ASSESSMENT UNIT

(1)

DEVELOPMENT

ASSESSMENT UNIT

Tuesday, 14 December 2021

T O ST R IV E F O R B E T T ER T H IN G S

(2)

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT UNIT MEETING 14 DECEMBER, 2021

PAGE 2

ITEM SUBJECT PAGE

ITEM-1 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 3

ITEM-2 DA 1553/2021/LD – TWO STOREY DWELLING AND RETAINING WALLS – LOT 280 DP 253060, NO. 5 BRADY PLACE KELLYVILLE

5

ITEM-3 DA 103/2022/HA – CONSTRUCTION OF A DETACHED SECONDARY DWELLING PURSUANT TO SEPP AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING 2009 - LOT 1 DP 552565, 2B HILDA ROAD, BAULKHAM HILLS

28

ITEM-4 DA 414/2020/HA/A – SECTION 4.55 (1A) MODIFICATION TO THE APPROVED DEMOLITION OF EXISTING STRUCTURES AND CONSTRUCTION OF A 110 PLACE CHILD CARE CENTRE WITH BASEMENT PARKING – LOT 1 AND LOT 2 DP 246630, 45-47 FISHBURN AVENUE CASTLE HILL

49

ITEM-5 DA 278/2021/LA/A – DIVISION 8.2 REVIEW OF DETERMINATION FOR A DETACHED GARAGE AND RETAINING WALLS - LOT 287 DP 1152852, NO. 7 CARDELL ROAD, KELLYVILLE

115

(3)

PAGE 3 MINUTES OF THE DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT UNIT MEETING HELD AT THE HILLS SHIRE COUNCIL ON TUESDAY, 7 DECEMBER 2021

PRESENT

Cameron McKenzie Group Manager – Development & Compliance (Chair) Ben Hawkins Manager – Subdivision & Development Certification Angelo Berios Manager – Environment & Health

Craig Woods Manager – Regulatory Services Paul Osborne Manager – Development Assessment Nicholas Carlton Manager – Forward Planning

Kristine McKenzie Principal Coordinator – Development Assessment APOLOGIES

NIL

CIRCULATED ELECTRONICALLY

ITEM-1 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES RESOLUTION

The Minutes of the Development Assessment Unit Meeting of Council held on 23 November 2021 be confirmed.

ITEM-2 DA 398/2022/LD – A TWO STOREY DWELLING, SWIMMING POOL AND RETAINING WALLS – LOT 2 DP 1261654, NO. 21 MELANIE PLACE, BELLA VISTA

PUBLIC NOTIFICATION OF THE DETERMINATION PURSUANT TO ITEM 20(2)(c) AND (d) OF SCHEDULE 1 OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING & ASSESSMENT ACT, 1979

DECISION

The Development Application was approved subject to the conditions outlined in the report with Condition 1 being amended and an additional Condition being added as follows:

Condition 1 being amended:

Development in Accordance with Submitted Plans (as amended)

The development being carried out in accordance with the approved plans and details submitted to Council, as amended in red, stamped and returned with this consent.

The amendments in red include: - Notation indicating retaining structures to be relocated clear of existing Right of Carriageway.

Additional condition (Prior to issue of Construction Certificate):

Works to be Clear of Existing Right of Carriageway

All proposed structures (excluding the driveway) shall be relocated clear of the existing Right of Carriageway which burdens the subject allotment.

(4)

PAGE 4 REASONS FOR THE DECISION

• Section 4.15 (1A) (EP&A Act) – Satisfactory.

• The Hills LEP 2019 – Satisfactory.

• DCP Part B Section 1 – Residential – Variation – Satisfactory.

HOW COMMUNITY VIEWS WERE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN MAKING THE DECISION Notification letters were issued to adjoining properties over 14 days. Three submissions were received. The issues raised in the submissions were addressed in the report.

NOTE

A further submission from an objector was received. The submission was tabled and considered by the Panel.

END MINUTES

(5)

PAGE 5 ITEM-2 DA 1553/2021/LD – TWO STOREY DWELLING AND

RETAINING WALLS – LOT 280 DP 253060, NO. 5 BRADY PLACE KELLYVILLE

THEME: Shaping Growth

OUTCOME: 5 Well planned and liveable neighbourhoods that meets growth targets and maintains amenity.

STRATEGY: 5.1 The Shire’s natural and built environment is well managed through strategic land use and urban planning that reflects our values and aspirations.

MEETING DATE: 14 DECEMBER 2021

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT UNIT

AUTHOR: SENIOR TOWN PLANNER

EAMON MURPHY

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER: PRINCIPAL COORDINATOR KRISTINE MCKENZIE

Applicant Metricon Homes Notification 14 days

Number Advised 10 Number of Submissions Three

Zoning R2 Low Density Residential

Site Area 732m²

List of all relevant s4.15(1)(a)

matters Section 4.15 (EP&A Act) – Satisfactory LEP 2019 – Satisfactory

SEPP (BASIX) 2004 – Satisfactory

DCP Part B Section 2 Residential – Variations required, see report.

Section 7.12 Contribution: $7,499.80 Political Donation None Disclosed

Reasons for Referral to DAU 1. Variations to DCP 2. Submissions received.

Recommendation Approval subject to conditions.

(6)

PAGE 6 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Development Application is for the construction of a two storey dwelling and retaining walls. The proposed dwelling includes five bedrooms and a double garage.

The proposal includes variations to the front set back and fill requirements of DCP Part B Section 2 Residential. The proposed front set back of 8m to the building and 5.946m to the porch/balcony is a variation to the DCP requirement of 10m. The proposed set backs are considered reasonable having regard to the irregular shape of the lot, the cul-de-sac street frontage layout and its set back of the dwelling across the street which has a similar shaped lot. The maximum proposed fill is approximately 1.1m which exceeds the DCP requirement of 600mm. The variation is supported as it will not result in impacts to amenity.

The application was notified for 14 days and three submissions from two properties were received. The issues raised primarily relate to view loss, height, scale and design of dwelling, front setback, traffic and noise impacts during the construction period. The proposal is considered to be satisfactory in terms of its design and location and will not unreasonably impact on the amenity of adjoining property owners.

The Development Application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

BACKGROUND

The Development Application was lodged on 29 April 2021. The proposal was notified for 14 days and three submissions from two properties were received.

A letter was sent to the applicant on 24 May 2021 requesting the submission of additional information and details to address the front setback variation, drainage easement requirements and stormwater management.

Additional information was received from the applicant on 23 June 2021. The information included evidence of negotiations with two downstream properties with respect to a proposed drainage easement through their respective properties, and amended plans increasing the building setback from 7m to 8m.

Further additional information, including an amended stormwater plan with a proposed absorption trench, was submitted by the applicant on 1 July 2021.

A letter was sent to the applicant on 22 July 2021 requesting further information with respect to soil conditions for the proposed absorption trench.

Additional information in relation to engineering matters was submitted by the applicant on 18 October 2021.

A further letter was sent to the applicant on 29 October 2021 requesting outstanding information relating to engineering matters. An updated landscape plan consistent with the amended architectural plans was also requested.

On 9 November 2021 the applicant submitted amended plans and additional information to address the outstanding matters.

(7)

PAGE 7 On 21 November the applicant sent an email to Council staff requesting a change to a ground floor side window. Council staff responded and advised the change is considered minor and could be included in the proposal.

Amended plans were submitted by the applicant on 22 November 2021.

PROPOSAL

The Development Application is for the construction of a two storey dwelling and associated retaining walls.

The proposed two storey dwelling includes five bedrooms and a double garage.

The proposed dwelling will be constructed of a mixture of rendered and cladded elements, both in a light brown/grey colour, colorbond monument window frames, and a tiled roof with dark brown coloured tiles.

ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION

1. Compliance with DCP Part B Section 2 – Residential

The proposal has been assessed against the relevant requirements of the DCP. The proposal achieves compliance with the DCP with the exception of the following:

DEVELOPMENT

CONTROL DCP

REQUIREMENTS PROPOSED

DEVELOPMENT COMPLIANCE Front Setback 10m

Where the predominant setback pattern of the street exceeds the above requirements, the setbacks of three (3) adjoining dwellings either side of the proposed dwelling will apply.

5.946m to the porch and balcony, 8m to the main wall of the dwelling and 10.24m to the garage.

No, however the proposed front setback will not result in adverse streetscape

impacts.

Cut and Fill Maximum 600mm of filling without a concealed dropped edge beam.

Maximum of 1.5 metres with a concealed dropped edge beam.

Proposed fill of approx.

566mm contained within a deepened edge beam (DEB) at the alfresco/outdoor room area.

External fill at the northern side of the dwelling, adjacent to the garage, of approximately 1.1m. The fill of 1.1m is approximately 3m from the northern boundary and batters

No, however the proposed fill is considered

satisfactory given the location of the works.

(8)

PAGE 8 DEVELOPMENT

CONTROL DCP

DEVELOPMENT COMPLIANCE down to natural ground

level.

No fill is proposed on the boundary.

a) Front Setback

The DCP requires a minimum front setback of 10 metres. The proposal has a front setback of 5.946m to the porch and balcony, 8m to the main wall of the dwelling and 10.24m to the garage. Attachment 3 shows the proposed front setbacks.

The applicant has provided the following justification for the setback:

The proposed dwelling house has a primary street frontage setback of 8m to the building line and 5.946m to the portico. While the proposed dwelling does not comply with the minimum required primary road setback of 10m, noting the irregular curved shape of the allotment and cu-de-sac street frontage layout, the proposed front setback variation is considered to be appropriate for the subject site.

The adjoining properties are setback at 7.6m and 11m, which results on an average front setback of 9.4m. The average front setback of the streetscape is seen to be approximately 9.6m as per survey provided however, the allotment directly across Brady Place has a dwelling house setback at 8.3m from the property boundary, which is the allotment with most similar shape and buildable area when comparing the subject lot with the lots within the streetscape. The dwelling adjoining the subject site is setback at approximately 7.6m however, due the allotment alignment, this dwelling and the existing vegetation along the shared boundary protrude in front of the existing, and new proposed dwelling and therefore the new proposed dwelling won’t be seen as adversely impacting the amenity of the streetscape.

The new proposed building is to be setback at 8m from the nearest point on the road boundary and 18m from the furthest point. Hence, if the subject allotment did not have a curved frontage due to the cul-de-sac nature of the road, the proposed dwelling would fully comply with the front setback requirements.

Given these facts, it is asserted that the proposed dwelling will not adversely impact on the streetscape noting the visually interesting façade and provided setback distances to the rest of the dwelling and garage. It is asserted that the dwelling will sit well within the locality and be consistent with the predominant built form of the surrounding area noting the proposed setback of the adjoining property at 3 Brady Place and the existing vegetation to remain at the shared boundary which is seen to provide further relieve in how the building is presented to the street and adjoining properties. Due to the above-mentioned planning grounds, this proposal warrants favourable consideration from Council. Accordingly, Council’s agreement is sought to the proposed variation in regards to the minimum required front setback for the subject site.

Comment:

The relevant objectives of the DCP are:

(9)

PAGE 9 (i) To provide setbacks that complements the streetscape and protects the privacy and

sunlight to adjacent dwellings in accordance with ESD objective 7.

(ii) To ensure that new development is sensitive to the landscape setting, site constraints and desired future character of the street and locality.

(iii) To ensure that the appearance of new development is of a high visual quality and enhances the streetscape.

The application does not meet the DCP front setback requirements however the proposed setback satisfies the relevant objectives of the DCP. In this regard the proposal will not unreasonably impact on the streetscape, privacy or solar impacts to adjoining properties.

The proposal is also considered satisfactory as the proposal provides appropriate side and rear setbacks. In this regard the DCP requires a 900mm side setback, 4m rear setback to the ground floor and 6m rear setback to the first floor. The proposal has side setbacks of 940mm (to the southern side boundary), 4.216m (to the northern side boundary) and a rear setback of 4m to the ground floor and 6m to the first floor.

It is also noted that the proposed garage has a compliant front setback 10.24m.

The existing front setback of No. 5 Brady Place is approximately 9.1m.

The front setbacks of three adjoining dwellings are as follows:

• No. 3 Brady Place: Approx. 1.8m to carport, a nil setback to the awning and 7.6m to dwelling.

• No. 7 Brady Place: Approx. 9m

• No. 9 Brady Place: Approx. 9m

• No. 11 Brady Place: Approx. 9.1m

It is also noted that No. 12 Brady Place (opposite) has a front setback of approximately 8.3m.

Given the curved frontage, irregular rear boundary and the location within a cul-de-sac, the front setback is considered reasonable given the existing streetscape pattern and the variation will not adversely impact on the surrounding area.

The proposal is not considered to result in any unreasonable impact beyond that of a compliant development and is therefore considered a suitable outcome for the site.

The proposed front setback is therefore considered satisfactory in this instance.

b) Fill

The DCP permits a maximum 600mm fill. The proposal is for approximately 1.1m external fill at the northern side of the lot adjacent to the garage. Attachment 4 shows the location of the fill variation.

The applicant has provided the following justification for the variation:

(10)

PAGE 10 The proposed dwelling house is to be established within the building platform of the existing dwelling house and therefore there is a small amount of cut and fill proposed to complement the building platform of the existing dwelling house with the proposed earthworks not having a detrimental impact on the surrounding land. The proposed building siting and design considers the topography of the site and the pre-existent building platform, with a small amount of cut and fill proposed to complement the building platform (maximum of 0.5m cut and 1.1m fill). A split-level design is proposed to minimise the amount of proposed earthworks.

The proposed earthworks are supported by structural engineering details and will not have a detrimental impact on the surrounding land. Appropriate measures will be but in place to ensure there will be no negative impacts to adjoining properties and to the environment.

Comment:

The relevant objective of the DCP is:

To ensure that dwellings are designed with regard to site conditions and minimise the impact on landform.

The proposed dwelling does not comply with the maximum fill controls due to the slope and topography of the subject site, particularly at the northern side of the lot where the land slopes towards the rear boundary.

It is considered that the development satisfies the relevant objectives of DCP in that the dwelling is designed to site conditions and does not result in any impacts to landform. The proposed fill is to the northern side of the site where the land falls about a 1m over a short distance. The non-compliance in regard to fill will not result in any additional amenity impacts and will not have a detrimental impact on the streetscape and character of the neighbourhood.

The external fill of approximately 1.1m is at the northern side of the dwelling, adjacent to the garage, and is approximately 3m from the northern boundary and batters down to natural ground level.

It is considered that the dwelling has been designed with regard to the constrained site conditions by use of a split level design and by containing fill at the rear outdoor alfresco area within the building footprint.

It is considered that the proposed development is consistent with the relevant objectives of DCP Part B Section 2 – Residential and the proposed variation can be supported.

2. Issues Raised in Submissions

The proposal was notified for 14 days and three submissions were received. The issues raised in the submissions are summarised below.

ISSUE/OBJECTION COMMENT

A double storey pitched roof home will adversely impact my mental health.

To assist maintaining good mental health, I enjoy taking in the filtered mountain views from my home office (lower level of my home) and balcony (upper level) whilst undertaking various employer sponsored health and wellbeing programs and

The request to amend the design and/or reduce the height of the proposed dwelling due to view loss is not considered necessary and does not warrant amendments to the proposal.

The maximum height controls for the site and surrounding area is 9m under LEP 2019. The proposed dwelling has a maximum height of 8.944m.

(11)

PAGE 11

exercises which includes Yoga and Meditation.

We have resided at our home for 18 years and in that time have truly enjoyed the vista from our front outlook. It was a key buying feature when we purchased here.

Our home is situated in the eye of the cul- de-sac and looks directly towards and over the applicant's property. Our home faces north-west and enjoys views of the horizon which includes the Blue Mountains.

Our complaint also includes the proposed loss of our treasured aspect onto the Blue Mountains. This is the main key drawback to us and will be a bitter pill to swallow.

Should Hills Council approve this DA, I would propose a flat roof construction to minimise the loss of views.

The two storey design of the dwelling is consistent with other dwellings in the immediate locality.

The application and subsequent submissions over loss of views was considered by reviewing the relevant Planning Principles which relate to assessment of view impacts. The judgement in Tenacity Consulting v Warringah (2004) NSWLEC 140 sets down four steps that should be undertaken to reach a decision whether a view impact is reasonable (see comments below).

The proposed facade of the home is not in keeping with the architecture and streetscape of Brady Place which was built in the late 1970's - early 1980's.

What we do oppose is the massive size this proposal encompasses which is totally out of sync with the other homes in the street.

The proposed external design of the dwelling is modern in character. The area is older in nature and may be described as one which will be likely to undergo redevelopment of older housing stock in the future.

The proposal complies with the LEP 2019 height limit and DCP requirements relating to site coverage, landscaping and side and rear setbacks.

It appears that the proposed house is going to be much closer to the street than any other house in Brady Place. All are (currently) set back substantially from the footpath. If this application is passed and the dwelling is built, it will be very different to the remaining dozen homes in Brady Place and practically border the council kerbside. This will totally change the overall aspect of our small cul-de-sac and threaten to change the village appeal of our little street.

Their frontage makes our streetscape unappealing and as a result will impact the value and selling of my home.

The proposal includes a variation to the front setback requirements under the DCP which are addressed above in Section 1 above.

Property valuation is not an issue for consideration under Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979.

My husband works from home and the noise of the construction will impact his ability to conduct his duties as he deals with all his clients via zoom and phone

Conditions of consent have been recommended requiring work to be carried out during Council’s standard construction hours, 7am – 5pm Monday

(12)

PAGE 12

calls. His inability to work productively will impact his mental health and well-being and that in turn will affect my family as the stress will be transferred to our daily life.

Concerns also raised about weekend construction.

to Saturday (See Condition 20.)

However, it is noted that under current State Government legislation, due to the Covid-19 pandemic, construction work including building and demolitions, may be undertaken on Saturdays, Sundays, and public holidays. This was originally brought in place for 6 months in April 2020 and has been extended a number of times;

the current order is in place until 24 December 2021. This legislation, if extended again would override Council’s standard construction hour’s policy.

However this is not a sufficient reason for refusal of the application.

Concerns raised about increased parking

and traffic during construction period. It is however expected that a temporary increase in the level of traffic and on-street parking may occur during the construction period.

Will waste and recycle bins be provided to eliminate food and wrapper waste from workers?

A waste management plan was submitted with the application and a condition has been recommended which addresses waste during the construction period from workers. (See Condition 9.)

3. View Loss Planning Principles

The application and subsequent submissions over loss of views was considered by reviewing the relevant Land and Environment Court Planning Principle which relate to assessment of view impacts.

The judgement in Tenacity Consulting v Warringah (2004) NSWLEC 140 sets down four steps that should be undertaken to reach a decision whether a view impact is reasonable.

The four steps are as follows:

1. How iconic, significant and valued are the views in question, is it a whole or partial view and the actual distance to the place being viewed.

The views from the objector’s homes to The Blue Mountains are not considered significant as The Blue Mountains are a considerable distance (approximately 30 kilometres to the base of The Blue Mountains) from the objector’s properties. The views are also partial views.

2. How reasonable is it to expect to retain those views. Views from side boundaries are more difficult to protect than views from front boundaries. Is the view enjoyed from standing or sitting down?

The views in question are principally from the front boundaries of two neighbouring properties.

The objectors advise they enjoy the views from a ground floor room (office), front verandah and an upper floor balcony. It would not be reasonable to expect to retain those views given

(13)

PAGE 13 the urban context and setting, where it is noted two storey dwellings are permissible and the proposal complies with the maximum height control under LEP 2019.

3. Extent of impact. Assess for the whole of the property. For example, views are considered more significant from living areas than bedrooms or service areas (although service areas such as kitchens can be considered valued if occupants spend a lot of time in them). Assessing whether the view loss is negligible, minor, moderate, severe or devastating.

The views in question are from a ground floor room (office), front verandah and upper floor (balcony). The extent of view loss is considered minor in these circumstances.

4. Assess the reasonableness of the proposal that is causing the impact. If the development complies with all planning controls then this is considered more reasonable than one that breaches them. If the obstruction of views arise as a result of a non-compliance of a planning control, then the impact, even a moderate impact, is considered unreasonable.

If it all complies, the question should be asked whether a more skilful design could provide the applicant with the same development potential and amenity and reduce the impact on the views of neighbours. If no, then the view as a result of a complying development would be considered reasonable and the sharing of the view acceptable.

In many cases residents obtain views as a result of an adjoining site being developed to a level below its potential. This is the case with this application. The existing dwelling on the subject lot is a single storey dwelling and had not previously been developed to its full potential, i.e. to the maximum height allowed. The proposal for a two storey dwelling complies with the height and all other relevant controls for that lot (with the exception of variations to the front setback and maximum fill, which if fully complied with, would not alter the proposal in terms of the obstruction of views). A redesign of the dwelling to reduce the impacts of the view obstruction is unreasonable and could not be achieved without making significant changes to the upper floor layout.

Comment

In addition to the consideration of the planning principles, the proposal has also been assessed against the requirements of DCP Part B Section 2 Residential and it complies with all relevant controls with the exception of variations to the front setback and maximum fill which are addressed above. The proposal is considered to be compatible with the existing character of the area and is therefore supported. The objection relating to loss of views to the Blue Mountains is not warranted and accordingly the proposal is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

4. Internal Referrals

The application was referred to following sections of Council:

• Section 7.12 Contributions

• Engineering

No objection was raised to the proposal subject to conditions.

(14)

PAGE 14 CONCLUSION

The Development Application has been assessed against the relevant heads of consideration under Section 4.15 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, The Hills Local Environmental Plan 2019 and The Hills Development Control Plan 2012 and is considered satisfactory. The issues raised in the submissions have been addressed in the report and do not warrant refusal of the application.

Approval is recommended subject to conditions.

IMPACTS Financial

This matter has no direct financial impact upon Council's adopted budget or forward estimates.

The Hills Future Community Strategic Plan

The proposed development is consistent with the planning principles, vision and objectives outlined within “Hills 2026 – Looking Towards the Future” as the proposed development provides for satisfactory urban growth without adverse environmental or social amenity impacts and ensures a consistent built form is provided with respect to the streetscape and general locality.

RECOMMENDATION

The Development Application be approved subject to the following conditions:

GENERAL MATTERS

1. Development in Accordance with Submitted Plans

The development being carried out in accordance with the following approved plans and details, stamped and returned with this consent except where amended by other conditions of consent.

REFERENCED PLANS AND DOCUMENTS

DESCRIPTION SHEET REVISION DATE

Site Plan 01 - 05/11/2020

Ground Floor Plan 02 J 05/11/2020

First Floor Plan 03 J 05/11/2020

Elevations 04 J 05/11/2020

Elevations 05 J 05/11/2020

Section 06 J 05/11/2020

Landscape Plan - C 08/11/2021

External Colour and Material Schedule - - 24/02/2021

(15)

PAGE 15 No work (including excavation, land fill or earth reshaping) shall be undertaken prior to the issue of the Construction Certificate, where a Construction Certificate is required.

2. External Finishes

External finishes and colours shall be in accordance with the details submitted with the development application and approved with this consent.

3. Vehicular Crossing Request

The driveway requires the lodgement of a separate vehicular crossing request accompanied by the applicable fee as per Council’s Schedule of Fees and Charges. The vehicular crossing request must be lodged before an Occupation Certificate is issued. The vehicular crossing request must nominate a contractor and be accompanied by a copy of their current public liability insurance policy. Do not lodge the vehicular crossing request until the contactor is known and the driveway is going to be constructed.

4. Minor Engineering Works

The design and construction of the engineering works listed below must be provided for in accordance with Council’s Design Guidelines Subdivisions/ Developments and Works Specifications Subdivisions/ Developments.

Works within an existing or proposed public road, or works within an existing or proposed public reserve can only be approved, inspected and certified by Council. The application form for a minor engineering works approval is available on Council’s website and the application and inspection fees payable are included in Council’s Schedule of Fees and Charges.

a) Driveway Requirements

The design, finish, gradient and location of all driveway crossings must comply with the above documents and Council’s Driveway Specifications.

The proposed driveway/s must be built to Council’s residential standard.

A separate vehicular crossing request fee is payable as per Council’s Schedule of Fees and Charges.

b) Disused Layback/ Driveway Removal

All disused laybacks and driveways must be removed and replaced with kerb and gutter together with the restoration and turfing of the adjoining footpath verge area. Specifically, this includes the removal of any existing laybacks, regardless of whether they were in use beforehand or not.

c) Footpath Verge Formation

The grading, trimming, topsoiling and turfing of the footpath verge fronting the development site is required to ensure a gradient between 2% and 4% falling from the boundary to the top of kerb is provided. This work must include the construction of any retaining walls necessary to ensure complying grades within the footpath verge area. All retaining walls and associated footings must be contained wholly within the subject site. Any necessary adjustment or relocation of services is also required, to the requirements of the relevant service authority. All service pits and lids must match the finished surface level.

d) Site Storm water Drainage

The entire site area must be graded, collected and drained by pits and pipes to a suitable point of legal discharge.

e) Earthworks/ Site Regrading

Earthworks and retaining walls are limited to those locations and heights shown on the concept engineering plan prepared by Metricon Job Number 714749. Where earthworks are not shown on the approved plan the topsoil within lots must not be disturbed.

(16)

PAGE 16 5. Construction Certificate

Prior to construction of the approved development, it is necessary to obtain a Construction Certificate. A Construction Certificate may be issued by Council or a Registered Certifier.

Plans submitted with the Construction Certificate are to be amended to incorporate the conditions of the Development Consent.

6. Building Work to be in Accordance with BCA

All building work must be carried out in accordance with the provisions of the Building Code of Australia.

7. Air Conditioner Location

The air-conditioning unit location is to be as shown on the approved plans or is to comply with the criteria of exempt development as outlined in the SEPP - Exempt & Complying

Development Codes 2008.

You are reminded that the air conditioning must be designed so as not to operate:

• Between 7am and 10pm — at a noise level that exceeds 5 dB(A) above the ambient background noise level measured at any property boundary, or

• Between 10pm and 7am — at a noise level that is audible in habitable rooms of adjoining residences.

8. Adherence to Waste Management Plan

All requirements of the Waste Management Plan submitted as part of the Development Application must be implemented except where contrary to other conditions of consent. The information submitted regarding construction and demolition wastes can change provided that the same or a greater level of reuse and recycling is achieved as detailed in the plan. Any material moved offsite is to be transported in accordance with the requirements of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and only to a place that can lawfully be used as a waste facility. Receipts of all waste/recycling tipping must be kept onsite at all times and produced in a legible form to any authorised officer of the Council who asks to see them.

Transporters of asbestos waste (of any load over 100kg of asbestos waste or 10 square metres or more of asbestos sheeting) must provide information to the NSW EPA regarding the movement of waste using their WasteLocate online reporting tool

www.wastelocate.epa.nsw.gov.au.

9. Management of Construction and/or Demolition Waste

Waste materials must be appropriately stored and secured within a designated waste area onsite at all times, prior to its reuse onsite or being sent offsite. This includes waste materials such as paper and containers which must not litter the site or leave the site onto neighbouring public or private property. A separate dedicated bin must be provided onsite by the builder for the disposal of waste materials such as paper, containers and food scraps generated by all workers. Building waste containers are not permitted to be placed on public property at any time unless a separate application is approved by Council to locate a building waste container in a public place.

Any material moved offsite is to be transported in accordance with the requirements of the Protection of the Environment Operations Act 1997 and only to a place that can lawfully be used as a waste facility. The separation and recycling of the following waste materials is required: metals, timber, masonry products and clean waste plasterboard. This can be achieved by source separation onsite, that is, a bin for metal waste, a bin for timber, a bin for bricks and so on. Alternatively, mixed waste may be stored in one or more bins and sent to a waste contractor or transfer/sorting station that will sort the waste on their premises for recycling. Receipts of all waste/recycling tipping must be kept onsite at all times and produced in a legible form to any authorised officer of the Council who asks to see them.

(17)

PAGE 17 10. Commencement of Domestic Waste Service

A domestic waste service must be commenced with Council and its Contractor. The service must be arranged no earlier than two days prior to occupancy and no later than seven days after occupancy of the development. All requirements of Council’s domestic waste management service must be complied with at all times. Contact Council’s Resource Recovery Team on (02) 9843 0310 to commence a domestic waste service.

11. Earthworks (Cut and Fill)

Earthworks are to be confined within the area shown on the site plan, landscape plan and elevation plans and that no earthworks (cut or fill) are to extend to any boundaries (with the exception of the two walls offset 200mm from the southern boundary), which are to remain at Natural Ground Level (NGL).

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE 12. Section 7.12 Contribution

Pursuant to section 4.17 (1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and The Hills Section 7.12 Contributions Plan, a contribution of $7,499.80 shall be paid to Council.

This amount is to be adjusted at the time of the actual payment in accordance with the provisions of the Hills Section 7.12 Contributions Plan.

You are advised that the maximum percentage of the levy for development under section 7.12 of the Act having a proposed construction cost is within the range specified in the table below;

Proposed cost of the development Maximum percentage of the levy

Up to $100,000 Nil

$100,001 - $200,000 0.5 %

More than $200,000 1%

PRIOR TO WORK COMMENCING ON THE SITE 13. Sydney Water Building Plan Approval

A building plan approval must be obtained from Sydney Water Tap in™ to ensure that the approved development will not impact Sydney Water infrastructure.

A copy of the building plan approval and receipt from Sydney Water Tap in™ (if not already provided) must be submitted to the Principal Certifier upon request prior to works

commencing.

Please refer to the website http://www.sydneywater.com.au/tapin/index.htm, Sydney Water Tap in™, or telephone 13 20 92.

14. Management of Building Sites

The erection of suitable fencing or other measures to restrict public access to the site and building works, materials or equipment when the building work is not in progress or the site is otherwise unoccupied.

The erection of a sign, in a prominent position, stating that unauthorised entry to the site is not permitted and giving an afterhours contact name and telephone number.

15. Consultation with Service Authorities

Applicants are advised to consult with Telstra, NBN Co and Australia Post regarding the installation of telephone conduits, broadband connections and letterboxes as required.

Unimpeded access must be available to the electricity supply authority, during and after building, to the electricity meters and metering equipment.

(18)

PAGE 18 16. Approved Temporary Closet

An approved temporary closet connected to the sewers of Sydney Water, or alternatively an approved chemical closet is to be provided on the land, prior to building operations being commenced.

17. Erosion and Sedimentation Controls

Erosion and sedimentation controls shall be in place prior to the commencement of site works;

and maintained throughout construction activities until the site is landscaped and/or suitably revegetated. The controls shall be in accordance with the details approved by Council and/or as directed by Council Officers. These requirements shall be in accordance with Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction produced by the NSW Department of Housing (Blue Book).

18. Stabilised Access Point

A stabilised all weather access point is to be provided prior to commencement of site works, and maintained throughout construction activities until the site is stabilised. The controls shall be in accordance with the requirements with the details approved by Council and/or as directed by Council Officers. These requirements shall be in accordance with Managing Urban Stormwater – Soils and Construction produced by the NSW Department of Housing (Blue Book).

19. Details and Signage - Principal Contractor and Principal Certifier Details

Prior to work commencing, submit to the Principal Certifier notification in writing of the principal contractor’s (builder) name, address, phone number, email address and licence number.

No later than two days before work commences, Council is to have received written details of the Principal Certifier in accordance with Clause 103 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000.

Signage

A sign is to be erected in accordance with Clause 98A(2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000. The sign is to be erected in a prominent position and show – a) the name, address and phone number of the Principal Certifier for the work,

b) the name and out of working hours contact phone number of the principal contractor/person responsible for the work.

The sign must state that unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited.

DURING CONSTRUCTION 20. Hours of Work

Work on the project to be limited to the following hours: - Monday to Saturday - 7.00am to 5.00pm;

No work to be carried out on Sunday or Public Holidays.

The builder/contractor shall be responsible to instruct and control sub-contractors regarding the hours of work.

21. Roof Water Drainage

(19)

PAGE 19 Gutter and downpipes are to be provided and connected to an approved drainage system upon installation of the roof covering.

22. Survey Report and Site Sketch

A survey report and site sketch signed and dated (including contact details) by the registered land surveyor may be requested by the Principal Certifier during construction. The survey shall confirm the location of the building/structure in relation to all boundaries and/or levels.

As of September 2018 the validity of surveys has been restricted by legislation to 2 years after issue.

23. Compliance with BASIX Certificate

Under clause 97A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000, it is a condition of this Development Consent that all commitments listed in BASIX Certificate No.1261024S is to be complied with. Any subsequent version of this BASIX Certificate will supersede all previous versions of the certificate.

24. Critical Stage Inspections and Inspections Nominated by the Principal Certifier Section 6.6 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 requires critical stage inspections to be carried out for building work as prescribed by Clause 162A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000. Prior to allowing building works to commence the Principal Certifier must give notice of these inspections pursuant to Clause 103A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation 2000.

An Occupation Certificate cannot be issued and the building may not be able to be used or occupied where any mandatory critical stage inspection or other inspection required by the Principal Certifier is not carried out. Inspections can only be carried out by the Principal Certifier unless agreed to by the Principal Certifier beforehand and subject to that person being a registered certifier.

25. Landscaping Works

Landscaping works, associated plantings and the construction of any retaining walls are to be undertaken generally in accordance with the approved plans.

26. Dust Control

The emission of dust must be controlled to minimise nuisance to the occupants of the surrounding premises. In the absence of any alternative measures, the following measures must be taken to control the emission of dust:

• Dust screens must be erected around the perimeter of the site and be kept in good repair for the duration of the construction work;

• All dusty surfaces must be wet down and suppressed by means of a fine water spray.

Water used for dust suppression must not cause water pollution; and

• All stockpiles of materials that are likely to generate dust must be kept damp or covered.

PRIOR TO ISSUE OF AN OCCUPATION CERTIFICATE 27. Retaining Walls

All retaining walls shown on the approved plans shall be completed prior to the issue of a

“Whole” Occupation Certificate.

THE USE OF THE SITE

28. Maintenance of Landscaping Works

The landscaping works, associated plantings and construction of retaining walls are to be effectively maintained at all times and throughout the life of the development.

(20)

PAGE 20 ATTACHMENTS

1. Locality Plan 2. Aerial Photograph 3. Site Plan

4. Elevations 5. Landscape Plan

6. External Colour and Material Schedule

(21)

PAGE 21 ATTACHMENT 1 – LOCALITY PLAN

(22)

PAGE 22 ATTACHMENT 2 – AERIAL PHOTOGRAPH

(23)

PAGE 23 ATTACHMENT 3 – SITE PLAN

(24)

PAGE 24 ATTACHMENT 4 – ELEVATIONS

(25)

PAGE 25

(26)

PAGE 26 ATTACHMENT 5 – LANDSCAPE PLAN

(27)

PAGE 27 ATTACHMENT 6 – EXTERNAL COLOUR AND MATERIAL SCHEDULE

(28)

PAGE 28

ITEM-3 DA 103/2022/HA – CONSTRUCTION OF A DETACHED

SECONDARY DWELLING PURSUANT TO SEPP AFFORDABLE RENTAL HOUSING 2009 - LOT 1 DP 552565, 2B HILDA ROAD, BAULKHAM HILLS

THEME: Shaping Growth

OUTCOME: 5 Well planned and liveable neighbourhoods that meets growth targets and maintains amenity.

STRATEGY: 5.1 The Shire’s natural and built environment is well managed through strategic land use and urban planning that reflects our values and aspirations.

MEETING DATE: 14 DECEMBER 2021

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT UNIT

AUTHOR: SENIOR TOWN PLANNER

MADISON MORRIS

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER: MANAGER – DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT PAUL OSBORNE

Applicant Granny Flat Solutions Pty Ltd Notification 14 days

Number Advised Eight

Number of Submissions Six (from five properties) Zoning R2 Low Density Residential

Site Area 695m²

List of all relevant s4.15(1)(a)

matters EP&A Act 1979 (Section 4.15) – Satisfactory.

SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 – Satisfactory.

SEPP BASIX 2004 – Satisfactory.

LEP 2019 – Satisfactory.

DCP 2012 Part B Section 2 – Residential – Satisfactory – Variation, see report.

Section 7.12 Contribution: $759.12 Political Donation None Disclosed

Reason for Referral to DAU 1. Variation to DCP 2. Submissions received.

Recommendation Approval subject to conditions

(29)

PAGE 29 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Development Application is for a single storey detached secondary dwelling pusuant to State Environmental Planning Policy (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009. The removal of two trees are required to facilite the development.

A merit based assessment has been undertaken against the relevant provisions of Development Control Plan Part B Section 2 – Residential. Whilst there are no specific requirements within the DCP which relate to secondary dwellings, the DCP limits rear setbacks of single storey dwellings to 4m. The proposal includes a rear setback of 1m to the southern boundary. The setback is considered reasonable given that the proposal does not result in unreasonable amenity impacts to adjoining properties.

The application was notified for 14 days to adjoining property owners and six submissions were received. The issues raised primarily relate to the use as a secondary dwelling, rear setback variation, privacy concerns and tree removal.

The application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

BACKGROUND

The subject application was lodged on 15 July 2021. The application was notified to adjoninig properties between 16 July 2021 and 9 August 2021. Six submissions were received during this time.

PROPOSAL

The Development Application is for a single storey detached secondary to the rear of an existing dwelling. The secondary dwelling will contain 2 bedrooms, open kitchen/living area, and porch to the eastern elevation.

Two trees are proposed for removal to faciliate the development. Tree 1 Musa acuminata is an exempt species and Tree 2 Melaleuca quinquenervia will be subject to major encroachment from the proposed dwelling.

ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION

1. Compliance with SEPP (Affordable Rental Housing) 2009 The SEPP defines a secondary dwelling as follows:

secondary dwelling means a self-contained dwelling that:

(a) is established in conjunction with another dwelling (the principal dwelling), and

(b) is on the same lot of land (not being an individual lot in a strata plan or community title scheme) as the principal dwelling, and

(c) is located within, or is attached to, or is separate from, the principal dwelling.

The proposal complies with this definition. A secondary dwelling is permitted on the site as per Clause 22 (1) of SEPP (ARH) 2009.

(30)

PAGE 30 Division 2 of the SEPP provides the relevant controls for secondary dwellings. The following addresses the controls of the SEPP relevant to the subject proposal:

CLAUSE REQUIRED PROVIDED COMPLIANCE

20 Land to which Division Applies

This Division applies to land within any of the following land use zones or within a land use zone that is equivalent to any of those zones, but only if development for the purposes of a dwelling house is permissible on the land –

(a) Zone R1 General Residential,

(b) Zone R2 Low Density Residential,

(c) Zone R3 Medium Density Residential,

(d) Zone R4 High Density Residential,

(e) Zone R5 Large Lot Residential.

Satisfactory - Subject site is zoned R2 Low Density Residential and a dwelling house is permissible with consent within the zone.

Yes

21 Development

to which Division Applies

This Division applies to development, on land to which this Division applies, for the purposes of a secondary dwelling and ancillary development (within the meaning of Schedule 1).

Satisfactory – proposal complies with definition.

Yes

22 Development May Be Carried

Out With Consent

(1) Development to which this Division applies may be carried out with consent.

Satisfactory Yes

(2) A consent authority must not consent to development to which this Division applies if there is on the land, or if the development would result in there being on the land, any dwelling other than the principal dwelling and the secondary dwelling.

Primary Dwelling = 1 Secondary Dwelling

= 1

Yes

(3) A consent authority must not consent to development to which this Division applies unless –

a) the total floor area of the principal dwelling and the secondary dwelling is no more than the maximum floor area allowed for a dwelling house on the land

under another Satisfactory

No floor space ratio applicable to the site Allowable = 60m² Proposed = 60m²

Yes

(31)

PAGE 31 environmental planning

instrument, and

b) the total floor area of the secondary dwelling is no more than 60 square metres or, if a greater floor area is permitted in respect of a secondary dwelling on the land under another environmental planning instrument, that greater floor area.

(4) A consent authority must not refuse consent to development to which this Division applies on either of the following grounds—

a) site area

if— (i) the secondary dwelling is located within, or is attached to, the principal dwelling, or (ii) the site area is at least 450 square metres,

b) parking

if no additional parking is to be provided on the site.

Satisfactory Site Area = 695m² Parking proposed = 1 existing

Yes

(5) A consent authority may consent to development to which this Division applies whether or not the development complies with the standards set out in subclause (4).

Noted N/A

24 No

Subdivision A consent authority must not consent to a development application that would result in any subdivision of a lot on which development for the purposes of a secondary dwelling has been carried out under this Division.

Satisfactory – No subdivision

proposed

Yes

2. Compliance with The Hills Local Environmental Plan 2019 (i) LEP 2019 Zone Objectives

The site is zoned R2 Low Density Residential under LEP 2019. The objectives of the zone are as follows:

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

(32)

PAGE 32

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

• To maintain the existing low density residential character of the area.

The proposal is considered to be consistent with the stated objectives of the zone, in that the proposal will provide for the housing needs of the community and maintain the existing low density residential character of the area.

(ii) LEP 2019 - Development Standards

The following addresses the principal development standards of the LEP relevant to the subject proposal:

CLAUSE REQUIRED PROVIDED COMPLIES

4.3 Height of

Buildings Maximum 9m 4m Yes

3. Compliance with DCP Part B Section 2 Residential

The proposal has been assessed against the provisions of DCP Part B Section 2 – Residential and achieves compliance with the relevant requirements of the above development controls with the exception of the following:

DEVELOPMENT

CONTROL DCP

DEVELOPMENT COMPLIANCE 2.14.1

Building Setbacks (Rear)

1 storey element of

dwelling= 4m 1m No, refer to

discussion below.

Whilst there are no specific requirements within the DCP which relate to secondary dwellings, the DCP limits rear setbacks of single storey dwellings to 4m. As such a merit assessment has been undertaken having consideration to the objectives of the control.

Comment:

The relevant objectives of the control are:

• To provide setbacks that complements the streetscape and protects the privacy and sunlight to adjacent dwellings in accordance with ESD Objective 7.

• To ensure that new development is sensitive to the landscape setting, site constraints and established character of the street and locality.

• To ensure that the appearance of new development is of a high visual quality and enhances the streetscape.

Being located at the rear of the site, there are no impacts to the streetscape of Hilda Road.

The low density streetscape character will be retained as the development is screened by an existing single storey brick dwelling. High visual quality has been provided through the use of materials and finishes consistent with the established character of the area. The secondary dwelling will be finished with brick veneer and a metal roof consistent with a neutral colour palette. A porch has been provided to the eastern boundary to promote architectural difference with the façade.

(33)

PAGE 33 No overlooking impacts will occur as the existing boundary fencing will suitably screen the proposed windows and the porch of the secondary dwelling. Standard 1.8m height fences protect adjoining properties to the east and west of the development site. A 2.25m high fence adjoins the rear (southern) boundary which is considered satisfactory in mitigating overlooking potential. No unreasonable overshadowing impacts are expected given the single storey nature of the proposal.

The proposal responds appropriately to site constraints by limiting earthworks and locating the development in a position which maximises landscaping and private open space within the subject site. Two trees are proposed for removal to facilitate the development, and a condition of consent has been imposed requiring replacement planting of advance trees to maintain the landscape setting of the local area.

The proposed variation to the rear setback can be supported in this instance as it maintains the objectives of the control notwithstanding the numerical non-compliance.

4. Issues Raised in Submissions

The proposal was notified for 14 days and six submissions were received. The issues raised in the submissions are summarised below.

ISSUE/OBJECTION COMMENT Maintenance of low density

character of the area. The proposed development is considered to be consistent with the objectives of the R2 Low Density Residential zoning under LEP 2019 in that it provides for the housing needs of the community and maintains the existing low density residential character of the area.

Visual and Acoustic Privacy Potential for the development to overlook into adjoining

properties private open space.

Privacy to adjoining properties will be maintained by existing boundary fences which will screen windows and the porch from the ability to overlook adjoining private open space.

Standard 1.8m high fences protect adjoining properties to the east and west of the development site. A 2.25m high fence is provided to the rear (southern) boundary which is considered satisfactory in mitigating overlooking potential.

Use of the site will result in unreasonable acoustic impacts to adjoining properties.

Use of the development is not expected to result in noise generation beyond what is expected within the R2 Low Density Residential zoning applicable to the site.

Rear setback variation

encroaches on privacy in that it will enable the occupants to hear neighbour conversations.

Use of the development is not expected to impact upon the privacy of residents conversations beyond what is expected within the R2 Low Density Residential zoning applicable to the site.

Compliance with SEPP (ARH) 2009 The proposed development

does not maintain the aims of SEPP (ARH) 2009 in that the residents will utilise the development.

SEPP (ARH) 2009 provides a variety of development types intended for use as long term affordable living

arrangements. Secondary dwellings are a permitted land use within the zone and the development complies with Division 2 of the SEPP (ARH) 2009. There are no controls listed within Division 2 defining permitted future occupants of the site and therefore is not a matter of consideration under the Development Application.

The proposal does not comply

with the definition for affordable A ‘secondary dwelling’ is a land use that is separately defined under the Standard Instrument. Clause 19 of SEPP

(34)

PAGE 34 ISSUE/OBJECTION COMMENT

housing. (ARH) 2009 defines development for the purpose of a secondary dwelling as:

“secondary dwelling means a self-contained dwelling that:

(a) is established in conjunction with another dwelling (the principal dwelling), and

(b) is on the same lot of land (not being an individual lot in a strata plan or community title scheme) as the principal dwelling, and

(c) is located within, or is attached to, or is separate from, the principal dwelling”.

There is no requirement under Division 2 of SEPP (ARH) 2009 for secondary dwellings to be provided as affordable housing as defined under the SEPP.

The proposal does not comply with Schedule 1 of SEPP (ARH) 2009, particularly the 3m control for rear setbacks.

Schedule 1 of SEPP (ARH) 2009 provides development standards for secondary dwelling under the complying development approval pathway. The subject application has been lodged with Council for development consent noting it does not meet the requirements of Schedule 1.

Division 2 of SEPP (ARH) 2009 applies to the development and provides relevant controls for secondary dwellings. The proposal complies with all requirements. A merit

assessment has been undertaken against the relevant provisions of DCP 2012. The rear setback variation is considered satisfactory noting the proposal meets the objectives of the control.

The development is to be used as affordable housing for 10 years under Clause 17 of SEPP (ARH) 2009.

Clause 17 of SEPP (ARH) 2009 applies to development provided under Division 1 – Infill affordable housing.

Division 2 of SEPP (ARH) 2009 applies to the development and provides relevant controls for secondary dwellings. The proposal complies with all requirements. The provisions of Division 1, namely clause 17, do not apply to the subject application.

Parking compliance Clause 22 (4) of SEPP (ARH) 2009 provides that a consent authority must not refuse consent to development if no additional parking is provided. The proposal does not provide any additional parking and is considered satisfactory.

Floor area compliance and inclusion of the porch area within calculations.

Clause 22(3)(b) of SEPP (ARH) 2009 provides that a consent authority must not consent to development unless the total floor area of the secondary dwelling is no more than 60 square metres or, if a greater floor area is permitted in respect of a secondary dwelling on the land under

another environmental planning instrument, that greater floor area. No greater floor area is permitted, and accordingly the 60 square metres applies to the

development. The proposal complies with the 60 square metre control.

Whilst SEPP (ARH) 2009 is silent with respect to a definition

(35)

PAGE 35 ISSUE/OBJECTION COMMENT

of total floor area, the Standard Instrument – Principal Local Environmental Plan provides the following definition for gross floor area:

“gross floor area means the sum of the floor area of each floor of a building measured from the internal face of external walls, or from the internal face of walls separating the building from any other building, measured at a height of 1.4 metres above the floor, and includes –

(a) the area of a mezzanine, and

(b) habitable rooms in a basement or an attic, and (c) any shop, auditorium, cinema, and the like, in a basement or attic,

but excludes—

(d) any area for common vertical circulation, such as lifts and stairs, and

(e) any basement—

(i) storage, and

(ii) vehicular access, loading areas, garbage and services, and (f) plant rooms, lift towers and other areas used exclusively for mechanical services or ducting, and

(g) car parking to meet any requirements of the consent authority (including access to that car parking), and (h) any space used for the loading or unloading of goods (including access to it), and

(i) terraces and balconies with outer walls less than 1.4 metres high, and

(j) voids above a floor at the level of a storey or storey above.…”

As per part (j) above, the porch area does not contain walls greater than 1.4m and has therefore been excluded from the calculation of total floor area.

Trees

Tree 2, being a high retention

tree, should not be removed. The application was referred to Council’s Tree Management Officer who raised no objection to the removal of Tree 2. To maintain the treed environment of the Shire, a condition of consent has been imposed requiring two advanced

seventy-five (75) litre pot size replacement trees be planted within the subject site.

Concern has been raised the development will cause impacts on neighbouring trees.

The application was reviewed by Council’s Tree

Management Officer who raised no objections subject to conditions of consent. Conditions have been imposed requiring tree protection measures be in place for

neighbouring trees prior to, and during construction. Refer to Part 5 of this report below for further discussion.

Trees maintain the character of, and provide amenity value to, the local area.

To maintain the treed environment of the Shire, a condition of consent has been imposed requiring two advanced seventy-five (75) litre pot size replacement trees be planted within the subject site.

A number of high significance Concern has been raised with the number of high retention