PAGE 99 2. The proposal is inconsistent with The Hills Corridor Strategy and Castle Hill North
4. PUBLIC SUBMISSIONS
Council received 8 public submissions. The following key issues were raised:
(a) Maximum building height
Submissions raised concerns with the maximum building height of the buildings. The planning proposal is a way for the development to avoid complying with the required two storey maximum contained in State Environmental Planning Policy – Housing for Seniors and People with a Disability 2004. The planning proposal means that there will be no consideration of the height and floor space ratios in the State Environmental Planning policy.
Comment:
The planning proposal does not contain any changes to the maximum building height or floor space ratio controls. The inclusion of ‘seniors housing’ as an additional permitted use does not make development on the site exempt from complying with the applicable height and floor space ratio controls.
State Environmental Planning Policy – Housing for Seniors and People with a Disability 2004 contains controls that relate to development in residential zones. Development in residential zones where residential flat buildings are not permitted requires that development only be 2 storeys in height and buildings located in the rear 25% of a site must only be 1 storey in height. However, development in commercial zones for the purposes of ‘seniors housing’ under this Policy are not subject to these requirements. In these instances the existing maximum building height control will determine the maximum height that a building can be.
The maximum building height and floor space ratio controls applicable under Local Environmental Plan 2012 will apply to any future development.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 09 AUGUST, 2016
PAGE 146 (b) Residential development in business park
Norwest Business Park is not meant to have residential development. The Shire doesn’t need more residential development. Council is circumventing their own zoning to help developers profit.
Comment:
The planning proposal will only permit ‘seniors housing’ on the site, not all residential development. Council is committed to delivering jobs growth, along with residential growth. The wider Circa Precinct and remainder of Norwest Business Park have capacity to provide a substantial amount of jobs growth in the future. This part of the business park is the least appropriate for high density commercial development, being located directly adjacent to low density residential development and furthest from the future rail stations. A ‘seniors housing’ development provides a softer interface with residential than commercial buildings and will facilitate housing for the ageing population.
(c) Amenity and privacy
Submissions raised concerns regarding the future development overshadowing properties, impacting on the operation of solar panels, the amenity and privacy of properties and stating that the setbacks from the future buildings are not large enough.
Comment:
The planning proposal does not seek to change any of the existing development controls applicable to the site pertaining to overshadowing, amenity, privacy or setbacks which seek to protect the amenity and privacy of adjoining properties. Any impacts of future buildings on neighbouring properties will be considered through the Development Application process.
(d) Employment numbers
Submissions raise the difference in employment numbers quoted in planning proposal and at the conciliation conference for Development Application 992/2016/JP. The planning proposal states that the development will facilitate 120 jobs but at the conciliation conference the developer stated only 35 jobs would be generated.
Comment:
The applicant has provided clarification with respect to the employment generation on the site.
Development Application 992/2016/JP includes a master plan for the site and the development of Stage 1. The overall masterplan includes 35 direct staff (including those employed in the residential aged care facility) and approximately 85 indirect/support staff including retail staff, wellness centre staff (for example doctors, physiotherapists, hairdressers, grounds staff and the like), which would result in a total of 120 people being employed on site.
(e) Noise
Submissions raise concerns regarding the potential noise from air conditioners and from residents using recreation facilities.
Comment:
The noise from air conditioners is not anticipated to cause disruption to the residential environment. Noise from residents is considered to be minimal, given that the recreation facilities include walking tracks and garden areas. The main recreation area with restaurants is fronting Norbrik Drive where residential properties will be buffered from noise by the buildings themselves. Amenity impacts from noise will be addressed in the Development Application process.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 09 AUGUST, 2016
PAGE 147 5. FINALISATION OF PLANNING PROPOSAL
Council has not been granted delegation to make the plan. Council has attempted to resolve the outstanding issues with Roads and Maritime Services and Transport for New South Wales, however no response has been received from either authority.
Given that Council does not have delegation to make the plan, it is recommended to forward the planning proposal to the Department of Planning and Environment to resolve the outstanding public authority concerns and to finalise the planning proposal.
CONCLUSION
The additional permitted use will facilitate a ‘seniors housing’ development on the subject site, comprising 446 ‘independent living units’ and a 144 bed ‘residential aged care facility’, as well as a range of facilities to meet the daily needs of residents.
The planning proposal was publicly exhibited and Council received 15 submissions. The submissions raised concerns relating to traffic generation, access to public transport, the height of the proposed buildings, impacts on adjacent dwellings such as overshadowing, loss of privacy and increased noise. As detailed in the report, the issues raised in submissions do not warrant any amendments to the planning proposal.
Despite being considered unnecessary and a duplication of existing investigations already completed, Roads and Maritime Services and Transport for New South Wales have not retracted their request for a traffic/transport plan to be prepared and as such, this remains as an outstanding objection to the planning proposal.
It is recommended that the planning proposal be forwarded to the Department of Planning and Environment for resolution of the outstanding public authority objections and finalisation.
IMPACTS Financial
This matter has no direct financial impact upon Council's adopted budget or forward estimates.
The Hills Future Community Strategic Plan
The planning proposal is consistent with the community strategic plan as it will deliver housing for seniors in a location with good access to services and public transport.
RECOMMENDATION
That the planning proposal to include seniors housing as an additional permitted use at 26-30 Norbrik Drive, Bella Vista be forwarded to the Department of Planning and Environment for finalisation.
ATTACHMENTS Nil.
ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL 09 AUGUST, 2016
PAGE 148 ITEM-8 HAWKESBURY RIVER COUNTY COUNCIL DELEGATE
DOC INFO
THEME: Proactive Leadership
OUTCOME: 3 Sound governance based on transparency and accountability.
STRATEGY: 3.1 Ensure Council is accountable to the community and meets legislative requirements and support Council’s elected representatives for their role in the community.
MEETING DATE: 9 AUGUST 2016 COUNCIL MEETING
GROUP: GENERAL MANAGER
AUTHOR:
MANAGER EXECUTIVE SERVICES AND PUBLIC OFFICER
PETER DOYLE
RESPONSIBLE OFFICER: GENERAL MANAGER DAVE WALKER
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The resignation of Andrew Jefferies from civic office now requires Council to elect a replacement delegate to represent The Hills Shire Council on Hawkesbury River County Council.
REPORT
The Hawkesbury River County Council (HRCC) was established in 1948 and has been administering the Noxious Weeds Act and controlling declared noxious weeds within the Hawkesbury/Nepean River catchment since that time.
Hawkesbury, Blacktown, Penrith and The Hills Shire Council each elect two (2) delegates to the Hawkesbury River County Council, a single purpose noxious weeds Council, after the quadrennial elections for the ensuing four (4) year term of Council. Those Councillors elected as delegates then elect a Chairperson.
The County Council currently meets at 6pm in the Hawkesbury River County Council Works Depot, South Windsor, during the even months on the second Thursday of the month, except where public holidays conflict.
Delegates that serve on the HRCC are paid an annual fee of $5,630 whilst the Chairperson is paid an annual fee of $10,270. Travelling claims are also met.
Since The Hills Shire Council is the only Council of the constituent Councils not having quadrennial elections in September, it is understood that the delegate that Council appoints at this meeting will represent Council until September, 2017 and after the 2017 elections The Hills Shire Council will determine who will be delegates for the remaining three years of the County Council’s term. This is to be confirmed at a later date.