Orthmac Developments Pty Ltd v Pittwater Council

[2002] NSWLEC 57

Land and Environment Court

of New South Wales

CITATION:	Orthmac Developments Pty Ltd v Pittwater Council [2002] NSWLEC 57
PARTIES:	APPLICANT: Orthmac Developments Pty Ltd ACN 096 383 890 RESPONDENT: Pittwater Council
FILE NUMBER(S):	10752 of 2001
CORAM:	Lloyd J
KEY ISSUES:	Development Application :- State Environmental Planning Policy No. 5 - merit considerations
LEGISLATION CITED:	Environment Planning and Assessment Act 1979 s 97 State Environmental Planning Policy No. 5 cl 3, cl 13, cl 14 and cl 25
CASES CITED:
DATES OF HEARING:	04/02/2002 and 05/02/2002
DATE OF JUDGMENT:	04/30/2002
LEGAL REPRESENTATIVES:	APPLICANT: Mr A E Galasso (barrister) SOLICITORS: Peter C Prior & Co RESPONDENT: Ms S A Duggan (barrister) SOLICITORS: Mallesons Stephen Jaques

JUDGMENT:

IN THE LAND AND Matter No.: 10752 of 2001

ENVIRONMENT COURT Coram: Lloyd J

OF NEW SOUTH WALES Decision date: 30 April 2002

Orthmac Developments Pty Limited

ACN 096 383 890
Applicant
v
Pittwater Council
Respondent

REASONS FOR JUDGMENT

1. This is an appeal under s 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (“the EP&A Act”) against the refusal of a development application to construct twelve residential home units on land known as Nos. 182-184 Powderworks Road, Elanora, being lots 166 and 167 in deposited plan 22670.

2. In these proceedings I have been assisted by Commissioner Bly and had the benefit of a view of the land in the presence of representatives of the parties.

3. The proposed development is described in the development application as “SEPP 5 housing project”. The statement of environmental effects which accompanied the development application states that the proposed development is intended to “be developed for 12 dwellings as Housing for Older People and People with Disability under the provisions of SEPP No. 5…”. The site of the proposed development is at present subject to the provisions of Pittwater Local Environmental Plan 1993 (“the LEP”). The land is zoned 2(a) under that instrument which makes residential flat buildings such as that which is proposed prohibited. The development is, however, permissible with consent pursuant to State Environmental Planning Policy No. 5 (“SEPP 5”) which permits development for the purpose of housing for older people or people with a disability, and which prevails over the local environmental plan to the extent of any inconsistency therewith.

4. A number of issues originally identified as being raised in this appeal were either not pressed or were resolved before or during the hearing. For example, it was initially contended by the respondent Pittwater Council (“the council”) that the proposed development did not satisfy cl 25(f)(i) of SEPP 5 by the provision of footpath and pedestrian crossing to the bus stop on the northern side of Powderworks Road. This issue was resolved by way of a proposed condition of consent, agreed to by the parties, for the construction of a pedestrian crossing and footpath on the northern side of Powderworks Road, Elanora, to a bus stop.

5. It is accepted by the parties that the only two following related issues remain:

· Streetscape and design; and

· Character.

6. As noted above, the subject land comprises of lots 166 and 167 in deposited plan 22670 (being Nos. 182-184 Powerworks Road). It has a frontage of 51.5 metres to Powderworks Road, with a slight fall from its rear to the front boundary of about 4.5 metres. The proposed building consists of two storeys at the front and one residential level at the rear of land with parking under, which is accessible by a driveway that passes between Nos. 182 and 184.

The Relevant Planning Controls

7. In order to appreciate what the applicant has to demonstrate for consent, it is necessary to turn to the legislation.

8. The principal legislative context in which the streetscape and design issues of this case fall, can be found in cl 3 of SEPP 5 which relevantly provides:

…
(c) be of good design.

…
(c) setting out design principles that should be followed to achieve built form that responds to the characteristics of its site and location.

9. Part 3 of SEPP 5 (cll 20-25), entitled “Design Requirements”, encourages a proposed housing development to be of a good design by stipulating design principles that must be taken into account by the consent authority and to which it must have adequate regard, “where possible”, when considering an application for consent. Clause 25 relevantly provides:

25. Consent must not be granted for development to which this Part applies unless the consent authority is satisfied that the proposed development demonstrates that adequate regard has been given to the following principles:
(a) Neighbourhood amenity and streetscape: The proposed development should:

(ii) [not relevant]

…

10. In addition, “streetscape” is described in the dictionary to SEPP 5 as follows:

The character of a locality (whether it is a street or precinct) defined by the spatial arrangement and visual appearance of built and landscape features when viewed from the street .

11. Also relevant to the matters of streetscape, design and residential character are cll 13 and 14 of SEPP 5 and Development Control Plan No. LP18 (“the DCP”). Clauses 13 and 14 of SEPP 5 relevantly provide:

A consent authority must not consent to a development application made pursuant to this Part unless it complies with the standards specified in this clause.
(2) Height in zones where residential flat buildings are not permitted:

…

(a) building height: if all proposed buildings are 8 metres or less in height; or
(b) density and scale: if the density and scale of the buildings when expressed as a floor space ratio is:
(i) 0.5:1 or less, except as provided by subparagraph (ii); or
(ii) 0.75:1 or less for hostels and residential care facilities located within 400 metres waking distance of public transport node (being a public transport facility such as a railway station, bus stop, or ferry wharf, that operates from Monday to Friday (both days inclusive) in daylight hours); or
…

12. “Height” is defined in the dictionary to SEPP 5 as follows:

height in relation to a building, means the distance measured vertically from any point on the ceiling of the topmost floor of the building to the ground level immediately below that point.

13. Clause 3.1.5 of the DCP specifies the front building line control as follows:

A minimum 6.5m setback measure parallel to the road boundary or established building line, shall apply to all streets other than those listed below. This shall apply to all structures and carparking spaces whether covered or not.
Where the established building line is greater than 6.5 metres, the established building shall prevail.

14. Clause 3.1.7 of the DCP provides that the maximum height of a building should be 8.5 metres. This height shall be measured from the highest point of the building (including the top of the ridge line) to the natural ground level and shall apply at any point on the building.

The Evidence

15. The principal evidence on the two remaining issues was given by Miss J McLoughlin, the council’s town planning witness and by Mr C F Blyth, the applicant’s consultant town planner.

16. Miss McLoughlin noted that the neighbourhood amenity and residential character of the vicinity of the site principally comprises of single storey residential properties within mature, leafy gardens that contain canopy trees. These things combine to give the locality a leafy garden suburb appearance. By contrast she explained the proposal does not resemble the established character of this locality. She was concerned that the two proposed buildings facing Powderworks Road would have a total height of 9.3 metres that will dwarf the surrounding single storey dwellings. This situation will be exacerbated by the absence of effective landscape screening. The proposal also does not comply with the DCP that sets a maximum building height of 8.5 metres for the area. The requirements of the DCP are important because it points towards the likely future character of the area.

17. Miss McLoughlin noted a number of other matters of non-compliance that the proposal has with the DCP. The development should seek to retain and improve existing tree canopy and indigenous vegetation, which forms an important role in maintaining the natural forested character of the locality. (I note, however, that the subject land could not be described as having a forested character and, on the contrary, is almost bare of vegetation other than grass.) New buildings should be designed with facade modulation and should incorporate shade elements such as pergolas and verandas in combination with the retention and planting of vegetation. The DCP requires a minimum setback of 6.5 metres as a front building line and for the most part the proposal complies with this requirement having an average setback of 9.5 metres. However there is a further requirement that where the building line indicated by the adjoining developments is greater than 6.5 metres, the established requirements shall prevail. This requirement is said to be infringed by up to 5.5 metres. She explained that these requirements are designed to reduce the visual bulk and scale of buildings and assist new developments in complementing existing streetscapes and blending into the natural environment.

18. Miss McLoughlin’s concerns as to the excessive height and the inadequate setback from the frontage was exacerbated in which her opinion by the extensive site coverage of the proposal, and which is said to be at 77 per cent and which in her view is excessive and inconsistent with the residential character of the area. These matters are said to be indicative of an inadequate level of integration with the established residential character of the area. She did not believe that the proposed development consequently gives “adequate regard” as required by cl 25(a) of SEPP 5 to the building bulk.

19. Miss McLoughlin also explained that the proposal would not resemble these dwellings which might otherwise be expected on land with a frontage of this size. In effect the development will present as a two-storey building with long walls. Mechanisms have not been used to break up the façade and the buildings will present a dominant character of the kind inappropriate in this streetscape. The only aspect of the proposal which she believed was responsive to the locality was the roof form but because in general the development was not well integrated into the streetscape, this was not enough. Instead the proposal will look like a unit development, which is completely at odds with other buildings in the immediate area. Such an outcome can be and should be avoided because unit development is not the dominant form in the streetscape.

20. In considering all these matters together it was Miss McLoughlin's opinion that the proposal does not meet the requirements of clause 25(a)(i) of SEPP 5 which in terms of neighbourhood amenity and streetscape requires a proposed development to contribute to an attractive residential environment with clear character and identity.

21. Conversely, Mr Blyth believed that the proposal was, in terms of neighbourhood amenity, residential character and streetscape entirely appropriate and acceptable. In was his opinion that the entire proposal met with 8 metres maximum height limit stipulated in cl 14(a) of SEPP 5 because the “height”, according to the definition section in SEPP 5 (as noted in par [12]), is measured vertically from any point on the ceiling of the topmost floor of the ground level immediately below that point, and not from the top of the roof as calculated by Miss McLoughlin. According to his calculations, at its maximum the building height of the proposed development is 6.5 metres. He did however accept that the maximum building height requirement in the DCP of 8.5 metres to the top of the ridge was exceeded by about 600 mm.

22. More particularly in relation to streetscape and neighborhood amenity Mr Blyth explained that the proposal would create contextual character through the adoption of pitched tile roof forms with projecting “sub-hips” and articulation created through the use of steel picket panels between masonry columns setback from the property line. Extensive landscape is also proposed as part of the development.

23. Mr Blyth believed that the buildings would present as a combination of simple domestic scale elements and provide an inviting, accessible and pleasant environment for the residents as well as be an appropriate addition to the streetscape. He recognised that the proposal comprises a medium density form of development that is normally prohibited in such area, exhibiting a different character by comparison with a single storey detached housing, an outcome anticipated by SEPP 5. In this regard Mr Blyth noted that the applicable non-refusable standards specified under SEPP 5 have been met and the relevant design considerations taken into account by the proposed development.

24. Mr Blyth did not accept that the proposal would have a significant impact on the streetscape or that the proposal would be incongruous in the area. It was his opinion that although the proposed buildings would be closer to the street by comparison with some others in the locality, the setbacks of the proposal do not so significantly depart from the residential environment, that there would be any consequential adverse impacts taking into account the details of the design and its landscaped setting.

25. When cross-examined about the symmetry of the design and the fact that there were no other developments in the locality with such features, he said that he did not believe that this would result in unacceptable impacts.

Conclusion

26. When examining the question of whether the proposed development is of good design as encouraged by SEPP 5 and dealing with the issues of residential character, neighbourhood amenity and the streetscape, it is necessary to examine the nature and character of the existing streetscape and the neighbourhood amenity.

27. The definition of streetscape in SEPP 5 expressly makes reference to “the character of a locality” and specifically provides “whether it is a street or precinct”. Consequently the locality or precinct in which the application needs to be considered includes more than just the adjoining or close-by properties. It is relevant then, to look beyond the land bounded by Elanora Road and Kalang Street and have adequate regard to the neighbourhood amenity and development of the locality.

28. As disclosed during the site view with the representatives of the parties, the character of the area comprises of a “mishmash” of a great range and variety of differing styles and types of buildings. Not only does the locality as a whole includes detached single-storey dwellings in landscaped allotments, but also larger double-storey residential buildings in more open settings and properties with substantial front boundary fences. In this context and bearing in mind that SEPP 5 anticipates a multi-unit and medium density form of development, the Court has not been persuaded that the design of this proposal would be unacceptable.

29. Although Miss McLoughlin expressed a concern about the non-compliance with the height control under the DCP, noted in par [16] above, the proposal clearly complies with the height control under SEPP 5. The maximum height calculated in accordance with SEPP 5 is 6.5 metres. As noted in par [11] above, consent cannot be refused on the ground of building height if the buildings are 8 metres or less in height.

30. Whilst the proposed development does not comply with the established building line requirement of the DCP, it is nevertheless well in excess of the minimum 6.5 metres requirement. Moreover, as cl 25(a)(vii) of SEPP 5 states, the front setback must be in sympathy with but not necessarily the same as the existing building line. This control prevails, of course, over the front setback requirements of the DCP. Taking into account the fact that the proposal complies with the height requirement in cl 14(a) of SEPP 5 and has acceptable landscaping, the proposed development should present to Powderworks Road and relate to its neighbours in a satisfactory manner notwithstanding that the proposed buildings will be noticeably larger than its immediate neighbours. As I have indicated, the latter fact is one which is anticipated by SEPP 5.

31. In terms of its presentation to Powderworks Road the proposal was criticised because architectural devices have not been used to break up the facades of the two buildings. I have referred to Miss McLoughlin’s comments in this respect in par [16] above. Whilst more might have been done in this respect, I nevertheless accept the evidence of Mr Blyth that the use of pitched tiled roof forms and articulation resulting for the use of balconies at the corners of the buildings can sufficiently overcome this concern and achieve the aims of the DCP in having a modulated facade.

32. It was also suggested that the proposed site coverage was indicative of excessive building bulk. There was, however, no suggestion that the proposal did not comply with the 0.5:1 floor space ratio in cl 14(b) of SEPP 5. This being the case, I do not know how Miss McLoughlin estimated a site coverage of 77 per cent as noted in par [18]. It must be remembered that the consent cannot be refused if the development complies with the requirements of the controls specified in cl 14 of SEPP 5. In this respect also, I am inclined to accept the evidence of Mr Blyth that whilst the proposal comprises a medium density form of development and will exhibit a different character by comparison with single detached dwelling houses, it will not be excessively bulky and will result in an appropriate addition to the locality and to the streetscape.

33. Having considered the standards in cl 14 and the principles in cl 25 of SEPP 5 including residential environment, setbacks, bulk, building form, building height, and landscaping, I conclude that there is nothing about the proposed development which would justify its refusal.

Orders

34. The orders of the Court are therefore:

(1) The appeal is upheld.

(2) Development consent is granted for a residential development comprising housing for older people or people with a disability at 182-184 Powderworks Road, Elanora, subject to the conditions in Annexure "A" hereto.

(3) Exhibits A and C are retained.

I hereby certify that the preceding 34 paragraphs are a true copy of the reasons for judgment herein of the Honourable Mr Justice Lloyd

Associate

Dated: 30 April 2002

ANNEXURE “A”

CONDITIONS OF DEFERRED DEVELOPMENT CONSENT

Lot 167 DP 22670 Lot 166 DP 22670

182 Powderworks Road, Elanora Heights, NSW 2101

State Environmental Planning Policy No. 5 housing project comprising 12 (twelve) dwellings for older people or people with a disability in four buildings with a maximum height of two storeys, linked by upper level walkways with undercover parking for 27 vehicles

The Development Application has been determined by the granting of consent in accordance with plans numbered 20123 DA1, 20123 DA2, 20123 DA3, 20123 DA4, 20123 DA5, 20123 DA6, 20123 DA7, 1050DA 1 /2, 1050DA 2 / 2 prepared by Building Design Association of New South Wales Inc and Winter Group Ltd, as amended in red (shown clouded) or as modified by any conditions of this consent.

In accordance with Part A3 “Classification of Buildings and Structures” of the Building Code of Australia, it has been determined that the building or part subject of this consent has a Class 2a Classification.

The reason for the imposition of the attached conditions is to ensure that the development consented to is carried out in such a manner as to achieve the objectives of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979 (as amended), pursuant to section 5(a) of the Act, having regard to the relevant matters for consideration contained in section 79C of the Act and the Environmental Planning Instruments applying to the land, as well as section 80A of the Act which authorises the imposing of the consent conditions.

PART 1

THE COMMENCEMENT OF THIS CONSENT IS DEFERRED

UNTIL THE CONSENT AUTHORITY IS SATISFIED AS TO COMPLIANCE WITH THE FOLLOWING CONDITION/S:

A. Access to the bus stop located on the northern side of Powderworks Road. In order to make the northern side of Pittwater Road accessible and safe a pedestrian crossing and foot-path is to be constructed in accordance with the provisions of AS 1428.1. This shall be subjected to a Roads Act approval and shall be certified by an engineer.

Upon receipt of evidence within 6 (six) months from the date of this consent satisfying the above, the consent will become operative, subject to the conditions listed in Part 2 below.

The consent will lapse if evidence satisfying the above conditions is not received within the prescribed time period.

PART 2

CONDITIONS OF DEVELOPMENT CONSENT

This Consent is not an approval to commence building work. The works associated with this consent can only commence following the issue of the Construction Certificate.

A1. The proposed works are to be carried out in accordance with the provisions of Clause 98 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Regulation, 2000.

A2. Compliance with the Building Code of Australia

1. All works are to be carried out in accordance with the requirements of the Building Code of Australia.

2. In the case of residential building work for which the Home Building Act 1989 requires there to be a contract of insurance in force in accordance with Part 6 of that Act, there is to be such a contract in force.

A3. Excavations and backfilling

1. All excavations and backfilling associated with the erection or demolition of a building must be executed safely and in accordance with appropriate professional standards.

2. All excavations associated with the erection or demolition of a building must be property guarded and protected to prevent them from being dangerous to life or property.

A4. Retaining walls and drainage

If the soil conditions require it:

1. retaining walls associated with the erection or demolition of a building or other approved methods of preventing movement of the soil must be provided, and

2. adequate provision must be made for drainage.

A5. Support for neighbouring buildings

Where excavations extend below the level of the base of the footings of a building on an adjoining allotment of land, the person causing the excavation must preserve and protect the building from damage and, if necessary, underpin and support the adjoining building in an approved manner. The person causing the excavation must give the owner of the adjoining property at least seven (7) days written notice of its intention to excavate below the level of the base of the footing. The person must also furnish the adjoining property owner with particulars of the proposed work.

A6. Protection of public places

1. If the work involved in the erection or demolition of a building:

a. is likely to cause pedestrian or vehicular traffic in a public place to be obstructed or rendered inconveniently, or

b. building involves the enclosure of a public place,

a hoarding or fence must be erected between the work site and the public place
2. If necessary, an awning or other structure is to be erected, sufficient to prevent any substance from, or in connection with, the work falling into the public place.

3. The work site must be kept lit between sunset and sunrise if it is likely to be hazardous to persons in the public place.

4. Any such hoarding, fence or awning is to be removed when the work has been completed.

NOTE: Hoardings and temporary awnings erected on or over public places are required to be subject to a separate approval from Council.

A7. Signs to be erected on building and demolition sites

A sign must be erected in a prominent position on any work site on which work involved in the erection or demolition of a building is to be carried out other than when work is carried out inside an existing building or where the premises is to be continuously occupied (both during and outside working hours):
1. stating that unauthorised entry to the work site is prohibited, and
2. showing the name of the person in charge of the work site and a telephone number at which that person may be contacted outside working hours.

Toilet facilities are to be provided at or in the vicinity of the work site during the duration of the development.

NOTE: All outstanding matters referred to in this section are to be submitted together. Incomplete Construction Certificate Applications/details will not be accepted.

B1. Three sets of amended working drawings complying with the conditions of the Development Consent and the Building Code of Australia must be submitted to the satisfaction of the principal certifying authority or Council prior to issue of the Construction Certificate.

B19. Three sets of Drainage details showing on-site stormwater detention facilities, are to be submitted prior to release of the Construction Certificate. Such details are to be accompanied by a certification by a qualified practicing Civil Engineer with corporate membership of the Institute of Engineers Australia (M.I.E), or who is eligible to become a Corporate member and has appropriate experience and competence in the related field, confirming that the plans/details comply with Council's Policy and Guidelines for the on-site detention of stormwater- Feb 1996. The details shall include disposal of the site stormwater from the OSD facility to a public drainage system (ie. kerb and gutter or natural watercourse. )

B25. A Certificate is to be submitted by a qualified Engineer with corporate membership of the Institute of Engineers Australia (M.I.E), or who is eligible to become a Corporate member and have appropriate experience and competence in the related field, Architect or Surveyor confirming to the satisfaction of Council or the accredited certifier that the proposed means of access to and within the site complies with the requirements of Council's policy DCP No. E3 “Driveways and Internal Roadways” and AS 2890.1 -1993: Parking Facilities - Off-street Car Parking.

NOTE: Prior to the submission of the Construction Certificate, a crossing application with appropriate fees is to be made to Council for the levels required for the construction of the concrete footpath and gutter crossing. The levels provided by Council are to be incorporated into the design of the internal driveway.

B26. Units 2 and 8 are required to have fixed louvre constructed at a 450 angle to the window face along the eastern and western sides. The lattice screen fence at the edge of the terrace to units 9 and 12 shall be extended to the southern most corner of the terrace.

B27. In relation to visitor parking the applicant is required to move the electrical box towards the rear of the site. This would extend to current 2770mm to 3300mm which is the space needed for a person to transfer to and from a wheelchair.

B28. The applicant is required to submit amended plans showing the provision of a single stair climber to the eastern stairs behind the garage as back up to the main vertical lift.

B.29 An Erosion and Sediment Management Plan is to be submitted with the Construction Certificate application. Control over discharge of stormwater and containment of run-off and pollutants leaving the site/premises shall be undertaken through the installation of erosion control devices such as catch drains, diversion drains, energy dissipaters, level spreaders and sediment control devices such as hay bale barriers, filter fences, filter dams, sedimentation basins. Such plan is to be a accompanied by a certification from an appropriately qualified person, that the plans/ details have been designed in accordance with the requirements of the N.S.W. Department of Land and Water Conservation’s “Urban Erosion and Sediment Control” manual.

B45. Three sets of detailed landscape working drawings, which comply in all respects with the conditions of development consent, are to be submitted prior to release of the Construction Certificate. Each plan/sheet is to be certified by a qualified landscape architect, landscape designer/environmental designer or horticulturist, confirming that the plans/details provide for the works to be carried out in accordance with Development Control Plan No 23 -Landscape and Vegetation Management.

B48. Any variation which substantially alters the design intent or potentially conflicts with a condition of development consent is to be approved by Council or the accredited certifier prior to implementation. Written notification and justification of the variation is to be provided by landscape architect/designer.

B60. Three sets of Structural Engineering details relating to the slabs, footings and structural framing are to be submitted prior to release of the Construction Certificate. Each plan/sheet is to be signed by a qualified practising Structural Engineer with corporate membership of the Institute of Engineers Australia (M.I.E), or is eligible to become a corporate member and has appropriate experience and competence in the related field.

NOTE: It is an offence to commence works prior to issue of a Construction Certificate.

C6. A certificate prepared by an appropriate qualified person is to be submitted for the following building components, certifying to the satisfaction of Council or the Accredited Certifier that the nominated works have been carried out in accordance with the Building Code of Australia, relevant Australian Standards and any conditions of Development Consent. Works are not to progress past this point until Council or the Accredited Certifier has confirmed that this condition has been satisfied.

Where this confirmation of compliance is issued by a private certifier, for the purposes of keeping a public record, a copy of the letter is to be forwarded to Council within 5 (five) working days of the date of issue.

C6a. Building setout BS-1

C6b Erosion Controls ER-1

C18. DELETED

D4. Car parking spaces for persons with disabilities shall have clear minimum dimensions of 3.2m x 6.0m. There shall be a minimum ceiling height of 2.5m of parking spaces for disabled

D20. Temporary sedimentation and erosion controls are to be constructed prior to commencement of any work to eliminate the discharge of sediment from the site

D21. Sedimentation and erosion controls are to be effectively maintained at all times during the course of construction and shall not be removed until the site has been stabilised or landscaped to the Principal Certifying Authority's satisfaction.

D22. An all weather accessway at the front of the property consisting of 50-75mm aggregate or similar material at a minimum thickness of 200mm and 15 metres long laid over geotechnical fabric is to be constructed prior to commencement of works.

D23. Adequate measures shall be undertaken to remove clay from vehicles leaving the site so as to maintain public roads in a clean condition.

D28. All excavated material is to be removed from the site. This is due to the site's location in an area identified as being subject to possible landslip.

D60. The footpath and adjacent roadway is to be kept free of obstruction by building materials and/or plant. All concrete trucks, pumps and associated plant are to be kept wholly within the site. No concrete or slurry is to be discharged into the street or the street drainage system.

D70. All Residential (containing three (3) or more units), Commercial and Industrial garbage enclosures/stores shall be constructed and fitted out in accordance with the following:

1. DELETED.

2. The area used for the storage and washing down of garbage receptacles shall be constructed of solid material (brick, concrete, concrete blocks, structural fibrous cement or other similar homogeneous material) so as to prevent the formation of cavities which become possible harbourages for insects and vermin, Framing In timber is not permitted.

3. The walls of the enclosure shall be cement rendered and steel trowelled to a smooth. Even surface.

4. The floor shall be of impervious material coved at the intersection with the walls, graded and drained to an approved floor waste within the room/enclosure.

5. Stormwaters shall not enter the floor of the garbage enclosure such that the sewer system may be contaminated by rainwaters.

6. The garbage enclosure shall be made vermin proof.

7. Garbage rooms shall be vented to the external air by natural or artificial means. The installation and operation of the mechanical ventilation system shall comply with AS 1668, Parts 1 & 2.

8. Hot and cold water hose cocks shall be located within a garbage enclosure or in close proximity to Council’s satisfaction.

9. Racks shall be provided for storage and drainage where domestic type garbage bins are used. The racks may be fixed or freestanding, with the lowest shelf 300mm above floor level. Racks shall be constructed of galvanised piping, "T" iron, angle iron or solid flat steel or other approved material and preferably designed to be demountable for ease of cleaning.

10. Garbage receptacle washing machines shall be housed in a room separate from the garbage store and kept 300mm clear of all walls.

D71. In residential developments containing three (3) or more units garbage and recycling facilities shall be provided in accordance with "Pittwater Council's Revised Waste Service Information Sheet". The current residential waste/recycling service allows for a once a week collection based on the following volumes per individual household.

1. Garbage 80 litres per unit,
2. Paper 50 litres per unit, and
3. Recycling (glass etc) 50 litres per unit.

D76. A stamped copy of the approved plans is to be kept on the site at all times, during construction.

D77. All plumbing and drainage fixtures are to be concealed and not exposed to public view on buildings over one storey in height.

D85. All external glazing is to have a maximum reflectivity index of 25%.

D89 The hours of construction are restricted to between the hours of 7.00am and 5.00pm Monday- Friday and 7.00am to 1.00pm on Saturdays. No works are to be carried out on Sundays or Public Holidays. Internal building work may be carried out at any time outside these hours, subject to noise emissions from the building or works not being audible at any adjoining boundary.

D105. The landscaping is to be maintained for the life of the development.

D106. No storage of building materials or building waste, excavated fill or topsoil storage is to occur within the dripline of trees shown on the approved landscape working drawing(s) as being retained or within protective fenced areas.

Drainage is to be arranged such that fill, building materials or contaminants are not washed into protective fenced areas.
Further, the project manager is to erect signs advising all contractors and visitors to the site that no works or storage are to take place within the dripline of existing trees.

D140. All bathroom and ensuite windows must be of an “Awning Type” and must be fitted with frosted and/or opaque glazing.

NOTE: It is an offence to occupy a building prior to issue of an Occupation Certificate.

E10. A certificate prepared by an appropriate qualified person is to be submitted for the following building components, certifying to the satisfaction of Council or the accredited certifier that the nominated works have been carried out in accordance with the Building Code of Australia, relevant Australian Standards and any conditions of Development Consent. Works are not to progress past this point until Council or the Accredited Certifier has confirmed that this condition has been satisfied (see copy of form attached).

Where this confirmation of compliance is issued by a private certifier, for the purposes of keeping a public record, a copy of the letter is to be forwarded to Council within 5 (five) working days of the date of issue.

E10a. Pest control PST -1

E10c. Ground floor levels FL-1

E10d. Footings/slabs/piers/retaining walls FN-1

E10e. Bearers and joists and subfloor ventilation BJ-1

E10f. Wall, roof frames and window location FM-1

E10g. Wet areas WA-1

E10h. Masonry construction, accessories and weatherproofing MC-1

E10i. Subsequent floor levels FL-2

E10j Stair construction ST-1

E10k. Balustrading adequacy BA-1

E10l. Glazing GL-1

E10n. Roof cladding RC-1

E10o. Roof ridge levels RL-1

E10p. Smoke alarms SA-1

E10r. Onsite stormwater detention OSD-1

E10s. Driveway construction DW-1

E10w. Landscaping LS-1

E40. A certificate is to be submitted by a qualified practising landscape architect, landscape/environmental designer or horticulturist, certifying that the proposed automatic watering system and/or subsoil drainage and any associated waterproofing membrane have been installed in accordance with the details shown on the approved landscape working drawing and/or the manufacturer's specification. Works are not to progress past this point until Council or the accredited certifier has confirmed that this condition has been satisfied.

Where the project is being supervised by a private certifier, for the purposes of keeping a public record, a copy of the certification to be forwarded to Council within 5 (five) working days of the date of issue.

E41. A landscape practical completion report is to be prepared by the consultant landscape architect/designer and submitted to Council or the accredited certifier within 7 (seven) working days of the date of practical completion of all landscape works. This report is to certify that all landscape works have been completed in accordance with the landscape working drawing. A copy of this report is to accompany the request for issue of an Occupation Certificate.

Where the project is being supervised by a private certifier, for the purposes of keeping a public record, a copy of the report is to be forwarded to Council within 5 (five) working days of the date of issue.

E42. Prior to issue of the Certificate of Occupation, the applicant is to submit evidence of an agreement for the maintenance of all site landscaping by a qualified horticulturist, landscape contractor or landscape architect, for a period of 2 (two) years, from the date of issue of the Certificate of Occupation.

E43. At the completion of the landscape maintenance period, the consultant landscape architect/designer is to submit a final report to Council or the accredited certifier within 7 (seven) working days, certifying that all plant material has been successfully established and that all of the outstanding maintenance works or defects have been rectified prior to preparation of the report.

Where the project is being supervised by a private certifier, for the purposes of keeping a public record, a copy of the report is to be forwarded to Council within 5 working days of the date of issue.

E70. A copy of the Section 73 Compliance Certificate issued under the provisions of the Sydney Water Act, 1994, is to be forwarded to Council or the accredited certifier, prior to release of the Occupation Certificate.

E85. Use of the on-site wastewater disposal system can not commence until a certificate is submitted by an accredited certifier/wastewater consultant, certifying to the satisfaction of Council or the accredited certifier that the wastewater treatment system and associated dispersal area have been installed and operate in accordance with the manufacturer's specification, associated operational guidelines, the recommendations contained in the Wastewater Report nominated on the Development Consent/Construction Certificate and relevant conditions of Development Consent.

E86. The building is not to be occupied or used until an Occupation Certificate has been issued, confirming that the project complies with the relevant standards and the conditions of development consent. The request for an Occupation Certificate is to be accompanied by a copy of all of the Compliance Certificates required by the conditions of development consent (see copy of form attached).

Nil

G14. You are advised to contact Australia Post regarding the required size and location of letterboxes.

G15. House numbering can only be authorised by Council. Before proceeding to number each lot/occupancy in your development, approval must be sought from Council's Planning and Assessment Business Unit.

G.23. Failure to comply with the relevant provisions of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 (as amended) and/or the conditions of this Development Consent may result in the serving of penalty notices (on-the-spot fines) under the summary offences provisions of the above legislation or legal action through the land and Environment Court, again pursuant to the above legislation.

G24. The applicant is also advised to contact the various supply and utility authorities, ie Sydney water, Sydney electricity, Telstra etc. to enquire whether there are any underground utility services within the proposed excavation area.

G25. It is the Project Manager's responsibility to ensure that all of the Component Certificates/certification issued during the course of the project are lodged with Council. Failure to comply with the conditions of approval or lodge the Component Certificates/certification will prevent Council from issuing the Occupation Certificate or the Building Certificate.

G27. To ascertain the date upon which the determination becomes effective, refer to Section 83 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 (as amended).

G28. Should any of the determination not be acceptable, you are entitled to request reconsideration under Section 82A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979. Such request to Council must be made in writing together with a $500 fee, within 28 days from the date of determination.

G29. If you are dissatisfied with this decision, Section 97 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, gives you a right of appeal to the Land and Environment Court within 12 months of the date of endorsement of this Consent.

G30. Applicant is to submit a new Development Application that must be accompanied by a Strata Survey for consideration by Council for Strata Subdivision.