services

Michael Miocic

Director Development & Regulation

Attachments:	A1 View	Location sketch	2015/255856
	A2 View	Zone extract - KPSO	2015/255857
	A3 View	Circular PS 08-014	2010/129057
	A4 View	SEPP1 Objection	2014/265470
	A5 View	Survey	2014/265475
	A6 View	Amended architectural plans	2015/090988
	A7 View	Amended landscape plan	2015/090985

Ordinary Meeting of Council - 6 October 2015	GB.9 / 383

Item GB.9	DA0282/15
	3 September 2015

development application

Summary Sheet

Report title:	28 Holt Avenue North Wahroonga - Alterations and additions
ITEM/AGENDA NO:	GB.9

Application No:	DA0282/15
Property Details:	28 Holt Avenue, North Wahroonga Lot & DP No: Lot 3 Sec 95 DP 242285 Site area (m²): 966.5m² Zoning: Residential 2(c)
Ward:	Wahroonga
Proposal/Purpose:	Alterations and additions
Type of Consent:	Local
Applicant:	Mr S. J. van Schalkwyk
Owner:	Mr S. J. & Mrs A. van Schalkwyk
Date Lodged:	2 July 2015
Recommendation:	Approval

Purpose of Report

To determine Development Application No. 282/15 for alterations and additions to an existing dwelling.

Consideration of variation pursuant to SEPP No. 1

Circular PS 08-014 (see attachment) from NSW Planning and Environment requires that all development applications which involve a variation of a development standard greater than 10% under the provisions of SEPP No. 1 be determined by full Council and not under delegated authority.

The maximum dwelling height allowed by clause 46(2) of the KPSO is 8 metres. The subject application involves construction of an addition to the existing dwelling. The existing dwelling has a maximum height of 10.56 metres and does not comply with Council’s maximum height requirement. Accordingly, a SEPP No. 1 objection has been submitted. As the proposal involves a variation of 32% to Council’s 8 metres height standard, the application is referred to full Council for determination.

Executive Summary

Issues:	Building height (SEPP No. 1 objection)

Submissions:	No submissions received

Land and Environment Court:	N/A

Recommendation:	Approval

History

Site

The site has a history of low density residential use.

The Site

Site description

The site is located on the northern side of Holt Avenue, North Wahroonga. The site is irregular in shape, with a width of 19.81 metres and a depth of 45.81-51.755 metres. The site has an area of 966.5m² (Figure 1).

The site is situated on the high side of the street and is steeply sloping. The site falls approximately 8.5 metres from its northern corner to its southern corner.

Existing development comprises a part two, part three storey dwelling house.

Figure 1: Subject site and surrounding properties

Surrounding development

The site is surrounded by residential development (Figure 2). To the east and west, are detached dwellings fronting Holt Avenue. To the north is a community titled development known as No. 153-165 Grosvenor Street.

Figure 2: The subject and surrounding properties

The Proposal

The application proposes alterations and additions to the existing dwelling house as follows:

- an addition to the existing ground floor living/dining room over an existing balcony; provision of new windows

- a new front door with sidelight

- cladding over the lower half of the existing south-east facing window

- internal alterations comprising demolition of existing walls to the kitchen/lounge room

- internal alterations comprising demolition of existing steps and cupboards and construction of new internal steps and cupboards

- bricking up of existing north-east facing window

- a new roof with skylights over the rear ground floor entertainment area

- new rear facing bi-fold doors leading to the entertainment area

- cladding over part of an existing north-east facing bedroom window

The proposed additions have been designed to match the finishes of the existing dwelling (brick and tile).

Consultation

Community

In accordance with Development Control Plan No. 56, owners of surrounding properties were given notice of the application. No submissions were received.

Within Council

Landscaping

Council's Landscape and Tree Assessment Officer has no objection to the proposed development, subject to standard landscaping conditions (Conditions 24 and 25).

Engineering

Council's Development Engineer has no objection to the proposed development, subject to standard engineering conditions (Conditions 20, 21-23 and 26).

Outside Council

Rural Fire Service

In accordance with the provisions of section Part 1(b) of Section 79BA of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Council has been provided with a certificate by a person who is recognised by the NSW Rural Fire Service as a qualified consultant in bush fire risk assessment stating that the development conforms to the relevant specifications and requirements. As such, the application does not require a referral to the Rural Fire Service.

Council has considered the measures to be taken with respect to the protection of persons, property and the environment from danger that may arise from a bush fire. Appropriate conditions that adopt the recommendations of the bush fire risk assessment report and certificate have been applied (Conditions 9 and 29).

Statutory Provisions

State Environmental Planning Policies

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 – Development Standards

Clause 46(2) of the KPSO states that a person shall not erect a dwelling house or dual occupancy with a height in excess of 8 metres.

The height of the existing dwelling is 10.56 metres and exceeds the maximum height requirement of the KPSO. Whilst it is not proposed to change the height of the existing dwelling and notwithstanding that the proposed additions comply with Council’s height control, a SEPP 1 objection is still technically required. Accordingly, a SEPP 1 objection has been lodged, which is considered below.

whether the planning control is a development standard

Clause 46 states:

(2) A person shall not erect a dwelling-house or dual occupancy building with a height in excess of 8 metres.

(4) In this clause –

“Ground level” means the level of the site before development is carried out on the site under this Ordinance

“Height” in relation to a building, means a distance measured vertically from any point on the ceiling of the topmost floor of the building to the ground level immediately below that point

Clause 46 of the KPSO is a development standard as defined by Section 4 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979.

the purpose/object of the standard

There are no specifically stated purposes or objectives expressed in clause 46(2) of the KPSO.

The relevant aims and objectives for residential zones as stated in schedule 9 of the KPSO are:

(a) All new dwelling-houses and additions to dwelling-houses maintain a reasonable level of sunlight to neighbour’s living areas and recreation space between 9am and 3pm during the winter solstice on 22 June.

(b) All new dwelling-houses and additions to dwelling-houses are sited and designed so as to minimise overlooking of neighbour’s living areas and recreation space.

(c) All new dwelling-houses and additions to existing dwelling-houses are of a height, size and bulk generally in keeping with that of neighbouring properties and, where larger buildings are proposed, they are designed so as not to dominate and so far as possible to harmonise with neighbouring development.

whether compliance with the development standard is consistent with the aims of the policy and whether compliance hinders the attainment of objects specified in section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the EP & A Act

SEPP No. 1 provides flexibility for development standards where compliance would be unreasonable or hinder the attainment of objects of section 5(a)(i) and (ii) of the Act.

The objects of the Act are:

(i) to encourage 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) Section 5(a)ii encourages the co-ordination of the orderly and economic use and development of land.

The proposed development is for alterations and additions to an existing dwelling which is of a reasonable size and appears to be sound. The proposed development represents an orderly and economic use of the land as it enables the existing dwelling to be retained and altered.

whether compliance with the standard unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case

The applicant has stated that the existing dwelling has a height of 10.56 metres. This is a 32% variation to the 8 metres maximum height standard.

The following is an extract from the applicant’s SEPP 1 objection:

Compliance with this standard is unreasonable as the ceiling height which is non-compliant with the standard is existing and has been such since the original house was built.

The proposed addition is on the ground floor and is well within the height restrictions.

Given that the non-compliance is existing and that the proposed works are fully compliant, it is agreed that it would be unreasonable and unnecessary to require the existing dwelling to comply with the current building height requirement. The proposed addition has a height of 6.19 metres and does not exacerbate the existing non-compliance. It also complies with Council’s current maximum height standard.

whether the objection is well founded

The building height non-compliance is existing and is a result of the historical development of the site. The site has a moderate slope and it is apparent that the dwelling was designed to take advantage of the slope through provision of a lower ground level garage.

The proposed addition, which is at ground level and has a height of 6.19 metres, will not result in any increase to the height of the existing dwelling, which is 10.56 metres at its highest point. The SEPP 1 objection is well founded as it will enable alterations and additions to the existing dwelling to be undertaken. In this regard, it enables the orderly and economic development of the land.

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 - Remediation of Land

Sydney Regional Environmental Plan No. 20 - Hawkesbury-Nepean River

The proposed development is considered to achieve the relevant aims under this policy.

State Environmental Planning Policy (Building Sustainability Index: BASIX) 2004

A valid BASIX certificate has been submitted. The certificate demonstrates compliance with the provisions of the SEPP and adequately reflects all amendments to the application (Condition 27).

Local Content (LEP, KPSO, etc)

Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance

Deferred areas

The Deferred Areas comprise 15 areas within Ku-ring-gai that have been deferred from inclusion in the Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2015 (KLEP 2015) to allow for reassessment of bushfire evacuation risk and proposed zoning changes. The recommendations for deferral were approved during an Ordinary Council Meeting on 26 November 2013.

The Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance applies to all development within a Deferred Area, with Draft Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2013 still a matter for consideration.

The subject site is within a Deferred Area. Specifically, it is within Area 2 – North Wahroonga. The provisions of the KPSO therefore apply.

Part A: Development standards

Development standard	Proposed	Complies
Site area: 966.5m²
Building height 8m (max)	proposed addition 6.19m existing dwelling 10.56m	YES NO
Built upon areas 60% (579.9m²)(max)	44% (427m²)	YES

Building height (clause 46[2]):

The height of the existing dwelling is 10.56 metres which exceeds the maximum height standard.

Part B: 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.

Draft Ku-ring-gai Local Environmental Plan 2013

The draft LEP and supporting material was exhibited from Monday 25 March 2013 to Monday 6 May 2013. 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 LEP forms a consideration for the assessment of this application.

As a result of the plan, the subject site will be zoned ‘R2 Low Density Residential’ and the development is permissible within this zoning. The objectives of the zone are:

· To provide for the housing needs of the community within a low density residential environment.

· To enable other land uses that provide facilities or services to meet the day to day needs of residents.

· To provide housing that is compatible with the existing environmental and low density character of Ku-ring-gai

The proposal has a built form which is compatible with the existing low density character of the area and the land to be developed. Therefore, the proposal meets the objectives of the draft zone.

Policy Provisions (DCPs, Council policies, strategies and management plans)

Development Control Plan No. 38 - Ku-ring-gai Residential Design Manual

Development Control	Proposed	Complies
4.1 Streetscape:
Building setbacks (s.4.1.3)
Front setback: 14m (avg) -75% front elevation 12m (min) - 25% front elevation	14m (min) 21m (avg)	YES YES
Side setback: Ground floor: 2 (min)	1m ground floor setback to south-eastern side boundary	NO
Rear setback: 12m(min) (avg site depth greater than 48m)	11.2m (building) 9.864m (awning)	NO
4.2 Building form:
FSR (s.4.2.1) 0.37:1 (max) 361m²	0.3:1 or 296m²	YES
Height of building (s.4.2.2)
2 storey (max) and 8m (site >20⁰ slope) or 7m (site <20⁰ slope)	proposed addition 6.19m existing dwelling 10.56m	YES NO
Building height plane (s.4.2.3) 45⁰ from horizontal at any point 3m above boundary	0.8m non-compliance to south-eastern side boundary	NO
First floor (s.4.2.4)
FSR: < 40% total FSR	45%	NO
Roof Line (s.4.2.6)
Roof height (5m - single storey) (3m - two⁺ storey)	unchanged	N/A
Roof pitch 35⁰(max)	unchanged	N/A
Built-upon area (s.4.2.7) 54% (521m²) (max)	44% (427m²)	YES
Unrelieved wall length (s.4.2.8) 12m for walls less than 4m in height 8m for walls more than 4m in height	unchanged	N/A
Solar access (4.2.11) 4h solar access to adjoining properties between 9am to 3pm	Solar access to adjoining property at No. 30 Holt Avenue maintained between 9am and 12pm	YES
4.3 Open space & landscaping:
Useable open space (s.4.3.8) Min depth 5m and min area 50m²	Min depth 9.8m and area of 204m²	YES
4.4 Privacy & security:
The proposed rear awning is over an existing entertaining area and will not result in any adverse privacy impacts to the adjoining properties to the rear, Nos 32 and 33 Lyndhurst Place. The proposed lounge room addition is over an existing balcony. The proposed addition is set back 9 metres from the swimming pool at No. 30 Holt Avenue and does not feature any windows along its north-eastern elevation. As such, the proposed addition will not result in any adverse privacy impacts.

Building setbacks (s.4.1.3)

Side setbacks

Section 4.1.3 of the DCP states that two storey dwellings on lots with a width of less than 20 metres should be set back a minimum of 2 metres from the side boundaries. The objective of this requirement is to allow for significant landscaping between buildings.

The proposed ground floor addition is set back 1 metre from the south-eastern side boundary. Whilst the proposal does not comply with Council’s numerical requirements, the proposed setback is acceptable for the following reasons:

· The proposed setback will not result in any adverse visual bulk impacts to the streetscape or adjoining property. The pattern of development is irregular due to the topography of the locality. As a result, the dwelling on the adjoining property, No. 30 Holt Avenue, is set further back, behind the subject dwelling (Figure 2).

· The proposed side setback will not result in any adverse solar access impacts for the reasons listed above.

· The proposed addition is over an existing elevated ground floor level balcony and is within the existing building footprint.

Rear setbacks

Section 4.1.3 of the DCP requires a minimum rear setback of 12 metres for dwellings on sites with a depth of more than 48 metres. The relevant objectives of section 4.1.3 are as follows:

· to ensure the amenity of neighbouring properties is maintained or enhanced

· to allow for the provision of landscaping and to provide room for additional tree plantings

· to facilitate solar access

· to protect significant vegetation

· to facilitate efficient use of the site

The existing development has a rear setback of 11.2 metres to the wall of the existing dwelling. The post of the proposed awning is set back 9.864 metres from the rear boundary and encroaches on the required rear setback area.

The proposed awning will not result in any adverse bulk or privacy impacts to adjoining properties and will maintain their amenity in this regard. The awning is over an existing paved area and does not preclude provision of an appropriate amount of private open space nor does it impact upon existing vegetation. The proposed awning is over an existing entertainment area and therefore facilitates efficient use of the site. It is an open, single storey structure and will not result in any adverse solar access impacts. For these reasons, the proposed awning is acceptable.

Height of building (s.4.2.2)

Section 4.2.2 of the DCP states that a dwelling must not exceed two storeys in height. However, the DCP states that Council may consider an additional floor on sloping sites where the height is not evident from public areas or adjoining properties and where excavation is not excessive.

The existing dwelling is three storeys in height, having been designed to accommodate a lower ground floor level within the slope of the land. The proposed addition is at ground floor level and will not increase the height of the existing dwelling. The proposed addition is therefore considered acceptable.

Building height plane (s.4.2.3)

Section 4.2.3 of DCP No. 38 states that development should avoid the creation of an overbearing impact upon adjoining development in order to:

· maintain the relative scale relationship between buildings

· ensure that daylight to habitable rooms in adjacent dwellings is not significantly reduced

· ensure that sunlight to the private open spaces of the subject property and adjacent properties is not significantly reduced

· encourage increased setback with increased height

The DCP states that this objective may be achieved by compliance with the building height plane.

The proposed development will project some 0.8 metres beyond the building envelope at the south-eastern side boundary. The non-compliance is minor in nature and will not result in any adverse bulk impacts to the streetscape. This is because the existing dwelling is set back a minimum of 14 metres from the front property boundary. The proposed non-compliance will not result in any adverse bulk impacts to the adjoining property, as the dwelling and primary area of private open space of the adjoining property, No. 30 Holt Avenue, are set significantly behind the subject dwelling (Figure 2).

First floor area (s.4.2.4)

DCP No. 38 states that the first floor of dwellings should be well integrated into the design of the development to avoid an overbearing bulk/scale relationship with neighbouring properties. The DCP states that this should be achieved by “stepping back” upper levels and ensuring that the first floor does not exceed 40% of total floor space.

The proposed ground floor addition results in the first floor of the dwelling having a floor area of 45%. However, this is an improvement on the existing situation, in which the first floor comprises 50% of the total floor area. The proposed ground floor addition assists in “balancing” the existing dwelling by providing a larger ground floor area (Figure 3). It is therefore acceptable.

Figure 3: South-western elevation showing ground floor addition

Likely Impacts

The proposed development will not result in any adverse streetscape, solar access, privacy, stormwater or visual bulk impacts.

Suitability of the Site

The site is zoned for residential purposes and is considered to be suitable for the proposed development, being alterations and additions to an existing residential dwelling.

Public Interest

The approval of the application is considered to be in the public interest.

Conclusion

Having regard to the provisions of section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, the proposed development is considered to be satisfactory. Therefore, it is recommended that the application be approved.

Recommendation:

A. That Council, as the consent authority, is satisfied that the objection under State Environmental Planning Policy No. 1 - Development Standards to the maximum height development standard in clause 46(2) of the Ku-ring-gai Planning Scheme Ordinance is well founded. Council is also of the opinion that strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of this case as the height non-compliance relates to the existing dwelling and will not be exacerbated by the proposed additions.

B. That Council, as the consent authority, grant development consent to DA0282/15 for alterations and additions on land at No. 28 Holt Avenue, North Wahroonga for a period of two (2) years from the date of the Notice of Determination, subject to the following conditions:

Conditions that identify approved plans:

1. Approved architectural plans and documentation (alterations and additions)

The development must be carried out in accordance with work shown in colour on 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
A001 Site and roof	Alison Ludwig	June 15
A101 Ground floor plan	Alison Ludwig	June 15
A102 First and garage floor plans	Alison Ludwig	June 15
A301 South-east and north-east elevations and Section A	Alison Ludwig	June 15
A302 North-west and south-west elevations and BASIX notes	Alison Ludwig	June 15

Document(s)	Dated
Basix certificate No. A224296	14 July 2015
Bush fire risk assessment and certification, prepared by Sydney Bushfire Consultants	20 July 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

Reason: To ensure public safety.

4. Notice of commencement

Reason: Statutory requirement.

5. Notification of builder’s details

Reason: Statutory requirement.

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

6. Long service levy

Reason: Statutory requirement.

7. Builder’s indemnity insurance

Reason: Statutory requirement.

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

8. Infrastructure restorations fee

To ensure that damage to Council Property as a result of construction activity is rectified in a timely matter:

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.

e) In this condition:

Reason: To maintain public infrastructure.

9. 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 Assessment and Compliance Report	Sydney Bushfire Consultants	20 July 2015

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:

10. Road opening permit

Reason: Statutory requirement (Roads Act 1993 Section 138) and to maintain the integrity of Council’s infrastructure.

11. Prescribed conditions

· The work must be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Building Code of Australia

Reason: Statutory requirement.

12. Hours of work

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.

13. Approved plans to be on site

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

14. 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

· 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.

15. Dust control