Section 117 Ministerial Directions were amended on 22 May 2017 to add “7.4 Implementation of North West Priority Growth Area Land Use and Infrastructure Implementation Plan”. This plan proposes a draft amendment to The SEPP and associated draft changes to the DCP. The proposed changes include the introduction of minimum and maximum density “bands”.
The draft amendments to the SEPP propose a density range of 15-20 dwellings per hectare for the site. The “residential net developable area” of the R2 portion of the site is approximately 3.6 hectares, providing for a resultant minimum and maximum density requirement of 54 and 72 dwellings for the site respectively. 33 residential lots are proposed for site resulting in a variation to the draft amendments to the SEPP.
Similar to the non-compliance with the current minimum density discussed earlier, achieving a lot yield of 54-72 dwellings is unachievable due to the site constraints including the existing transmission easement and the fact the ILP does not establish a road network for the site.
Consequently, it is considered that 33 residential lots is the maximum achievable yield for the site in accordance with the applicable controls and site constraints.
LOCAL PLANNING PANEL MEETING - 21 NOVEMBER, 2018 THE HILLS SHIRE
PAGE 132 3. The Box Hill Growth Centre Precincts Development Control Plan
The proposal has been assessed against the provisions of the DCP, particularly Section 3 – Land Development.
The proposed development generally achieves compliance with the key requirements of the DCP as tabulated below:
Control Proposal Compliance
2.0 – Vision and Character
2.2 – Indicative Layout Plan The ILP does not establish a road network for the subject site or surrounding properties. Nonetheless, the proposed road layout provides suitable access to the proposed residential lots enables vehicular access to adjoining properties, ties into the surrounding road network and improves permeability throughout the precinct.
Yes
3.0 – Land Development 3.1.2 – Block and Lot Layout 3.1.2(4) Street blocks are to be generally a maximum of 250m long and 70m deep.
As discussed the ILP does not establish a road network or block pattern for the subject site. Despite this, the proposed residential block has a length of approximately 207m with a minimum and maximum depth of 40.6m and 92m respectively.
The proposed block pattern is considered acceptable as it creates residential allotments that are in keeping with the character of the R2 zone and that will achieve an acceptable residential amenity.
Furthermore, the proposed block layout appropriately responds to the site constraints and enables the site and adjoining properties to be developed in an orderly manner.
No, but acceptable
3.1.2(6) Minimum lot frontage width applying to each density band to comply with the following:
Table 7 – Minimum lot frontages by density bands:
Net Residential Density Target (dw/ha)
All lots with a frontage to the proposed public roads achieve a minimum frontage width of 9m with the exception of lot 30.
Lot 30 has a frontage width of 8.9m, resulting in a minor non-compliance. This variation arises as the ILP does not establish a road pattern for the site.
Nonetheless, this variation will be indiscernible and will not detract from the wider streetscape.
It is noted that to achieve compliance
No, but acceptable
LOCAL PLANNING PANEL MEETING - 21 NOVEMBER, 2018 THE HILLS SHIRE
PAGE 133
Control Proposal Compliance
15 Front
Loaded 9m
Rear
Loaded 4.5m
with the lot frontage control would require lot 30 to be amalgamated with an adjoining lot. This approach would further exacerbate the variation to the minimum density control and is therefore considered unreasonable.
3.1.2(7) A range of residential lot types (area, frontage, depth, zero lot and access) must be provided to ensure a mix of housing types and dwelling sizes and to create coherent streetscapes with distinctive garden suburban, suburban and urban characters across a neighbourhood.
A mix of lot types has been provided. Yes
3.1.2(8) In areas with a minimum residential density of
≤20dw/ha no more than 40%
of the total residential lots proposed in a street block may have a frontage of less than 10m wide.
21 of the residential lots within the proposed residential block have a public road frontage. 10 of these lots have a frontage less than 10m wide which equates to 47.6% of the block.
This variation as the ILP does not establish a road pattern for the site. To achieve compliance with this lot mix control would require lots to be amalgamated. This approach would further exacerbate the variation to the minimum density control and is therefore considered unreasonable.
No, but acceptable
3.1.3 – Battle-axe Lots 3.1.3(3) In density bands 10, 15 and 20dw/Ha, the minimum site area for battle-axe lots without any street or park frontage is 500m² (excluding the shared driveway) and only detached dwelling houses will be permitted.
The proposed battle-axe lots have a
minimum lot size of 500m2 Yes
3.5 – Residue Lots
3.5(1) Include documentation demonstrating how the minimum density can be achieved across each residue lot through future subdivision.
Residue lot 34 is the subject of a separate development application (DA 1091/2018/ZB) which is under assessment. DA 1091/2018/ZB complies with the minimum density control.
Yes
LOCAL PLANNING PANEL MEETING - 21 NOVEMBER, 2018 THE HILLS SHIRE
PAGE 134 7.0 – Managing the Environment
7.2 – Aboriginal heritage (5) Areas of moderate archaeological sensitivity as shown in Figure 53 warrant an Aboriginal archaeological due diligence assessment. This assessment is to be conducted in accordance with the relevant code of practice stipulated in the NPW Regulation.
An Aboriginal Heritage Due Diligence Assessment was submitted with the application as the site is identified a low to medium sensitive Aboriginal archaeological area. This report concludes that the site is of low aboriginal archaeological sensitivity.
Yes
7.4 – Bush Fire Management The subject site is mapped as bush fire prone land. The application has been referred to the RFS who have issued their General Terms of Approval without any specific conditions.
Yes
7.6 – Contamination
Management Council’s Environment and Health team have reviewed the application and have not raised any issues subject to the imposition of conditions.
Yes