ASSESSMENT UNIT

(1)

DEVELOPMENT

ASSESSMENT UNIT

Tuesday, 2 October 2018

T O S T R I V E F O R B E T T E R T H I N G S

(2)

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT UNIT MEETING 2 OCTOBER, 2018

ITEM SUBJECT PAGE

ITEM-1 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES 3

ITEM-2 DA 1752/2018/LD - TWO STOREY DWELLING AND FRONT FENCE - LOT 5 DP 1166676, NO. 71 ARNOLD AVENUE, KELLYVILLE

5

ITEM-3 DA 1886/2018/LD - TWO STOREY DWELLING, RETAINING WALL AND INGROUND SWIMMING POOL - NO. 58A EVANS ROAD, GLENHAVEN

26

(3)

PAGE 3 MINUTES OF THE DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT UNIT MEETING HELD AT THE HILLS SHIRE COUNCIL ON TUESDAY, 25 SEPTEMBER 2018

PRESENT

Cameron McKenzie Group Manager – Development & Compliance (Chair) Robert Buckham Acting Manager – Development Assessment

Andrew Brooks Manager – Subdivision & Development Certification Angelo Berios Acting Manager – Environment & Health

Craig Woods Manager – Regulatory Services Stewart Seale Manager – Forward Planning Kristine McKenzie Principal Executive Planner APOLOGIES

Paul Osborne Manager – Development Assessment TIME OF COMMENCEMENT

8:30am

TIME OF COMPLETION 8:40am

ITEM-1 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

RESOLUTION

The Minutes of the Development Assessment Unit Meeting of Council held on 18 September 2018 be confirmed.

ITEM-2 DA 1220/2018/HA - TWO STOREY CHILD CARE CENTRE FOR 120 CHILDREN AND BASEMENT PARKING FOR 39 VEHICLES - 62-68 BALMORAL ROAD KELLYVILLE 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 application be approved subject to conditions as set out in the report with the following condition to be added:

28A. Consolidation of Lots

All lots included in this consent must be consolidated before a Construction Certificate is issued. A copy of the registered plan must be submitted to Council.

(4)

PAGE 4 REASONS FOR THE DECISION

Section 4.15(EP&A Act) – Satisfactory.

The Hills LEP 2012 – Satisfactory.

SEPP (Educational Establishments and Child Care Facilities) 2017 – Satisfactory.

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 55 – Remediation of Land – Satisfactory.

DCP Part B Section 6 – Business – Variation, see report.

DCP Part C Section 1 – Parking – Satisfactory.

DCP Part C Section 3 – Landscaping – Satisfactory.

DCP Part D Section 7 – Balmoral Road Release Area – Satisfactory.

Section 7.12 Contribution - $49,000.04.

HOW COMMUNITY VIEWS WERE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN MAKING THE DECISION The development application was notified and five submissions were received including a petition with 71 signatures.

ITEM-3 DA 1030/2017/ZD - SUBDIVISION CREATING EIGHT COMMUNITY TITLE RURAL RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND ONE ASSOCIATION LOT - LOT 194 DP 752039, NO. 3340 OLD NORTHERN ROAD, GLENORIE

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 be deferred at the request of the applicant to allow amendment of the plan to address Rural Fire Service requirements with respect to bushfire protection.

REASONS FOR THE DECISION As above.

HOW COMMUNITY VIEWS WERE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT IN MAKING THE DECISION The development application was notified. No submissions were received.

END MINUTES

(5)

PAGE 5 ITEM-2 DA 1752/2018/LD - TWO STOREY DWELLING AND FRONT FENCE - LOT 5 DP 1166676, NO. 71 ARNOLD AVENUE, KELLYVILLE

THEME: Balanced Urban Growth

OUTCOME: 7 Responsible planning facilitates a desirable living environment and meets growth targets.

STRATEGY:

7.2 Manage new and existing development with a robust framework of policies, plans and processes that is in accordance with community needs and expectations.

MEETING DATE: 2 OCTOBER 2018

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT UNIT

AUTHOR: SENIOR TOWN PLANNER

JUSTIN KEEN

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER: PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE PLANNER KRISTINE MCKENZIE

Applicant E Mekhaail

Owner A Saad

Notification 14 days

Number Advised 1^st Notification: 11 2^nd Notification: 11 Number of Submissions 1^st Notification: One

2^nd Notification: One

Zoning R2 Low Density Residential

Site Area 701.5m²

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

Section 4.15 (EP&A Act) – Satisfactory.

LEP 2012 – Satisfactory.

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

DCP Part C Section 3 – Landscaping – Satisfactory.

DCP Part D Section 7 – Balmoral Road Release Area – Variation, see report.

Political Donation None Disclosed

Reason 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 front fence.

The proposed development complies with DCP Part B Section 7 – Balmoral Road Release Area with the exception of the front setback, maximum fill, minimum private open space area and solar access. The DCP requires a minimum front setback of 6 metres. The proposed front setbacks are 6.2 metres to the main wall of the dwelling, 5.8 metres to the feature element (columns) on the front façade, and 5.2 metres to the front porch. The DCP requires a maximum fill of 500mm. A maximum of 860mm of fill is proposed which will be contained within a dropped edge beam. The DCP requires that dwellings be provided with a private open space area behind the building line, having a total area of 20% of the total lot size or 80m², whichever is the greater. The proposed private open space area is 17.5% (123m²) of the total lot area, resulting in a shortfall of 17m². The DCP requires that dwellings be sited to allow for access of direct sunlight to at least 50% of the required private open space within the subject property and adjoining properties for a minimum of 4 hours between 9am and 3pm on June 21. The private open space of the proposed development does not receive the minimum required solar access on June 21. The proposed variations will not result in an unreasonable impact on streetscape or amenity for residents of the dwellings. The design of the dwelling will not result in any unreasonable overshadowing, privacy or bulk and scale impacts to adjoining properties.

The application was notified to adjoining property owners and two submissions were received. The issues raised primarily relate to building setbacks, overshadowing, bulk and scale, visual and acoustic privacy, excessive fill, fence height and plan inadequacies. The proposed dwelling is considered to be satisfactory in terms of its design and relationship to adjoining properties. The proposal will not unreasonably impact on existing or future adjoining dwellings.

The Development Application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

BACKGROUND

The subject Development Application was lodged on 27 March 2018. The proposal was notified for 14 days and one submission was received. The proposal was amended during the assessment process. Due to the amendments, the proposal was re-notified for 14 days and an additional submission was received.

PROPOSAL

The Development Application is for the construction of a two storey dwelling and front fence.

The ground floor of the dwelling will contain a study, lounge room, kitchen, family, dining, games room, play room, bathroom, laundry and a double garage. The upper floor of the dwelling will contain four bedrooms, a study and a TV area.

The proposed dwelling will consist of black face brick with grey accents, pitched tiled roof with charcoal coloured tiles and a face brick front fence.

(7)

PAGE 7 ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION

1. Compliance with DCP 2012

The proposal has been assessed against the following provisions of DCP 2012:

Part D Section 7 – Balmoral Road Release Area;

Part B Section 2 – Residential; and Part C Section 3 – Landscaping

The proposal achieves compliance with the DCP with the exception of the following:

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL

DCP

REQUIREMENTS

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

COMPLIANCE Front Setback Minimum 6 metres 6.2m to main wall of

the dwelling, 5.8 to feature elements on front façade and 5.2m to front porch.

No, however the proposal will not have an adverse impact on the streetscape.

Cut and Fill Maximum 500mm 860mm fill, contained within a dropped edge beam.

No, however the earthworks are considered

reasonable as there will be minimal impacts on adjoining owners.

Private Open Space 20% of the lot area or 80m², whichever is the greater

A private open space area totalling 17.5%

(123m²) of the total lot area provided

No, however the proposal provides a usable private open space area behind the building line with adequate amenity.

Solar Access 50% of the required private open space within the subject property and adjoining properties shall receive direct sunlight for a minimum of 4 hours between 9am and 3pm on 21 June.

The private open space of the proposed development does not receive the minimum required solar access on June 21.

No, however the proposal provides adequate solar

access and

maximises amenity given the lot orientation.

a) Building Setbacks

The DCP requires that front building setbacks be a minimum of 6 metres. The proposed front setbacks are 6.2 metres to the main wall of the dwelling, 5.8 metres to feature elements (columns) on the front façade and 5.2 metres to the front porch.

(8)

PAGE 8 Attachment 3 shows the required setback.

The applicant has provided the following justification for the variation:

The encroachment into the 6m setback only represents a small part of the project. The majority of the dwelling house is at a setback that exceeds 6m, which is compliant with the minimum front setback.

Five columns which are showing on the façade present a very common feature element in most of the houses in the area, this adds to the versatility of the house & the street in total.

Those columns are approximately 5.8m away from the front boundary.

The porch, which is 5.2m away, is needed to cause some variation in the building line which in return will add to the versatility of the house & the streetscape in general.

The proposed front setback encroachment will not compromise or be out of character with neighbouring dwelling house front setbacks and will complement the streetscape already established (and envisaged for other vacant lots). For example, neighbouring lots have existing or proposed dominant house designs that present to the street.

Arnold Avenue is a curved and elevated street. The front setbacks for such a street which has a curved street subdivision layout are also not similar to typical ‘grid subdivision’

patterns or open road (square) streetscapes. Averaging of neighbouring setbacks along curved street frontages is generally not reflective of streetscape impacts, and a minor encroachment into the front setback would not be visible.

The development involves a high quality of design and appearance and the new development is therefore considered to enhance the streetscape of the area. The proposed dwelling house will still achieve an appropriate separation between buildings on neighbouring land.

The development will not impact on any potential for site landscaping of the site. Large front setback and yard areas allow for generally larger landscaped areas at the front of the site.

However, landscaping target has been achieved.

In conclusion, the impact of the front setback encroachment is considered to be minimal and the encroachment will have a minimal impact on the surrounding locale and neighbouring properties.

Comment:

The relevant objectives of the DCP are:

(i) To provide setbacks that complement the streetscape and protect 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.

(9)

PAGE 9 The feature elements on the front façade and the front porch encroach into the minimum 6 metre front setback. The proposed encroachments will not result in an adverse impact on the streetscape. The proposed design features provide architectural relief and visual interest to the dwelling façade. It is considered that the development as proposed will be of a high visual quality and will complement and enhance the streetscape. 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 variation to the front setback is considered satisfactory and is supported.

b) Fill

The DCP limits cut and fill to a maximum of 500mm. The proposal includes up to 860mm fill for the proposed dwelling which is contained within a dropped edge beam. Attachment 4 shows the area which exceeds 500mm of fill.

The applicant has provided the following justification for the variation:

Please accept our variation for the fill within the building footprint as per our drawings, as the site is not levelled.

Any proposed fill will be conditioned to be contained by dropped edge beams which will be designed by the structural engineer.

No external fill will be done.

Comment:

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

(ii) To reduce the risk that potentially saline soils may affect dwellings.

(iii) To maintain topsoil and endemic plant species seed bank.

The site slopes from RL 63.2 in the north-eastern (front) corner to RL 65.4 in the south- eastern (rear) corner. Due to the cross-slope of the subject site, the proposal does not comply with the DCP requirements for fill. The proposed variation to fill is located within the building footprint and will be contained by a dropped edge beam (refer to Condition 23). No external fill is proposed. The proposed variation to fill will not result in any unreasonable privacy, overshadowing or bulk and scale impacts to adjoining properties. The proposal provides a balance of cut and fill through the provision of a split level design that is an appropriate response to the site constraints.

The proposed variation to the fill control is considered satisfactory and is supported.

c) Private Open Space

The DCP requires that dwellings be provided with a private open space area behind the building line, having a total area of 20% of the total lot size or 80m², whichever is the greater.

The subject site has an area of 701.5m², which means a minimum private open space area of 140.3m² is required. The proposal provides a private open space area with a total area of 123m²(17.5%), resulting in a shortfall of 17m².

(10)

PAGE 10 Comment:

(i) To provide for a private outdoor living space, as an extension of the dwelling, for the enjoyment of residents.

(ii) To provide outdoor living spaces which receive a reasonable quantity of sunshine during all months of the year.

The dwelling is provided with a useable private open space area despite the minor shortfall in the area provided. The private open space area contains a useable rectangle measuring 6 metres by 4 metres, and the private open space area is continuous to, and accessible from, the primary living areas of the proposed dwelling.

If the side setback area adjacent to the western boundary was included in the private open space area calculations, this would increase the private open space by 44m² which would satisfy the DCP requirements. However this area has a varying width of 1.7m – 3.6m and is not directly accessible from the dwelling.

It is also noted that the proposal achieves compliance with the building height, site coverage, landscaped area and side and rear setback controls.

The proposed variation to private open space is considered satisfactory in this instance.

d) Solar Access

The DCP requires that dwellings be sited to allow for adequate provision for access of direct sunlight to at least 50% of the required private open space within the subject property and adjoining properties for a minimum of 4 hours between 9am and 3pm on June 21. The private open space of the proposed development does not receive the minimum required solar access on June 21.

Required Private Open

Space

Provided Private

Open Space

Required Direct Sunlight in Private Open

Space

Solar Access Received at:

9am 12pm 3pm

140m² 123m² 70m² 36m²

(25.7%)

44m²(31.4%) 19.5m² (13.9%) Comment:

(i) To maximise solar access to internal living spaces within buildings and open space areas in winter.

(ii) To ensure no adverse overshadowing of adjoining allotments/developments including the principal area of open space.

(iii) To orient the development in a way that best allows for appropriate solar access and shading, to ensure energy efficient outcomes in accordance with Council’s ESD objective 5.

(11)

PAGE 11 (iv) To minimise the need for artificial lighting in dwellings during the day, to ensure

energy efficient outcomes in accordance with Council’s ESD objective 5.

(v) To orientate dwellings so that the living areas face north.

The subject site is oriented north-south, with the private open space located to the rear (south) of the proposed dwelling. Due to the orientation of the site, the private open space of the proposed development does not receive direct sunlight to at least 50% of the required private open space for a minimum of 4 hours between 9am and 3pm on June 21 (refer to Attachment 6).

During the assessment of the application, concerns were raised with the applicant in respect to the lack of solar access to the rear yard. In response, the applicant amended the proposal to increase the rear setback by a metre to improve the provision of solar access to the rear yard. The ground floor rear setback is now a minimum of 5.745 metres and the upper floor rear setback is a minimum of 9.115 metres.

It is noted that the proposal achieves compliance with the building height, site coverage, landscaped area and side and rear setback controls which regulate bulk and scale. The solar access provided is considered to be reasonable and satisfactory in this instance.

The proposal will not result in more than 50% of the required private open space of neighbouring properties receiving less than 4 hours of solar access between 9am and 3pm on June 21. Accordingly, any overshadowing impacts on adjoining properties are considered acceptable.

The proposed variation to solar access is considered acceptable in this instance.

3. Issues Raised in Submissions

The proposal was notified to adjoining property owners on two separate occasions. One submission was received in response to the first notification period, and one submission was received in response to the second notification period. Two submissions were received in total. The issues raised in the submissions are summarised below.

ISSUE/OBJECTION COMMENT

Concerns regarding overshadowing due to the height, bulk and scale, and excessive fill.

The DCP requires that 50% of the required private open space within the subject property and that of adjoining properties shall receive direct sunlight for a minimum of 4 hours between 9am and 3pm on June 21. Shadow diagrams demonstrating shadow impact at 9am, 12pm and 3pm on June 21 have been provided. The proposal will not result in more than 50% of the required private open space of neighbouring properties receiving less than 4 hours of solar access between 9am and 3pm on June 21 (refer to Attachment 6).

The proposal achieves compliance with building height, site coverage, landscaped area and side and rear building setbacks, and is considered acceptable with respect to bulk and scale. The proposed fill will be contained via a dropped edge beam (refer to Condition 23) and is considered acceptable.

(12)

PAGE 12

ISSUE/OBJECTION COMMENT

Concerns regarding inadequacies in respect to the shadow diagrams.

The original shadow diagrams submitted with the Development Application had the shadows incorrectly depicted. The shadow diagrams have been amended and correctly indicate the proposed shadow being cast south (refer to Attachment 6). This was included as part of the second notification period.

Concerns regarding privacy impacts due to the excessive finished floor levels of the living areas and alfresco, and the front balcony.

The alfresco has been modified to a play room with openings a minimum of 1.5m above finished floor level. The finished floor level has also been lowered from RL 65.09 to RL 64.86.

To minimise unreasonable overlooking impacts to adjoining properties, a condition is recommended that obscure glazing up to 1.5m above floor level be installed to the eastern window serving the dining room (refer to Condition 12). The front balcony overlooks the street and the front setbacks of neighbouring properties. The proposal is not expected to result in unreasonable privacy impacts.

Concerns regarding non-compliant front fence heights.

The proposed front fence originally exceeded the maximum permitted height of 1.2m. The fence has been amended to have a maximum height of 1.2m and now achieves full compliance with DCP 2012.

Concerns regarding inconsistent rear boundary setbacks and concerns that a rear setback less than 6 metres is excessive due to the size of the house and will result in overshadowing and privacy impacts.

The DCP requires a 4 metre rear setback to the ground floor and a 6 metre rear setback to the first floor. The proposed ground floor rear setback is a minimum 5.7m, and the upper floor rear setback is a minimum 9.1m. The proposal achieves full compliance with the rear setback controls. The proposed rear setbacks will not result in unreasonable overshadowing and privacy impacts to neighbouring properties.

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 2012 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.

(13)

PAGE 13 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 of consent.

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

DRAWING NO DESCRIPTION SHEET REVISION DATE

17-69 Site Plan A1 E 07/09/2019

17-69 Ground Floor

Plan

A2 E 07/09/2019

17-69 First Floor Plan A3 E 07/09/2019

17-69 Roof Plan A4 E 07/09/2019

17-69 Front and Rear Elevation

A5 E 07/09/2019

17-69 Side Elevation A6 E 07/09/2019

17-69 Section

Elevation and Schedule of Finishes

A7 E 07/09/2019

17-69 Landscaping

Plan

A11 E 07/09/2019

17-69 BASIX

Information

A13 E 07/09/2019

17-69 Fence Details A15 E 07/09/2019

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.

(14)

PAGE 14 2. 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 an Accredited Certifier.

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

3. 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 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.

4. Management of Construction

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.

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.

5. Commencement of Domestic Waste Service

The property owner or agent acting for the owner must ensure to arrange the commencement of a domestic waste service with Council. The service is to be arranged no earlier than two days prior to occupancy and no later than two days after occupancy of the development. All requirements of Council’s domestic collection service must be complied with at all times. Please telephone Council on (02) 9843 0310 for the commencement of waste services.

6. Provision of Domestic Waste Storage Area

Sufficient space must be allocated onsite to store a minimum of three 240 litre mobile bins (for waste streams as determined by Council). Note two separate areas are required for dual

(15)

PAGE 15 occupancies. The location is required to ensure that the bins are not visible from any adjoining property or public place, are easily accessible by future occupants and allow the bins to be wheeled to the street over flat or ramped surfaces, grade not to exceed 1:14, and not over steps, kerbs, landscape edging or through a habitable area of the dwelling.

7. External Finishes

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

8. Protection of Public Infrastructure

Adequate protection must be provided prior to work commencing and maintained during building operations so that no damage is caused to public infrastructure as a result of the works. Public infrastructure includes the road pavement, kerb and gutter, concrete footpaths, drainage structures, utilities and landscaping fronting the site. The certifier is responsible for inspecting the public infrastructure for compliance with this condition before an Occupation Certificate is issued. Any damage must be made good in accordance with the requirements of Council and to the satisfaction of Council.

9. 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.

10. Air Conditioner Location

Air-conditioning unit location is to be a minimum 450mm from the side/rear boundary, and is to comply with SEPP (Exempt and Complying Development Codes) 2008 requirements.

PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE 11. Erosion & Sediment Control Plan

Submission of an Erosion and Sediment Control Plan to the Principal Certifying Authority, including details of:

a) Allotment boundaries

b) Location of the adjoining roads c) Contours

d) Existing vegetation e) Existing site drainage f) Critical natural areas g) Location of stockpiles h) Erosion control practices i) Sediment control practices

j) Outline of a maintenance program for the erosion and sediment controls

(NOTE: For guidance on the preparation of the Plan refer to ‘Managing Urban Stormwater Soils & Construction’ produced by the NSW Department of Housing).

12. Visual and Acoustic Privacy – Obscure Glazing

The ground floor dining room window on the east elevation shall contain either obscure glazing up to 1.5m above finished floor level or alternatively be amended to a highlight window with a sill height a minimum 1.5m above finished floor level. All wet areas shall contain obscure glazing.

(16)

PAGE 16 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 Certifying Authority 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. 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.

15. 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).

16. 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).

17. Builder and PCA Details Required

Notification in writing of the builder’s name, address, telephone and fax numbers to be submitted to the Principal Certifying Authority prior to work commencing.

Two days before work commences, Council shall be notified of the Principal Certifying Authority in accordance with the Regulations.

18. Erosion & Sediment Control Plan Kept on Site

A copy of the Erosion and Sediment Control Plan must be kept on site at all times during construction and available to Council on request.

19. Management of Building Sites – Builder’s Details

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 after hours’ contact name and telephone number. In the case of a privately certified development, the name and contact number of the Principal Certifying Authority.

20. 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.

(17)

PAGE 17 Unimpeded access must be available to the electricity supply authority, during and after building, to the electricity meters and metering equipment.

21. Principal Certifying Authority

A sign is to be erected in accordance with Clause 98 A (2) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulations 2000.

DURING CONSTRUCTION 22. 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.

23. Dropped Edge Beam

All fill is to be contained within the dropped edge beam as shown on the approved plans.

The dropped edge beam is to extend to natural ground level. No fill is to be placed to the exterior of the building unless otherwise shown on the approved plans.

24. 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.

910723S_03 is to be complied with. Any subsequent version of this BASIX Certificate will supersede all previous versions of the certificate. A Section 4.55 Application may be required should the subsequent version of this BASIX Certificate necessitate design changes to the development. However, a Section 4.55 Application will be required for a BASIX Certificate with a new number.

25. Compliance with Critical Stage Inspections and Inspections Nominated by the PCA

Section 6.5 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 PCA 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 PCA is not carried out. Inspections can only be carried out by the PCA unless agreed to by the PCA beforehand and subject to that person being an accredited certifier.

26. Roof Water Drainage

Gutter and downpipe and/or rainwater tank overflow, to be provided and connected to an approved lawful discharge point (ie. kerb, inter-allotment drainage easement or OSD) upon installation of roof coverings.

27. Landscaping Works

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

28. 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:

(18)

PAGE 18

 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.

THE USE OF THE SITE

29. 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.

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

4. Elevations 5. Section

6. Shadow Diagrams

(19)

PAGE 19 ATTACHMENT 1 – LOCALITY PLAN

(20)

PAGE 20 ATTACHMENT 2 – SITE PLAN

(21)

PAGE 21 ATTACHMENT 3 – SITE PLAN

(22)

PAGE 22 ATTACHMENT 4 – ELEVATIONS

(23)

PAGE 23 ATTACHMENT 4 – ELEVATIONS

(24)

PAGE 24 ATTACHMENT 5 – SECTION

(25)

PAGE 25 ATTACHMENT 6 – SHADOW DIAGRAMS

(26)

PAGE 26 ITEM-3 DA 1886/2018/LD - TWO STOREY DWELLING, RETAINING WALL AND INGROUND SWIMMING POOL - NO. 58A EVANS ROAD, GLENHAVEN

THEME: Balanced Urban Growth

OUTCOME: 7 Responsible planning facilitates a desirable living environment and meets growth targets.

STRATEGY:

7.2 Manage new and existing development with a robust framework of policies, plans and processes that is in accordance with community needs and expectations.

MEETING DATE: 2 OCTOBER 2018

DEVELOPMENT ASSESSMENT UNIT

AUTHOR: TOWN PLANNER

JOHN MARTINEZ

RESPONSIBLE OFFICER: PRINCIPAL EXECUTIVE PLANNER KRISTINE MCKENZIE

Applicant Chateau Constructions Pty Ltd

Owner Ms M Dejneka

Notification 14 days

Number Advised Seven Number of Submissions One

Zoning R2 Low Density Residential

Site Area 1,133.00m²

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

Section 4.15 (EP&A Act) – Satisfactory.

LEP 2012 – Satisfactory.

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

Section 7.12 Contribution: $9,491.04 Political Donation None Disclosed

Reason for Referral to Development Assessment Unit

1. Variation to DCP.

2. Submission received.

Recommendation Approval subject to conditions.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

The Development Application is for the construction of a two storey dwelling, swimming pool and retaining wall on a battle-axe lot. The proposed dwelling consists of four bedrooms, alfresco and double garage.

(27)

PAGE 27 The proposed development complies with DCP Part B Section 2 Residential with the exception of solar access. The DCP requires that adjoining properties receive at least 50%

solar access to the required private open space for 4 hours between 9am and 3pm on 21 June. The adjoining lots to the south will not receive the required solar access however the variation is considered satisfactory due to the subject allotments siting, level and orientation in respect to the adjoining properties.

The application was notified and one submission was received. The submission raised issues primarily relating to setbacks, privacy and solar access. The proposed dwelling is considered to be satisfactory in terms of its design and relationship to adjoining properties.

The proposal will not unreasonably impact on existing or future adjoining dwellings.

The Development Application is recommended for approval subject to conditions.

BACKGROUND

On 23 April 2018, the subject Development Application was lodged with Council. A letter was sent to the applicant on 15 May 2018 requesting the proposal be amended to comply with DCP requirements in relation to setbacks, privacy and solar access.

Three meetings have been held with the applicant to discuss solar access impacts to the two rear adjoining lots. During the two meetings held on 15 June 2018 and 26 June 2018, the applicant advised that overshadowing to the adjoining lots is unavoidable due to the constraints and orientation of the subject site.

Council staff requested a northern elevation shadow diagram of Lot 5 (rear adjoining lot) in order to assess the extent of overshadowing to the private open space the area of Lot 5.

Council staff also requested the applicant to submit an eastern elevation showing the subject lot (Lot 3) and the rear adjoining lot (Lot 5) in order to demonstrate the difference in levels between sites. The applicant’s town planning consultant provided a written justification addressing the solar access variation in reference to the Planning Principle for Access to sunlight in The Benevolent Society v Waverley Council [2010] NSWLEC 1082.

A third meeting with the applicant was held on 20 August 2018 and Council staff requested the applicant to submit shadow diagrams of the dwelling if it were to be conceptually mirrored and located along the northern part of the site. The shadow diagrams demonstrate that the dwelling will result in similar shadowing onto the rear adjoining lots (Lots 4 and 5) and cast beyond the existing shadows of the fence.

It is noted that during the assessment process the applicant amended the single storey component of the design to increase the setback from the rear boundary from 1m to 2.5m in order to reduce impacts of overshadowing.

The subject site is part of the approved subdivision (DA 1004/2005/ZB) consisting of seven allotments located between Evans Road and Fingal Avenue. As a result of the approved subdivision works, the subject site has a higher ground level than the two southern adjoining allotments (Lots 4 and 5).

PROPOSAL

The Development Application is for the construction of a two storey dwelling, inground swimming pool and retaining walls on a battle-axe lot. The proposed dwelling consists of four bedrooms, alfresco area and double garage.

(28)

PAGE 28 The proposed building materials are brick and brown cladding with colorbond roof. The proposed colour scheme is predominantly brown tones.

The LEP height limit is 9 metres. The proposed dwelling has a maximum height of 7.205 metres.

ISSUES FOR CONSIDERATION

1. Compliance with DCP Part B Section - Residential

The proposed development achieves compliance with the relevant requirements in the DCP with the exception of the following:

DEVELOPMENT CONTROL

DCP

REQUIREMENTS

PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT

COMPLIANCE Solar Access At least 50% of the

required private open space within the subject property and that on adjoining properties, is to receive direct sunlight for a minimum of 4 hours between 9am and 3pm on 21 June.

The two rear adjoining allotments will not receive the minimum requirements for solar access.

No, however the dwelling design is considered

reasonable given the orientation and siting of the allotment.

a) Solar Access

The DCP requires that 50% of the private open space of the subject lot and adjoining lots are to receive direct sunlight for a minimum of four hours between 9am and 3pm on 21 June.

The subject allotment will receive adequate sunlight however the two rear adjoining lots will not receive the required amount of solar access between 9am and 3pm on 21 June.

The following solar access is achieved:

Required and Provided

Private Open Space

Required Direct Sunlight in Private

Open Space

Solar Access Received at:

9am 12pm 3pm

Lot 4 (vacant)

143.40m² 71.70m²/50% 0m²/0% 35.68m²/24.8 8%

64.32m²/44.8 5%

Lot 5 197.84m² 98.92m²/50% 19.77m²/9.99

%

66.23m²/33.4 7%

0m²/0%

Note: Lot 4 (No. 72 Fingal Avenue) has no approval for a dwelling on the site. As such the above figures have been assumed based on the required private open space area located along the rear boundary of the site. Lot 5 (No. 74 Fingal Avenue) has a dwelling and pool approved under Development Consent 2028/2017/LD (approved 25 August 2017).

The following planning principles in The Benevolent Society v Waverley Council [2010]

NSWLEC 1082 are used as a reference in the assessment of the shadowing impacts of this development onto the adjoining properties.

(29)

PAGE 29

 The ease with which sunlight access can be protected is inversely proportional to the density of development. At low densities, there is a reasonable expectation that a dwelling and some of its open space will retain its existing sunlight. (However, even at low densities there are sites and buildings that are highly vulnerable to being overshadowed.)

 The amount of sunlight lost should be taken into account, as well as the amount of sunlight retained.

 Overshadowing arising out of poor design is not acceptable, even if it satisfies numerical guidelines. The poor quality of a proposal’s design may be demonstrated by a more sensitive design that achieves the same amenity without substantial additional cost, while reducing the impact on neighbours.

 For private open space to be assessed as receiving adequate sunlight, regard should be had of the size of the open space and the amount of it receiving sunlight. Self- evidently, the smaller the open space, the greater the proportion of it requiring sunlight for it to have adequate solar amenity. A useable strip adjoining the living area in sunlight usually provides better solar amenity, depending on the size of the space. The amount of sunlight on private open space should ordinarily be measured at ground level but regard should be had to the size of the space as, in a smaller private open space, sunlight falling on seated residents may be adequate.

 Overshadowing by fences, roof overhangs and changes in level should be taken into consideration.

 In areas undergoing change, the impact on what is likely to be built on adjoining sites should be considered as well as the existing development.

The applicant’s town planning consultant has provided the following justification for the variation:

The land to the east is currently undeveloped, although given the extended setback from the subject dwelling to this boundary I would expect that the overshadowing impacts upon a future dwelling erected on this lot would be minimal.

It is apparent that both the dwelling (under construction) immediately adjoining to the south (Lot 5 in DP 1182967) and Lot 4 in DP 1182967 to the south-west of the subject site are both potentially impacted by the proposed development for overshadowing of their respective rear Private Open Space (P.O.S.).

In respect of Lot 4 this land is currently undeveloped and will be less affected due to the relative position of the subject dwelling which lies more to the north-east of this site. This land also has the benefit of designing their future P.O.S. to take account of any shadow impacts resulting from the position of subject dwelling.

In respect of Lot 5 this dwelling (being under construction at the time of this Report) has the greater potential for overshadowing resulting from the development and requires further analysis. Council has received a letter from this owner to this effect, the contents and substance of which has been addressed in this analysis.

(30)

PAGE 30 I have examined the additional ‘Shadow Diagrams’ prepared by the Applicant and find that the overshadowing impacts upon Lot 5 relate mainly to the north-south lot orientation and the relative topography between the two lots, with the finished ground level RL of Lot 5’s P.O.S. at 120.92 AHD compared to the ground floor level of Lot 3 at 122.815 AHD, a difference of some 2 metres. Furthermore, I understand that the finished P.O.S. level of Lot 5 has been further reduced by excavation to some 600 mm below the natural ground level.

Referring to the DCP Control, ie P.O.S. to receive 50% direct sunlight for a minimum of 4 hours between 9 am and 4 pm on June 21, it is obvious that the existing situation for Lot 5 is severely compromised by the existing boundary fence. Most of the grassed area and the swimming pool is overshadowed on June 21, with a small portion of the paved terrace between the pool and the house receiving sunlight. The Al Fresco area is shadowed by its own roof.

Whilst the impacts of the proposal at June 21 clearly result in some additional overshadowing of the P.O.S. of Lot 5, it is important to assess whether these impacts are reasonable in the context of the particular proposal.

For further assistance I have considered the current Planning Principle for Solar Access as developed in the NSW Land & Environment Court (The Benevolent Society v Waverley Council [2010] NSWLEC 1082).

This is in the following terms:

 The ability of the affected sites to maintain solar access is greatly compromised by the north-south lot orientation and the relative topography, with Lot 5 being some 2 m lower than Lot 3. Thus Lot 5 is clearly an example of a site that is ‘…highly vulnerable to being overshadowed…’ as contemplated by the Planning Principle.

 The amount of sunlight lost to Lot 5 is to an area which contains a swimming pool, which is highly unlikely to be utilised at June 21. The bulk of the P.O.S. is already compromised by the overshadowing from the boundary fence line. It should be noted that the impacts are limited to mid-winter; by the equinox the overshadowing is much reduced and becomes numerically compliant.

 The Applicant has made a genuine effort to design the proposal to address the impact of solar access upon the affected neighbour, and the result would be similar if any new two storey dwelling is erected upon the subject lot. It should be noted that the proposed dwelling is complying with the relevant DCP Controls for setbacks for battleaxe lots.

The possibility of increasing the side (southern) setback of the proposed dwelling, ie pushing the new dwelling further to the north, was considered, however any marginal improvement in the solar access for the P.O.S. would be inconsequential and would compromise the functionality of the P.O.S. of the proposed dwelling, as well as creating the potential for overlooking int the northern neighbour (#60 Evans Road). It would also create a ‘narrow width’ and non-useable side setback zone between the house and the boundary fence, this area mostly being in shadow and difficult to landscape effectively.

(31)

PAGE 31

 Whilst the majority of the rear terraced area of Lot 5 is apparently shadowed in ‘plan view’, referring to the elevations on ‘Shadows on Rear Façade’ shows a more amenable situation, as it can be seen that sunlight is available to a person in a seated position on that part of the terrace that closely adjoins the windows at both 9.00 am and midday on June 21. Given the obvious constraints of the two lots this outcome should be given some weight as to being considered ‘adequate’ in the terms expressed by the above Planning Principle.

 The extensive overshadowing imposed by the boundary fence and change in levels has been taken into consideration in this analysis and discussion.

 The proposed development is not materially different in design, bulk and scale from that of any of the adjoining neighbours and is entirely consistent with the low density residential development pattern for the neighbourhood. It is obvious that the impacts imposed by this proposal are, or would be, identical to the impacts imposed by other dwelling upon their neighbours in similar conditions for lot orientation and topography.

 In summary, I have considered and applied the relevant Planning Principle for the significant constraints imposed by topography, lot orientation and existing conditions and conclude that the design solution achieves a reasonable balance between the rights of the adjoining neighbours for solar access and the rights of the Applicant to achieve a realistic development outcome. Whilst not numerically compliant at June 21, the variation is well founded and can be supported on merit grounds.

The dwelling has been appropriately designed to incorporate the relevant passive solar design principles. Living areas are mainly located with a northerly aspect; window shading devices are incorporated into the design. The proposal is supported by a NatHERS Energy Building Efficiency Certificate.

In respect of a mirror-reversed dwelling design that is pushed to a minimum setback along the northern boundary, I have considered the resulting shadow diagrams and submit that the following comments are relevant to your assessment:

1. The position does show some improvement on solar access at June 21 for the southern neighbour, but this is not significantly different than the DA plan. The main impacts for solar access to the neighbour remain topography, lot orientation and the boundary fence line.

2. The Applicant’s own design is unjustifiably compromised as a result. Their Private Open Space, which is located on the south side of the lot, does not achieve any solar access on June 21.

3. There is no solar access into any of the ground living rooms on June 21, nor is any possible with the main building bulk against the northern boundary. Additional windows in the northern wall of the living rooms at ground level would look directly into the boundary retaining wall and neighbour’s fence and these windows would not receive any sunlight.

4. It would be difficult and expensive for a dwelling on the northern boundary to comply with BASIX, due to the orientation.

5. It is also likely that a 3-point turn would be required to access the garage for at least 1 of the 2 car spaces.

(32)

PAGE 32 In short, a dwelling on the northern boundary would fail the DCP controls for solar access to its own Private Open Space and internal living rooms. The increase in amenity to the neighbour is marginal and cannot be justified on either planning grounds or equity.

Comment:

The relevant objectives of this clause of the DCP are:

(i) To maximise solar access to internal living spaces within buildings and open space areas in winter.

(ii) To ensure no adverse overshadowing of adjoining allotments/developments including the principal area of open space.

(iii) To orient the development in a way that best allows for appropriate solar access and shading, to ensure energy efficient outcomes in accordance with Council’s ESD objective 5.

(iv) To minimise the need for artificial lighting in dwellings during the day, to ensure energy efficient outcomes in accordance with Council’s ESD objective 5.

(v) To orientate dwellings so that the living areas face north.

The proposed two storey dwelling meets objectives (i), (iii), (iv) and (v) of Clause 2.14.10 Solar Access of DCP Part B Section 2 – Residential. The dwelling is considered to be designed to achieve the maximum extent of solar access within the subject lot’s internal and external spaces. It has been adequately demonstrated that all living areas and open spaces are oriented north which satisfies the DCP’s objectives and that the use of artificial lighting during the day is reduced.

In regard to objective (ii), the proposed two storey dwelling is sited on a battle-axe lot. Due to the existing site constraints such as slope, orientation and the limited building envelope for battle-axe lots, it is difficult for either a single or two storey dwelling proposal to achieve full compliance with the required solar access due to the topography of the existing subdivision.

The applicant has provided shadow diagrams of the dwelling located in both the northern and southern part of the site (refer to Attachments 9 and 12). The shadow diagrams demonstrate that whether the dwelling is located on the northern or southern part of the site, overshadowing onto the rear adjoining lots will result.

The land within this area slopes downwards from Evans Road (north) to Fingal Avenue (south). The subject site has a higher natural ground level than the two southern adjoining allotments (refer to Attachment 3 and 5). Due to the topography, the two rear properties (Nos. 72 and 74 Fingal Avenue) are likely to require cut and fill works to provide appropriate building platforms and access to rear open space areas. To date there has been no dwelling approved on Lot 4 (No. 72 Fingal Avenue). A Development Application has been approved for Lot 5 (No. 74 Fingal Avenue – currently under construction) which included 1.6m of cut in the rear part of the site for the level area adjoining the pool. The result of the required excavation leads to a further reduction to solar access to the private open space area. As a consequence the finished ground level is likely to be sited lower than the natural ground level.

The non-compliance to solar access has been assessed under the relevant Planning Principles for Access to Sunlight as discussed in The Benevolent Society v Waverley Council [2010] NSWLEC 1082. With the aid of the Planning Principle’s guidelines, it is stated that there are sites and buildings within low density areas being highly vulnerable to