Ordinary Meeting No. 4383 - Municipality of Hunter's Hill · CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES Meeting 4383 -...

Ordinary Meeting No. 4383

27 July 2015 at 7.30 PM

Hunter 's H i l l Counc i l

ORDER OF BUSINESS

Acknowledgement of Country

Prayer

Attendance, Apologies,

Declarations of Interests

1 Confirmation of Minutes

2 Mayoral Minutes & Reports

Tabling of Petitions

Addresses from the Public

3 Notice of Motions

(including Rescission Motions)

Reports from Staff

4 Our Heritage & Built Environment

5 Our Community & Lifestyle

6 Our Environment

7 Moving Around

8 Our Council

9 Committees

10 Correspondence

11 Delegates Reports

12 General Business

13 Questions With or Without Notice

14 Council in Committee of the Whole

Item

HUNTER'S HILL COUNCIL ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL

Meeting 4383 - 27 July 2015

INDEX

1 – CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

1 Confirmation of Minutes of Ordinary Meeting 4382 held 13 July 2015

2 - MAYORAL MINUTES & REPORTS

2.1 Joint Regional Authority - Official Signing of memorandum of Understanding 1

3 - NOTICES OF MOTION INCLUDING RESCISSION MOTIONS

3.1 Exercise Equipment 6 3.2 Upgrade southern end De Milhau Road 7 3.3 Pains Road, Boronia Park 10 3.4 Harbour Sculpture 11

4 - OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT

4.1 Part of Boronia Park, Hunters Hill 12 4.2 30a Viret Street, Hunters Hill 35 4.3 19 Le Vesinet Drive, Hunters Hill 62 4.4 6 Collingwood Street, Woolwich 83 4.5 Delegated Authority Report 126 4.6 Report of Legal Matters 129

5 - OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE

Nil

6 - OUR ENVIRONMENT

Nil

7 - MOVING AROUND

Nil

8 - OUR COUNCIL

8.1 Fit for the Future - Advocacy Program 137 8.2 Local Government NSW Annual Conference 2015 142 8.3 Monthly Report on Outstanding Matters 146 8.4 Payment of Mayoral Fees to Deputy Mayor 154

9 - COMMITTEES

9.1 Minutes of the Moocooboola Festival Advisory Committee Meeting held Wednesday 8 July 2015 156

9.2 Minutes of the Conservation Advisory Panel held on 15 April 2015 159 9.3 Minutes of the Conservation Advisory Panel held on 20 May 2015 164 9.4 Minutes of the Conservation Advisory Panel held on 17 June 2015 170

Item

9.5 Minutes of the Hunters Hill Village Mainstreet Meeting held 24 June 2015 174

10 - CORRESPONDENCE

10.1 Correspondence 180

11 - DELEGATES REPORTS

Nil

12 - GENERAL BUSINESS

12.1 Meetings - Various Committees of Council 183

13 - QUESTIONS WITH OR WITHOUT NOTICE

Nil

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES Meeting 4383 - 27 July 2015

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting No. 4382 held on 13 July 2015. This is page 1

COMMENCEMENT

The meeting opened with Acknowledgement of Country and Prayer at 7.30 pm..

IN ATTENDANCE

Acting Mayor Councillor Meredith Sheil, Councillors Peter Astridge, Justine McLaughlin and Zac Miles.

ALSO PRESENT

The Group Manager Corporate Governance Debra McFadyen and the Group Manager Development and Regulatory Control Steve Kourepis.

APOLOGIES

Apologies were received from Clr Richard Quinn (Leave of Absence was granted at Council Meeting 4380 via Minute No. 191/15), Clr Gary Bird (See Item 8.3) and Clr Mark Bennett .

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS

217/15 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Miles, seconded Clr McLaughlin

That at 7:35 pm Standing Orders be suspended to allow Item 8.3 to be brought forward.

8.3 REQUEST FOR LEAVE OF ABSENCE - COUNCILLOR GARY BIRD

218/15 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr McLaughlin, seconded Clr Miles

That Leave of Absence be granted to Councillor Gary Bird for Ordinary Meeting 4382 to be held 13 July 2015 and that his apology be recorded in the Minutes.

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS


That at 07:36 PM Standing Orders be resumed.


That apologies be accepted and leave of absence be granted to Councillor Bennett

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

The Mayor called for Declarations of Interest without response.

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES


That the Minutes of Ordinary Meeting No. 4381 held 22 June 2015 be confirmed.



REPORTS FROM STAFF

OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT 4.1 AMENDMENT TO THE PROTECTION OF THE ENVIRONMENT OPERATIONS

(CLEAN AIR) REGULATION 2010


That the report be received and the Correspondence from the Environment Protection Authority be noted.

RECORD OF VOTING

Yes Against

Clr Meredith Sheil Clr Justine McLaughlin

Clr Peter Astridge

Clr Zac Miles

4.2 DELEGATED AUTHORITY REPORT


That the report be received and noted.

RECORD OF VOTING

Yes Against

Clr Meredith Sheil

Clr Peter Astridge

Clr Zac Miles

Clr Justine McLaughlin

4.3 REPORT OF LEGAL MATTERS

224/15 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Astridge, seconded Clr Miles


RECORD OF VOTING

Yes Against

Clr Meredith Sheil

Clr Peter Astridge

Clr Zac Miles

Clr Justine McLaughlin

OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE

5.1 PRIORY ADVISORY PANEL

PROCEEDINGS IN BRIEF

Andrew Atkin (Objector) addressed the meeting on this matter. Jessica Chow (Objector) addressed the meeting on this matter. Valerie Flanagan (Objector) addressed the meeting on this matter. Nicholas Taylor-Fick (Objector) addressed the meeting on this matter. Virginia Wise (Supporter) addressed the meeting on this matter.



225/15 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Miles, seconded Clr McLaughlin That an extension of time be granted to Ms Wise to complete her presentation.

Phil Jenkyn (Supporter) addressed Council on this matter Caroline Mackaness (Supporter) addressed the meeting on this matter.

MOVED on the motion of Clr Astridge

That the recommendation be amended to include an additional clause that the hours of operation be reviewed within 12 months.

The motion on being put to the meeting LAPSED for want of a seconder


That Council supports in principle, subject to successful Development Application processes and Crown Lands Approval in accordance with:

1. An Agreement to Lease the Priory, its building and surrounds, to Tranter Vass Pty Ltd for adaptive re-use as a function centre , and

1. 2. The Draft Terms and Conditions of Agreement for lease of The Priory as

Attachment 1, dated July 15.

OUR ENVIRONMENT

6.1 TRANSFER OF CONTRACT - STREET SWEEPING

227/15 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Miles, seconded Clr Astridge

1. That Council agree to the assignment of the Contract to the Roadworx Group and the release of Ron Hutchinson, Rob Hutchinson and Glenn Antonelli from their Director’s guarantees.

2. That delegated authority be given for the Mayor and the General Manager to execute any required contract changes to the contract document.

6.2 KEEP NSW BEAUTIFUL CONFERENCE; REDUCING LITTER IN YOUR LGA


That Council nominates the Mayor or his alternate to attend the Keep NSW Beautiful Annual Conference on Wednesday 22 and Thursday 23 July 2015.



OUR COUNCIL

8.1 ADOPTION OF LONG TERM FINANCIAL PLAN 2015/2016 - 2024/2025


1. That the following rates are adopted for 2015/16

Rate Description 2015/16 2015/16

Rate in $ Minimum/ Base

Amount

Rates

Residential 0.001285693 $515.40 Min

Business 0.001364179 $64.35 Base

Strata Unit Residential 0.001285693 $515.40 Min

Strata Unit Business 0.001364179 $64.35 Base

Business Maritime Lease 0.001364179 $64.35 Base

Mixed Business Strata Unit 0.001364179 $64.35 Base

Mixed Residential 0.001285693 $515.40 Min

Mixed Residential Strata Unit 0.001285693 $515.40 Min

Special Rates

Community Facilities Asset Infrastructure Residential 0.00003630 $26.14 Base

Community Facilities Asset Infrastructure Business 0.00003630 $26.14 Base

Roads Infrastructure Residential 0.00003630 $31.11 Base

Roads Infrastructure Business 0.00003630 $31.11 Base

Environmental Residential 0.00001745 $14.31 Base

Environmental Business 0.00001745 $14.31 Base

Infrastructure Residential 0.00002492 $20.44 Base

Infrastructure Business 0.00002492 $20.44 Base

2. That the Hunters Hill Council Long Term Financial Plan 2015/16 – 2024/25

is adopted. 3. That the Fees and Charges for 2015/16 is adopted subject to the following

amendments:

i. That an item be added to the Fees and Charges – Under Local History Services on Page 194 - History of our WW1 Trophy Gun - $10.

2. ii. That the costs associated with the Sale of Tender documents be

reversed so that Hardcopy Cost - $260.00 and Disk Cost - $190.00 4. That Waste Services Charges only be increased by 4.6% to cover CPI and

extra cleaning services in Gladesville



8.2 FIT FOR THE FUTURE - SUBMISSION TO UPPER HOUSE INQUIRY INTO LOCAL GOVERNMENT FIT FOR THE FUTURE - ADVOCACY PROGRAM

230/15 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr McLaughlin, seconded Clr Astridge

1. That Council defer consideration of the proposed Advocacy Program until the next meeting of Council.

3. 2. That Council receive and note the Council submission made to the Upper

House Inquiry.

COMMITTEES

9.1 MINUTES OF THE MOOCOOBOOLA FESTIVAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE HELD WEDNESDAY 24 JUNE 2015


That the Minutes be received and noted. 9.2 REPORT ON COUNCILLOR BRIEFINGS HELD 22 JUNE 2015


That the report be received and noted. 9.3 MINUTES OF THE PUBLIC TRANSPORT AND TRAFFIC ADVISORY HELD ON 16

JUNE 2015


1. That compliance information is provided for the wheelchair ramps on Gladesville Road.

4. 2. That Council request further advice with the intent of developing a bespoke

shared zone solution for Bonnefin Road and that the solution be brought back to the next PTTA meeting for discussion prior to being referred to Council’s Local Traffic Committee for advice and consideration.

5. 3. That the proposed Drop Off Zone be referred to mediation and community

consultation then returned to the PTTA Committee for consideration. 9.4 MINUTES OF THE HUNTERS HILL PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE HELD 16 JUNE

2015


That the Minutes are received and noted. 9.5 MINUTES OF THE GLADESVILLE MAINSTREET COMMITTEE HELD 21 MAY

2015


That the Minutes be received and noted.



CORRESPONDENCE

10.1 CORRESPONDENCE


1. That the report be received and noted. 6. 2. That the Correspondence regarding Graffiti Removal Day be referred to

EPAAG Committee for consideration.

GENERAL BUSINESS

12.1 MEETINGS - VARIOUS COMMITTEES OF COUNCIL



12.2 VOTE OF THANKS - PRIORY ADVISORY PANEL

Clr Justine McLaughlin expressed her thanks to the Priory Advisory Panel for their hard work over many years in developing this adaptive re-use of the Priory and also particular thanks to Annie Goodman who has supported this project for the last eight years.

12.3 FAREWELL TO NORTHERN DISTRICT TIMES JOURNALIST

Clr Justine McLaughlin noted that this was the last meeting to be attended by Matthew Connellan of the Northern District Times and wished him well in his future endeavours.

TERMINATION The meeting terminated at 8.55 pm. I confirm that these Minutes are a true and accurate record of Ordinary Meeting No. 4382 held 13 July 2015.

............................................. ................................... Councillor Meredith Sheil Steve Kourepis ACTING MAYOR ACTING GENERAL MANAGER

ATTACHMENTS

1. Draft Terms and Conditions of Agreement to Lease The Priory.



ATTACHMENT A JULY 2015

DRAFT TERMS & CONDITIONS FOR AGREEMENT TO LEASE THE PRIORY

(WHICH MAY INCLUDE BUT NOT LIMITED TO)

The contained Draft Terms and Conditions as itemised below have not been legally vetted and are not

legally binding. The Terms and Conditions are a guide only to be used for the purpose of informing

residents of Hunter’s Hill Council of the major parameters of a potential lease for The Priory, 10 Salter

Street, Gladesville 2111.

1. BACKGROUND

A. The Lessor is the proprietor of an estate in fee simple of the Land pursuant to Section

100 of the Act.

B. The Lessor has received an offer from the Lessee for the lease, development and

operation of the Land, such offer arising from negotiations between the Lessor and

Lessee following a resolution by the Council as manager of the Lessor to negotiate with

the Lessee following an Expression of Interest process.

C. The parties have agreed that subject to:

(a) The Lessee obtaining Development Consent for the use of the Land (including

the Building) as a function centre for private and corporate events and for

community activities;

(b) The Lessor obtaining the Minister's Consent;

(c) The Lessee obtaining a Construction Certificate for the construction of the

Lessee's Works where such a certificate is required to perform such works; and

(d) Completion of the Lessee's Works

the Lessor will grant and the Lessee will take the Lease of the Land.



2. DEFINITTIONS AND INTERPRETATIONS

To be advised/clarified

3. PREMISES

"Premises" means the part of the land so described in the Lease (if any) and the Building.

"Building" means such part of the building known as "The Priory" erected on the part of the

Land the subject of the Lease together with all modifications, extensions, fixtures, fittings,

furniture and infrastructure to, upon or forming part of such building including such parts of the

Lessee's Works as become part of such building except to the extent (if any) that the Lessee is

required or permitted by the Lease to remove any of the Lessee's Works upon the expiration or

sooner termination of the Lease.

4. CONSENT AUTHORITY

The Lessee expressly covenants and agrees with the Lessor that nothing contained herein or

done in pursuance thereto shall prejudice or effect any right power or duty which the Council

shall otherwise be entitled to exercise pursuant to any statute or the general law as Consent

Authority (if it is so appointed) pursuant to any statue and notwithstanding that the Lessor is the

owner of the Land or Premises the Lessor expressly reserves its rights, powers and duties as

aforesaid and the Lessee hereby expressly covenants with the Lessor and acknowledges that the

Lessor shall not be liable to pay any sum for damages, costs, expenses or otherwise arising from

or in connection with the exercise or attempted exercise by the Lessor of its aforesaid rights,

powers and duties as consent authority or local authority pursuant to any statute whether

before or after the date hereof or after the date of commencement of the Lease.

Nothing in this Deed shall be read or construed as fettering the Council's rights, powers and

discretions as Consent Authority.

The following shall be adhered to:

(a) The Lessor must apply for the Minister’s Consent as soon as practicable after the date of

this Deed. The Lessee must supply to the Lessor such information and documentation

as the Lessor may reasonably require to assist it to support the business case for the

grant of the Minister's Consent.

(b) The Lessor must use reasonable endeavours to obtain the Minister’s Consent.

(c) The Lessor must notify the Lessee in writing of the granting or refusal of the Minister’s

Consent as soon as practicable after the date of such grant or refusal.

(d) All costs and expenses incurred by the Lessor in respect of its application for the

Minister’s Consent will be borne by the Lessor.

Conditions subject to:

(a) The Lessor obtaining the Minister’s Consent;

(b) The Lessee obtaining the Development Consent and the Construction Certificate; and

(c) The obtaining of any necessary consents from a Heritage Authority



the Lessee shall be entitled at its own cost and expense to carry out the Lessee’s Works in

accordance with the provisions of this Deed.

5. WORKS

5.3 The Lessee's Works must be carried out by the Lessee in accordance with:

5.3.1 (a) The conditions of the Development Consent and Construction Certificate,

(b) The Building Code of Australia;

(c) The Conservation Management Plan for The Priory prepared by Graham

Brooks and Associates dated April 2009;

(d) Any obligations or conditions imposed on such works by a Heritage Authority;

(e) In accordance with the Work Health and Safety Act 2011 (NSW) and

Regulations made thereunder and any other laws relating to workplace safety;

(f) In accordance with any reasonable direction by the Heritage Consultant;

(g) In a proper and workmanlike manner.

5.3.2 In the event of any inconsistency between the requirements of clause 6.3.1 the matter

must be referred to the Lessor and the Lessor will issue a direction to the Lessee as to

the method of resolving the inconsistency.

5.4 The Lessor shall provide possession of the Premises for the purposes of carrying out the

Lessee's Works forthwith after the Lessee obtains the consents and approval referred to

in this document upon delivery to the Council of:

(a) Evidence of the issue of a contractor's all risk insurance policy (or similar) in

respect of the Lessor's Works;

(b) A certificate of currency in an amount of not less than $20 million in respect of

the Lessee's occupancy and use of the Premises noting the interests of the

Lessor, Lessee and the Minister;

(c) The Bank Guarantee.

5.5 The period for completion of the Lessee's Works may be extended by a period which is

fair and reasonable arising from any of the Events of Delay provided that the Lessee

notifies the Lessor in writing of the cause and duration of the delay not later than 7 days

after the cessation of the particular Event of Delay. The Events of Delay for the

purposes of this clause are:



(a) inclement weather;

(b) loss or damage by fire, explosion, earthquake, storm, tempest, war or other

like cause;

(c) any industrial dispute;

(d) any proclamation, by-law or order;

(e) any delay by any local or other authority in giving any necessary approval or

consent or in carrying out any inspection of the Lessee’s Works, if the Lessee

has taken all reasonable steps to obtain such approval, consent or inspection;

(f) any variation to any part of the Lessee’s Works made at the written request of

the Lessor;

(g) proceedings being taken or threatened affecting progress of the Lessee's

Works or by any disputes with adjoining or neighbouring owners;

(h) any temporary or permanent unavailability of any materials required for the

proper construction of the Lessee’s Works or any part thereof to the extent

that such unavailability arises from circumstances beyond the control of the

Lessee;

(i) any other matter, cause or thing beyond the control of the Lessee acting

reasonably.

5.6 (a) The Lessee must rectify at its cost any defects (other than minor settlement cracks) in the Lessee's Works which appear in such works within 12 months of Practical Completion of the Lessor's Works and of which written notice is given by the Lessor to the Lessee.

(b) The Lessee must provide access to the Land and Premises to the Lessor and its

consultants to enable the Lessor to identify any such defects. Such access

must be during daylight hours when no function is being conducted in the

Premises and no less than two Business Days' notice of any required access

must be given by the Lessor to the Lessee.

(c) If the Lessee fails to rectify any defect which it is required to rectify then it

must do so within a reasonable period of a written request by the Lessor to do

such rectification. If the Lessee fails to do such rectification within such period

the Lessor and its contractors are hereby authorised to enter upon the

Premises to effect such rectification works at the Lessee's cost.

(d) The Lessor is hereby authorised to drawn down upon the Bank Guarantee to

pay for any costs expended by it in carrying out rectification works. If the Bank

Guarantee has been exhausted or returned to the Lessee or applied as the



Bank guarantee for the Lease, then the Lessor may draw down upon that Bank

Guarantee for the purposes of this subclause.

(e) The provisions of this clause shall survive termination of this Deed by the

exercise of either an express or implied right to terminate.

6. DEFAULT BY THE LESSEE

6.1 If the Lessee fails to promptly observe and perform any of the Essential Terms of this

Deed on its part to be observed and performed and such failure continues for more

than twenty one (21) days after the service on the Lessee of a notice in writing from the

Lessor or its solicitors specifying such failure and reasonably and lawfully requiring the

same to be rectified the Lessor may forthwith terminate this deed by notice in writing to

the Lessee whereupon:

(a) the Lessor shall be entitled to recover from the Lessee all costs, damages and

expenses incurred or suffered by the Lessor by reason of the Lessee’s failure as

aforesaid:

(b) the Lessee shall cease to have any interest of any kind in the Premises; and

(c) the Lessor shall be entitled to resume occupation of the Premises (if the Lessee

shall then have become entitled to enter the same) and to remove from the

Premises any property of the Lessee on the Property.

7. RENT AND OTHER PAYMENTS

This section is to include:

(a) Calculation of Rent (based on 5 yearly market reviews)

(b) CPI Rent Review

(c) Days of Payment for Rent

(d) Payment of Rates and taxes

(e) Abatement of rent

(f) Interest on Arrears

(g) Tender after Determination

(h) Goods & Services Tax

(i) Stamp Duty and Lessor’s Costs

8. TERM

The potential Lessee is requesting a term of not less than 21 years from date of signing of lease

– subject to approvals and reviews.

9. HOURS OF OPERATION

The potential lessee is requesting the following hours of operation:



• Sunday to Thursday operating until 10.00pm – staff to vacate premises by 11.00pm

• Friday and Saturday operating until 11.00pm – staff to vacate premises by 12.00am

10. BANK GUARANTEE

10.1 The Bank Guarantee must be delivered to the Lessor by the Lessee not later than the

date which is the earlier of:

(a) the giving of possession of the Premises by the Lessor to the Lessee for the

commencement of preliminaries; and

(b) the date of commencement of the Lessee's Works.

10.2 At any time prior to the return of the Bank Guarantee to the Lessee pursuant to clause

15.3 the Lessor may call upon the Bank Guarantee for payment of any moneys to which

the Lessor is entitled pursuant to any breach by the Lessee of its obligations under this

Deed. The Lessor must notify the Lessee in writing of the quantum of any drawdown

made by it from the Bank Guarantee.

10.3 Not later than 14 days after the later of the date of Practical Completion and the date of

resolution of any dispute between the parties concerning the Lessee's obligations

(whether such dispute is being determined pursuant to clause 12 or otherwise) and the

date when the Lessee delivers to the Lessor the Bank Guarantee referred to in clause ##

of the Lease, the Lessor must return the Bank Guarantee (or the remaining part of any

Bank Guarantee to the Lessee.

10.4 If the Lessor draws down upon the Bank Guarantee pursuant to this Deed prior to the

Practical Completion of the Lessee's Works then within 21 days of notification of the

Lessee of such drawn down by the Lessor, the Lessee must "top up" the quantum of the

Bank Guarantee to its full amount prior to any such draw down.

11. LIGHT POWER AND OTHER UTILITIES

This section to include (but not limited to):

Source of Light and Power

Payment of Service and Utility Charges

12. MAINTENANCE AND FURTHER OBLIGATIONS


Maintenance

Notice of repair

Replacement of fixtures and installations

13. FURTHER OBLIGATIONS OF THE LESSEE




Injurious or illegal conduct – Noise

Drains and waste

Doorways and windows

Cleaning

Rodents and vermin

Signs

Storage

Equipment

Machinery

14. DEFAULT OF LESSEE


Security deposit

Lessor may remedy defaults

Removal of lessees fixtures and goods

Antecedent breaches

15. LICENCE


Ownership of licence

Trading

Transfer of licence

Transfer or removal of licence

Compliance with licensing laws

16. COMMUNITY USE


Open days per annum

Hire deductions for residents/community groups of Hunter’s Hill Council

Events

Access through property/building

MAYORAL MINUTES & REPORTS Meeting 4383 - 27 July 2015

Item 2.1 Page 1

ITEM NO : 2.1

SUBJECT : JOINT REGIONAL AUTHORITY - OFFICIAL SIGNING OF MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING

CSP OUTCOME : COUNCIL IS RECOGNISED AND RESPECTED AS AN OPEN AND TRANSPARENT ORGANISATION

DELIVERY PLAN STRATEGY

: COUNCILLORS ARE WELL-INFORMED ABOUT ISSUES/PROJECTS

REPORTING OFFICER : CLR RICHARD QUINN

Ref:239775

INTRODUCTION

On Tuesday 21 July 2015, in an historic show of unity, Hunter’s Hill Council, Lane Cove Council and the City of Ryde, celebrated the culmination of a collaborative process between the three Councils, through the official signing of their Joint Regional Authority (JRA), Memorandum of Understanding. REPORT

The process undertaken by the three Councils in the lead up to the Joint Response Submission to the State Government’s Fit for the Future reform program, has included the rejection of forced amalgamations and details the formation of a Joint Regional Authority. The submission outlined the robust community engagement process that was undertaken and the details of the extensive research and assessment process, demonstrating that the JRA proposal is a superior alternative to amalgamation and one that meets the State Government’s scale and capacity criteria. Hunter’s Hill Mayor, Clr Richard Quinn, said: “The Joint Regional Authority model is a way for local councils to stay local, retain their close community representation and autonomy over local character and development. It will band us together as we work co-operatively on areas of common interest such as sharing services to gain efficiencies and working together on regional priorities and advocacy.” Ryde Mayor Clr Bill Pickering said our Councils are committed to working proactively with the State Government and were never opposed to local government reform: “This MOU sends a strong signal to the State Government that our three councils are working together for the benefit of our communities. We can immediately get a better, more efficient and financially beneficial result through co-operation rather than through any disruptive process of forced amalgamation, or in the case of Ryde the destructive splitting of our city. “Our residents want proper local representation and to keep local government ‘local’. We can preserve this important framework, but this memorandum also provides a stated and signed commitment by Ryde, Hunters Hill and Lane Cove councils to deliver planning at a sub-regional level and greater efficiencies through joint service provision where appropriate. “This MOU further strengthens our determination for a Joint Regional Authority model as being the best way forward as part of the State Government’s Fit for the Future agenda.”


Item 2.1 Page 2

Lane Cove Mayor, Clr David Brooks-Horn, said: “As a lifelong resident of Lane Cove, I understand the connection that the community has to Council. Each resident knows that they can contact their Councillor about issues that they have and that they can also contact key staff at Council and have their concerns addressed. The discussion about amalgamations has raised within the Lane Cove community concerns about the loss of local democracy and access to local Councillors and to staff. They also have concerns about how their assets will be treated ranging from parks and bushland to the Library services. Lane Cove residents truly value the local in local government.” The JRA is a superior proposal to the Independent Local Government Review Panel’s proposals and a JRA in Metropolitan Sydney is a more viable and advantageous model to that of amalgamation. Core benefits of the JRA include:

Subregional land use and infrastructure planning:

o Single approach to subregional planning priorities and policy

o Central management

o Single set of State/Major local infrastructure priorities

o Subregional Section 94 Plan

Single point of contact for State and Federal Government

Subregional advocacy

Subregional procurement

Shared service centre for economies of scale The joint submission can be viewed on Councils Website at http://www.huntershill.nsw.gov.au/fitforthefuture CONCLUSION

Council has also received correspondence from The Hon Anthony Roberts MP Member for Lane Cove, Minister for Industry, Resources and Energy reiterating his support for this agreement and the establishment of a Joint Regional Authority between our Councils. See Item 10.1 Correspondence. FINANCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

There is no direct environmental impact on Council arising from Council consideration of this matter. SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

There is no direct social impact on Council arising from Council consideration of this matter. RISK ASSESSMENT

There are no direct or indirect risks impacting on Council arising from consideration of this matter. HUNTERS HILL 2030

Council and the community need to be well informed about issues affecting local democracy as provided in the Our Council section of the CSP.

http://www.huntershill.nsw.gov.au/fitforthefuture


Item 2.1 Page 3

RECOMMENDATION


ATTACHMENTS

1. Official Signing of JRA Memorandum of Understanding 2. Signing of JRA MOU - Group Photo


Item 2.1 Attachment 1 Page 4

NOTICES OF MOTION INCLUDING RESCISSION MOTIONS


Item 3.1 Page 6

ITEM NO : 3.1

SUBJECT : EXERCISE EQUIPMENT

CSP OUTCOME : INCREASED LEVEL OF PARTICIPATION IN A RANGE OF HEALTHY LIFESTYLE ACTIVITIES


: ENCOURAGE ACTIVE RECREATION, FITNESS AND HEALTHY LIFESTYLE PARTICIPATION

REPORTING OFFICER : CLR ZAC MILES

Ref:239638

We the undersigned Councillors wish to move the following Notice of Motion at Ordinary Meeting 4383 on 27 July 2015: 1. That Council installs chin up bars on the Riverglade Reserve, Harry Shelley Reserve

and Weil Park.

2. That Council investigate the installation of additional exercise equipment at the Gladesville Reserve, Riverglade Reserve and Weil Park and a report be brought back to Council.

Councillor Zac Miles

Councillor Peter Astridge

RECOMMENDATION

1. That Council installs chin up bars on the Riverglade Reserve, Harry Shelley Reserve and Weil Park.

2. That Council investigate the installation of additional exercise equipment at the Gladesville Reserve, Riverglade Reserve and Weil Park and a report be brought back to Council.

ATTACHMENTS

There are no attachments to this report.



Item 3.2 Page 7

ITEM NO : 3.2

SUBJECT : UPGRADE SOUTHERN END DE MILHAU ROAD

CSP OUTCOME : MAXIMISE SUSTAINABLE ACCESS AND USE OF HIGH QUALITY SPORTING COMMUNITY AND RECREATIONAL FACILITIES


: ENSURE MAXIMUM ACCESS TO AND USAGE OF COUNCIL’S COMMUNITY AND SPORTING FACILITIES


Ref:239654

We the undersigned Councillors wish to move the following Notice of Motion at Ordinary Meeting 4383 on 27 July 2015: 1. That Council upgrades the area at the southern end of De Milhau Road currently

being used for informal dinghy storage, and list it as a formal dinghy storage area.

2. That Council remove the fence that currently exists on the site to provide better access to the water and in the meantime does not impede access.

3. That Council clean up the area, providing:

Formal Dinghy Racks;

Safety Barriers;

Walkway; and

Pontoon or jetty for ease of access to the water for dinghy users. 4. That Council investigates if there is any State or Federal grant funding available for

these upgrades. Councillor Zac Miles




Item 3.2 Page 8

RECOMMENDATION

1. That Council upgrades the area at the southern end of De Milhau Road currently being used for informal dinghy storage, and list it as a formal dinghy storage area.

2. That Council remove the fence that currently exists on the site to provide better access to the water and in the meantime does not impede access.

3. That Council clean up the area, providing:

Formal Dinghy Racks;

Safety Barriers;

Walkway; and

Pontoon or jetty for ease of access to the water for dinghy users.

4. That Council investigates if there is any State or Federal grant funding available for these upgrades.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Map showing the Southern End De Milhau Road




ATTACHMENT 1

Showing Area at Southern end of De Milhau Road



Item 3.3 Page 10

ITEM NO : 3.3

SUBJECT : PAINS ROAD, BORONIA PARK

CSP OUTCOME : IMPLEMENTATION OF LOCAL AREA TRAFFIC MANAGEMENT PLANS AND RESIDENT PARKING SCHEMES WHICH MANAGE TRAFFIC FLOW AND SPEED


: IMPROVE THE SAFETY AND AMENITY OF THE LOCAL ROAD NETWORK


Ref:239657

We the undersigned Councillors wish to move the following Notice of Motion at Ordinary Meeting 4383 on 27 July 2015: 1. That Council investigates the need for resurfacing works on Pains Road, Boronia

Park which are in a dire condition.

2. That Council investigates the damage to signage on the road and replace signs where appropriate to do so.

3. That Council investigates widening Pains Road, on the northern side, to formalise

car parking which is currently dangerous due to the steepness of the fall off towards the Buffalo Creek Estuary.

Councillor Zac Miles


RECOMMENDATION

1. That Council investigates the need for resurfacing works on Pains Road, Boronia Park which are in a dire condition.

2. That Council investigates the damage to signage on the road and replace signs where appropriate to do so.

3. That Council investigates widening Pains Road, on the northern side, to formalise

car parking which is currently dangerous due to the steepness of the fall off towards the Buffalo Creek Estuary.

ATTACHMENTS




Item 3.4 Page 11

ITEM NO : 3.4

SUBJECT : HARBOUR SCULPTURE





Ref:239769

We the undersigned Councillors wish to move the following Notice of Motion at Ordinary Meeting 4383 on 27 July 2015: That Hunters Hill Council: 1. Waive paid parking fees at Clarkes Point Reserve car park for the duration of the

Harbor Sculpture Event; 2. Install temporary signage at the entrance to Clarkes Point Carpark to reflect this

change in paid parking arrangements during the Harbor Sculpture event; 3. Instruct the General Manager to write to the organisers of Harbor Sculpture to inform

them of our continued support of the event through the waiving of these fees. Councillor Zac Miles

Councillor Justine McLaughlin

RECOMMENDATION

1. That Hunters Hill Council waive paid parking fees at Clarkes Point Reserve car park

for the duration of the Harbor Sculpture Event; 2. That Hunters Hill Council install temporary signage at the entrance to Clarkes Point

Carpark to reflect this change in paid parking arrangements during the Harbor Sculpture event;

3. That Hunters Hill Council instruct the General Manager to write to the organisers of

Harbor Sculpture to inform them of our continued support of the event through the waiving of these fees.

ATTACHMENTS


OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4383 - 27 July 2015

Item 4.1 Page 12

ITEM NO : 4.1

SUBJECT : PART OF BORONIA PARK, HUNTERS HILL

CSP OUTCOME : THE HERITAGE, CHARACTER AND CONSERVATION OF THE AREA IS RESPECTED, PRESERVED AND ENHANCED


: ASSESS ALL APPLICATIONS AGAINST THE NEW LEP/DCP

REPORTING OFFICER : SHAHRAM MEHDIZADGAN

DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION NO

DA2015-1082

PROPOSAL INSTALLATION OF NEW LIGHTING AT EXISTING CRICKET NETS

APPLICANT RYDE HUNTERS HILL CRICKET CLUB INC.

OWNER HUNTER'S HILL COUNCIL

DATE LODGED 25 MAY 2015

Ref:238299

INTRODUCTION Reasons for Report The subject site is owned by Council. The proposal results in two (2) submissions received in response to the notification process. It should be noted that both submissions were received outside of the notification period. REPORT 1. SUMMARY Submission Issues Cathy Merchant Ryde – Hunters Hill Flora and Fauna Preservation Society

Issues arising from the original installation of the cricket nets.

Clarification as to why lighting is being requested.

Whether there has been due process regards notification to residents.

How any changes in use arising from the installation of the lights could affect the intent of the yet un-finalised Boronia Park Plan of Management?


Item 4.1 Page 13

Alister Sharp 11 Martin Street Hunters Hill Oppose to the granting approval for the following reasons:

DA was not adequately advertised in that a notice was not displayed on the nets themselves

Cricket is played only in the summer (October – March), and the club has not demonstrated a demand for use of the nets after dark.

The DA does not specify the hours when the lights will be used.

The proposal is based on the unwarranted assumption that the club has previously been given authority to erect lights over the nets (the DA proposes the replacement of three halogen lights with nine LED lights, not the installation of lights).

Submissions Two (2) submissions were received. Recommendation The application is recommended for approval for reasons that it is acceptable having regard to: 1. is permissible under the zoning 2. complies with the relevant planning objectives contained in Hunters Hill Local

Environmental Plan 2012 and Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013 3. will not have adverse effects on the amenity of adjoining properties. 2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL The subject application seeks consent for removal of three (3) existing halogen lights above the nets (1 over each net) and replace them with 9 LED lights (3 over each net) to improve occupant safety when the nets are used in poor natural light conditions. A site inspection revealed that currently no lights exist over the inside part of the cricket nets. The plans are incorrect and a condition will be imposed that amended plans are to be submitted to Council indicating no existing lights, only proposed. 3. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND LOCALITY The site is known as Boronia Park, Hunters Hill and is legally described as Lot 7352 in DP 1156319, for which Council is charged with the care and maintenance. The site has public road frontage to Ryde Road, Boronia Avenue, Park Road and High Street and is split by Princes Street. The bushland area is to the north and east of the ovals and has frontage to Lane Cove River.


Item 4.1 Page 14

The subject location is in Boronia Park, with the existing net structure being constructed of metal posts and poly coated chain link wire mesh with seven (7) lights in total (4 located on the perimeter and 1 above each of the nets). 4. PROPERTY HISTORY No relevant DA or BA history. 5. STATUTORY CONTROLS Relevant Statutory Instruments Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 Local Environmental Plan 2012 Zone: RE1 Public Recreation Conservation Area: No River Front Area: Yes SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment 2005): Yes Development Control Plan 2013: Yes Listed Heritage item: Yes Contributory Building: No Vicinity of Heritage Item: Yes 6. POLICY CONTROLS Plan of Management for Boronia Park 7. REFERRALS 7.1 External Approval Bodies Not applicable. 7.2 Health & Building Not applicable. 7.3 Heritage As stated within the body of the report, the property is a heritage item and under Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012. The proposal was referred to Council’s Heritage Advisor who provided the following comments:

Heritage Status: Heritage Item 86.

Proposal: Additional lighting mounted over practice nets.

Statement of Heritage Impact: minimal visual impact apart from light spill at night.

Comments: presumably the additional lighting is sought as a matter of proper function and safety, and is supportable Recommendation: Approval.


Item 4.1 Page 15

7.4 Works & Services The application was referred to Council’s Design and Development Engineer who raised no concern subject to special conditions being imposed for position of the lights being facing down towards the ground and the lights being turned off by 9pm throughout the year. 7.5 Parks & Landscape The application was referred to Council’s Tree Consultants who raised no concern subject to special conditions being imposed for position of the lights being facing down towards the ground and the lights being turned off by 9pm throughout the year. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UNDER S.79C The relevant matters for consideration under section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 are assessed under the following headings. 9. STATE INSTRUMENTS / LEGISLATION 9.1 State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs) Not applicable. 9.2 Regional Environmental Plans (REPs) – Deemed SEPPs The subject site is located within the area covered by SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005. This plan has a number of general aims and objectives, the most relevant of which, in this case, are as follows:

Aims of plan

(1) This plan has the following aims with respect to the Sydney Harbour Catchment:

(a) to ensure that the catchment, foreshores, waterways and islands

of Sydney Harbour are recognised, protected, enhanced and maintained:

(i) as an outstanding natural asset, and

(ii) as a public asset of national and heritage significance, for

existing and future generations,

(b) to ensure a healthy, sustainable environment on land and water, (c) to achieve a high quality and ecologically sustainable urban

environment, (d) to ensure a prosperous working harbour and an effective transport

corridor, (e) to encourage a culturally rich and vibrant place for people, (f) to ensure accessibility to and along Sydney Harbour and its

foreshores,


Item 4.1 Page 16

(g) to ensure the protection, maintenance and rehabilitation of watercourses, wetlands, riparian lands, remnant vegetation and ecological connectivity,

(h) to provide a consolidated, simplified and updated legislative

framework for future planning.

(2) For the purpose of enabling these aims to be achieved in relation to the Foreshores and Waterways Area, this plan adopts the following principles: (a) Sydney Harbour is to be recognised as a public resource, owned

by the public, to be protected for the public good,

(b) the public good has precedence over the private good whenever and whatever change is proposed for Sydney Harbour or its foreshores,

(c) protection of the natural assets of Sydney Harbour has

precedence over all other interests. Furthermore, Part 3 Division 2 of SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 lists matters for consideration by Council when determining an application. It further states that Council shall not grant consent to an application unless it is satisfied that the proposal is consistent with the relevant objectives of the SREP. The following matters for consideration are relevant to this application:

25 Foreshore and waterways scenic quality The matters to be taken into consideration in relation to the maintenance, protection and enhancement of the scenic quality of foreshores and waterways are as follows: (a) the scale, form, design and siting of any building should be based on an

analysis of:

(i) the land on which it is to be erected, and

(ii) the adjoining land, and

(iii) the likely future character of the locality,

(b) development should maintain, protect and enhance the unique visual qualities of Sydney Harbour and its islands, foreshores and tributaries,

(c) the cumulative impact of water-based development should not detract from the character of the waterways and adjoining foreshores.

It is considered that the proposal would satisfy the above aims of the policy. The matters for consideration, in particular those of specific relevance pertaining to the appearance of the development from the waterway and foreshore are considered to have been satisfactorily addressed. 9.3 Other Legislation Not Applicable.


Item 4.1 Page 17

10. HUNTERS HILL LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 2012 10.1 Aims and Objectives of Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012 and Zone The proposal is permissible with consent under Zone RE1 Public Recreation and complies with the relevant statutory controls of Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012. 10.2 Statutory Compliance Table Not applicable. 10.3 Site Area Requirements Not applicable. 10.4 Residential flat buildings and low-rise multi-unit housing-density and garden

area controls Not Applicable. 10.5 Height of Buildings No change to the height of the existing cricket nets. 10.6 Landscaped Area Not applicable. 10.7 Subdivision Lot Size Not Applicable. 10.8 Floor Space Ratio Not Applicable. 10.9 Street Frontage Not Applicable. 10.10 Dual Occupancy Not Applicable. 10.11 Foreshore Building Lines Not Applicable. 10.12 River Front Area The subject site is also located with the River front Area and, as such, assessment is required in accordance with Clause 6.7 of Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012. Clause 6.7 states: 6.7 (3) Development consent must not be granted for development on land to

which this clause applies unless the consent authority is satisfied that:


Item 4.1 Page 18

(a) Measures will be taken, including in relation to the location, design and appearance of the development and conservation of existing trees, to minimize the visual impact of the development to and from the nearest waterway, and

(b) Any historic, scientific, cultural, social, archaeological,

architectural, natural or aesthetic significance of the land on which the development is to be carried out, and of surrounding land, will be maintained, and

(c) Existing views towards waterways from public roads and reserves

would not be obstructed.

It is considered that there will be no detrimental effect created by the appearance of the development due to the visual quality when viewed from or towards the waterway as it will not be able to be seen due to the perimeter landscaping beyond the development. 10.13 Other Special Clauses / Development Standards Not Applicable. 11. DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO STATUTORY CONTROLS No relevant draft amendments pertaining to this application. 12. DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS (DCPs) 12.1 Compliance Table Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013 (DCP) Not Applicable. Planning Policy – All Development Not applicable. Heritage Conservation Areas The proposal complies with the relevant objectives under Part 2 of Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013. River Front Area Refer to section 10.12 of this report ‘River Front Area’. Height Not Applicable, Front, Side & Rear Setbacks Not Applicable. Landscaped Area Not Applicable.


Item 4.1 Page 19

Solar Access Not Applicable. Privacy Not Applicable. Views Not Applicable. Car Parking Not Applicable. Garages & Carports Not Applicable. Fences Not Applicable. 12.2 Other DCPs, Codes and Policies Boronia Park Reserve Plan of Management Clause 4.5 under the heading of ‘Active Recreation opportunities’ gives possible directions and opportunities for sporting facilities at the Reserve include;

Access to and use of existing facilities

Upgrading facilities at ovals Clause 5.0 under the heading Boronia Park Reserve Management Approach, it states Council will focus their management activities in areas including ‘visitor management’ (including general, passive and active recreational activities). Boronia Park Reserve Plan of Management (Draft Plan) Under Part 3.11.14 of the Draft Plan, the proposed change states:

Given comments received, the PoM action plan will be updated to note that a Development Application is required for any new lighting with Boronia Park.

Under Part 4.5.2 Active Management Zone of the Draft Plan it states:

Objective: Maintain and enhance current active recreational uses and encourage an increased variety of community based sporting uses compatible with park values. Key Strategies:

Improve active recreational facilities;


Item 4.1 Page 20

Promote increased use of active recreation areas by general public for a variety of uses;

Under table 2.1 - issues Light spill into surrounding adjacent bushland areas Under table 2.1- Action

Ensure any future lighting does not cause spill into residential properties.

Light spill into surrounding adjacent bushland areas to be considered in context of Rivers

Under table 2.1- Means of Implementation Consultation and Council assessment and detailed design.

Thus, as a result the subject Development Application has been lodged with Council for assessment. It is considered that the proposed lighting would have low light spillage, as the lights would be encased and facing down towards the ground (3.6m distance from light to ground) within the nets. Also, the existing cricket nets would be approximately 100m setback from the nearest residential properties. However to ensure that light spillage into the adjacent bushland and residential properties is kept to a minimum, the following special conditions will be imposed:

That the proposed overhead lights for the cricket nets within Boronia Park are to be turned off at 9pm at all times during the year.

That the proposed lights to be directed down at the ground at all times to avoid light spillage.

13. THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT The proposed development is permissible with Council’s consent in accordance with the zoning provisions of the Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan and the Boronia Park Plan of Management. 14. SUBMISSIONS The proposed development was notified in accordance with Council’s Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013 in the TWT local newspaper for a period of fourteen (14) days commencing on the 10 June 2015 and ending on 24 June 2015. Within the specified time period two (2) submissions were received. It should be noted that both submission were received by Council outside of the notification period. Copy of the submissions are attached to this report.

NOTIFICATION REQUIRED YES

NUMBER NOTIFIED TWT Newspaper

SUBMISSIONS RECEIVED Name & Address of Respondents

SUMMARY OF SUBMISSIONS

Cathy Merchant Ryde – Hunters Hill Flora and Fauna Preservation Society

Issues arising from the original installation of the cricket nets

Clarification as to why lighting is being requested


Item 4.1 Page 21


NUMBER NOTIFIED TWT Newspaper



Whether there has been due process regards notification to residents

How any changes in use arising from the installation of the lights could affect the intent of the yet unfinalised Boronia Park Plan of Management

Alister Sharp 11 Martin Street Hunters Hill



The DA does not specify the hours when the lights will be used.

The proposal is based on the unwarranted assumption that the club has previously been given authority to erect lights over the nets (the DA proposes the replacement of three halogen lights with nine LED lights, not the installation of lights)

The main issues of concern outlining the objections are discussed below: Cathy Merchant Ryde – Hunters Hill Flora and Fauna Preservation Society

Issues arising from the original installation of the cricket nets

Comment: This comment is unrelated to this application. This objection is unsustained.

Clarification as to why lighting is being requested

Comment: However, the applicant has advised within the application that the proposed lighting would improve occupant safety when the nets are used in poor natural light conditions. This objection is unsustained.

Whether there has been due process regards notification to residents

Comment: The proposed development was in the TWT local newspaper for a period of fourteen (14) days commencing on the 10 June 2015 and ending on 24 June 2015. Also, Council Rangers on 11 June 2015 at approximately 3.30pm attached a red DA notification sign on the cricket nets at Boronia Park. Therefore, the proposal was notified in accordance with Council’s Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013.

How any changes in use arising from the installation of the lights could affect the intent of the yet unfinalised Boronia Park Plan of Management


Item 4.1 Page 22

Comment: In the process of assessing this application Council has considered the application under the Boronia Park Reserve Plan of Management and the Boronia Park Reserve Plan of Management (Draft Plan) with the proposed changes, as noted below: Boronia Park Reserve Plan of Management Clause 4.5 under the heading of ‘Active Recreation opportunities’ gives possible directions and opportunities for sporting facilities at the Reserve include;

Access to and use of existing facilities

Upgrading facilities at ovals Clause 5.0 under the heading Boronia Park Reserve Management Approach, it states Council will focus their management activities in areas including ‘visitor management’ (including general, passive and active recreational activities). Boronia Park Reserve Plan of Management (Draft Plan) Under Part 3.11.14 of the Draft Plan, the proposed change states:

Given comments received, the PoM action plan will be updated to note that a Development Application is required for any new lighting with Boronia Park.

Under Part 4.5.2 Active Management Zone of the Draft Plan it states:

Objective: Maintain and enhance current active recreational uses and encourage an increased variety of community based sporting uses compatible with park values. Key Strategies:

Improve active recreational facilities;

Promote increased use of active recreation areas by general public for a variety of uses.

Under table 2.1 - issues Light spill into surrounding adjacent bushland areas Under table 2.1- Action

Ensure any future lighting does not cause spill into residential properties.

Light spill into surrounding adjacent bushland areas to be considered in context of Rivers

Under table 2.1- Means of Implementation

Consultation and Council assessment and detailed design.


Item 4.1 Page 23

Thus, as a result the subject Development Application has been lodged with Council for assessment. It is considered that the proposed lighting would have low light spillage, as the lights would be encased and facing down towards the ground (3.6m distance from light to ground) within the nets. Also, the existing cricket nets would be approximately 100m setback from the nearest residential properties. However to ensure that light spillage into the adjacent bushland and residential properties is kept to a minimum, the following special conditions will be imposed:

That the proposed overhead lights for the cricket nets within Boronia Park are to be turned off by 9pm at all times during the year.


Alister Sharp 11 Martin Street Hunters Hill


Comment: Council Rangers on 11 June 2015 at approximately 3.30pm attached a red Development Application notification sign on the cricket nets at Boronia Park (a photo of the red notification sign on the nets is attached to this report). Also, the proposed development was notified in accordance with Council’s Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013 in the TWT local newspaper for a period of fourteen (14) days commencing on the 10 June 2015.


Comment: The cricket nets have been placed at Boronia Park for use. The use may vary during periods of the year. During summer there would be extended use of natural light and supplemented by the proposed lighting. It is considered that the proposed lighting would have low light spillage, as the lights would be encased and facing down towards the ground (3.6m distance from light to ground) within the nets. Also, the existing cricket nets would be approximately 100m setback from the nearest residential properties. However to ensure that light spillage into the adjacent bushland and residential properties is kept to a minimum, the following special conditions will be imposed:



The DA does not specify the hours when the lights will be used. Comment: To ensure that light spillage into the adjacent bushland and residential properties is kept to a minimum, the following special condition has been imposed:



Item 4.1 Page 24

The proposal is based on the unwarranted assumption that the club has previously been given authority to erect lights over the nets (the DA proposes the replacement of three halogen lights with nine LED lights, not the installation of lights)

Comment: A site inspection revealed that currently no lights exist over the inside part of the cricket nets. The plans are incorrect and a condition will be imposed that amended plans are to be submitted to Council indicating no existing lights, only the proposed - 9 LED lights (3 over each net). CONCLUSION Subject to conditioning, the proposed works are considered acceptable and would have no unreasonable impacts upon adjacent bushland and surrounding properties. The proposal has been assessed in terms of the public interest and following compliance with the relevant development standards and objectives in Boronia Park Reserve Plan of Management and Draft Plan (with changes), Development Control Plan 2013 and Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012, the application is considered acceptable. The proposal has been assessed having regard to the relevant matters for consideration under s79 C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012, and Development Control Plan 2013. For the reasons outlined in this report it is considered that the proposed development would not unduly impact upon the adjoining residential properties and accordingly is recommended for approval. FINANCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct environmental impact on Council arising from Council consideration of this matter. SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct social impact on Council arising from Council consideration of this matter. RISK ASSESSMENT There are no direct or indirect risks impacting on Council arising from consideration of this matter. HUNTERS HILL 2030 This matter relates to ensuring that heritage and conservation of the area is respected, preserved and enhanced including the preservation of the character, views to and from the Municipality, and the preservation of the tree canopy.


Item 4.1 Page 25

RECOMMENDATION That Development Application No.2015-1082 for the installation of 9 LED lights (3 over each net).at existing cricket nets on Boronia Park, Park Road, Hunters Hill, be approved, subject to the following conditions: Special Conditions: 1. Pursuant to the provisions of the Environment Planning & Assessment Act 1979 this

approval shall lapse and be void if the building work or use to which it refers is not physically commenced within five (5) years after the date of approval.

2. The development consent No.2015-1082 relates to the plan prepared by Cad Draft P/L, unknown author, dated 4 September 2014, date stamped by Council 25 May 2015.

3. That the proposed overhead lights for the cricket nets within Boronia Park are to be

turned off by 9pm at all times during the year.

4. That the proposed lights to be directed down at the ground at all times to avoid light spillage.

5. That the proposed lighting (Hippo Maxi) is to be in accordance with the

specifications noted on the plan prepared by Cad Draft P/L, unknown author, dated 4 September 2014 , date stamped by Council 25 May 2015.

6. The plans are incorrect and are to be amended, indicating no existing lights, only the

proposed - 9 LED lights (3 over each net). Standard Conditions: L4

ATTACHMENTS

1. Map 2. Plans 3. Submissions


Item 4.2 Page 35

ITEM NO : 4.2

SUBJECT : 30A VIRET STREET, HUNTERS HILL




REPORTING OFFICER : KERRY SMITH


2015-1074

PROPOSAL MODIFICATIONS TO EXISTING ROOF, ENCLOSE FIRST FLOOR BALCONY FOR A BEDROOM AND PERGOLA

APPLICANT TONY LE TRINH

OWNER MR T & MRS L LE TRINH

DATE LODGED 11 MAY 2015

Ref:238169

INTRODUCTION Reasons for Report The proposal was accompanied by an ‘Exceptions’ submission re non-compliance with landscaped area provisions of LEP 2015. REPORT 1. SUMMARY The proposed development does not comply with the landscaped area provisions of LEP 2012. Issues Not applicable. Submissions No submissions were received. Recommendation The application is recommended for approval for reasons that it is acceptable having regard to: 1. It is permissible under the zoning


Item 4.2 Page 36

2. The development standard non-compliance is reasonable in the circumstances. 3. It complies with the relevant planning objectives contained in Hunters Hill Local

Environmental Plan 2012 and Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013 and 4. It will not have adverse effects on the amenity of adjoining properties.

2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL It is proposed to carry out alterations and additions to the existing dwelling including the provision of a lift, the excavation at the lower level, expansion of the garage and the conversion of the upper balcony to a bedroom. The dwelling will be used as follows: On the lower ground floor, kitchen, dining / living room, study, bathroom staircase and lift. Part of the existing lower ground floor area will be closed off with a masonry wall and soil filling to obviate the creation of a third storey. The rear of this section of the house will open onto a covered verandah area. On the ground floor, a double garage, laundry, main entry, bathroom, two (2) bedrooms (one with a walk-in ‘robe and ensuite and one with a walk-in ‘robe), cloakroom, staircase and lift. The two bedrooms open to the rear full width existing terrace. A privacy screen will be installed on the western side of the existing terrace. On the first floor, an existing bedroom with an ensuite, an existing landing and a new second bedroom with ensuite and walk-in ‘robe and staircase. A new tiled roof section will replace the existing verandah covering to be constructed over the new rear bedroom. On the lower ground floor, the proposed study on the eastern side will be affected by the removal of the external wall and the area extended towards the boundary, thus increasing the site coverage of that part of the dwelling house. The large fireplace at the centre of the western elevation will be removed, thus reducing the site coverage of that part of the dwelling house. A new skylight will be added to the western roof section midway along such structure. A new external staircase will be constructed mid-way along the eastern side of the dwelling connecting the upper level landing with the natural ground level adjacent to the existing side portico. Accompanying the application were a Statement of Environmental Effects, an ‘Exceptions’ submission, a BASIX Certificate and a Statement of Heritage Impact.

3. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND LOCALITY The premises are known as No.30A Viret Street, Hunters hill and are legally described as Lot 10 in DP 787366. The site is located on the northern side between Kokera Street and the Lane Cove River. It is a hatchet shaped lot and an area of 988sqm with a frontage of 1.455 metres (plus a reciprocal ROW) to Viret street and a mean high water mark frontage to Lane Cove River. The main part of the site has a slope of 4.7 metres down to the River and a cross slope of 0.68 metres down to the east along the southern part of the allotment. Existing on the site is a two-storey dwelling with a large side portico, an attached garage plus a rear pool and a timber ramp and jetty to the River.


Item 4.2 Page 37

4. PROPERTY HISTORY The applicant was advised that the original proposal created a three storey development and as such would not receive a recommendation for an approval. As a result, the applicant submitted amending plans on 29 June 2015, eliminating the creation of a three-storey development. 5. STATUTORY CONTROLS Relevant Statutory Instruments Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 Local Environmental Plan 2012 Zone: Low Density Residential R2 Conservation Area: Yes River Front Area: Yes SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment 2005): Yes Development Control Plan 2013: Yes Listed Heritage item: No Contributory Building: No Vicinity of Heritage Item: Yes 6. POLICY CONTROLS Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013 7. REFERRALS 7.1 External Approval Bodies Not applicable. 7.2 Health & Building The application was referred to Council’s Environmental Health and Building Surveyor who advised that there are no BCA or Swimming Pool Act issues with the development. 7.3 Heritage As stated within the body of the report, the property is a heritage item and/or is in a conservation area under Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012. The proposal was referred to Council’s Heritage Advisor who provided the following comments:

Heritage Status: within Conservation Area C1 (‘The Peninsula’); adjoins Item 342 (“Enderslea”) at 30 Viret Street; foreshore location to Lane Cove River.

Proposal: alterations and additions

Statement of Heritage Impact: by Dr Sue Rosen- O.K.

Comments: the house was most probably built in the 1980s/90s after the grounds of “Enderslea” were subdivided. The main impacts that may arise are changes to the appearance of the house within the setting of the Item when viewed from the Lane Cove River. While this has not been canvassed in the SoHI to any considerable degree, the proposed “makeover” may serve to lessen the disparity.

Recommendation: Approval


Item 4.2 Page 38

The application was not forwarded to the Conservation Advisory Panel as there were no changes to the roof form or to the building footprint. 7.4 Works & Services The application was referred to Council’s Design and Development Engineer who advised by memo that there are no engineering objections to the proposed development. 7.5 Parks & Landscape The application was referred to Council’s Tree Consultants who advised by memo that there are no landscape objections to the proposal subject to compliance with conditions of consent. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UNDER S.79C The relevant matters for consideration under section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 are assessed under the following headings. 9. STATE INSTRUMENTS / LEGISLATION 9.1 State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs) Not applicable. 9.2 Regional Environmental Plans (REPs) – Deemed SEPPs Sydney Harbour Catchment 2005 Aims of plan




(i) as an outstanding natural asset, and (ii) as a public asset of national and heritage significance, for





foreshores,


Item 4.2 Page 39

(g) to ensure the protection, maintenance and rehabilitation of watercourses, wetlands, riparian lands, remnant vegetation and ecological connectivity,



(2) For the purpose of enabling these aims to be achieved in relation to the Foreshores and Waterways Area, this plan adopts the following principles:

(a) Sydney Harbour is to be recognised as a public resource, owned

by the public, to be protected for the public good, (b) the public good has precedence over the private good whenever

and whatever change is proposed for Sydney Harbour or its foreshores,


precedence over all other interests.

Furthermore, Part 3 Division 2 of SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 lists matters for consideration by Council when determining an application. It further states that Council shall not grant consent to an application unless it is satisfied that the proposal is consistent with the relevant objectives of the SREP. The following matters for consideration are relevant to this application:

25 Foreshore and waterways scenic quality

The matters to be taken into consideration in relation to the maintenance, protection and enhancement of the scenic quality of foreshores and waterways are as follows: (a) the scale, form, design and siting of any building should be based

on an analysis of:

(i) the land on which it is to be erected, and (ii) the adjoining land, and (iii) the likely future character of the locality,


(c) the cumulative impact of water-based development should not

detract from the character of the waterways and adjoining foreshores.

The proposed development would be readily discernible from the nearby river. The new development would not have a detrimental effect on the skyline as seen from the River and would not have a significant undue impact in relation to visual presentation of the built form to the river. Accordingly, the development would not detrimentally affect the visual amenity of the foreshore.


Item 4.2 Page 40

It is considered that the proposal would satisfy the above aims of the policy. The matters for consideration, in particular those of specific relevance pertaining to the appearance of the development from the waterway and foreshore are considered to have been satisfactorily addressed by the proposal. 9.3 Other Legislation Not Applicable. 10. HUNTERS HILL LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 2012 10.1 Aims and Objectives of Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012 and Zone The proposal is permissible with consent under Zone Low Density residential R2 and complies with the relevant statutory controls of Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012. 10.2 Statutory Compliance Table The following table illustrates whether or not the proposed development complies with the relevant statutory controls of Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan No.2012.

Compliance with Current Statutory Controls

Proposed Control Compliance

HEIGHT Ridge

8.5 metres

8.5 metres

Yes

STOREYS 2 storeys 2 storeys Yes

LANDSCAPED AREA 57.4% 60% No

FORESHORE BUILDING LINE 15 metres 15 metres Yes

10.3 Site Area Requirements The proposal complies with these requirements. 10.4 Residential flat buildings and low-rise multi-unit housing-density and garden

area controls Not Applicable. 10.5 Height of Buildings The height of the proposal, being 8.5 metres and 2 storeys in height is acceptable as it would comply with the maximum of 8.5 metres/no more than two storeys height limit as prescribed by Clause 4.3 of the Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012. 10.6 Landscaped Area The landscaped area of 57.4% would breach the 60% minimum permissible landscaped area as prescribed by the Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012. The applicant has submitted an ‘Exceptions’ submission under clause 4.6 of LEP 2012 to justify the non-compliance with the 60% minimum landscaped area provisions of clause 6.9 of LEP 2012. The fact of this non-conformity is that the existing landscaped area of the site is 57.4% and the landscaped area, based on the present development proposal, will remain at 57.4%. This is a result of the relatively large dwelling/portico/garage on the site. That is, there will be no increase in the footprint of the house nor any increase in the vehicular driveway, nor any new structure to be constructed on the site that would be deemed to be ‘non landscaped area’ by definition.


Item 4.2 Page 41

The current ‘soft’ landscaping is 25.7% of the site and the proposed ‘soft’ landscaping will be 29.7% of the site. The existing ‘hard’ landscaping, which includes the large existing pool, occupying 31.7% of the site and the proposed ‘hard’ landscaping being reduced to 29.7%. Therefore, the proposed landscaping works proposed for the site will provide for a ‘betterment’ of this part of the development. The architects for the applicant in their submission on this matter have reasonably argued that strict compliance with the development standard would be unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case. A copy of the ‘Exceptions’ submission is attached. The submission stated in part: The proposal however improves the percentage of soft landscaping by proposing to re-turf the area between the pool and lower ground floor terrace. This improves the soft landscaping from 25.7% to 29.7%. The eastern side setback terraced area has also been modified into a pergola, therefore positively contributing to the landscaped area. Most battle-axe and waterfront properties along Viret Street do not satisfy the 60% requirement of landscaping, therefore the proposal is consistent if not more compliant with the controls than other properties in the relevant zone. In summary, the applicant is providing for a ‘betterment’ of the landscaping of the site and is not reducing the landscaped area. He has argued that strict compliance with the landscaped area development standard is unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case and it is reasonable to uphold the request. In this case, the development will be in the public interest and is consistent with the objectives of the particular standard within the zone. 10.7 Subdivision Lot Size Not Applicable. 10.8 Floor Space Ratio Not Applicable. 10.9 Street Frontage Not Applicable. 10.10 Dual Occupancy Not Applicable. 10.11 Foreshore Building Lines The proposed development does not breach the 15 metre Foreshore Building Line of 15 metres as prescribed under clause 6.6 of LEP 2012. Although a small portion of the existing dwelling, being a veranda roof to replace an existing pergola, is located within such Foreshore Building line area, it is considered that such alteration within the Foreshore Area will not have an adverse impact on the amenity or aesthetic appearance of the foreshore as per sub-clause 4.4 of clause 6.6 of LEP 2012.


Item 4.2 Page 42

10.12 River Front Area The subject site is also located with the River front Area and, as such, assessment is required in accordance with Clause 6.7 of Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012. Clause 6.7 states: 6.7 (3) Development consent must not be granted for development on land to







As the proposed external alterations and additions will be of a minor effect and will have no undue detrimental effect in relation to the views to or from the waterway. 10.13 Other Special Clauses / Development Standards Not Applicable. 11. DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO STATUTORY CONTROLS No relevant draft amendments pertaining to this application. 12. DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS (DCPs) 12.1 Compliance Table Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013 (DCP)

CONTROL REQUIRED/ PERMISSIBLE

PROPOSED COMPLIANCE

HEIGHT Ridge External walls

8.5 metres 7.2 metres


Yes Yes

Storeys 2 2 Yes

Landscaped Area 60% minimum 57.4% No

BOUNDARY SETBACKS Dwelling house South (Front) North (Rear) East (Side) West (Side)

Predom. Building line 6 metres 1.5 metres 1.5 metres

No change 14.4 metres 2.02 metres 1.645 metres

Yes Yes Yes Yes

Planning Policy – All Development The proposal complies with the relevant objectives, design parameters and preferred design elements under Parts 2 and 3 of Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013.


Item 4.2 Page 43

Heritage Conservation Areas The proposal complies with the relevant objectives under Part 2 of Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013. River Front Area Refer to section 10.12 of this report ‘River Front Area’. Height Refer to section 10.5 of this report ‘Height of Buildings’. Front, Side & Rear Setbacks Comply. Landscaped Area Refer to section 10.6 of this report ‘Landscaped Area’. Solar Access Complies and no change to the shadow effects will result. Privacy It is considered that there will be an improvement in privacy for the adjoining residents due to the upper level large veranda being converted into a bedroom and a privacy screen will be installed at the western end of the existing rear terrace. Views There will be no undue loss of shared water views as a result of this development. Car Parking Complies. Garages & Carports Complies in that the enclosed area adjacent to the existing attached garage will be converted into a second attached garage. Fences No change in existing fencing of the site is proposed. 12.2 Other DCPs, Codes and Policies

Hunter’s Hill Council S94A Developer Contributions Plan 2011


Item 4.2 Page 44

13. THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT Notwithstanding, the existing non-compliance with the landscaped area of the development (which does not change as a result of this development) it is considered that the scale of the development would remain satisfactory and would not alter the landscaped area. To satisfy the continuation of this non-conformity, the applicant has provided for an effective ‘betterment’ of the development in the way of improved landscaping of the site. The development on the site has a landscaped area of 57.4% by definition. This proposal is made up of 29.7% ‘soft’ landscaping and 27.7% ‘hard’ landscaping, which includes the area of the pool and its surrounds. The existing development on the site is made up of a 57.4% overall landscaped area comprising 25.7% ‘soft’ landscaping and 31.7% ‘hard’ landscaping. The provisions of clause 6.9 of LEP 2012, being a development standard, stipulates a minimum area of 60% made up of a minimum of 40% of the site for soft planting and a maximum of 20% of the site for ‘hard’ landscaping. The development therefore does not comply but it proposes to increase the ‘soft’ landscaping and decrease the ‘hard’ landscaping. It must be viewed on the basis that if the overall landscaped area is less than the required standard, the mix of ‘hard’ and ‘soft’ landscaping will also be likely to be less than the standard of clause 6.9 of the LEP 2012 but should at least maintain if not improve the percentage figures. The development does not comply with the development standard for landscaped area based on the requirements of clause 6.9 of LEP 2012 for which an objection was submitted under the ‘Exceptions’ provisions of clause 4.6 of the LEP. In support of the non-conformity with the development standard, the applicant has submitted an ‘Exceptions’ letter and states in part:

The eastern side setback terraced area has also been modified into a pergola, thereby positively contributing to the landscaped area.

The proposal therefore upgrades the current landscaping of the site, increasing the amount of soft landscaping by approximately 41 square meters: improving the general amenity both to the subject property and also to the neighbours that surround.

This is recommended to be upheld as set out in the report and the recommendation. This is on the basis that strict compliance is deemed to be unnecessary and unreasonable in the circumstances of the case. Accordingly, the development application relating to the alterations and additions to the dwelling house applied for under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 is recommended for approval subject to recommendation and conditions, as set out below.

The existing development on the site does not give compliance to the sides and rear setback provisions of the DCP 2013. As the proposed development does not further reduce any of these building setbacks, it is reasonable for approval in the circumstances.

The proposal has been assessed having regard to the relevant matters for consideration under s.79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012, and Development Control Plan 2013. Subject to conditioning, for the reasons outlined in this report it is considered that the proposed development would not unduly impact upon the adjoining residential properties and accordingly is recommended for approval.

14. SUBMISSIONS The proposed development was notified in accordance with Council’s Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013 for a period of fourteen (14) days commencing on the 25 May 2015. Within the specified time period, no submissions were received.


Item 4.2 Page 45

CONCLUSION Notwithstanding, the existing non-compliance with the landscaped area and the sides and rear setbacks of the development house (which does not change as a result of this development) it is considered that the scale of the development would remain satisfactory. The proposal would not alter the landscaped area of the premises by definition. The development does not comply with the development standard for landscaped area based on the requirements of clause 6.9 of LEP 2012 for which an objection was submitted under the ‘Exceptions’ provisions of clause 4.6 of the LEP and which is recommended to be upheld as set out in the report and the recommendation. This is on the basis that strict compliance is deemed to be unnecessary and undesirable in the circumstances of the case and utilising the ‘betterment’ landscaping works proposed to be carried out on the site. Accordingly, the development application relating to the alterations and additions to the dwelling house applied for under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 is recommended for approval subject to conditions, as set out below. The proposal has been assessed having regard to the relevant matters for consideration under s.79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012, and Development Control Plan 2013. Subject to conditioning, for the reasons outlined in this report it is considered that the proposed development would not unduly impact upon the amenity of the residents of the adjoining residential properties and accordingly is recommended for approval.

FINANCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct environmental impact on Council arising from Council consideration of this matter. SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct social impact on Council arising from Council consideration of this matter. RISK ASSESSMENT There are no direct or indirect risks impacting on Council arising from consideration of this matter. HUNTERS HILL 2030 This matter relates to ensuring that heritage and conservation of the area is respected, preserved and enhanced including the preservation of the character, views to and from the Municipality, and the preservation of the tree canopy.


Item 4.2 Page 46

RECOMMENDATION

A. That the Council, as the consent authority, is satisfied that the objection lodged under clause 4.6 of LEP 2012 to vary the landscaped area development standard of clause 6.9 of the Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012, is well founded under the circumstances of the case and is consistent with the aims of the Policy.

B. That Development Application No.2015-1074 for the construction of alterations

and additions to the dwelling house at No.30A Viret Street, Hunters Hill, be approved, subject to the following conditions:

Special Conditions:

1. Pursuant to the provisions of the Environment Planning & Assessment Act 1979 this approval shall lapse and be void if the building work or use to which it refers is not physically commenced within five (5) years after the date of approval.

2. The development consent No. 2014/1123 relates to the plans prepared by Luigi Rosselli Pty Ltd cadfile 1407 numbered DA 01 to DA 09 Issue D dated 20 July 2015 as received by Council on 22 July 2015, except where amended by conditions of this consent.

3. The external finishes on the site being carried out as per drawing No.DA 17 Issue A dated 30 April 2015 and prepared by Luigi Rosselli Pty Ltd as received by Council on 11 May 2015.

4. Compliance with BASIX Certificate No.A216054 dated 7 May 2015.

5. Pursuant to section 80A(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and the Hunters Hill Section 94A Developer Contributions Plan 2011, a contribution of $8,918.48 shall be paid to council.

The amount to be paid is to be adjusted (if required) at the time of the actual payment, in accordance with the provisions of Hunters Hill Section 94A Developer Contributions Plan 2011. The contribution must be paid to Council: (a) in the case of Complying Development;

prior to the time notice is given to Council under s86 of the Act of the applicant's intention to subdivide, commence work or erect a building;

prior to the commencement of any work pursuant to the complying development certificate;

prior to the issue of any subdivision certificate;

prior to the issue of any occupation certificate; whichever occurs first. (b) in all other instances:

prior to the issue of any construction certificate;



Item 4.2 Page 47

prior to the commencement of any work pursuant to the development consent;

prior to the issue of any occupation certificate; whichever occurs first.

6. The area at the south western corner of the lower ground floor area being enclosed by masonry walls after being filled with soil such that this area cannot be used as a third floor level by definition under the provisions of clause 4.3 of LEP 2012.

7. The provision of any pump for a rainwater tank and/or any air-conditioning

equipment to be installed on the outside of the building being acoustically treated to ensure that noise does not exceed 5dBA above ambient noise levels on the boundaries at any time.

8. Any rainwater tank not being connected up to Sydney Water’s mains supply for

its topping up with water.

9. Compliance with the following tree management controls:

(a) Trees covered under the provisions of Hunters Hill Council’s Tree Management Controls shall be retained except where Council’s prior written consent has been given.

Tree Protection (a) Tree protection measures shall be in accordance with these Conditions

of Consent. (b) Prior to the commencement of works of on-site (including any demolition

or site enabling works), Tree Protection Zone/s (TPZ) shall be established around trees to be retained at the following radial distances specified below.

Tree Location Species TPZ (m)

Rear of site Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) 12 x DBH

(c) or mixing of materials The TPZ must:

be enclosed with 1.8m (minimum) high, fully supported temporary weld mesh fencing panels.

be maintained for the duration of the development works and shall not be realigned without prior authorisation from the Project Arborist.

have signs identifying the TPZ which are visible from within the development site.

(d) The following works are excluded from within the TPZ, unless otherwise

stated:

Grade alteration, soil cultivation, disturbance or compaction


Item 4.2 Page 48

Stockpiling, storage, disposal

Refuelling and washing of machinery or vehicles

Pedestrian or vehicular access

Siting of offices, sheds or temporary services

Any action that has the potential to impact the tree’s health and structural condition

Arboricultural Supervision (e) A Project Arborist shall be engaged prior to commencement of work on-

site and monitor compliance with the tree protection measures as set out within these Conditions of Consent.

(a) A Compliance Certificate shall be prepared by the Project Arborist for

review by the Principal Certifying Authority showing compliance with these Conditions of Consent prior to the release of the Occupation Certificate.

10. Landscaping to Approved Plan

(a) The landscaping shall be undertaken as per the Landscape Plans, [prepared by (Luigi Rosselli), dwg no (DA 18), dated (30.04.2015)] and these Conditions of Consent.

(b) The landscaping shall be completed prior to the issue of the final

Occupation Certificate.

Tree Supply (a) The tree planting shall be undertaken using healthy and vigorous stock

grown accordance with Australian Standard AS2303-2015 Tree Stock for Landscape Use.

Tree Planting (a) The tree planting shall be completed prior to the issue of the final

Occupation Certificate. (b) The tree planting shall be undertaken by a qualified Horticulturalist or

Arborist (minimum AQF Level 2) and shall be undertaken at the completion of the construction works.

(c) New tree plantings will be covered by Council’s Tree Management

Controls, irrespective of size.

11. Compliance with Landscape Plan

(a) A Landscape Architect/Horticulturalist (minimum AQF Level 5) shall inspect the site following the completion of the landscape works to determine that works have been completed in accordance with the approved Landscape Plan and Conditions of Consent.


Item 4.2 Page 49

(b) Compliance Certification shall be prepared by the Landscape Architect/Horticulturalist (minimum AQF Level 5) for review by the Principal Certifying Authority prior to the release of the Occupational Certificate.

Landscape Maintenance

(a) All new landscape plantings must be in a healthy condition for an establishment period of 2 years. Maintenance includes watering, weeding, pest and disease control and any other operations required to maintain the plantings in a healthy condition.

(b) Any landscape planting which fails to establish within the 2 year establishment period must be replaced with the same size and species as outlined on the approved plans or Conditions of Consent.

Standard Conditions:

A4 to A9, B1, B7 ($1,300), C1 to C5, C19, C34, C35, C40, C44, S1, SP2 to SP7, SP10, SP12, W1.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Map 2. Plans 3. Cl 4.6 'Exceptions' Submission


Item 4.3 Page 62

ITEM NO : 4.3

SUBJECT : 19 LE VESINET DRIVE, HUNTERS HILL




REPORTING OFFICER : KERRY SMITH


2015-1062

PROPOSAL ALTERATIONS & ADDITIONS

APPLICANT MARK HUDDERS

OWNER MRS K HUDDERS

DATE LODGED 24 APRIL 2015

Ref:238755

INTRODUCTION Reasons for Report The proposal involved an ‘exceptions’ submission in relation to height non-compliance. REPORT 1. SUMMARY Issues

Height non-compliance

Setback non-compliance Submissions No submissions were received. Recommendation The application is recommended for approval for reasons that it is acceptable having regard to: 1. It is permissible under the zoning 2. It complies with the relevant planning objectives contained in Hunters Hill Local

Environmental Plan 2012 and Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013


Item 4.3 Page 63

3. It will not have adverse effects on the amenity of adjoining properties. 2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL It is proposed to add a bay window within the upper level of the front portico for the front bedroom of the dwelling and to replace the existing glazed roofing on the existing aluminium framed eastern verandah at ground floor level with a raked ceiling. The French doors on the southern wall of the dining room will be replaced by fixed glazing and a solid lower panel. On the basement level, It is proposed to excavate rock from the void area at the rear of the garage so as to provide a shower room at the rear of the workshop and to extend one side of the garage to accommodate extra vehicle storage. On the ground floor level, it is proposed to remove the guest toilet and join the rear facades of the two rear bays in a straight line. It is proposed to reconfigure the existing kitchen, laundry and pantry to give more space for the kitchen and laundry and to accommodate a new guest toilet. The eastern wall of the breakfast room will be reglazed to remove the diagonal corner and to extend the northern side of the breakfast room to the edge of the existing concrete slab and to replace the concrete column with a steel column. To replace the French doors in the southern wall of the dining room with a fixed window above 1.2 metres above floor level and with a solid panel to the floor. On the first floor, to pour at the rear, a concrete infill section between the two existing rear balconies to form a roof over the bay window infill area on the ground floor. To construct a bay extension to Bed 1 on the existing balcony with the enclosing balcony walls. There will be no change in the uses of the rooms within the house. Accompanying the application was a Statement of Environmental Effects, a Heritage Impact Statement a basix Certificate and an ‘Exemptions’ submission. 3. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND LOCALITY The premises are known as No.19 Le Vesinet Drive, Hunters Hill, and are legally described as Lot 10 in DP 832954.

The site is located on the western side, south of Chevalier Crescent. The site has an area of 420.9sqm with a frontage of 12.89 metres. The land slopes down to the road.

Existing on the site is a two-storey and basement dwelling house constructed approx.13 years ago. The subject premises are one of over a dozen similar such buildings on this side of Le Vesinet Drive.

The area comprises dwellings similar to the subject premises.

4. PROPERTY HISTORY In March 2015 and in May 2012, alterations and additions similar to this proposal on dwellings virtually identical to the subject one, were approved under delegated authority in respect of premises No.15 Le Vesinet Drive and No.17 Le Vesinet Drive respectively. The subject site has no recent development or building history. 5. STATUTORY CONTROLS Relevant Statutory Instruments


Item 4.3 Page 64

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 Local Environmental Plan 2012 Zone: Medium Density Residential R3 Conservation Area: Yes River Front Area: Yes SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005: Yes Development Control Plan: 2013 Listed Heritage item: No Contributory Building: No Vicinity of Heritage Item: No 6. POLICY CONTROLS Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013 7. REFERRALS 7.1 External Approval Bodies Not applicable. 7.2 Health & Building The application was referred to Council’s Environmental Health and Building Surveyor who advised by memo that there are no BCA objections to the proposal. 7.3 Heritage As stated within the body of the report, the property is not a heritage item but is in a conservation area under Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012. As the works were deemed to be of a minor nature and not have any detrimental effect on the heritage significance of the Conservation Area, the proposal therefore was not was referred to Council’s Heritage Advisor or to the Conservation Advisory Panel.

7.4 Works & Services The application was referred to Council’s Design and Development Engineer who advised by memo that there are no engineering objections to the proposal. 7.5 Parks & Landscape The application was not referred to Council’s Tree Consultants as there was no landscaping work proposed. 8. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UNDER S.79C The relevant matters for consideration under section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 are assessed under the following headings. 9. STATE INSTRUMENTS / LEGISLATION 9.1 State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs) Not applicable.


Item 4.3 Page 65

9.2 Regional Environmental Plans (REPs) – Deemed SEPPs Sydney Harbour Catchment 2005 Aims of plan




(i) as an outstanding natural asset, and (ii) as a public asset of national and heritage significance, for





foreshores, (g) to ensure the protection, maintenance and rehabilitation of

watercourses, wetlands, riparian lands, remnant vegetation and ecological connectivity,




(a) Sydney Harbour is to be recognised as a public resource, owned

by the public, to be protected for the public good, (b) the public good has precedence over the private good whenever



precedence over all other interests.

Furthermore, Part 3 Division 2 of SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 lists matters for consideration by Council when determining an application. It further states that Council shall not grant consent to an application unless it is satisfied that the proposal is consistent with the relevant objectives of the SREP.


Item 4.3 Page 66

The following matters for consideration are relevant to this application:

25 Foreshore and waterways scenic quality

The matters to be taken into consideration in relation to the maintenance, protection and enhancement of the scenic quality of foreshores and waterways are as follows: (a) the scale, form, design and siting of any building should be based

on an analysis of:

(i) the land on which it is to be erected, and (ii) the adjoining land, and (iii) the likely future character of the locality,


(c) the cumulative impact of water-based development should not

detract from the character of the waterways and adjoining foreshores.

The proposed development would not be readily discernible from the nearby river due to the trees in the public reserve at the rear of the site. The new building would not have a detrimental effect on the skyline as seen from the River and would not have a significant impact in relation to visual presentation of the built form to the river. Accordingly, the development would not detrimentally affect the visual amenity of the foreshore. It is considered that the proposal would satisfy the above aims of the policy. The matters for consideration, in particular those of specific relevance pertaining to the appearance of the development from the waterway and foreshore are considered to have been satisfactorily addressed by the proposal. 9.3 Other Legislation Not Applicable. 10. HUNTERS HILL LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 2012 10.1 Aims and Objectives of Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012 and Zone The proposal is permissible with consent under Zone Medium Density residential R3 and complies with the relevant statutory controls of Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012. 10.2 Statutory Compliance Table The following table illustrates whether or not the proposed development complies with the relevant statutory controls of Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan No.2012.



HEIGHT Ridge

11.3 metres (existing)

8.5 metres

No

Storeys 3 storey (existing) 2 storeys No


Item 4.3 Page 67

Landscaped Area 48.6% 45% Yes


area controls Not applicable despite the fact that the premises are in a medium density zone under LEP 2012. 10.5 Height of Buildings The height of the proposal, being 11.3 metres and 3 storeys is acceptable as even though it would not comply with the maximum of 8.5 metres/no more than two storeys height limit as prescribed by Clause 4.3 of the Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012, the dwelling was approved and constructed in this form and will not exceed such original figures for height. The architect for the applicant has submitted a formal ‘exceptions’ letter under clause 4.6 of LEP 2012 relative to the height non-conformities of the development. In support of this proposal the architect for the applicant states in part: Although the development is not compliant with the height controls, The Pulpit Point area was

developed with those non-compliant figures as part of that original development. There is no

opportunity to comply with the development standard and the proposal is entirely compatible

with the established form in this precinct.

Despite the fact that specific development controls are not met, the outcomes meet the

objectives of the control in that they are entirely compatible with the character, amenity and

potential of the Pulpit Point area, they protect existing dwellings from excessive overshadowing,

from loss of privacy, from obstruction of views and from general visual impact. Additional excavation work of a relatively minor nature at the rear of part of the garage section is proposed which is at basement level. As none of this work will be seen from the street and is at true basement level, that aspect is deemed reasonable for approval. It does however involve work in breach of the two-storey objective under clause 4.3 of LEP 2012. For the reason set out above, it is considered that the exception to the three storey objective breach is reasonable to be evoked under the circumstances. As the proposed alterations are not to be sited more than 8.5 metres above natural ground level, there are no objections to that part of the proposal and is deemed to comply. That is, the height of the existing building will not be increased as a result of the proposed works. Resultant from the above, it is considered that the exceptions to the height standard are such that strict compliance is both unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case. 10.6 Landscaped Area The proposed revised landscaped area of 48.6% would be above the 45% minimum permissible garden area as prescribed by the Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012. 10.7 Subdivision Lot Size Not Applicable.


Item 4.3 Page 68

10.8 Floor Space Ratio Not applicable. 10.9 Street Frontage Not Applicable 10.10 Dual Occupancy Not Applicable. 10.11 Foreshore Building Lines Not Applicable. 10.12 River Front Area The subject site is also located with the River front Area and, as such, assessment is required in accordance with Clause 6.7 of Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012. Clause 6.7 states: 6.7 (3) Development consent must not be granted for development on land to







As the proposed modifications will be of a minor effect when compared to the development approval, this will have no detrimental effect in relation to the views to or from the waterway. 10.13 Other Special Clauses / Development Standards Not Applicable, 11. DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO STATUTORY CONTROLS No relevant draft amendments pertaining to this application. 12. DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLAN (DCP) 12.1 Compliance Table Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013 (DCP)


PROPOSED COMPLIANCE

HEIGHT Ridge External wall


11.3m existing 9.0m existing

No No


Item 4.3 Page 69

Storeys 2 3 (existing) No

Landscaped Area 45% 48.6% Yes

BOUNDARY SETBACKS Dwelling house East (Front) West (Rear) North (Side) South (Side)

Predom. Building Line 6 metres 1.5 metres 1.5 metres

4.8 metres 11.7 metres 0 metres 1.7 metres

Yes Yes No Yes

Planning Policy – All Development The proposal complies/does not comply with the relevant objectives, design parameters and preferred design elements under Parts 2 and 3 of Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013. Heritage Conservation Areas The proposal complies with the relevant objectives under Part 2 of Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013. River Front Area Refer to section 10.12 of this report ‘River Front Area’. Height Refer to section 10.5 of this report ‘Height of Buildings’. Front, Side & Rear Setbacks The northern side boundary setback at a zero lot line for the existing dwelling does not comply with the DCP 2013 requirements. As this is part of the existing dwelling and is a feature of all such similar recently constructed dwellings in this part of the local streetscape, there are no objections to this ground floor level extension by 700mm of the laundry to the side boundary. Further, the ground floor sunroom is proposed to be extended to within 900mm of the northern side boundary which is considered reasonable in view of the fact that it adjoins the laundry which is sited on that boundary. The length of the sunroom extension is proposed to be 3 metres long. Both of these non-conformities with the side setback provisions of the DCP 2013 can be readily encompassed within the “Exceptions’ provisions of the DCP without creating an undesirable precedent for Council. Landscaped Area Complies. Solar Access There will be no alteration to the mid-winter shadow effects due to the proposed development. Privacy There will be no alteration to the privacy of the adjoining residents due to the proposed development.


Item 4.3 Page 70

Views There will be no alteration to the shared water views for adjoining residents due to the proposed development. Car Parking Complies. Garages & Carports There is no change proposed to the garage section of the premises as seem from the street. Fences No work proposed. 12.2 Other DCPs, Codes and Policies


13. THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT The development does not comply with the development standard for height based on the requirements of clause 4.3 of LEP 2012 for which an objection was submitted under the ‘Exceptions’ provisions of clause 4.6 of the LEP. This is recommended to be upheld as set out in the report and the recommendation. This is on the basis that strict compliance is deemed to be unnecessary and unreasonable in the circumstances of the case. Accordingly, the development application relating to the alterations and additions to the dwelling house applied for under the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 is recommended for approval subject to recommendation and conditions, as set out below. . In the circumstances, where the height of the building is not being exceeded, it is reasonable to accede to the ‘Exceptions’ submission lodged with this application under clause 4.6 of LEP 2012 in relation to the height non-conformity. The existing building breaches the two-storey control as an objective for height and also exceeds the 8.5 metre ridge height as set by clause 4.3 of LEP 2012.

The existing dwelling at No.21 Le Vesinet Drive has been altered with a similar bay window and glass verandah cover at the front converted to a solid cover with a raked ceiling underneath the cover. The alterations proposed do not comply with the external wall height control. Both such non-conformities in relation to the height control are relatively minor, are reasonable for approval and would not create an undesirable precedent in this area as a number of similar developments on this side of Le Vesinet Drive have been altered in a similar way.

Although there is an existing side setback non-conformity under DCP 2013 with the existing dwelling, the proposed development does provide for a ground floor level extension by 700mm of this non-conformity. As this work will not be readily visible from the street and is of a minor nature, approval of this part of the work is considered reasonable for approval. would not create an undesirable precedent for Council in this area as a number of similar developments on this side of Le Vesinet Drive have been altered in a similar way.

It is likely from the development that there will be no undue detrimental effects on the amenity of the neighbourhood nor on the Le Vesinet Drive streetscape.


Item 4.3 Page 71

Further, there will be no undue loss of privacy, solar access nor water views for the adjoining and nearby residents. It is considered that the development will remain in scale and character with the likely future development of this part of the locality based on the controls of the LEP 2012 and DCP 2013. There would be no undue impact upon the natural and built environment within the vicinity of the subject site as a result of the proposed works. It is therefore considered, on balance, that the finished building works will be of a form, height and character that will complement its setting in this locality and not be out of character and scale with the existing dwelling house on the site as well as adjoining and nearby dwelling houses, both existing and proposed. Furthermore, there would be no undue social and economic impacts to the locality as a result of the proposed development and subject to compliance with the conditions of for approval as set out in the recommendation.

14. SUBMISSIONS The proposed development was notified in accordance with Council’s Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013 for a period of fourteen (14) days commencing on the 6 May 2015. Within the specified time period no submissions were received. CONCLUSION The proposal would not alter the height nor the number of storeys of the premises by definition. The existing development does not comply with the development standards for height based on the requirements of clause 4.3 of LEP 2012 for which an objection was submitted under the ‘Exceptions’ provisions of clause 4.6 of the LEP. This objection is recommended to be upheld as set out in the report and the recommendation. This is on the basis that strict compliance is deemed to be unnecessary and unreasonable in the circumstances of the case. The proposed works are considered acceptable, subject to conditions, as set out in the recommendation below for deferred commencement compliance. There would be no unreasonable impacts upon the amenity of the residents of adjoining premises. The proposal has been assessed in terms of the public interest and having generally given compliance with the relevant provisions and objectives of Development Control Plan 2013 and Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012. The application therefore is considered suitable for a development approval. The proposal has been assessed having regard to the relevant matters for consideration under s.79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. For the reasons outlined in this report, it is considered that the proposed development would not detrimentally impact upon the local streetscape, the Conservation Area or the amenity of the residents of the adjoining properties. Accordingly, the application is recommended for conditional approval. FINANCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct environmental Impact on Council arising from Council consideration of this matter. SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct social impact on Council arising from Council consideration of this matter.


Item 4.3 Page 72

RISK ASSESSMENT There are no direct or indirect risks impacting on Council arising from consideration of this matter. HUNTERS HILL 2030 This matter relates to ensuring that heritage and conservation of the area is respected, preserved and enhanced including the preservation of the character, views to and from the Municipality, and the preservation of the tree canopy.


Item 4.3 Page 73

RECOMMENDATION

A. That Council is prepared to accede to the ‘Exceptions’ submission as lodged by the applicant in respect of non-conformity with clause 4.3 of LEP 2012 in relation to the height objective and controls.

B. That Development Application No.2015/1062 for the carrying out of alterations and

additions to the existing dwelling plus landscaping at No.19 Le Vesinet Drive, Hunters Hill, be approved, subject to the following conditions:

Special Conditions:

1. Pursuant to the provisions of the Environment Planning & Assessment Act 1979 this approval shall lapse and be void if the building work or use to which it refers is not physically commenced within five (5) years after the date of approval.

2. The development consent No.2015/1062 relates to the plans prepared by Marjorie Gamble Architect numbered HU:01, HU:03 to HU:06 dated February 2015, as received by Council on 24 April 2015 except where amended by conditions of this consent.

3. The finished surface materials being provided in accordance with ‘External Colours & Materials’ as received by Council on 24 April 2015.

4. Compliance with the Basix Certificate NO.A216776 dated 17 April 2015.

5. The existing landscaping of the site being maintained to Council’s satisfaction.

6. Pursuant to section 80A(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and the Hunters Hill Section 94A Developer Contributions Plan 2011, a contribution of $2,900.00 shall be paid to council.

The amount to be paid is to be adjusted (if required) at the time of the actual payment, in accordance with the provisions of Hunters Hill Section 94A Developer Contributions Plan 2011. The contribution must be paid to Council: (a) in the case of Complying Development;

prior to the time notice is given to Council under s86 of the Act of the applicant's intention to subdivide, commence work or erect a building;

prior to the commencement of any work pursuant to the complying development certificate;


prior to the issue of any occupation certificate; whichever occurs first. (b) in all other instances:

prior to the issue of any construction certificate;



Item 4.3 Page 74

prior to the commencement of any work pursuant to the development consent;

prior to the issue of any occupation certificate; whichever occurs first.

7. The area to the north of the driveway at the front of the site being suitably landscaped with grass and shrubs to complement the existing landscaping of such areas on the adjoining and nearby dwellings in this part of Le Vesinet Drive.

8. Dilapidation reports being prepared and certified by a practising structural engineer

on the current state of the original section of the adjoining dwelling house at No.17 and No.21 Le Vesinet Drive, Hunters Hill. Such reports shall be completed and submitted to Council and the adjoining neighbours prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate and commencement of any excavation or construction work. Upon completion of the approved building works, second dilapidation reports are to be carried out on the buildings and a copy of such report submitted to Council and the adjoining neighbours prior to the issue of the Occupation Certificate. The applicant is to pay for the cost of the above-mentioned reports.


A4 to A9, B1, B7 ($1,300), C1 to C5, C19, C35, C40, C44, C45, S1, W1.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Map 2. Plans 3. Cl 4.6 'Exceptions' Submission


Item 4.4 Page 83

ITEM NO : 4.4

SUBJECT : 6 COLLINGWOOD STREET, HUNTERS HILL




REPORTING OFFICER : SHAHRAM MEHDIZADGAN


2014-1124

PROPOSAL ALTERATIONS & ADDITIONS TO EXITING DWELLING

APPLICANT ELGAN POTTER

OWNER FIONA POTTER

DATE LODGED 27 JULY 2015

Ref:239333

INTRODUCTION Reasons for Report The proposal results in three (3) submissions received in response to the neighbour notification process of the amended plans received by Council 27 March 2015. REPORT 1. SUMMARY Objectors Issues Merryl-Lee Houghton & Dianne Banks 3A Collingwood Street Woolwich

Only two (2) off street car parking spaces have been provided for the proposal, more car parking is required as Collingwood street is a narrows street, lacks car parking and is congested

Andrew & Danielle Wheeler 4 Collingwood Street Woolwich & Tony Moody (Planning Consultant) Moody & Doyle Pty Ltd


Item 4.4 Page 84

4The proposed development of a second level of habitable space over the current single storey kitchen area will, notwithstanding the reduction in roof height by 75cm:

1. Eliminate the views we currently enjoy from our kitchen, home office,

outdoor living area and garden, of the Lane Cove River and the iconic Riverview School.

2. Eliminate the views we currently enjoy from our first level entertaining deck

to the historic Woolwich Baths complex. 3. Significantly degrade the close range views we enjoy from the bedroom

level of our home to the bay and yachts moored adjacent to Woolwich Baths.

Jennifer Craigie 5 Collingwood Street Woolwich


Submissions Three (3) submissions were received. Recommendation The application is recommended for approval for reasons that it is acceptable having regard to: 1. is permissible under the zoning 2. complies with the relevant planning objectives contained in Hunters Hill Local

Environmental Plan 2012 and Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013 3. will not have adverse effects on the amenity of adjoining properties. 2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL The subject application seeks approval for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling, as follows: Lower Ground Floor Studio, media, living, kids study, kitchen, pantry, laundry, bathroom, media, storage and Pool Ground Floor

Shower and W/C to kids rumpus area

Entry

Window to dining room


Item 4.4 Page 85

Remove internal walls to dining

Lift

Define pantry and laundry areas and block up openings as required

Walls extended as noted in colour on the floor plan outside the laundry and kitchen Areas

First Floor

Bedroom windows

Lift

Ensuite windows and infill window

New Master bedroom with WIR and ensuite

Walk in robe and ensuite to existing bedroom

Balustrades

Glazing to rooms as nominated on plans

Garage Level

2 individual car spaces

Entry

Lift

Ancillary

Demolish part of the timber decking around pool

Drainage as required

Landscaping as per the landscape plan

Part suspended driveway to the existing gutter in Collingwood Street

External painting as required to integrate new works

Remove shed on public land On 23 March 2015, Council received amended plans indicating the following changes:

Replacing the entire roof of the main house with a new almost flat 5 degree pitch roof of Colorbond construction.


Item 4.4 Page 86

A reduction of 750mm in ridge height, not just for the 1st floor extension but for the entire house.

3. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND LOCALITY The subject site is known as 6 Collingwood Street, Woolwich, situated on the northern side of Collingwood Street. The allotment is legally referred to as Lot 2 DP402611 and Lot 10 in DP551663. Lot 2 has an area of 773.9sqm and Lot 10 has an area of 70.75sqm, in total 844.65sqm. The site is rectangular in shape with the site sloping down from its south (front), down to the north end (front) of the site, with views towards the Lane Cove River.

Currently standing on the subject site is a part one and two storey timber, stone clad and rendered house with a tile and metal roof. The site accommodates a swimming pool and a driveway currently services the site from the ROW.

The site is within Conservation Area, but is not a listed heritage item. Surrounding development consists of varying architectural designs and one to three storey residential dwellings. The site adjoins a Council reserve to its west.

4. PROPERTY HISTORY No relevant DA or BA history. 5. STATUTORY CONTROLS Relevant Statutory Instruments Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 Local Environmental Plan 2012 Zone: R2 Conservation Area: Yes River Front Area: Yes SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment 2005): Yes Development Control Plan 2013: Yes Listed Heritage item: No Contributory Building: No Vicinity of Heritage Item: Yes, 8 & 18 Gale Street 6. POLICY CONTROLS Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013 7. REFERRALS 7.1 External Approval Bodies Not applicable. 7.2 Health & Building The application was referred to Council’s Environmental Health and Building Surveyor who has imposed the following Special Condition:


Item 4.4 Page 87

The lift shaft now connects the dwelling and garage, and is required to be fire rated along the eastern boundary. Amended plans are to be submitted indicating compliance with Part 3.7 of the BCA.

7.3 Heritage As stated within the body of the report, the property is a located within a conservation area under Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012. The application was forwarded to the Conservation Advisory Panel meeting of 20 May 2015. The minutes for this item are as follows:-

The meeting was addressed by the owner, Elgin Potter, architects, Joshua Mulder and associate of Joshua Mulder Architects, and Andrew Martin, planner.

The property is within Hunters Hill Conservation Area C1 (‘The Peninsula’), within the vicinity of heritage items at 8 and 18 Gale Street, and is partially visible from the Lane Cove River. It is proposed to make alterations and additions to the existing dwelling-house, including a two car garage and entry structure addressing Collingwood Street. The Panel had previously reviewed the proposed works and the current proposal is intended to address concerns previously expressed- particularly in relation to impacts on a rock outcrop adjacent the garage entry. In examining the current proposal, the Panel was of the view that further detail of the impacts on the structure of the rock is required, and that the owner is to provide photographs of the existing rock for record purposes to monitor impacts during the course of construction- provided that the further detailing is appropriate. The remainder of the works are considered to be of low relative impact. Committee Resolution: That the Manager, Development & Regulatory Control, be advised of the CAP’s request for further detail with regard to the proposal for consideration in the assessment of the development application.

CAP raised no objection to the proposal, however a special condition has been imposed reflecting the above comments. 7.4 Works & Services The application was referred to Council’s Design and Development Engineer who raised no concern. 7.5 Parks & Landscape The application was referred to Council’s Tree Consultants who provided the following comments: Further to the Referral Response of the 4th October 2014 the following amended plans have

been received and reviewed:

Landscape Concept Plan

(prepared by Bell Landscapes, dated 12th January 2015, date stamped 23rd

March 2015)


Item 4.4 Page 88

Architectural Plans

(prepared by Joshua Mulders Architects, dwg DA01-R03 to DA02-R03,

DA03-R06, DA04-R07, DA05-R07, DA06-R010, dated 01.08.2014, date

stamped 23rd March 2015)

The following documentation/plans were received and reviewed as part of the

previous Referral Response:

Survey Plan

(prepared by Adam Clerke Surveyors, dated 31/05/2010, date stamped 5th

August 2014)

Landscape Concept Plan

(prepared by Bell Landscapes, dated 21st July 2014, date stamped 5th

August 2014)

Architectural Plans

(prepared by Joshua Mulders Architects, dwg DA00-R00 to DA11-R00,

dated 01.08.2014, not date stamped)

Objections

(prepared by Merry-Lee Houghton and Dianne Banks 3A Collingwood

Street, Jennifer Craigie 5 Collingwood Street, Tony Moody of Moody &

Doyle on behalf of Andrew and Danielle Wheeler 4 Collingwood Street)

Tree Management

Existing vegetation is located in the front western corner of the site. The vegetation

is overgrown in parts but includes palms and ferns. Any weeds that have spread

from the adjacent reserve should be removed. The remaining vegetation will be

important for screening the proposed structure from the reserve and the Lane Cove

River, and should be retained and protected throughout the development. It may be

necessary to include additional amenity and screening species in this area of the

site once weed removal has been undertaken.

Landscape Management

The development proposal is for a new driveway and carport structure accessed

from Collingwood Street. There is existing access to a garage via a right of way lane

leading from Gale Street.

The amended Landscape Plan has replaced the Eleocarpus umundii (Quandong)

hedge along the northern and eastern boundaries with a smaller hedge

Raphiolepsis ‘Oriental Pearl’.

The front western area of the site contains noxious and environmental weeds which

will be required to be removed prior to commencement of the development with

additional maintenance to reduce further infestation. Particular care must be taken


Item 4.4 Page 89

during site development not to damage existing trees and vegetation to be retained.

No machinery or materials storage should be taken into this area of the site with all

weed removal undertaken by hand. Ongoing weed management should be

undertaken in accordance with best practice bush regeneration guidelines.

There is concern regarding the height and scale of the proposed structure and the

impact on neighbourhood amenity and view sharing. A number of objections have

been received relating to this issue by neighbours at 3A Collingwood Street, 5

Collingwood Street and 4 Collingwood Street. These planning issues are being dealt

with by Planning Officer, Shahram Zadgan.

Recommendations

The following Special Conditions must be satisfied:

TREE MANAGEMENT Tree Management Controls (a) Trees covered under the provisions of Hunters Hill Council’s Tree

Management Controls shall be retained except where Council’s prior written consent has been given.

Tree Protection (a) Prior to the commencement of works of on-site (including any demolition or

site enabling works), Tree Protection Zone/s (TPZ) shall be established

around trees to be retained at the following radial distances specified

below.


Front western corner

Mixed 12 x Diameter Breast Height (DBH)

(b) The following works are excluded from within the TPZ, unless otherwise

stated:


Stockpiling, storage, disposal or mixing of materials





(c) The TPZ must:


Item 4.4 Page 90




LANDSCAPING Landscaping to Approved Plan (a) The landscaping shall be undertaken as per the Landscape Plans,

prepared by (Bell Landscapes), no dwg, dated (12th January 2015) date stamped (23rd Mar 2015)] and these Conditions of Consent.


Occupation Certificate. Tree Supply (a) The tree planting shall be undertaken using healthy and vigorous stock

grown accordance to NATSPEC Guidelines for Specifying Trees. Tree Planting (a) The tree planting shall be completed prior to the issue of the final

Occupation Certificate. (b) The tree planting shall be undertaken by a qualified Horticulturalist or

Arborist (minimum AQF Level 2) and shall be undertaken at the completion of the construction works.


Controls, irrespective of size. Compliance with Landscape Plan (a) A Landscape Architect/Horticulturalist (minimum AQF Level 5) shall inspect

the site following the completion of the landscape works to determine that

works have been completed in accordance with the approved Landscape

Plan and Conditions of Consent.

(b) Compliance Certification shall be prepared by the Landscape

Architect/Horticulturalist (minimum AQF Level 5) for review by the Principal

Certifying Authority prior to the release of the final Occupational Certificate.


(a) All new landscape plantings must be in a healthy condition for an establishment period of 2 years. Maintenance includes watering, weeding,


Item 4.4 Page 91

pest and disease control and any other operations required to maintain the plantings in a healthy condition.


LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT

Weed Removal

(a) A weed removal treatment shall be undertaken in the front western area of

the site in accordance with best practice guidelines.

(b) No machinery or materials storage shall be taken into this area of the site

with all weed removal undertaken by hand.

(c) Ongoing weed management shall be undertaken in accordance with best

practice guidelines.

8. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT UNDER S.79C The relevant matters for consideration under section 79C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 are assessed under the following headings. 9. STATE INSTRUMENTS / LEGISLATION 9.1 State Environmental Planning Policies (SEPPs) Not applicable. 9.2 Regional Environmental Plans (REPs) – Deemed SEPPs The subject site is located within the area covered by SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005. This plan has a number of general aims and objectives, the most relevant of which, in this case, is as follows: Aims of plan


(a) to ensure that the catchment, foreshores, waterways and islands of Sydney Harbour are recognised, protected, enhanced and maintained:

(i) as an outstanding natural asset, and

(ii) as a public asset of national and heritage significance, for existing and future generations,

(b) to ensure a healthy, sustainable environment on land and water,


Item 4.4 Page 92

(c) to achieve a high quality and ecologically sustainable urban environment,


(a) Sydney Harbour is to be recognised as a public resource, owned by the public, to be protected for the public good,

(b) the public good has precedence over the private good whenever


(c) protection of the natural assets of Sydney Harbour has precedence over all other interests.

The emphasis here is that the area covered by the SREP is a public resource to be protected for the public good. These factors need to be considered when assessing development that is to take place in this area. Furthermore, Part 3 Division 2 of SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005 lists matters for consideration by Council when determining an application. It states that Council shall not grant consent to an application unless it is satisfied that the proposal is consistent with the relevant objectives of the SREP. The following matters for consideration are relevant to this application: 25 Foreshore and waterway Scenic Quality The matters to be taken into consideration in relation to the maintenance, protection and enhancement of the scenic quality of foreshores and waterways are as follows:

(a) the scale, form, design and siting of any building should be based on an analysis of:

(i) the land on which it is to be erected, and

(ii) the adjoining land, and

(iii) the likely future character of the locality,


(c) the cumulative impact of water-based development should not detract from the character of the waterways and adjoining foreshores.

The proposed development would not be overly visible from the waterway. The proposal would satisfy the above aims of the policy and matters for consideration, in particular those of particular relevance pertaining to the appearance of the development from the waterway and foreshore, heritage issues and those requiring the protection and enhancement of the landscape qualities of the Harbour.


Item 4.4 Page 93

9.3 Other Legislation Not Applicable. 10. HUNTERS HILL LOCAL ENVIRONMENTAL PLAN 2012 10.1 Aims and Objectives of Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012 and Zone The proposal is permissible with consent under Zone R2 and complies with the relevant statutory controls of Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012. 10.2 Statutory Compliance Table The following table illustrates whether or not the proposed development complies with the relevant statutory controls of Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan No.2012.



HEIGHT

8.5metres

8.5 metres

Yes

STOREYS 2 storey 2 storeys Yes

LANDSCAPED AREA 53% 50% Yes


area controls Not Applicable. 10.5 Height of Buildings The height of the proposal, being 8.5metres and 2 storeys in height is acceptable as it would comply with the maximum of 8.5 metres/no more than two storeys height limit as prescribed by Clause 4.3 of the Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012. 10.6 Landscaped Area The proposed Landscape area of 53% would be above the 50% minimum permissible garden area as prescribed by the Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012. 10.7 Subdivision Lot Size Not Applicable. 10.8 Floor Space Ratio Not Applicable. 10.9 Street Frontage Not Applicable.


Item 4.4 Page 94

10.10 Dual Occupancy Not Applicable. 10.11 Foreshore Building Lines Not Applicable. 10.12 River Front Area The subject site is also located with the River front Area and, as such, assessment is required in accordance with Clause 6.7 of Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012. Clause 6.7 states: 6.7 (3) Development consent must not be granted for development on land to







As the proposed additions would have no detrimental effect in relation to the views to or from the waterway. 10.13 Other Special Clauses / Development Standards Not Applicable. 11. DRAFT AMENDMENTS TO STATUTORY CONTROLS No relevant draft amendments pertaining to this application. 12. DEVELOPMENT CONTROL PLANS (DCPs) 12.1 Compliance Table Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013 (DCP)


PROPOSED COMPLIANCE

HEIGHT Ridge External walls


8.5m 6m

Yes Yes

Storeys 2 2 Yes

Landscaped Area 50% minimum 53% Yes


Item 4.4 Page 95

BOUNDARY SETBACKS Dwelling house South (Front) East (Rear) North (Side) South (Side) Garage South (front) North (rear) East (side) West (side)

Predom. Building line 6 metres 1.5 metres 1.5 metres Predom. Building Line 6 metres 1.5 metres 1.5 metres

Existing 3.078m 28m 1.5m 10m

Yes Yes/No Yes/No Yes/No Yes Yes Yes Yes

Planning Policy – All Development The proposal complies with the relevant objectives, design parameters and preferred design elements under Parts 2 and 3 of Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013. Heritage Conservation Areas As stated within the body of the report, the property is a located within a conservation area under Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012. The application was forwarded to the Conservation Advisory Panel meeting of 20 May 2015. The minutes for this item are as follows:-

The meeting was addressed by the owner, Elgin Potter, architects, Joshua Mulder and associate of Joshua Mulder Architects, and Andrew Martin, planner.

The property is within Hunters Hill Conservation Area C1 (‘The Peninsula’), within the vicinity of heritage items at 8 and 18 Gale Street, and is partially visible from the Lane Cove River. It is proposed to make alterations and additions to the existing dwelling-house, including a two car garage and entry structure addressing Collingwood Street. The Panel had previously reviewed the proposed works and the current proposal is intended to address concerns previously expressed- particularly in relation to impacts on a rock outcrop adjacent the garage entry. In examining the current proposal, the Panel was of the view that further detail of the impacts on the structure of the rock is required, and that the owner is to provide photographs of the existing rock for record purposes to monitor impacts during the course of construction- provided that the further detailing is appropriate. The remainder of the works are considered to be of low relative impact. Committee Resolution: That the Manager, Development & Regulatory Control, be advised of the CAP’s request for further detail with regard to the proposal for consideration in the assessment of the development application.

A special condition has been imposed reflecting the above comments. River Front Area The subject site is also located with the River Front Area and, as such, assessment is required in accordance with Clause 6.7 of Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012. Clause 6.7 states:


Item 4.4 Page 96

6.7 (3) Development consent must not be granted for development on land to which this clause applies unless the consent authority is satisfied that :

(a) Measures will be taken, including in relation to the location, design

and appearance of the development and conservation of existing trees, to minimize the visual impact of the development to and from the nearest waterway, and

(b) Any historic, scientific, cultural, social, archeological, architectural, natural or aesthetic significance of the land on which the development is to be carried out, and of surrounding land, will be maintained, and

(c) Existing views towards waterways from public roads and reserves would not be obstructed.

The proposed works will have no detrimental effect in relation to the views from the waterway. Height The height of the proposal, being 8.5metres and 2 storeys in height is acceptable as it would comply with the maximum of 7.2m for wall heights and 8.5 metres for ridge height, and no more than two storeys height limit. It should be noted that the proposed garage is not considered to be a storey as it is not a habitable space and would only be viewed as a single storey from the street. Front, Side & Rear Setbacks Complies. Landscaped Area Complies. Solar Access The shadow diagrams indicate that at 9am mid winter, the shadows are cast to the south-west of the subject site and onto the adjoining Council reserve.

The shadow diagrams indicate that at 12 noon mid winter the shadows are cast to the south of

the subject site and onto the front of the adjoining property, being No.4 Collingwood Street. The shadowing would affect less than 33% of the recreational open space of the site. The shadow diagrams indicate that at 3pm mid winter there would be shadows cast south-east within the subject site and onto the adjoining property, being No.4 Collingwood Street. The shadowing would affect less than 33% of the recreational open space of the site. The proposal would comply with the general requirements, being that new development must not eliminate more than one third of the existing sunlight to adjacent properties at ground level, measured at 9 am, 12 noon and 3 pm of the winter solstice. The proposal would comply with the general requirements and objectives stipulated under Part 3.5.2 of the Development Control Plan 2013, as the proposal would allow for reasonable access to sunlight to adjoining buildings and their recreational open space. Privacy


Item 4.4 Page 97

The proposed development is not likely to reduce the privacy of the residents of adjoining premises. Views The owners’ of the property to the east, being No. 4 Collingwood Street, have objected to the proposed development with regard to potential loss of views of the Lane Cove River. An inspection of the premises revealed that from the objectors living, dining and study on the ground floor there are cross view corridors through trees of Lane Cove River. Views across side boundary are being lost. This view is considered to be the secondary view for the objectors land with the northern view from the ground floor living areas providing a more active maritime and waterway view. From the first floor level bedrooms and entertaining deck there are cross view corridors through trees of the Lane Cove River and the Woolwich Baths. Views across side boundary are being lost. This view is considered to be the secondary view for the objectors land with the Northern view providing a more active maritime and waterway view. The development has been tested against the provisions of Part 3.5.5 View Sharing of Consolidated DCP 2013 and the principles set out by the Land & Environment Court in the ‘Tenacity’ case. Part 3.5.5 of the DCP states in part :- New developments should promote view sharing by minimising the loss of existing views for adjoining or nearby properties while providing views from the proposed development itself. Also, the principles set out by the Land & Environment Court in the ‘Tenacity’ case state that:

The first step is the assessment of views to be affected. Water views are valued more highly than land views. Iconic views (eg of the Opera House, the Harbour Bridge or North Head) are valued more highly than views without icons. Whole views are valued more highly than partial views, eg a water view in which the interface between land and water is visible is more valuable than one in which it is obscured. The second step is to consider from what part of the property the views are obtained. For example the protection of views across side boundaries is more difficult than the protection of views from front and rear boundaries. In addition, whether the view is enjoyed from a standing or sitting position may also be relevant. Sitting views are more difficult to protect than standing views. The expectation to retain side views and sitting views is often unrealistic. The third step is to assess the extent of the impact. This should be done for the whole of the property, not just for the view that is affected. The impact on views from living areas is more significant than from bedrooms or service areas (though views from kitchens are highly valued because people spend so much time in them). The impact may be assessed quantitatively, but in many cases this can be meaningless. For example, it is unhelpful to say that the view loss is 20% if it includes one of the sails of the Opera House. It is usually more useful to assess the view loss qualitatively as negligible, minor, moderate, severe or devastating. The fourth step is to assess the reasonableness of the proposal that is causing the impact. A development that complies with all planning controls would be considered more reasonable than one that breaches them. Where an impact on views arises as a result of non-compliance with one or more planning controls, even a moderate impact may be considered unreasonable. With a complying proposal, the question should be asked whether a more skilful design could provide the applicant with the


Item 4.4 Page 98

same development potential and amenity and reduce the impact on the views of neighbours. If the answer to that question is no, then the view impact of a complying development would probably be considered acceptable and the view sharing reasonable.

When considering the principles set out by the Land & Environment Court in the ‘Tenacity’ case, as mentioned above, the expectation to retain side views are often unrealistic. Therefore, it is considered that the shared view loss will not be ‘severe’ or ‘devastating’. Under the circumstances, it is therefore considered that a refusal by Council could not be substantiated on the basis of shared water view loss. Car Parking The proposal complies with Part 5.3.3 of the DCP 2013, as two (2) car parking spaces have been provided for a gross floor area in excess of 125sqm. Garages & Carports The proposal would have a double garage split by an entry with a setback of 3.078m from the front boundary. Due to the dramatic slope of the northern side of Collingwood Street properties, there would be no other possible location to place the car parking of the site, only to the front. The garages would not be overly visible from the street as there is approximately 2 fall from the street to the level of the garages. In this instance, it is considered that the location of the garages and design of the garages would satisfy the objectives stipulated under Part 3.6 of the Development Control Plan 2013. Fences Not Applicable. 12.2 Other DCPs, Codes and Policies


13. THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT The proposal is considered not to unreasonably impact upon the amenity of the adjoining properties or the Collingwood Street streetscape. As stated within the body of the report, the proposal would satisfy the objectives of the Development Control Plan 2013 and LEP 2012. There would be no impact upon the natural and built environment within the vicinity of the subject site as a result of the proposed works. Furthermore, there would be no social and economic impacts to the locality as a result of the proposed works.

14. SUBMISSIONS The amended plans were notified in accordance with Council’s Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013 for a period of fourteen (14) days commencing on the 27 March 2015. Within the specified time period three (3) submissions were received. Copies of the submissions are attached to the report.


NUMBER NOTIFIED 9



Merryl-Lee Houghton & Dianne Only two (2) off street car parking spaces have been


Item 4.4 Page 99

Banks 3A Collingwood Street Woolwich

provided for the proposal, more car parking is required as Collingwood street is a narrows street, lacks car parking and is congested

Andrew & Danielle Wheeler 4 Collingwood Street Woolwich & Tony Moody (Planning Consultant) Moody & Doyle Pty Ltd

The proposed development of a second level of habitable space over the current single storey kitchen area will, notwithstanding the reduction in roof height by 75cm: 1. Eliminate the views we currently enjoy from our

kitchen, home office, outdoor living area and garden, of the Lane Cove River and the iconic Riverview School.

2. Eliminate the views we currently enjoy from our first level entertaining deck to the historic Woolwich Baths complex.

3. Significantly degrade the close range views we enjoy from the bedroom level of our home to the bay and yachts moored adjacent to Woolwich Baths.

Jennifer Craigie 5 Collingwood Street Woolwich


The main issues of concern outlining the objections are discussed below: Merryl-Lee Houghton & Dianne Banks 3A Collingwood Street Woolwich


Comment: The proposal complies with Part 5.3.3 of the DCP 2013, as two (2) car parking spaces have been provided for a gross floor area in excess of 125sqm. Due to the slopping topography of the site and the natural rock outcrop to the front of the site, only two car parking spaces would be possible. The proposal would have a double garage split by an entry with a setback of 3.078m from the front boundary. Due to the dramatic slope of the northern side of Collingwood Street properties, there would be no other possible location to place the car parking of the site, only to the front. The garages would not be overly visible from the street as there is approximately 2 fall from the street to the level of the garages. In this instance, it is considered that the location of the garages and design of the garages would satisfy the objectives stipulated under Part 3.6 of the Development Control Plan 2013. This concern is not sufficient to warrant the refusal of the application. Hence, this objection cannot be sustained. Andrew & Danielle Wheeler 4 Collingwood Street Woolwich & Tony Moody (Planning Consultant) Moody & Doyle Pty Ltd


Item 4.4 Page 100

The proposed development of a second level of habitable space over the current single storey kitchen area will, notwithstanding the reduction in roof height by 75cm:

1. Eliminate the views we currently enjoy from our kitchen, home office,

outdoor living area and garden, of the Lane Cove River and the iconic Riverview School.

2. Eliminate the views we currently enjoy from our first level entertaining

deck to the historic Woolwich Baths complex. 3. Significantly degrade the close range views we enjoy from the bedroom

level of our home to the bay and yachts moored adjacent to Woolwich Baths.

Comment: The owners’ of the property to the east, being No. 4 Collingwood Street, have objected to the proposed development with regard to potential loss of views of the Lane Cove River. An inspection of the premises revealed that from the objectors living, dining and study on the ground floor there are cross view corridors through trees of Lane Cove River. Views across side boundary are being lost. This view is considered to be the secondary view for the objectors land with the northern view from the ground floor living areas providing a more active maritime and waterway view. From the first floor level bedrooms and entertaining deck there are cross view corridors through trees of the Lane Cove River and the Woolwich Baths. Views across side boundary are being lost. This view is considered to be the secondary view for the objectors land with the Northern view providing a more active maritime and waterway view. The development has been tested against the provisions of Part 3.5.5 View Sharing of Consolidated DCP 2013 and the principles set out by the Land & Environment Court in the ‘Tenacity’ case. Part 3.5.5 of the DCP states in part:- New developments should promote view sharing by minimising the loss of existing views for adjoining or nearby properties while providing views from the proposed development itself. Also, the principles set out by the Land & Environment Court in the ‘Tenacity’ case state that:

The first step is the assessment of views to be affected. Water views are valued more highly than land views. Iconic views (e.g. of the Opera House, the Harbour Bridge or North Head) are valued more highly than views without icons. Whole views are valued more highly than partial views, e.g. a water view in which the interface between land and water is visible is more valuable than one in which it is obscured. The second step is to consider from what part of the property the views are obtained. For example the protection of views across side boundaries is more difficult than the protection of views from front and rear boundaries. In addition, whether the view is enjoyed from a standing or sitting position may also be relevant. Sitting views are more difficult to protect than standing views. The expectation to retain side views and sitting views is often unrealistic. The third step is to assess the extent of the impact. This should be done for the whole of the property, not just for the view that is affected. The impact on views from living areas is more significant than from bedrooms or service areas (though views from kitchens are highly valued because people spend so much time in them). The


Item 4.4 Page 101

impact may be assessed quantitatively, but in many cases this can be meaningless. For example, it is unhelpful to say that the view loss is 20% if it includes one of the sails of the Opera House. It is usually more useful to assess the view loss qualitatively as negligible, minor, moderate, severe or devastating. The fourth step is to assess the reasonableness of the proposal that is causing the impact. A development that complies with all planning controls would be considered more reasonable than one that breaches them. Where an impact on views arises as a result of non-compliance with one or more planning controls, even a moderate impact may be considered unreasonable. With a complying proposal, 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 the answer to that question is no, then the view impact of a complying development would probably be considered acceptable and the view sharing reasonable.

When considering the principles set out by the Land & Environment Court in the ‘Tenacity’ case, as mentioned above, the expectation to retain side views are often unrealistic. Therefore, it is considered that the shared view loss will not be ‘severe’ or ‘devastating’. Under the circumstances, it is therefore considered that a refusal by Council could not be substantiated on the basis of shared water view loss. Jennifer Craigie 5 Collingwood Street Woolwich


Comment: The proposal complies with Part 5.3.3 of the DCP 2013, as two (2) car parking spaces have been provided for a gross floor area in excess of 125sqm. Due to the slopping topography of the site and the natural rock outcrop to the front of the site, only two car parking spaces would be possible. The proposal would have a double garage split by an entry with a setback of 3.078m from the front boundary. Due to the dramatic slope of the northern side of Collingwood Street properties, there would be no other possible location to place the car parking of the site, only to the front. The garages would not be overly visible from the street as there is approximately 2 fall from the street to the level of the garages. In this instance, it is considered that the location of the garages and design of the garages would satisfy the objectives stipulated under Part 3.6 of the Development Control Plan 2013. This concern is not sufficient to warrant the refusal of the application. Hence, this objection cannot be sustained. CONCLUSION The proposed works are considered acceptable and would have no unreasonable impacts upon the adjoining properties. The proposal has been assessed in terms of the public interest and following compliance with the relevant development standards and objectives in Development Control Plan 2013 and Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012, the application is considered acceptable. The proposal has been assessed having regard to the relevant matters for consideration under s79 C of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, Hunters Hill Local


Item 4.4 Page 102

Environmental Plan 2012, and Development Control Plan 2013. For the reasons outlined in this report it is considered that the proposed development would not unduly impact upon the adjoining residential properties and accordingly is recommended for approval.



Item 4.4 Page 103

RECOMMENDATION

That Development Application No. 14/1124 for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling at No.6 Collingwood Street, Hunters Hill be approved, subject to the following conditions: Special Conditions: 1. Pursuant to the provisions of the Environment Planning & Assessment Act 1979 this

approval shall lapse and be void if the building work or use to which it refers is not physically commenced within five (5) years after the date of approval.

2. The development consent No.14/1124 relates to the plans prepared by Joshua Mulders Architects, numbered DA01-R03, DA02-R03, revision R3, dated 1 August 2014, DA03-R06, DA04-R07, DA05-R07, DA06-010, revision R6, dated 18 March 2015, landscape plan prepared by Bell Landscapes, dated 12 January 2015, schedule of colours and finishes prepared by Architectural Interior Landscape Design, date stamped by Council 5 August 2014, Driveway Plan prepared by Istruct Consulting Engineers, drawing No.C01, revision C, dated 16 July 2015.

3. Pursuant to section 80A(1) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979, and the Hunters Hill Section 94A Developer Contributions Plan 2011, a contribution of $6220.00 shall be paid to Council. The amount to be paid is to be adjusted (if required) at the time of the actual payment, in accordance with the provisions of Hunters Hill Section 94A Developer Contributions Plan 2011. The contribution must be paid to Council.

4. The lift shaft now connects the dwelling and garage, and is required to be fire rated along the eastern boundary. Amended plans are to be submitted indicating compliance with Part 3.7 of the BCA.

5. That further detail of the impacts on the structure of the rock outcrop to the front of

the site is required, and that the owner is to provide photographs of the existing rock for record purposes to monitor impacts during the course of construction.

6. The following landscape conditions must be satisfied:

TREE MANAGEMENT Tree Management Controls (a) Trees covered under the provisions of Hunter’s Hill Council’s Tree

Management Controls shall be retained except where Council’s prior written consent has been given.

Tree Protection (a) Prior to the commencement of works of on-site (including any demolition or

site enabling works), Tree Protection Zone/s (TPZ) shall be established

around trees to be retained at the following radial distances specified

below.


Front western corner

Mixed 12 Diameter Breast Height (DBH)


Item 4.4 Page 104

(b) The following works are excluded from within the TPZ, unless otherwise stated:


Stockpiling, storage, disposal or mixing of materials





(c) The TPZ must:




LANDSCAPING

Landscaping to Approved Plan (a) The landscaping shall be undertaken as per the Landscape Plans,

[prepared by (Bell Landscapes), no dwg, dated (12 January 2015) date stamped (23 Mar 2015)] and these Conditions of Consent.


Occupation Certificate. Tree Supply (a) The tree planting shall be undertaken using healthy and vigorous stock

grown accordance to NATSPEC Guidelines for Specifying Trees. Tree Planting (a) The tree planting shall be completed prior to the issue of the final

Occupation Certificate.

(b) The tree planting shall be undertaken by a qualified Horticulturalist or Arborist (minimum AQF Level 2) and shall be undertaken at the completion of the construction works.


Controls, irrespective of size. Compliance with Landscape Plan (a) A Landscape Architect/Horticulturalist (minimum AQF Level 5) shall inspect

the site following the completion of the landscape works to determine that

works have been completed in accordance with the approved Landscape

Plan and Conditions of Consent.


Item 4.4 Page 105

(b) Compliance Certification shall be prepared by the Landscape

Architect/Horticulturalist (minimum AQF Level 5) for review by the Principal

Certifying Authority prior to the release of the final Occupational Certificate.


(a) All new landscape plantings must be in a healthy condition for an establishment period of 2 years. Maintenance includes watering, weeding, pest and disease control and any other operations required to maintain the plantings in a healthy condition.


LANDSCAPE MANAGEMENT

Weed Removal

(a) A weed removal treatment shall be undertaken in the front western area of

the site in accordance with best practice guidelines.

(b) No machinery or materials storage shall be taken into this area of the site

with all weed removal undertaken by hand.

(c) Ongoing weed management shall be undertaken in accordance with best

practice guidelines.


A4-A9, B1, B7, C1-C5, C12, C14, C15, C35, C40-C42, C44, D1, D2, D13-D19, FS2, L2, L4, PE4, PE5, S1, S7 (50%), SP3, SP4, SP7, SP19

ATTACHMENTS

1. Map 2. Plans 3. Submissions


Item 4.5 Page 126

ITEM NO : 4.5

SUBJECT : DELEGATED AUTHORITY REPORT

CSP THEME : THE HERITAGE, CHARACTER AND CONSERVATION OF THE AREA IS RESPECTED, PRESERVED AND ENHANCED



REPORTING OFFICER : STEVE KOUREPIS

Ref: 237496

INTRODUCTION

In accordance with Section 327 of the Local Government Act 1993, authority is hereby delegated to the Group Manager, Development and Regulatory Control to exercise and perform those powers, duties and functions in line with the authority and limitations of that position. These include approval and refusal of Development Applications as per Section 10 of Hunter's Hill Council Delegations of Authority. REPORT

Development Application No. DA 2015-1089 Zone R2

Construction Certificate No. N/A Notification Yes

Applicant Ian Brown Value N/A

Premises 19 Reiby Road Hunters Hill

Garden Area N/A

Classification (BCA) N/A Date lodged 1 June 2015

Assessing Officer Anna Hopwood Martin Peacock

Determination Date

6 July 2015

Proposal Pruning of one (1) tree.

Determination Approve pruning of one (1) tree with conditions to limit the extent of the pruning works.



Applicant Michael Hyde Value N/A

Premises 11 Ady Street, Hunters Hill

Garden Area N/A

Classification (BCA) N/A Date lodged 2 April 2015

Assessing Officer Anna Hopwood Determination Date

6 July 2015

Proposal Pruning of three (3) trees.

Determination Approve pruning of two (2) trees with conditions to limit the extent of pruning works. Refuse the pruning of one (1) tree.


Item 4.5 Page 127

Development Application No. DA2014-1163 Zone R2


Applicant Roberto Barbagallo Value $742,500

Premises 33 Waruda Place Huntleys Cove

Landscaped Area

50%

Classification (BCA) 1a, 10b & 10a Date lodged 2 October 2014

Assessing Officer Norm Fletcher Determination Date

9 July 2015

Proposal Proposed new dwelling with a swimming pool and alterations to an existing out building on the site

Determination Approval-Deferred Commencement



Applicant ARC Architects Value $93,500

Premises 1 Ady Street Hunters Hill

Landscaped Area

50%

Classification (BCA) 1a Date lodged 8 May 2015


9 July 2015

Proposal Alterations and additions to an existing dwelling

Determination Approval


Construction Certificate No. NA Notification Yes

Applicant Anna Prieston Value N/A

Premises 3 & 4 Aspinall Place Woolwich

Garden Area N/A


Assessing Officer Anna Hopwood Determination Date

6 July 2015

Proposal Removal of one (1) tree.

Determination Approve removal of one (1) tree with one (1) replacement tree in each premises.



Applicant Huw Davies Value N/A

Premises 54 Mary Street Hunters Hill

Garden Area N/A


Assessing Officer Anna Hopwood Martin Peacock

Determination Date

6 July 2015

Proposal Pruning of one (1) tree.

Determination Approve pruning of one (1) tree with conditions to limit the extent of the pruning works.


Item 4.5 Page 128



Applicant Strata Plan 1029 Value $54,000

Premises 12 Margaret Street, Woolwich

Landscaped Area

NA

Classification (BCA) 2 Date lodged 19 May 2015


2 July 2015

Proposal Air Condition Compressors on the roof of existing Residential Flat Buildings




Applicant Vision Lifestyle Projects P/L

Value $19,170

Premises 43 Gladesville Road, Hunters Hill

Landscaped Area

NA

Classification (BCA) Class 3 Date lodged 13 May 2015


7 July 2015

Proposal Alteration of the entrance doors and passage ways to the existing one bedroom units being Lot 28 and Lot 21 at Hunters Hill Lodge to create a two bed room unit



RECOMMENDATION


ATTACHMENTS

There were no attachments to this report.


Item 4.6 Page 129

ITEM NO : 4.6

SUBJECT : REPORT OF LEGAL MATTERS

CSP THEME : THE HERITAGE, CHARACTER AND CONSERVATION OF THE AREA IS RESPECTED, PRESERVED AND ENHANCED




Ref: 239544

INTRODUCTION The purpose of this report is to keep Council informed of legal matters currently being dealt with. These matters are generally with the Land and Environment Court. REPORT APPEALS Status report in relation to recent or pending appeals is attached. FINANCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct environmental impact on Council arising from Council consideration of this matter. SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct social impact on Council arising from Council consideration of this matter. RISK ASSESSMENT There are no direct or indirect risks impacting on Council arising from consideration of this matter. HUNTERS HILL 2030 This matter relates to ensuring that heritage and conservation of the area is respected, preserved and enhanced including the preservation of the character, views to and from the Municipality, and the preservation of the tree canopy.


Item 4.6 Page 130

RECOMMENDATION


ATTACHMENTS

1. Status Report - Pending Appeal

OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4383 - 27 July 2015

Item 8.1 Page 137

ITEM NO : 8.1

SUBJECT : FIT FOR THE FUTURE - ADVOCACY PROGRAM




REPORTING OFFICER : WENDY MCGUIRK

Ref:239641

INTRODUCTION

This report provides advice to Council on the proposed Joint Advocacy Program in conjunction with Lane Cove and Ryde Councils as part of our response to the Fit for the Future program. A key part of the Advocacy Program would be to reinforce the strong support from all of the community meetings and community surveys, support each Council’s exploration of the opportunities created by a Joint Regional Authority across the three Councils and potentially to include other Northern Sydney Councils in the Joint Regional Authority. REPORT

Council at its Ordinary Meeting 4380 held 9 June 2015 endorsed the Fit for the Future response to IPART and resolved inter alia:

193/15 6. Endorses undertaking a future advocacy campaign with both Lane Cove and Hunter’s Hill Councils, between July and November 2015, on an equal basis in sharing costs to a maximum of $30,000 subject to a further report to Council;

A report on the Advocacy Program was prepared for OM 4382 and Council resolved:

001/15 1. That Council defer consideration of the proposed Advocacy Program until the next meeting of Council.

2. That Council receive and note the Council submission made to the Upper

House Inquiry. Advocacy Program In order to maintain momentum it is imperative that Council focuses on an Advocacy Program promoting the benefits of the Joint Regional Authority (JRA). The proposed Program of Advocacy would include the following activities:

Potential representation either by way of written submissions or presentations from Brian Dollery (or alternate), Percy Allan, key community leaders, key business and industry leaders and representation from Macquarie University to IPART to speak at the Parliamentary Inquiry.


Item 8.1 Page 138

Engage a relevant and suitably qualified registered lobbyist organisation to facilitate meetings with the Premier, appropriate Ministers and Members of Parliament to allow the Council Mayors and General Managers to present and explain the Councils’ proposal. This also includes securing meetings with Members of Upper and Lower Houses of Parliament with assistance from local State Members.

Create a submission link for use on the three Council’s websites (supply three options to avoid the appearance of bias) where members of our communities can complete and make submissions to the Parliamentary Inquiry for consideration.

Targeted news articles to local and metropolitan media, in promoting benefits of our collaborative and superior option.

Opinion pieces developed for the Mayors of Ryde, Hunter’s Hill and Lane Cove Councils to send to local and metropolitan media.

Media releases, letters to the Editor and radio opportunities to discuss superior option of JRA.

Change in collateral and signage from “No Forced Amalgamations” to new branding focused on the JRA and our collaborative approach (establish ‘Yes to JRA’ Campaign), noting it would not be as extensive as Ryde Council’s previous campaign.

Keep the community informed of the progress through existing communication channels such as the website, digital newsletters and social media at no cost.

Set up a petition of signatures on-line from the community, in support of the superior option of a Joint Regional Authority.

Secure speaking roles for the General Managers at local, industry and government events / conferences to promote the Joint Regional Authority.

Provide copies of our submission to all Members of Parliament and Cabinet Ministers.

Provide support and assistance to LGNSW, ALGA and Sydney Metropolitan Mayors in their campaign against forced amalgamations to the State Government.

Make representations to organisations such as Urban Task Force, the Property Council, with assistance from community groups such as the Save Hunters Hill Municipality Coalition and Better Planning Network, relevant business leaders, industry leaders and other community groups.

Engagement of a Lobbyist A critical element of the Advocacy Program is to engage a relevant and suitably qualified registered lobbyist to make representations in support of the JRA to Government representatives through oral, written and electronic communications. The lobbyist will be commissioned to enable representations to be made to the Premier, all Cabinet Ministers, Shadow Cabinet, other key Members of Parliament in promoting and explaining the Councils’ JRA proposal.


Item 8.1 Page 139

A budget of $35,000 (total shared between 3 Councils) has been allowed to cover the cost, within the Advocacy Program. Subsequent to the previous reports it has become more obvious that engagement of a professional lobbyist is an integral component of our advocacy program, as it is imperative that messages and information about our proposed superior alternative reach the identified targets. The work proposed will include but is not necessarily limited to:

The development of a strategic plan to ensure the strength of your response to FFTF within the NSW State Government and bureaucracy.

The agreement of a list of key contacts within the NSW Government, bureaucracy, and other influential contacts.

bureaucracy, and such other individuals as are deemed to be significant. A fee proposal has been received on the basis of a $10,000/month retainer for an initial 3 month period. It is essential to select a lobbyist who has a significant knowledge and understanding of all three Councils. A preferred lobbyist has been identified and our partner Councils Lane Cove and Ryde City Council have indicated their support and Ryde City Council will be responsible for engaging the lobbyist. Internal Costing Component of Advocacy Program It should be noted that the majority of the next phase of the communications and branding program is focused on the benefits of the JRA and can be produced through the three Council’s in-house resources. The key areas where the three Councils will be targeting their expenditure on the Advocacy Program will be as follows and the program is already underway.

Stage 2 Communications JRA Advocacy Program (Ryde, Hunter’s Hill and Lane Cove Councils)

Description In House

Estimated Cost ($)

Parliamentary Inquiry

Engagement of specialist advisors to present/prepare submissions to Parliamentary Inquiry

$10,000.00 Completed

Lobbyist Engagement of Lobbyist $30,000.00

Joint Submission Print professional copies of the Joint Submission

$3,000.00 Completed

Joint Mayoral Articles

Updates to community $5,000.00

Large Format Banners

1 Banner at each Council Chamber (x3)

$6,000.00 Completed (Small banner to be used as

and when required)

Social Media Advertising

Geo-targeting Facebook advertising and articles

$3,000.00 In progress

Logo and Graphic Establish a ‘Yes to JRA’ In House $0.00 Completed


Item 8.1 Page 140

Description In House

Estimated Cost ($)

Design campaign

Rates Notice – October

Update in Council Newsletter – October

In House $0.00

Plasma Screens Adverts on digital screens at 5 libraries, Ryde Customer Service Centre, West Ryde Village Square, Ryde Aquatic Centre and Ryde Planning and Business Centre

In House $0.00 Completed

Council Website Featured on the homepage and dedicated page to point submissions from the community to IPART.

In House $0.00 Commenced

Social Media Advertising

4 month campaign on the Council Social Media Channels

In House $0.00 Commenced

Community Engagement*

On-going community engagement to assist in understanding the JRA model, including:

FAQ sheets In House $1000.00 Commenced Review web site content In House $0.00 Special newsletter (Sept) In House $3000.00

TOTAL $61,000.00

Each Council Contribution

Approximately $20,000.00

* Additional matters specific to Hunters Hill and added since the last report. CONCLUSION

Since the original consideration of this report a number of program items have commenced or been completed and some cost estimates revised. The report still recommends that Council support the proposed Advocacy Program at an estimated cost of up to $30,000 per Council to allow for additional strategies and costs. FINANCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT

It was originally estimated that an appropriate and targeted Advocacy Program may cost from $72,000 to $90,000. The contribution from each of the three Councils would range from $24,000 to $30,000. This estimate was dependent upon the cost of the two key components of the Advocacy Program, being the qualified registered lobbyist and engagement of specialist advisors to present/prepare submissions to the Parliamentary Inquiry. Subsequent to the previous reports firm costs have been established for the above and the estimate for these costs has been reduced by $15,000. At this point in time it would be prudent to leave the original estimated cost at $30,000 to allow for additional costs and strategies to be added without requiring additional budget variations. This item was not included in the formation of the 2015/2016 budget advertised in May 2015 as part of the Long term Financial Plan as it was not known. Therefore its inclusion will be a budget


Item 8.1 Page 141

variation. However, to conserve the integrity of the budget and LTFP included with our submission Councils share of the costs will be met from within existing budget provisions. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT



Following release of Fit for the Future there is an elevated risk level for Local Government that may lead to the amalgamation of Councils. Councils Strategic Risk register contains the following risk and risk rating:

Unit Risk Description Inherent Risk

Residual Risk

Control Description

General Manager

Local government reforms may result in fundamental changes to Council objectives, structure and operations e.g. amalgamations.

Extreme High Ongoing monitoring, lobbying and submissions

HUNTERS HILL 2030

Council and the community need to be well informed about issues affecting local democracy as provided in the Our Council section of the CSP.

RECOMMENDATION

1. That Council receive and adopt the proposed Advocacy Program and the equal cost sharing arrangements ($30,000 for Hunters Hill Council).

2. Council supports the engagement of the preferred lobbyist by Ryde City Council.

ATTACHMENTS



Item 8.2 Page 142

ITEM NO : 8.2

SUBJECT : LOCAL GOVERNMENT NSW ANNUAL CONFERENCE 2015





Ref:239668

INTRODUCTION

Council considered a report on the Local Government NSW Annual Conference 2015 at Ordinary Meeting No. 4379 held 25 May 2015 and resolved: 166/15

1. That Council nominate Clr Miles, together with the Mayor and the General Manager, to attend the LG NSW Conference between 11 – 13 October 2015.

22. That Council submit motions for consideration at the Local Government NSW

Annual Conference to the General Manager no later than 27 July 2015, for consideration by Council on 10 August and submission to the Local Government NSW Annual Conference no later than 24 August 2015.

In preparation for the Conference, Local Government NSW has asked all councils to consider the key issues affecting its community. These issues will be discussed and debated during the business sessions of the Conference. This report recommends that Council give consideration supporting a joint motion with the City of Ryde and Lane Cove Councils regarding the Fit for the Future reform Agenda. REPORT

Councils have been requested to identify issues or motions relating to the following overall categories: Industrial Relations & Employment Industrial relations and employment related legislation; industrial awards and rates of pay; WHS and workers compensation compliance; human resources policy, practice and benchmarking; workforce planning and development; staff and councillor training and development; skills shortages; staff attraction, retention and productivity; employment security; workplace change; Code of Conduct; leadership and management capacity; capability framework and council governance. Economic Own source revenue (e.g. rates, fees, charges etc.); intergovernmental fiscal relations (e.g. grants, cost shifting etc.); financial management and governance including long term financial planning and asset management; financial sustainability; economic policy affecting Local Government; local and regional economic development (including tourism); transport (e.g. roads, bridges, airports, pedestrian and cycle facilities, rail); Local Water Utilities; stormwater and floodplain infrastructure; other infrastructure and disaster management and recovery.


Item 8.2 Page 143

Environmental Land use planning (including environmental, heritage conservation and development planning); ecologically sustainable development; waste management in accordance with the waste hierarchy and extended producer responsibility; natural resource management; protection of local, regional and state natural environments including air quality, rivers and waterways and biodiversity, biosecurity and weeds management; pollution prevention including energy consumption and soil contamination; environmental risk management through reduction of hazards and pollutants and remediation/rehabilitation of degraded environments; climate change mitigation and adaptation; and responsible resource consumption and conservation. Governance / Civic Leadership Local Government legislative and regulatory settings (e.g. Australian and/or NSW Constitutional recognition; Local Government Act review); corporate governance (e.g. role differentiation for Mayors, Councillors, General Managers and senior staff; Codes of Conduct; Political donations); structural reform (e.g. amalgamations and/or boundary changes; shared resources and services); Local Government elections (e.g. financial impact of electoral reforms on councils; impact of electoral reforms); participation (e.g. women’s participation rates as Councillors; cultural diversity in leadership; other opportunities for citizens to genuinely participate in council processes); and policies and programs of other spheres of government that impact on Local Government governance or citizen involvement in local democracy. Social Policy

Social planning, social impact assessment, access, equity and social justice; community development and community cultural development; community halls and neighbourhood centres, ageing and disability services, women’s services, youth services and children’s care and education services); issues of concern and interest to NSW Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander Peoples; cultural services (performing and visual arts, art galleries, performing arts centres, museums, public art, community arts, festivals, celebrations, heritage, new media and digital arts); Libraries; Health services (regulatory activities reducing public health risks; promoting healthy lifestyles; immunisation, early childhood health centres or rural medical services); Recreation facilities and services; and crime prevention planning. Fit for the Future Reform Agenda The Fit for the Future reform issue has been identified as a key issue. In the Independent Panel’s Final Report (ILGRP), ‘Revitalising Local Government’ the Panel considered and recommended Joint Organisations as an option for all NSW Local Government Authorities. The key objectives of the Panel in this review were to:

Create high capacity Councils providing better services to their community’s and being equal partners with State and Federal agencies;

Allow for more equitable pattern of development across the metropolitan area taking into account planned development;

Underpin Sydney status as a global city; and

Support the implementation of the Metropolitan Strategy, especially planning major centres and sub-regional delivery plans.


Item 8.2 Page 144

In the ILGRP’s recommendation No. 43 as detailed on Page 103 of their report, it stated:

‘Pending any further action on mergers, establish Joint Organisations of Councils for the purposes of strategic sub-regional planning’;

However when the Minister for Local Government launched the Government’s ‘Fit for the Future’ reform initiative in September 2014, Joint Organisations were not an option for metropolitan Sydney and only applied to Regional NSW. It is proposed to put forward a Motion jointly with the City of Ryde and Lane Cove Councils that calls upon the Premier of NSW, The Hon. Mike Baird, and the Minister for Local Government, The Hon. Paul Toole, to allow the one set of rules to equally apply to all Local Government in NSW and allow Joint Regional Organisations (JRA’s) to be an option in the Sydney metropolitan area, in addition to rural and regional NSW. Further it is proposed that the following supporting information be submitted with the motion: The JRA Model proposed by the Councils of Lane Cove, Ryde and Hunters Hill is:

Fit for purpose;

A more functional and integrated approach to inter-government relations;

Well positioned to provide strategic decision making, service delivery and advocacy; and

An option that avoids the huge cost of amalgamations.

From our research and studies, mergers present;

No evidence that forced mergers result in cost savings;

That a ‘one size fits all approach’ of mergers is misplaced;

Empirical evidence of the 2000-2004 NSW Council mergers, shows no difference in performance between merged and unmerged Councils;

Empirical evidence of the 2008 Queensland amalgamations shows that most amalgamated Councils are operating under diseconomies of scale;

The proposed mergers do not represent ‘a common community of interest’;

Local representations severely diminished; and

A loss of ‘local’ in Local Government. This motion highlights the benefits of our proposed Joint Regional Authority (JRA) option for northern Sydney and it being a superior option over mergers, thereby enhancing the Local Government sector. It reinforces the recommendations of the ILGRP and the importance of the option of Joint Organisations being available as an option for all Sydney metropolitan Councils. CONCLUSION A joint motion with the City of Ryde and Lane Cove Councils is recommended for submission to the Local Government NSW Annual Conference 2015. FINANCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report.


Item 8.2 Page 145

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct environmental impact on Council arising from Council consideration of this matter. SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct social impact on Council arising from Council consideration of this matter. RISK ASSESSMENT There are no direct or indirect risks impacting on Council arising from consideration of this matter. HUNTERS HILL 2030

RECOMMENDATION

1. That Council submit to the Conference the proposed joint motion with Lane Cove and City of Ryde Councils as outlined in the report, in respect of seeking the application of rules allowing Joint Organisations to be an option for metropolitan Sydney as well as rural and regional NSW councils;

ATTACHMENTS



Item 8.3 Page 146

ITEM NO : 8.3

SUBJECT : MONTHLY REPORT ON OUTSTANDING MATTERS

CSP THEME : COUNCIL IS RECOGNISED AND RESPECTED AS AN OPEN AND TRANSPARENT ORGANISATION




Ref: 239683

REPORT

The following is a regular report, which lists all items considered by Council that require a further report, or information to Council. FINANCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT





This proposal addresses strategies identified under “Our Council’ and in particular 1.3.2 Councillors are well informed about issues/projects.

RECOMMENDATION


ATTACHMENTS

1. Outstanding Matters - July 2015



NO. ITEM AGREED ACTION OFFICER PROGRESS REPORT 4351 Social Media Policy 401/13

2. Council activate its social media capabilities via the Council website for a trial period of 6 months commencing in February 2014.

3. Council capture and record data during the trial

period to ensure the feasibility of the social media components of its website.

4 A further report be brought forward to Council in

June 2014.

Annie Goodman

Council’s Facebook page and Twitter page are now live and data is being collected for analysis. A report on the first 6 months of operation will be provide in August 2015

4372 Public Art at Clarkes Point

414/14 1. The sculpture remains in situ and Council consult

with Mr Kaplan, the community and the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust about an alternate location for the sculpture in the Municipality of Hunters Hill that is not in Clarkes Point Reserve.

2. Consultation and resolution of this matter is to be

concluded by 30 June 2015.

Barry Smith Initial Discussions have been held with SHFT. A consultation letter has been sent to all persons who have previously made submissions. A suitable alternate location is still being investigated. The Harbour Sculpture group have requested that the Sculpture stay on site until after the completion of Harbour Sculpture Exhibition so as not to disrupt the site. This is a reasonable request. The Harbour Sculpture Exhibition is scheduled to occur from 30 July until 9 August 2015.



NO. ITEM AGREED ACTION OFFICER PROGRESS REPORT

4374 Report of Outcomes from Councillor 2015 Planning Workshop

48/15 2. That a further report be brought forward in April

2015 from Council’s Finance Department outlining the budgetary impact for new Delivery Plan strategies.

Debra McFadyen

A report will be provided to Councillors will be provided under separate memo.

4375 6.1 Draft Significant Tree Register and Minor Associated Amendment to Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013

66/15 1. That The Draft Hunters Hill Significant Tree

Register and Tree Profile Sheets be placed on public exhibition. All property owners with trees recommended for retention or removal from the draft STR to be notified during this time.

2. That the amended clause 2.3.6(d) of the

Consolidated DCP is exhibited at the same time as the draft STR.

3. That all submissions and nominations for new

listings on the draft STR are reported to Council at the conclusion of the exhibition period.

Philippa Hayes

Exhibition of Draft Hunters Hill Significant Tree Register and Tree Profile Sheets commenced on 6 May 2015 and will close on Wednesday 3 June 2015. A report will be brought to Council in August 2015

4375 9.3 Minutes of the Hunters Hill Access Advisory Committee Meeting held on Thursday 19 February 2015

76/15 2. That a report is brought forward on actions

arising from the safety audit of vegetation on street lighting.

Margaret Kelly

Matter under investigation.

4377 3.1 Buffalo Creek Reserve Parking

110/15 That this matter is deferred for further information and review

David Innes A review will be conducted in October 2015 and a report will be brought to Council




4377 3.2 Car Parking – Clarke Road Woolwich

111/15 1. That Hunter’s Hill Council makes immediate

contact with the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority informing them of our interest in the use of their land on the northern side of Clarke Road, Woolwich for extra car parking facilities.

2. That Council prepares a formal proposal to the Sydney Harbour Foreshore Authority for the use of that land for parking facilities.

3. That Council reaffirm to the residents surrounding the Woolwich village the efforts being made to increase parking amenity for businesses in order to ease parking congestion on residential streets.

David Innes A report will be brought to Council in August 2015.

4377 3.3 Modification to the Hunters Hill Village Urban Design Plan

112/15 1. That Hunters Hill Council investigates costs to

extend paving from Gladesville Road South (75 Gladesville Road) to Joubert Street South (16 Gladesville Road) finishing at Howard Place. [as shown in the attached map]

2. That Hunter’s Hill Council develop landscape improvement plan for public land between Joubert Street and Burns Bay Road - north and south and the entry points to the Hunters Hill Shopping Village - to better integrate the area with the Hunters Hill Urban Design Plan and landscape improvements throughout the rest of Hunters Hill - (such as at Mary St round-about).

David Innes This matter is under investigation and a report will be brought to Council in August 2015.




4377 9.6 Minutes of Gladesville Village Mainstreet Committee Held 5 March 2015

122/15 2. That City of Ryde Council and Hunter’s Hill

Council work together with the Economic Development Officer from City of Ryde to formulate an economic development strategy for Victoria Road, Gladesville to ensure opportunities are met within the commercial centre and that Gladesville is a vibrant place to visit.

3. That Gladesville Mainstreet Committee do not support paid parking on Council’s assets within Gladesville commercial centre.

Steve Kourepis

A report will be brought to Council in August 2015.

4377 9.7 Minutes Of Hunters Hill Village Mainstreet Committee Held 24 March 2015

123/15 2. That a Municipality wide events calendar be

coordinated and issued by Council with all stakeholders and community groups including the Hunters Hill Village, Gladesville Mainstreet, and other Committees, being a collaborative approach with input to commence to ensure it is operational for January 2016 events.

3. That Council provide some maintenance works and improvement to the landscaping including cleaning up the area at Joubert Street South, eastern side of Joubert Street.

Steve Kourepis

A report will be brought to Council in August 2015.

4378 6.1 Stormwater Drainage Works Cowell Street Gladesville

136/15 2. That Council proceed to obtain quotations for the

work and proceed in a timely manner.

David Innes Quotations have been sought. Work will likely commence late August 2015

4378 Public Transport & Traffic Advisory Committee, Meeting held 21 April 2015

148/15 1. Parking In Narrow Street Of Hunters Hill Consult with the residents of Ferdinand Street

and D’Aram Street to arrive at a suitable solution for parking problems in the streets.

David Innes Matters are under investigation.




2. Bonnefin Road – Parking Issues Prepare a possible parking layout plan for

Bonnefin Road showing parking restricted to one side of the road in suitable locations. The plan is to form the basis of consultation with residents to achieve a suitable outcome.

3. Gaza Ave/Ramleh Street Convert the existing “no stopping Friday 6am to

12 noon” signs on the eastern side of Gaza Avenue to full time “no stopping” signage.

Install “no stopping” signs at the 90º bend in

Ramleh Street. Install line marking at driveways to ensure

vehicles are not parked too close to driveways. Monitor the outcome for possible adverse

outcome. Request that Montefiore have staff park in Barons

Crescent, where possible, to avoid excessive parking in High Street, Gaza Avenue and Ramleh Street.

Consider an extension of the 90º parking in High Street.

4. Pittwater Road Install parking restrictions in front of No’s 29 and

31 Pittwater Road in the hours of 10am – 3pm Monday to Friday. The time limit to be 1 hour.




Advise the applicant is to meet the cost of the installation of the signage.

5. Gladesville – Residential Parking Scheme Take no further action at this time regarding a residential parking scheme in Gladesville. Reconsider such a scheme at an appropriate time in the future.

4378 13.4 Street lights – Hunters Hill - QWN

Clr McLaughlin requested report on the Audit of Street Lighting

Margaret Kelly

With regards to the audit, Margaret Kelly will pursue this with Ausgrid and advise in due course.

4379

6.1 Boronia Park – Plan of Management

162/15 That this matter be deferred for a Councillor’s

Workshop prior to exhibition. Councillor’s to submit any further comments in writing as soon as possible and the Consultants are requested to review and provide further advice on any comments received.

Jacqui Vollmer

Councillors Workshop was held 1 June 2015. Two Councillors have provided written comments to date. The consultants will amend the Draft Plan of Management and a briefing of Councillors will occur on 27 July 2015 and a further report to Council will be provided to OM4384 to be held 10 August 2015.

4380 L.1 Fit for the Future

193/15 6. Endorses undertaking a future advocacy

campaign with both Lane Cove and Hunter’s Hill Councils, between July and November 2015, on an equal basis in sharing costs to a maximum of $30,000 subject to a further report to Council;

Barry Smith Report on this matter to OM4382 deferred for consideration at OM4383.




4381 4.1 Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013 - Draft Replacement Chapter 4.4 (Gladesville Village Centre)

202/15 1. That in accordance with the Environmental

Planning and Assessment Act 1979 and Regulation, the Draft Chapter 4.4 Gladesville Village Centre, attached to this report, be endorsed and publicly exhibited for a period of 28 days.

2. That after the exhibition period has closed a

further Council report be prepared to summarise the results of the exhibition and makes further recommendations in relation to the adoption of the draft document.

Steve Kourepis

The Draft Chapter 4.4 (Gladesville Village Centre) is currently on exhibition from 15 July 2015 to 12 August 2015 and during this period two public information sessions will be held during the afternoon of Saturday 25 July and on the evening of Tuesday 28 July 2015.

4382 Public Transport & Traffic Advisory Committee, Meeting held 16 June 2015

232/15 1. That compliance information is provided for the

wheelchair ramps on Gladesville Road.

2. That Council request further advice with the intent of developing a bespoke shared zone solution for Bonnefin Road and that the solution be brought back to the next PTTA meeting for discussion prior to being referred to Council’s Local Traffic Committee for advice and consideration.

3. That the proposed Drop Off Zone be referred to mediation and community consultation then returned to the PTTA Committee for consideration.

David Innes Matters are under investigation.


Item 8.4 Page 154

ITEM NO : 8.4

SUBJECT : PAYMENT OF MAYORAL FEES TO DEPUTY MAYOR




REPORTING OFFICER : BARRY SMITH

Ref:239955

INTRODUCTION

Council previously granted Leave of Absence (Ordinary Meeting 4380 via Minute No. 191/15) to the Mayor Clr Quinn from 14 June 2015 to 17 July 2015. REPORT

During this period the Deputy Mayor Clr Sheil has been the Acting Mayor and should Council be of a mind to pay the Deputy Mayor the Mayoral fee during that time then the following must apply. S249 Fixing and payment of annual fees for the Mayor

(1) A Council must pay the Mayor an annual fee.

(2) The annual fee must be paid in addition to the fee paid to the Mayor as a Councillor.

(3) A Council may fix the annual fee and, if it does so, it must fix the annual fee in accordance with the appropriate determination of the Remuneration Tribunal.

(4) A Council that does not fix the annual fee must pay the appropriate minimum fee determined by the Remuneration Tribunal.

(5) A Council may pay the Deputy Mayor (if there is one) a fee determined by the Council for such time as the Deputy Mayor acts in the Office of the Mayor. The amount of the fee so paid must be deducted from the Mayor’s annual fee.

CONCLUSION

To enable this to occur the Mayor would only be paid a Councillors fee during the period of leave and the Deputy Mayor would be paid the Mayoral fee. FINANCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT



There is no direct social impact on Council arising from Council consideration of this matter.


Item 8.4 Page 155

RISK ASSESSMENT


Accounting management and policies comply with current legislation.

RECOMMENDATION

1. That Clr Sheil be paid the Mayoral fee for the period 14 June 2015 to 17 July 2015. 2. That Clr Quinn be paid only a Councillors fee for the period 14 June 2015 to 17 July

2015.

ATTACHMENTS


COMMITTEES Meeting 4383 - 27 July 2015

Item 9.1 Page 156

ITEM NO : 9.1

SUBJECT : MINUTES OF THE MOOCOOBOOLA FESTIVAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING HELD WEDNESDAY 8 JULY 2015

CSP OUTCOME : IMPLEMENTATION OF A RANGE OF ARTS AND CULTURAL PROGRAMS AND ACTIVELY SUPPORT LOCAL CULTURAL ORGANISATIONS AND EVENTS


: INVOLVE THE COMMUNITY IN PLANNING AND ORGANISING OF EVENTS

REPORTING OFFICER : ADRIAN BLACK

Ref:238598

REPORT

The meeting opened at 6.05pm. PRESENT Clr Peter Astridge Hunter's Hill Council Clr Zac Miles Hunter's Hill Council Sally Castel Natalie Shymko SES Mirella Scott SES Bassam Batshon Jann Anschau Adrian Black Hunter's Hill Council Jane Tamasauskas Hunter's Hill Council APOLOGIES Louise Bertoni SES Ian Cox 1. CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

The minutes of the previous meeting were confirmed, moved Zac Miles and seconded Bassam Batshon.

2. BUSINESS ARISING FROM MINUTES Nil. 3. DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST Nil.


Item 9.1 Page 157

4. GENERAL BUSINESS 4.1 Promotion

Flyers received and distribution to commence Thursday 9 July. They have been printed on matt finish paper so that children can colour in the Activity Sheet which is inside. The posters will be on gloss paper.

Blocked full pages in the TWT through to the event.

Flags

Various posters.

Promotion is just about to start.

Moocooboola website is up to date now.

We are buying Facebook advertising – three streams.

Three full pages booked in TWT. We also put in the Village Observer, but it is the previous red design (not the current green one).

4.2 Entertainment/Activities

The headliners will be the Salsa Kingz. There will also be Rock and Roll group – Dick Smithers and the Doo Wops, local semi pro groups Stringybark Jazz Band and Peter Miller-Robinson Trio will finish. There will be lots of dance schools, Irish Dance group, and gymnastics. Possibly a ‘Lion Dance’. Free activities for kids include rock climbing, circus playground, Big Yellow Bus (for 3-8 year olds), Nick Fury will be running game sessions near the Dog Ring in between Tae Kwan Do and Kung Fu. Zac advised he has been in contact with the Bus Museum. The intention is to have two double decker buses, but they will have to check whether they can get the buses through the foliage. If not then two single level buses will be provided. Zac will give Adrian contact details to find out the footprint needed. He also has a link to a car club database. Next Year: Peter suggested the Delltones, and Zac suggested “Dump the Mayor/Councillor” (where you throw balls at a target and if you hit it, the person sitting on a seat falls into the water).

4.3 Sponsorship/Stalls/Budget Sponsorship – McGrath did not come on board.

Greenwood Early Education Centres will sponsor the Big Yellow Bus and the Adventure Sheet.

Pacific Smiles Dental will sponsor the Animal Farm. Hunters Hill Private Hospital will sponsor the Parade. Hunters Hill Club will run the Bar. 5. OTHER BUSINESS 5.1 Parade – only three groups so far (Pipers, Scouts, Probus). Mirella advised she

might be able to get the SES truck in the Parade. She will check and get back to Adrian. Will assemble at 9am at the roundabout as we always do, and kick off at 9.30am. Adrian to organise road closures.


Item 9.1 Page 158

5.2 Lost Children. Peter recommended we have balloons above the Council tent like last year for lost children and parents. Wrist bands for children were also suggested so parents can write their details on them if the children get lost. Adrian will source.

5.3 Wet Weather Plan. It was asked if there was a wet weather plan, and Adrian

advised that it would depend on the amount of rain and duration. North Boronia Park could be a possibility, but only part of the Festival would fit.

5.4 Anzac Biscuit Bake-Off. It was asked if there were any suggestions how we can

encourage people to get into the spirit of the Anzac Biscuit Bake-Off. Zac suggested we use the Hunters Hill Twitter. Adrian asked Jann if she would make Anzac Biscuits on a time lapse video. It has to be fun. He will speak further with Jann about it.

5.5 Shuttle Buses. Adrian to speak with Sally about the free shuttle buses. 6. NEXT MEETING

The next meeting will be held on Wednesday 22 July 2015 at 6.00pm. Peter advised that he will be away and unable to attend. Zac offered to chair the meeting.

The meeting closed at 7.00pm. FINANCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT





A key outcome in the Community and Lifestyle section of Council’s current Community Strategic Plan is: 1.1 Implementation of a range of arts and cultural programs and actively support local cultural

organisations and events. The Moocooboola Festival Advisory Committee will assist Council to achieve this outcome.

RECOMMENDATION


ATTACHMENTS



Item 9.2 Page 159

ITEM NO : 9.2

SUBJECT : MINUTES OF THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY PANEL HELD ON 15 APRIL 2015




REPORTING OFFICER : GREG PATCH

Ref:239486

COMMENCEMENT

The meeting commenced at approximately 5.30 pm in the Council Chambers, Hunters Hill

PRESENT Clr Meredith Sheil Deputy Mayor, Hunter’s Hill Council Michael Lehany Landscape Advisor Helen Wilson National Trust Representative Bronwyn Doutreband Community Representative Brian McDonald AIA Representative Tony Coote Hunters Hill Trust Representative Steve Kourepis Group Manager, Development & Regulatory Control Greg Patch Heritage Advisor

APOLOGIES

Clr Justine McLaughlin Councillor, Hunter’s Hill Council Helen Temple Berry Community Representative


None


RECOMMENDATION

That the Minutes of Conservation Advisory Panel of previous Meeting held 18 March 2015 be read and accepted.

BUSINESS ARISING

2.1 SITE INSPECTION NONE


Item 9.2 Page 160

2.2 BRIEFINGS NONE

REPORTS

3.1 6.00 PM - 63-67 HIGH STREET, HUNTERS HILL


The meeting was addressed by the architect, Daniel Younan, Andrew Martin, planner, and heritage consultant, Julian Siu of Godden Mackay Logan.

The property is within the vicinity of Items: No 86 - “Boronia Park”; and Item 272 at 62 Park Road. It is proposed to demolish the existing development on the site, including the shops and residential accommodation, and erect a 3 storey mixed use development over an excavated carpark/basement. In examining the drawings presented, the Panel noted that the scale of the context is represented as being a consequence of the maximum “complying development” building envelopes to adjoining properties. It is contented that this is a somewhat spurious representation of the situation, as it is improbable that redevelopment of all surrounding properties may result in this manner. The inclusion of an outline presenting a past failed development proposal was also considered inappropriate. In essence, the Panel concluded that the proposal does not respond to the character of the area, and that its architectural expression would be more appropriate to development on the Northern Beaches than to the substantially interwar cottage character of Boronia Park.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Manager, Development & Regulatory Control, be advised of the CAP’s comments with regard to the proposal for consideration in the assessment of a possible future development application.

3.2 6.20 PM - 44 WOOLWICH ROAD, HUNTERS HILL


The meeting was addressed by Felicity King and Diana Turello of Inspire Design. It is proposed to make alterations and additions to the existing property, by way of a garage within the front boundary setback, modifications to the façade of the house, a pool and cabana to the rear yard, media room, ensuite and walk-in robe to the lower ground floor, and stair and extension to the rear deck to the attic level. The existing garage to the south-western corner of the property is to be demolished and the stone wall reconstructed to match the adjacent wall.


Item 9.2 Page 161

The property is within Hunters Hill Conservation area C1 (“The Peninsula”) and adjoins a heritage item at 42 Woolwich Road. The boundary stone wall to Woolwich Road appears to be a continuation of the listed wall to 42 Woolwich Road. In considering the proposal, the Panel raised no objection to the proposed works to the house itself, but advised that the garage door should be minimised in width and that the parapet to the garage be detailed with perhaps a corbel and string to lessen its starkness. Further detail on the proposed garden landscaping, including trees to be retained/ removed was requested for further consideration.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Manager, Development & Regulatory Control, be advised of the CAP’s comments in relation to the proposal.

3.3 6.40 PM - 4 GLENVIEW AVENUE, HUNTERS HILL


There was no representative of the applicant present, and so the Panel considered the proposal in their absence. It is proposed to make alterations and additions to the existing [interwar?] cottage to the above by way of an upper level addition. In considering the proposal, the Panel was of the view that the design requires considerable refinement to lessen the impact of the bulk of the proposed addition, and to better relate the fenestration to the existing.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Manager, Development & Regulatory Control, be advised of the CAP’s negative reaction to the proposal, and the call for design refinement so that the resultant development is more reflective of the character of Hunters Hill.

3.4 7.00 PM - 29 MOOREFIELD AVENUE, HUNTERS HILL


The Panel was addressed by the owner, Greg Sheehy, of Rubicon Constructions, Adam Haddow and Mac Gordon of SJB Architects and Andrew Martin, planner. The subject property is within Hunters Hill Conservation Area C1 (“The Peninsula”), and within the vicinity of heritage items at 26 Church Street and 10 Moorefield Avenue. The Panel had requested further information on the nature of the proposed external materials, finishes and colours as it had expressed concern at the “feature” sandstone chimney elements, brickwork, the nature of the proposed landscaping and the design of the fence to the street boundaries in past meetings. Samples of the proposed zinc roof cladding, brick and sandstone walling were tabled at the meeting. It was explained that the roofing is to be applied with a standing seam, and is pre-patinated to the sample colour. The grey/white Roman bricks are to be laid with raked bed joints and flush-struck perpends, and the sandstone laid as random rubble with dry jointing.


Item 9.2 Page 162

In considering the proposed materials, the Panel expressed the opinion that they did not respond to the context of the site, and the character of the conservation area. It is the opinion of the Panel that the materials and colours will serve to exaggerate the scale of the building, and be anomalous.

Further, concern was expressed at the comparative sparsity of the proposed landscaping when compared to that which exists currently on the site

RECOMMENDATION


3.5 7.20 PM - 24 JOUBERT STREET, HUNTERS HILL


The Panel was addressed by the owners, Mr & Mrs Schirato, and Ross Sheerin. It is proposed to make alterations and additions to an existing garage/ “studio” structure to the rear yard of the property (though fronting Figtree Road), make alterations and additions to the existing house- including a carport within the front boundary setback, and utilise both as a dual occupancy. The extent of tree removal was discussed. It was explained that the majority of trees to be removed are Cocos Palms [exempt] that pose a danger to pedestrians through dropping palm nuts that cause slip hazards. The Panel agreed with the extent of tree removal in relation to those located adjacent the road frontage, but advised that the trees within the site should be retained. The carport within the front setback was also discussed and it was advised that the design of this element should be simplified, but preferably removed and a vehicle hardstand built instead. There was no objection to the remainder of the proposed works.

RECOMMENDATION


3.6 7.40 PM - 1 FUTUNA STREET, HUNTERS HILL


The Panel was addressed by the owner, Alan McDonald and architect, Stephen Grech. The property is within Hunters Hill Conservation Area C1 (“The Peninsula”), and is within the vicinity of heritage items at 28 and 30 Woolwich Road, and 2,5,7 & 9 Futuna Street. It is proposed to make alterations and additions to the existing house which while having a Futuna Street address, has an extensive frontage to Woolwich Road. The works include an extension to what is ostensibly the rear of the house, with modifications to the existing internal layout to create a new kitchen/laundry/ dining/family area and walk-in robe and ensuite to an adjoining master bedroom.


Item 9.2 Page 163

A new pool is to be located in the rear setback, extending towards Woolwich Road to an area where an existing carport is to be demolished. In examining the proposal, the Panel was of the view that the proposed second gable (which is related to a desired “cathedral” ceiling over the proposed Family Room has the potential to compete with the existing gable which has a significant streetscape presence to Woolwich Road. Several approaches to resolving the roof to this area were discussed, and the architect agreed to revisit the roof design to this area. In general terms, the proposal met with the CAP’s approval.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Manager, Development & Regulatory Control, be advised of the CAP’s comments in relation to the proposal for consideration in a possible future development application.

OTHER BUSINESS

4.1 GENERAL BUSINESS

The next meeting of the CAP will be held on Wednesday, 20 May 2015 commencing at 5.30pm at the Council Chambers, Hunters Hill.

FINANCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT




This matter relates to ensuring that heritage and conservation of the area is respected, preserved and enhanced including the preservation of the character, views to and from the Municipality, and the preservation of the tree canopy.

RECOMMENDATION


ATTACHMENTS



Item 9.3 Page 164

ITEM NO : 9.3

SUBJECT : MINUTES OF THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY PANEL HELD ON 20 MAY 2015





Ref:239489

COMMENCEMENT

The meeting commenced at approximately 5.30pm in the Council Chambers, Hunters Hill

PRESENT

Bronwyn Doutreband Community Representative Helen Temple Berry Community Representative Brian McDonald AIA Representative Tony Coote Hunters Hill Trust Representative Steve Kourepis Group Manager, Development & Regulatory Control Greg Patch Heritage Advisor

APOLOGIES

Clr Meredith Sheil Deputy Mayor, Hunter’s Hill Council Clr Justine McLaughlin Councillor, Hunter’s Hill Council Michael Lehany Landscape Advisor Helen Wilson National Trust Representative


Tony Coote - 56 Woolwich Road, Hunters Hill.


RECOMMENDATION The minutes of the meeting 18 April 2015 were read and generally accepted, with the following amendment: Item 3.4: 29 Moorefield Avenue Hunters Hill (last paragraph):


Item 9.3 Page 165

Further, concern was expressed at the comparative sparsity of the proposed landscaping when compared to that which exists currently on the site. It was also noted that the proposal entails the removal of all trees without a proper arborist assessment of the trees to be removed. Trees such as the liquidambar [London plane tree?] and jacaranda are seen to be viable, and with no justification given for their removal, should be retained. Amended- additional text in italics-by GP 3 June 2015

BUSINESS ARISING 2.1 SITE INSPECTIONS

None 2.2 BRIEFINGS

None

REPORTS 3.1 6.00 PM - 6 COLLINGWOOD STREET, WOOLWICH

PROCEEDINGS IN BRIEF The meeting was addressed by the owner, Elgin Potter, architects, Joshua Mulder

and associate of Joshua Mulder Architects, and Andrew Martin, planner.

The property is within Hunters Hill Conservation Area C1 (‘The Peninsula’), within the vicinity of heritage items at 8 and 18 Gale Street, and is partially visible from the Lane Cove River. It is proposed to make alterations and additions to the existing dwelling-house, including a two car garage and entry structure addressing Collingwood Street. The Panel had previously reviewed the proposed works and the current proposal is intended to address concerns previously expressed- particularly in relation to impacts on a rock outcrop adjacent the garage entry. In examining the current proposal, the Panel was of the view that further detail of the impacts on the structure of the rock is required, and that the owner is to provide photographs of the existing rock for record purposes to monitor impacts during the course of construction- provided that the further detailing is appropriate. The remainder of the works are considered to be of low relative impact.

RECOMMENDATION That the Manager, Development & Regulatory Control, be advised of the CAP’s request for further detail with regard to the proposal for consideration in the assessment of the development application.


Item 9.3 Page 166

3.2 6.20 PM - 7A COLLINGWOOD STREET, WOOLWICH

PROCEEDINGS IN BRIEF The meeting was addressed by the owner, Mr M Miah and planner, Andrew Martin.

It is proposed to make alterations and additions to the existing cottage to the subject property by way of an upper level addition and modifications to the existing garage at the street frontage. The Panel had previously considered an initial scheme for the place at its meeting of June 2014, and the proposed amendments in the s82A review are intended to address the concerns of the Panel. In examining the amended proposal, the Panel noted that the cut-out/ inset roof deck had been deleted and the façade simplified in terms of fenestration and materials. Concern was expressed at the extent of eaves overhang and the potential to reduce the visual separation of the subject house and its neighbours. It was recommended that the eaves overhang to the rear portion of the building be reduce to 450mm, so that the effective overhang to the front portion would be in the order of a maximum of 900mm.

RECOMMENDATION That the Manager, Development & Regulatory Control, be advised of the CAP’s comments in relation to the proposal.


PROCEEDINGS IN BRIEF Tony Coote left the meeting.

The Panel was addressed by the owner, Mr Geroulis and architect, Martin Borg. It is proposed to make alterations and additions to the above premises, including additions to the rear of the existing garage, a new opening to the Woolwich Road boundary wall, a swimming pool to the north-western quarter of the property and a new sandstone wall to the Serpentine Road frontage. The Panel had considered the proposal previously at its meeting of March 2015, including a prior site inspection. Concern at the height (1800mm) and adverse impact of the proposed wall to the Serpentine Road frontage was expressed at that time, and the proponents presented an alternative approach as a result of consequent discussions with Council. The alternative proposed is a 1200mm stone wall extending across the street frontage, with a panel of timber offset “hit and miss” battening above it to a height of 1800mm to that portion of the wall adjacent the proposed pool.


Item 9.3 Page 167

There was further discussion in relation to the pool location, and some confusion as to the relative level of the pool coping. It was advised that the pool coping is at an RL of 39.65, and that the height of the fence is generated from a required 1800mm above the coping at the lowest point of the adjacent footpath- which slopes from Woolwich, down Serpentine Road. The owner maintained that the proposed location of the pool is the only viable one, given the constrained nature of the ground associated with the house. The panel felt that the position of the pool in such close proximity to the fence and the house was problematic and resulted in a fence that was too high on the Serpentine street frontage.

It was concluded that the proposed alternative treatment of the wall will still have adverse impacts on the streetscape and that further alternative approaches should be considered.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Manager, Development & Regulatory Control, be advised of the CAP’s comments with regard to the negative impact of the proposed wall and screen.

3.4 7.00 PM - 8 GALE STREET, WOOLWICH

PROCEEDINGS IN BRIEF Tony Coote re-joined the meeting.

The Panel was addressed by the owners, Roger and Anthea Rowe. It is proposed to make alterations and additions to the rear of the house “Croxted” and to demolish an existing shed and erect a new garage fronting Collingwood Street. The property is listed as heritage Item 155, and is within Hunters Hill Conservation Area C1 (‘The Peninsula’). It is within the vicinity of numerous heritage items, most of which are opposite on Gale St. In examining the proposal, the Panel found that the approach is appropriate and that there will be minimal impacts on the item and its setting. The lack of setback of the garage from the Collingwood Road frontage was questioned as a matter for Council’s planners.

RECOMMENDATION That the Manager, Development & Regulatory Control, be advised of the CAP’s general support for and comments in relation to the proposal.

3.5 7.20 PM - 15 MARY STREET, HUNTERS HILL

PROCEEDINGS IN BRIEF There was no representative of the applicant present, so the Panel considered the

proposal in their absence.


Item 9.3 Page 168

It is proposed to make alterations and additions to the previous rear addition to the semi-detached cottage at the above, which is within Hunters Hill Conservation Area C1 (‘the Peninsula”) and within the vicinity of items at 7 and 54 Mary Street. The Panel had no concerns with the proposed works in considering the proposal.

RECOMMENDATION That the Manager, Development & Regulatory Control, be advised of the CAP’s general support for the proposal.


PROCEEDINGS IN BRIEF There was no representative of the applicant present, so the Panel considered the

proposal in their absence. It is proposed to make alterations and additions to the property which is within the Hunters Hill Conservation Area C1 (“The Peninsula”) and within the vicinity of items at 1 Passy Avenue (“Passy”), 6 Passy Avenue (“ Tranby”), 16 Woolwich Road and items opposite on Woolwich Road. The Panel had considered the proposal at its meeting of February 2015, when:

It was advised that the proposed garage should be setback from both the Passy Avenue boundary (to align with the garage to No 12 Woolwich Road) and splayed off the rear boundary, and with landscaping buffers to the southern and northern setbacks.

In reviewing the amending proposal, the Panel was of the view that while the garage had been appropriately set back from the Passy Avenue frontage- to align with the setback of the outbuilding to No 12 Woolwich Road, the setback from Passy walk is inadequate. It was also noted that the strip of land to the south-west of the proposed garage may function as a driveway (although noted as ‘grass” on the drawings), with the access gates combined with the garage doors giving the appearance of a virtual triple width access.

RECOMMENDATION That the Manager, Development & Regulatory Control, be advised of the CAP’s comments in relation to the proposal for consideration in the process of the development application.

OTHER BUSINESS 4.1 HUNTERS HILL CONSERVATION AREAS - STATEMENTS OF SIGNIFICANCE

PROCEEDINGS IN BRIEF The Panel was invited to comment on the proposed modification of the 1987 W

Phipson “…Character of Hunters Hill…” and its adoption as part of a statement of significance for Conservation Area C1, and also to provide input for a statement for “The Isler” conservation area (C2).


Item 9.3 Page 169

It was advised that additional information is required to better understand the background to “The Isler” and that additional historical information is required for Conservation Area C1. GP to provide further background.

RECOMMENDATION Further information required by Panel, GP to provide.

4.2 SIGNIFICANT TREE REGISTER – DRAFT AMENDMENTS

PROCEEDINGS IN BRIEF Some members of the panel questioned whether the proposed amendments to and

the significant tree register are sufficiently comprehensive to reflect the character of Hunters Hill.

RECOMMENDATION SK to advise on surveying practices and extent at next meeting.

The next meeting of CAP will be held Wednesday, 17 June 2015 commencing at 5.30pm at the Council Chambers, Hunters Hill. FINANCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct environmental impact on Council arising from Council consideration of these matters. SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct social impact on Council arising from Council consideration of these matters. RISK ASSESSMENT There are no direct or indirect risks impacting on Council arising from consideration of these matters. HUNTERS HILL 2030 This matter relates to ensuring that heritage and conservation of the area is respected, preserved and enhanced including the preservation of the character, views to and from the Municipality, and the preservation of the tree canopy.

RECOMMENDATION That the Minutes be received and noted.

ATTACHMENTS



Item 9.4 Page 170

ITEM NO : 9.4

SUBJECT : MINUTES OF THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY PANEL HELD ON 17 JUNE 2015





Ref:239596

COMMENCEMENT

The meeting commenced at approx. 5.30 pm at the Council Chambers, Hunters Hill.

PRESENT

Clr Meredith Sheil Deputy Mayor, Hunter’s Hill Council Clr Justine McLaughlin Councillor, Hunter’s Hill Council Helen Temple Berry Community Representative Helen Wilson National Trust Representative Michael Lehany Landscape Advisor Brian McDonald AIA Representative Tony Coote Hunters Hill Trust Representative Steve Kourepis Group Manager, Development & Regulatory Control Greg Patch Heritage Advisor

APOLOGIES

Bronwyn Doutreband Community Representative


None


The minutes of the meeting 20 May 2015 were read and accepted.

BUSINESS ARISING

2.1 SITE INSPECTIONS

NONE


Item 9.4 Page 171

2.2 BRIEFINGS

NONE

REPORTS 3.1 5.30 PM - 9, 11 & 15 RYDE ROAD, HUNTERS HILL


The meeting was addressed by Stuart Plumb of Third i Property, Matt Zappia and Sebastian Kesby representing the owners. It is proposed to demolish the existing development on the above properties and erect a residential flat building containing 18 dwellings over an excavated basement carpark. The Panel had considered a previous iteration of the proposed development as a preliminary item at its meeting of 18 March 2015, and was requested to review the development application scheme as lodged. In examining the proposal, the Panel raised the following matters: Trees: the proposed development entails the removal of all trees on the site. It was noted that 3 trees to adjoining properties are to be retained but that the approach to the design did not take into proper account the retention of mature trees (such as the Ficus hillii and Eucalyptus globulus) and as a matter of site constraint, particularly in light of the role of trees in the character of Hunters Hill Conservation Area C1 (“the Peninsula”).

Historic Subdivision Pattern: the site of the proposed development falls within the Joubert Figtree Subdivision which is listed as Heritage Conservation Area C450 at Schedule 5 of Hunters Hill LEP 2012. The proposed development fails to adequately acknowledge the historic subdivision pattern of the area and will have adverse impacts on the ability to interpret this important aspect of the place.

Scale and Zoning: the intent of the zoning is that the development in the area be transitional between the mixed commercial/residential buildings of the B4 zoned Hunters Hill Village area and the residential areas to “The Peninsula” conservation area as a whole. It was noted that the scale of the proposal largely draws its influence from the development which is within the Village Core to Mapledorams Corner, and east along Gladesville Road, rather than providing an appropriate transition to the residential areas.

Site Analysis: it was observed that much of the documentation accompanying the proposal appears to selectively draw on elements of the places adjoining the site to virtually post-rationalise the intended development. There appears also to be a misinterpretation of the notion of “rooms within the roof”, and many of the guidelines contained within the Development Control Plan for the area.

It is considered the proposed external materials, colours and finishes to be now more appropriate. The Panel looks forward to further considering the design of the development at this important transitional site.


Item 9.4 Page 172

RECOMMENDATION

That the Manager, Development & Regulatory Control, be advised of the CAP’s lack of support for the proposal for consideration in the assessment of the development application.

3.2 5.50 PM - 9 CROWN STREET, HENLEY


The meeting was addressed by the owners, Lisa and Richard Edwards, and architect, Vanessa Wegner. It is proposed to modify the existing late Federation-era dwelling, and developed the land to the rear as an attached dual occupancy, incorporating the cottage itself. In considering the proposal, the Panel was of the view that the design of the proposal should be modified in the following respects: The connection of the portion of the proposal attached to the roof of the existing cottage would be better resolve by relocating the bathroom back into the hallway of the upper level, moving the volume of the addition back off the rear hip of the existing house- to allow the volume of the existing roof to remain legible and intact.

The allowed structural floor zone to the new works should be examined in terms of reducing its depth.

The floor-ceiling heights should be reduced; particularly the upper level which should be reduced to a springing height of nominally 2200mm.

Vertical window proportions (as sash proportions within openings) should be employed.

The garage roofs would be best treated as ‘pergola-like’ elements to allow better separation between the volumes of the two proposed dwellings.

Further detail is required in terms of fenestration changes to the existing house. The Panel looks forward to further consideration of the proposal, in light of the above comments.

RECOMMENDATION


3.3 6.10PM - 117-123 VICTORIA ROAD, GLADESVILLE


The meeting was addressed by the owner, Michael Sahyoun, Louisa Alessi, heritage consultant, Farah George, designer and planner, Jonathan Wood. It is proposed to demolish the existing development on the three lots, which front Victoria Road, and abut Hunters Hill Conservation Area C2 (“The Isler”), being located at the corner of Victoria Road and Sunnyside Street. Council had previously approved a development for two of the properties, 121 and 123 Victoria Road.


Item 9.4 Page 173

In examining the proposal, the Panel noted that there is to be considerable deep soil planting as the proposed residential buildings are located above the excavated carpark level in a way that largely allows planting amongst the buildings. There was discussion as to the fencing and perimeter treatment, and it was advised that the proposed lych gate (in its present form), and the masonry piers to the fence would not attract the support of the Panel. The Panel was appreciative of the fact that a proper site analysis had been done with regard to the extant trees to the site and the relationship of the proposed buildings to those in the conservation area.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Manager, Development & Regulatory Control, be advised of the CAP’s comments with regard to what is considered a supportable proposal.

OTHER BUSINESS

4.1 GENERAL BUSINESS

The next meeting of the CAP will be held on Wednesday 15 July 2015 commencing at 5.00pm on site at 2 Mark Street, Hunters Hill and afterwards at the Council Chambers, Hunters Hill.

FINANCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct environmental impact on Council arising from Council consideration of these matters. SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct social impact on Council arising from Council consideration of these matters. RISK ASSESSMENT There are no direct or indirect risks impacting on Council arising from consideration of these matters. HUNTERS HILL 2030 This matter relates to ensuring that heritage and conservation of the area is respected, preserved and enhanced including the preservation of the character, views to and from the Municipality, and the preservation of the tree canopy.

RECOMMENDATION


ATTACHMENTS



Item 9.5 Page 174

ITEM NO : 9.5

SUBJECT : MINUTES OF THE HUNTERS HILL VILLAGE MAINSTREET MEETING HELD 24 JUNE 2015





Ref:239491

COMMENCEMENT

The Meeting was held at 5.30pm at Gladesville Community Centre, 44 Gladesville Road, Hunters Hill.

PRESENT Councillor Meredith Sheil Chair Sam Arnaout Mario Pellegrino Lisa Locantro-Silicato Andrew See Elizabeth Krassoi Justin Burt Margret Kelly Manager Community Services Shahram Mehdizadgan Development Assessment Officer Steve Kourepis Group Manager Development & Regulatory Control

APOLOGIES

Councillor Richard Quinn Mayor Councillor Zac Miles Sam Pybles Sandra Hardman Sam Stipo Phillip Southcombe Simon Frame Anthony Roberts MP office Bassam Batshon Lucy Bourke Adrian Black Community Events Coordinator


There were no declarations of interest.


Item 9.5 Page 175


RECOMMENDATION

That the Minutes of Hunters Hill Village Mainstreet Committee held 24 March 2015 be read and accepted - Moved by Mario Pellegrino, Seconded by Lisa Locantro-Silicato

LOCAL PLACE MANAGEMENT Steve Kourepis provided an overview of current on development applications before Council such as:

DA2015-1078: 9-15 Ryde Road, Hunters Hill – Proposed 3 storey flat roof with 18 units proposed on exhibition at present.

Outcome of Section 96 application by the Hunters Hill Hotel was settled with regard to the bus bay and landscaping.

URBAN DESIGN AND LANDSCAPING – HUNTERS HILL VILLAGE 1. Public Domain Landscape Plan Stage 2 - is continuing however the following points

need to be clarified. With the intent of improving the aesthetics and visual aspect of the Hunters Hill Village area the following amendments would need to be made to the Public Domain Landscaping Plan for the Hunters Hill Village to incorporate the following:

a) Provide for pedestrian “safety posts and wire”- similar treatment as entry

Statement – along the northern side of Gladesville Road, (the length of the Hunters Hill Hotel) be incorporated as part of the Public Domain Landscaping Plan for the Hunters Hill Village;

b) Providing for a pedestrian friendly paving at the intersection of Gladesville

Road and Ryde Road crossing; c) Stormwater drainage works in Gladesville Road outside Chemist area,

along the Gladesville Road Western end; d) Safety bollards, RMS equipment’s to provide bollards, along Gladesville

road, if required are to be integrated with the urban design (e.g. by timber casing);

e) Council install one street light or solar powered lighting to the existing light

poles near the residential flat building, No18 Joubert Street North near the Hunters Hill Hotel, along Joubert Street North, improving the safety and security of residents of Hunters Hill;

f) Providing for lighting or solar lighting to the Joubert Streets, north and south

improving safety and security; g) Bike racks; h) Disabled access, finalisation of disability access, i) Public art, siting;


Item 9.5 Page 176

j) The issue of the disabled ramp, along Gladesville road, not complying with the requirements and able to be used by those using the ramp (can’t press the button);

k) New waste public street bins provided outside the Hunters Hill Hotel and

the Commonwealth Bank; l) Extend the new paving works around the corner - southern side - of

Gladesville Road into Joubert street (real estate agent) ending at lane way; m) Review the landscaping area along the Joubert Street south eastern end

(RMS) land; n) Finalise tree locations on Gladesville Road south, and ensure tree species

are the same on both sides of the road.

Discussions took place with regards to the amendments mention above and when would the Public Domain Landscaping Plan for the Hunters Hill Village be available, and which part of the plan would be implemented when…?? - Particularly the trees on Gladesville Road south, and the bins and seats etc. Further to the above, the committee did not support the deciduous trees, and thought the trees should be the same both sides of the road. There was also the issue of needing to finalise the location of trees on the south side of Gladesville Road. 2. Graffiti – 71-75 Gladesville Road, Hunters Hill - This matter is still being pursued by

Council officers with the owner of the subject site. 3. Public Art – A briefing was provided with regard to the urban design outcomes on

Gladesville Road.

TRAFFIC AND PEDESTRAIN REVIEW – FLOW & MANAGEMENT Car parking/patrolling by rangers - Ongoing

MANAGEMENT OF CONSTRUCTION PHASE OF SITES – “DAY TO DAY ISSUES” 1. Joubert Street South Work cages – it was advised by Steve Kourepis that four

spaces occupied by work cages in Joubert Street South has been reduced to only two spaces and two spaces are freed up for parking. This will be reviewed in due course to be removed accordingly.

2. AIM – Minimise disruption to the community and local businesses. 3. Outdoor seating and A frames a present issue – Council officers are monitoring that

at the moment and provided a briefing in regards to Via Napoli and the issues raised with Council. Other issues with Stoneground Bakery on Gladesville Road breaching their consent need to be reviewed including that area.

ACTIVITIES AND EVENTS 1. Hunters Hill Village Street Feast – Margaret Kelly provided an overview and briefing

clarifying discussions that Discover Hunters Hill are the responsible body for the event not Council. It was clearly highlighted that the Main Street committee were supportive of transferring responsibility to Discover Hunters Hill for the event in November.


Item 9.5 Page 177

RECOMMENDATION – That Discover Hunters Hill be the body responsible for the “Street Feast” event within the Hunters Hill Village and not Council

2. Events Calendar – This point was discussed in detail with the intent of a diary and

events summit, the diary is to be resolved by September for the diary to begin in 2016.

GENERAL BUSINESS

Non Smoking legislation that will come into effect in 6 July 2015 was discussed.

Christmas decorations were discussed and this will be followed up and it was agreed that it needs to be a collaborative approach.

RECOMMENDATION – That Hunters Hill Council assist co-ordinate a Hunters Hill Village Christmas lights display (lights to be funded by local businesses).

Issue with regard to the installed solar power lighting on Joubert Street South has been blocked by tree canopy, this is to be reviewed by Council staff.

NEXT MEETING The next meeting of Main Street Committee of the Hunters Hill Village to be held on Wednesday 23 September 2015 at Gladesville Community Centre at 44 Gladesville Road, Hunters Hill commencing at 5.30pm. The meeting terminated at 7.40pm. FINANCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT


There is no direct social impact on Council arising from Council consideration of this matter.

RISK ASSESSMENT

There are no direct or indirect risks impacting on Council arising from consideration of this matter. HUNTERS HILL 2030 A key outcome in the Community and Lifestyle section of Council’s current Community Strategic Plan is: 3.1 Increase active and informal participation by local residents and business owners in

creating a sustainable future.


Item 9.5 Page 178

RECOMMENDATION

1. That Council review and note the minutes.

2. That Discover Hunters Hill be the body responsible for the “Street Feast” event within the Hunters Hill Village and not Council.

3. That Hunters Hill Council assist co-ordinate a Hunters Hill Village Christmas lights

display (lights to be funded by local businesses).

4. That Council be advised which part of the Public Domain Landscaping Plan for the Hunters Hill Village would be implemented and when, in particularly the trees on Gladesville Road South including the street bins and seats etc., when considering the following amendments/reviews to be made to the Plan:

a. Provide for pedestrian “safety posts and wire”- similar treatment as entry

Statement – along the northern side of Gladesville Road, (the length of the Hunters Hill Hotel) be incorporated as part of the Public Domain Landscaping Plan for the Hunters Hill Village;

b. Providing for a pedestrian friendly paving at the intersection of Gladesville

Road and Ryde road crossing; c. Stormwater drainage works in Gladesville Road outside Chemist area,

along the Gladesville Road Western end; d. Safety bollards, RMS equipment’s to provide bollards, along Gladesville

road, if required are to be integrated with the urban design (e.g. by timber casing);

e. Council install one street light or solar powered lighting to the existing light

poles near the residential flat building, No18 Joubert Street North near the Hunters Hill Hotel, along Joubert Street North, improving the safety and security of residents of Hunters Hill;.

f. Providing for lighting or solar lighting to the Joubert Streets, north and south

improving safety and security; g. Bike racks; h. Disabled access, finalisation of disability access; i. Public art, siting/location etc; j. The issue of the disabled ramp, along Gladesville Road, not complying with

the requirements and able to be used by those using the ramp (can’t press the button);

k. New waste public street bins provided outside the Hunters Hill Hotel and

the Commonwealth Bank; l. Extend the new paving works around the corner - southern side - of

Gladesville Road into Joubert Street (real estate agent) ending at lane way; m. Review the landscaping area along the Joubert Street south eastern end

(RMS) land;


Item 9.5 Page 179

n. Finalise tree locations on Gladesville Road south, and ensure tree species are the same on both sides of the road (The committee did not support the deciduous trees, and thought the trees should be the same both sides of the road. There was also the issue of needing to finalise the location of trees on the south side of Gladesville Road).

ATTACHMENTS


CORRESPONDENCE Meeting 4383 - 27 July 2015

Item 10.1 Page 180

ITEM NO : 10.1

SUBJECT : CORRESPONDENCE




REPORTING OFFICER : SHARON MURDOCH

Ref:239794

INTRODUCTION

Council receives items of correspondence, requests for donations and representations from business organisations. The following correspondence is for the information of Council. REPORT

1. LETTER FROM THE HON ANTHONY ROBERTS MP, MEMBER FOR LANE

COVE, MINISTER FOR INDUSTRY RESOURCES AND ENERGY, LEADER OF THE HOUSE, dated 16 July in response to the invitation to attend the signing of the Memorandum of Understanding and reiterating his support for the Agreement and the establishment of a Joint Regional Authority.

Minister Roberts’ correspondence in full is attached, for information.

CONCLUSION

The correspondence is for the information of Council. FINANCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT





The report addresses strategies identified under ‘Our Council’ and in particular 1.3.2 Councillors are well informed about issues and projects.


Item 10.1 Page 181

RECOMMENDATION


ATTACHMENTS

1. Copy of correspondence from The Hon Anthony Roberts MP

GENERAL BUSINESS Meeting 4383 - 27 July 2015

Item 12.1 Page 183

ITEM NO : 12.1

SUBJECT : MEETINGS - VARIOUS COMMITTEES OF COUNCIL

CSP THEME : COUNCIL IS RECOGNISED AND RESPECTED AS AN OPEN AND TRANSPARENT ORGANISATION



REPORTING OFFICER : SHARON MURDOCH

Ref: 239798

INTRODUCTION

Council has adopted a Committee and Working Party structure. REPORT

The following meetings are updated for the information of Council.

PURPOSE DATE TIME LOCATION

Hunters Hill Seniors Advisory Group 03.08.15 10.00am 35 Gladesville Road

Moocooboola Festival Advisory Committee 12.08.15 6.00pm Chamber

Bushland Management Working Group 17.08.15 2.30pm Chamber

Public Transport & Traffic Advisory Committee (PT&T) 18.08.15 6.00pm Chamber

Conservation Advisory Panel (CAP) (Third Wednesday of the Month)

19.08.15 5.30pm

Chamber

Hunters Hill Access Advisory Committee 20.08.15 12.30pm Chamber

Gladesville Mainstreet Committee 20.08.15 6.00pm Gladesville Library

Joint Library Service Advisory Committee 26.08.15 5.30pm Gladesville Library

Environment Projects & Advisory Group (EPAAG) 02.09.15 6.00pm Small Hall

Hunters Hill Le Vesinet Friendship Committee 02.09.15 7.00pm Chamber

Hunters Hill Village Mainstreet Committee 23.09.15 5.30pm 44 Gladesville Road

Young in Art Committee Meeting 07.10.15 3.45pm Chamber

Hunters Hill Art Exhibition Advisory Committee 07.10.15 6.00pm Small Hall

Children’s Services Advisory Committee 22.10.15 12.30pm Chamber

Finance & Strategic Planning Advisory Committee TBA 5.30pm Chamber

Hunters Hill Local Traffic Advisory Committee TBA 9.30am Chamber

Hunters Hill Property Advisory Committee TBA 6.00pm Museum

Precinct Forums TBA

Priory Advisory Panel. (As required) TBA 6.00pm The Priory

Public Art Committee TBA

Schools Principals’ Liaison Committee.(Twice per year) TBA 12.30pm Small Hall


Item 12.1 Page 184

FINANCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct environmental impact on Council arising from Council consideration of this matter. SOCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct social impact on Council arising from Council consideration of this matter. RISK ASSESSMENT There are no direct or indirect risks impacting on Council arising from consideration of this matter. HUNTERS HILL 2030 This matter complies with the Council operational plan.

RECOMMENDATION


ATTACHMENTS

1. What's On

Ordinary Meeting No. 4383 - Municipality of Hunter's Hill · CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES Meeting 4383 -...

Documents

Transcript of Ordinary Meeting No. 4383 - Municipality of Hunter's Hill · CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES Meeting 4383 -...