Hunter's Hill Council

Ordinary Meeting

No. 4425

14 August 2017 at 7.30 PM

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

HUNTER'S HILL COUNCIL ORDINARY MEETING OF COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017 INDEX

1 – CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

1 Confirmation of Minutes of Ordinary Meeting 4424 held 24 July 2017

2 - MAYORAL MINUTES & REPORTS

2.1 Court of Appeal Judgement in Favour of Hunter's Hill Council 1 2.2 Honorary Freedom of the Municipality - Mr Philip Jenkyn OAM 3 2.3 2017 Moocooboola Festival 6 2.4 Retirement from Local Government - Councillor Peter C. Astridge 8

3 - NOTICES OF MOTION INCLUDING RESCISSION MOTIONS

Nil

4 - OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT

4.1 57 Ryde Road, Hunters Hill 10 4.2 18 Huntleys Point Road, Huntleys Point 43 4.3 Delegated Authority Report 61

5 - OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE

5.1 Disability Inclusion Action Plan 69

6 - OUR ENVIRONMENT

Nil

7 - MOVING AROUND

Nil

8 - OUR COUNCIL

8.1 Summary of Council Investments as at 30 June 2017 180 8.2 Summary of Council investments as at 31 July 2017 183 8.3 Fit For The Future Merger Proposal Update 186 8.4 Hunter's Hill Council IP&R Communication and Engagement Strategy 192 8.5 Monthly Report on Outstanding Matters 211

9 - COMMITTEES

9.1 Minutes of the Conservation Advisory Panel held on 19 July 2017 214 9.2 Minutes of Public Art Committee held Tuesday 25 July 2017 220 9.3 Minutes of Seniors Advisory Group Meeting held 7 August 2017 223 9.4 Report on Councillor Briefings held 24 July 2017 227

10 - CORRESPONDENCE

Item Page 3

10.1 Correspondence 1. The Hon. Gabrielle Upton MP - Proposed Merger Decision. 229

11 - DELEGATES REPORTS

Nil

12 - GENERAL BUSINESS

12.1 Meetings - Various Committees of Council 232

13 - QUESTIONS WITH OR WITHOUT NOTICE

Nil

Item Page 4 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

COMMENCEMENT

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

IN ATTENDANCE

The Mayor Councillor Richard Quinn, Deputy Mayor Councillor Mark Bennett, Councillors, Gary Bird, Justine McLaughlin, Zac Miles and Meredith Sheil.

ALSO PRESENT

The General Manager Barry Smith, the Group Manager Development and Regulatory Control Steve Kourepis and the Acting Group Manager Works and Services Dhruba Bhowmik.

APOLOGIES

Apologies were received from Clr Peter Astridge.

216/17 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Sheil, seconded Clr McLaughlin That Leave of Absence be granted to Councillor Peter Astridge, that his apologies be recorded in the Minutes and that Council forward thoughts and best wishes to him..

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

The Mayor called for Declarations of Interest without response.

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

217/17 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Bennett, seconded Clr Sheil That the Minutes of Ordinary Meeting No. 4423, held 26 June 2017 be confirmed.

SUSPENSION OF STANDING ORDERS

218/17 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Bennett, seconded Clr Bird That at 07:35 PM Standing Orders be suspended to allow items No. 8.1 and 8.2 to be discussed prior to item 4.1

8.1 COUNCIL POLL INFORMATION

PROCEEDINGS IN BRIEF

Mr Phil Jenkyn addressed Council on this matter

219/17 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Bennett, seconded Clr Sheil 1. That the format of the draft flyer is agreed subject to amendments to content upon receipt of advice from the Office of Local Government and comments from Councillors and others.

2. That a further report on this matter be brought to the next Ordinary Meeting of Council.

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting No. 4424 held on 24 July 2017. This is page 1 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

RECORD OF VOTING Yes Against Clr Richard Quinn Clr Meredith Sheil Clr Mark Bennett Clr Gary Bird Clr Zac Miles Clr Justine McLaughlin

8.2 FIT FOR THE FUTURE MERGER PROPOSAL UPDATE

PROCEEDINGS IN BRIEF

Mr Phil Jenkyn addressed Council on this matter

220/17 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Sheil, seconded Clr Bennett 1. That the report be received and noted.

2. That in the event that the Council is unsuccessful in its Court of Appeal proceedings regarding the amalgamation of Hunters Hill, City of Ryde and Lane Cove Council, Council is to immediately seek legal advice as to its prospects of success in seeking special leave to Appeal to the High Court and if such application has reasonable prospects of success, commence such special leave proceedings. The General Manager and/or the Mayor is granted delegated authority to commence and conduct an application for special leave to appeal and make any other applications on behalf of Council to ensure that such High Court proceedings may be heard and determined.

3. That the General Manager and/or the Mayor is granted delegated authority to seek to intervene in the Woollahra Council appeal and commence an application for such leave, if advice is received recommending that Council proceed with such an action.

4. That the General Manager and/or the Mayor is granted delegated authority to take other such relevant actions that may be needed to protect Councils adopted position regarding amalgamation.

5. That the above delegation be revisited at the first Council meeting following the election.

RECORD OF VOTING Yes Against Clr Richard Quinn Clr Zac Miles Clr Meredith Sheil Clr Mark Bennett Clr Gary Bird Clr Justine McLaughlin

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting No. 4424 held on 24 July 2017. This is page 2 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

RESUMPTION OF STANDING ORDERS

221/17 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Bennett, seconded Clr Bird That at 8:03 PM Standing Orders be resumed.

REPORTS FROM STAFF

OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT

4.1 IMPROVING THE COMMERCIAL CORE OF GLADESVILLE - DRAFT ACTION PLAN

222/17 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Sheil, seconded Clr McLaughlin

1. That Council endorse the attached draft report and the eight urban improvement ideas included on pages 10-17, as the Action Plan for improving the Commercial Core of Gladesville. As detailed implementation designs are prepared further consultation is to occur with Council.

2. That prior to commencement of any work, notification is undertaken of business owners and residents on land adjoining or in close proximity to areas targeted for urban improvements.

3. That Council endorse upgrading the footpath along Victoria Road from Pittwater Road to Massey Street and from Massey Street to Cowell Street. Notification of all adjoining owners/business owners to be undertaken prior to any works commencing.

RECORD OF VOTING Yes Against Clr Richard Quinn Clr Meredith Sheil Clr Mark Bennett Clr Gary Bird Clr Zac Miles Clr Justine McLaughlin

4.2 DELEGATED AUTHORITY REPORT

223/17 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Bird, seconded Clr Sheil That the report be received and noted.

RECORD OF VOTING Yes Against Clr Richard Quinn Clr Meredith Sheil Clr Mark Bennett Clr Gary Bird Clr Zac Miles Clr Justine McLaughlin

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting No. 4424 held on 24 July 2017. This is page 3 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

4.3 REPORT OF LEGAL MATTERS

224/17 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr McLaughlin, seconded Clr Bird That the report be received and noted.

RECORD OF VOTING Yes Against Clr Richard Quinn Clr Meredith Sheil Clr Mark Bennett Clr Gary Bird Clr Zac Miles Clr Justine McLaughlin

OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE

5.1 RYDE HUNTERS HILL JOINT LIBRARY AGREEMENT

225/17 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Bennett, seconded Clr Sheil 1. That Council write to the City of Ryde requesting an extension of the current library agreement for a further 12 months.

2. That Council review possible options for the provision of a library service as part of the preparation of the new Community Strategic Plan.

OUR ENVIRONMENT

6.1 APPOINTMENT OF AUTHORISED OFFICERS UNDER NEW BIOSECURITY ACT 2015

226/17 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Miles, seconded Clr Bird That Council delegate to the General Manager, in accordance with Section 377 of the Local Government Act (1993), those powers, duties and functions as contained in the instrument, Section 371 (1) of the Biosecurity Act 2015 in accordance with Section 375 of the Biosecurity Act 2015.

OUR COUNCIL

Item - 8.1 Council Poll Information - has been moved to another part of the document.

Item - 8.2 Fit for the Future Merger Proposal Update - has been moved to another part of the document.

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting No. 4424 held on 24 July 2017. This is page 4 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

8.3 COUNCIL MEETING DATES

227/17 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Miles, seconded Clr McLaughlin That Council cancel the Ordinary Meeting scheduled for 28 August 2017.

8.4 MONTHLY REPORT ON OUTSTANDING MATTERS

228/17 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Miles, seconded Clr Bird That the report be received and noted.

COMMITTEES

9.1 MINUTES OF THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY PANEL HELD ON 21 JUNE 2017

229/17 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Miles, seconded Clr Bird That the Minutes be received and noted.

9.2 MINUTES OF THE EVENTS ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING HELD 11 JULY 2017

230/17 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Miles, seconded Clr McLaughlin 1. That an alternate organisation be sought to run both Hunters Hill Street Feast and Gladesville Flicks’n’Eats.

2. That the expenditure at the 2017 Moocooboola be reduced, with the aim of breaking even.

3. That a sponsor be sought for the 2017 Carols in the Park.

4. That possible grant opportunities be investigated for Carols in the Park to reduce the cost to Council.

9.3 MINUTES OF LE VESINET FRIENDSHIP COMMITTEE MEETING HELD 7 JUNE 2017

231/17 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Miles, seconded Clr McLaughlin That the Minutes be received and noted.

9.4 REPORT ON COUNCILLOR BRIEFINGS HELD 26 JUNE 2017

232/17 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Bird, seconded Clr Miles That the report be received and noted.

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting No. 4424 held on 24 July 2017. This is page 5 CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

CORRESPONDENCE

10.1 CORRESPONDENCE 1. NSW PREMIER & CABINET - REVIEW OF THE LOBBYING OF GOVERNMENT OFFICIALS ACT 2011. 2. MR AND MS BRADSHAW - LAND AND ENVIRONMENT COURT PROCEEDINGS 3. LGNSW REPORT CARD 4. THE HON. GABRIELLE UPTON MP - NELSON PARADE 5. MR MARK GIFFORD PSM - NELSON PARADE 6. MR MARCUS RAY - NELSON PARADE 7. MR GRAEME KELLY - USU FUNDRAISER YOUTH OFF THE STREETS

233/17 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Miles, seconded Clr McLaughlin 1. That the report be received and noted. 2. That the General Manager be authorised to make a donation to Youth off the Streets on behalf of Council.

GENERAL BUSINESS

12.1 MEETINGS - VARIOUS COMMITTEES OF COUNCIL

234/17 RESOLVED on the motion of Clr Miles, seconded Clr Bird That the report be received and noted.

TERMINATION

The meeting terminated at 8:43 PM.

I confirm that these Minutes are a true and accurate record of Ordinary Meeting No. 4424 held on 24 July 2017.

...... Councillor Richard Quinn Barry Smith MAYOR GENERAL MANAGER

Minutes of the Ordinary Meeting No. 4424 held on 24 July 2017. This is page 6 MAYORAL MINUTES & REPORTS Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

ITEM NO : 2.1

SUBJECT : COURT OF APPEAL JUDGEMENT IN FAVOUR OF HUNTER'S HILL COUNCIL

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

DELIVERY PLAN : TO PUBLICISE ALL THINGS ‘HERITAGE’ WITHIN THE STRATEGY MUNICIPALITY

REPORTING OFFICER : CLR RICHARD QUINN

Ref:327917

INTRODUCTION On Thursday 27 July 2017, the NSW Premier, The Hon. Gladys Berejiklian, announced that the NSW Government would not be proceeding with the forced merger of Hunter’s Hill Council, Lane Cove Council and City of Ryde Council, following a period of sustained political advocacy and associated legal proceedings.

Subsequently, in a landmark decision on 31 July 2017 which further put an end to the recent proposal by the NSW Government to force the merger of Hunter’s Hill Council, the NSW Court of Appeal ruled that “the proposal made by the Minister for Local Government under Section 218E(1) of the Local Government Act 1993 for the amalgamation of Hunters Hill, Lane Cove and Ryde local government areas is invalid”.

Further, the Court of Appeal also ordered that the Minister pay Hunter’s Hill Council’s costs of the original hearing before the Land and Environment Court and the subsequent Court of Appeal hearing.

REPORT From the outset of this debate, this Council’s position of principle has consistently been that any merger proposal must be voluntary and have the majority support of the local community before a merger is to proceed. Hunters Hill Council has argued that ‘forced’ mergers should not proceed, and that communities should always have a direct say in how they are governed.

The Fit for the Future agenda and the threat of forced mergers has preoccupied our agenda for the last three years, and has been a huge distraction from the core business of local government. We now need to put this behind us and continue to work cooperatively with our neighbouring councils and the NSW Government to deliver the best possible outcomes and services for our community.

The professionalism of Council officers and staff who have continued to perform their duties during this period of ongoing uncertainty about their future has been admirable, as has the huge joint effort by the Council, the staff and the local community, united in a common purpose and a shared vision for our future.

Item 2.1 Page 1 MAYORAL MINUTES & REPORTS Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

CONCLUSION I gratefully acknowledge the resolve of Councillors and the extraordinary commitment of the Save Hunters Hill Municipality Coalition, led by Phil Jenkyn OAM and Ross Williams, and the unrelenting political advocacy of Save Hunters Hill Municipality Coalition (SHHMC) and Save Our Councils Coalition (SOCC).

FINANCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT The Court of Appeal has ordered that the Minister pay Hunter’s Hill Council’s costs of the original hearing before the Land and Environment Court and the subsequent Court of Appeal hearing.

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 The heritage, character and conservation of the area is respected and preserved.

RECOMMENDATION That the report be received and noted.

ATTACHMENTS There are no attachments to this report.

Item 2.1 Page 2 MAYORAL MINUTES & REPORTS Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

ITEM NO : 2.2

SUBJECT : HONORARY FREEDOM OF THE MUNICIPALITY - MR PHILIP JENKYN OAM

CSP OUTCOME : A CARING COMMUNITY WHERE DIFFERENT GROUPS AND INDIVIDUALS FEEL THAT THEY CAN BELONG

DELIVERY PLAN : MAXIMISE PARTICIPATION OF COMMUNITY MEMBERS STRATEGY IN COMMUNITY LIFE

REPORTING OFFICER : CLR RICHARD QUINN

Ref:327918

INTRODUCTION The Standing Orders of Council meetings include the subject of Civic Ceremonies which provides Council the opportunity to present Awards and conduct ceremonial events such as the presentation of the Honorary Freedom of the Municipality to outstanding citizens and the conferral of Australian Citizenship on approved candidates.

REPORT Mr Philip Norman Jenkyn OAM is a retired barrister and former Hunters Hill Councillor (previously known as Alderman) who served a four year term on Council from 1983 to 1987.

Over the years Phil has been involved in many community advocacy campaigns, including environmental and heritage campaigns. He was the first Chair of Defenders of Sydney Harbour Foreshores and the Joint Convener of Protectors of Public Lands. He was awarded the Medal of the Order of Australia (OAM) in 2005 for services to the protection and preservation of the environment, particularly heritage sites on the Sydney Harbour foreshore, including former Defence sites that today are accessible and open to the public.

On Australia Day1989, he was named Hunters Hill Citizen of the Year in recognition of his service to this community. In 2010 he received the National Trust’s Lifetime Achievement Award for his contribution to heritage conservation. He has been a member of the Sydney Harbour Federation Trust’s Community Advisory Committee, and a member of the Sydney Harbour National Landscape Steering Committee.

Through his political advocacy and passionate involvement in community affairs, Phil has continued to leave a significant legacy for future generations through the many projects and programs that were initiated through his leadership.

A brief outline of his extensive affiliations at various times include:

 Co-Convenor, Save Hunters Hill Municipality Coalition;  Inaugural Chair, Defenders of Sydney Harbour Foreshores (1997-2001);  Public Officer, Discover Hunters Hill Association Incorporated;  Better Planning Network;  Chair of the Inaugural Sydney Harbour and Coast Walkers;  Sydney Harbour Federation Trust Community Advisory Committee;  National Trust – Vienna Committee;  Hunters Hill Trust; and  Save Our Councils Coalition.

Item 2.2 Page 3 MAYORAL MINUTES & REPORTS Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

In 2003-04 he developed with Peter van Sommers ‘Walks in Hunters Hill’. Phil’s efforts were not just confined to Hunters Hill and over time this resulted in a partnership between the Walking Volunteers, the Department of Planning and the Sydney Coastal Councils Group to develop what is now called the Sydney Harbour and Coastal Walking Network. His significant contribution to this project spanned the period from 2003 to 2011 and he was involved with Leigh Shearer-Heriot and Bill Orme in applying for grants, arranging funding for printing and in the distribution of brochures. Phil organized the inaugural four day ‘Harbour Circle Walk’ (Sept 2005), the inaugural seven day ‘Sydney’s Great Coastal Walk’ (July 2008) and the inaugural ‘Governor Phillip Walk’ (Sept 2011).

The depth of Phil’s commitment to the Hunters Hill community and its environs has been captured in an informal interview recorded with community stalwarts Carl and the late Alison Ryves on their Woolwich home veranda – titled Hunters Hill ”It is Worth Fighting For”. See the link to video on the Discover Hunters Hill website http://www.huntershill.com.au/a-verandah- chat-its-worth-fighting-for/

Most recently Phil, together with Emeritus Mayor Ross Williams and with significant support from many in our community, has fought long and hard and successfully to save Hunters Hill from forced amalgamation. Phil and Ross galvanised community support through the Save Hunters Hill Municipality Coalition (SHHMC) and were active in the broader Save Our Councils Coalition (SOCC). Prior to this, Phil and Ross also spearheaded a political advocacy campaign to oppose significant changes to planning legislation being proposed by the then State Government. Phil has led the local community tirelessly and generously throughout these and other campaigns.

CONCLUSION Phil Jenkyn is a genuine altruist and community activist who for many years has dedicated his time, talent and treasure to ensure ongoing grassroots democracy in Hunters Hill local government area. His strong sense of service and his “never give up” attitude have inspired others to come together to achieve the best possible outcomes for this local community that is so dear to him, his wife Gloria and so many others. I strongly commend him to Council for formal recognition and acknowledgement.

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.

Item 2.2 Page 4 MAYORAL MINUTES & REPORTS Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

RECOMMENDATION That Mr Philip Norman Jenkyn OAM be awarded the Honour of Freedom of the Municipality of Hunters Hill in recognition of his extraordinary and ongoing advocacy, service, and contribution to the Municipality of Hunters Hill over many years.

ATTACHMENTS There are no attachments to this report.

Item 2.2 Page 5 MAYORAL MINUTES & REPORTS Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

ITEM NO : 2.3

SUBJECT : 2017 MOOCOOBOOLA FESTIVAL

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

DELIVERY PLAN : ORGANISE AND DELIVER HIGH QUALITY COMMUNITY STRATEGY EVENTS

REPORTING OFFICER : CLR RICHARD QUINN

Ref:327847

INTRODUCTION I had the pleasure of attending the 2017 Hunters Hill Moocooboola Festival on Sunday 6 August at Boronia Park. It was a wonderful community gathering celebrating our local area, very well organised and the crowd was the largest I have ever seen at the event.

REPORT The name of the Festival recognises the aboriginal name for our area which means the meeting place of the two waters, where the Parramatta and Lane Cove Rivers join.

The Festival provides an opportunity for the different segments of our community, schools, business, community groups and entertainers to all come together for a day of fun and celebration. The Festival recognises that Hunters Hill is a special place and helps us appreciate our community’s extraordinary history, achievement and potential. It was especially satisfying that we were able to celebrate together the continuation of our Council after winning the long battle we have had with the State government about amalgamation.

This year the Festival was attended by an estimated crowd of 15,000 – 20,000 people. There was something for everyone with over 120 stalls, a huge variety of food and wine, children’s rides, free children’s entertainment, dance groups, community musical groups and professional entertainment. The dog show on Oval 2 was closely contested with a Hunters Hill Dog of the Year announced. The Festival provides an opportunity for community groups to promote their activities and to fundraise and we saw the involvement of many local community organisations including the SES, Discover Hunters Hill and the Hunters Hill Historical Society.

The event was organized by Council’s Event Coordinator, Esther Barra with the assistance of other Council staff and Council’s Events Advisory Committee. The event was supported by two key partners URM and the Hunters Hill Hotel. Final costings for the event have not been completed but the Event Coordinator is hopeful that the event will be very close to breaking even for the first time since it commenced 38 years ago.

Guests at the Festival included Trent Zimmerman, Member for North Sydney, The Hon Anthony Roberts MP – Member for Lane Cove, Hunters Hill Citizen of the Year Mr Andrew Curtin and my fellow Councillors Mark Bennett, Justine McLaughlin and Zac Miles.

Item 2.3 Page 6 MAYORAL MINUTES & REPORTS Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

CONCLUSION I would like to express my thanks to staff from Hunter’s Hill Council who worked hard to ensure that the event was such an outstanding success. In particular I would congratulate Council’s Events Coordinator, Esther Barra, and Jane Tamasauskas, Admin Support for their tremendous work organizing the wonderful event.

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 The Moocooboola Festival will assist Council to deliver CSP strategy 1.1.2 to organise and deliver high quality community events.

RECOMMENDATION 1. The report be received and noted and the congratulations of Council be recorded in the Council Minutes.

2. That Council particularly acknowledge the contribution of the staff members involved in the successful organisation of the Moocooboola Festival.

ATTACHMENTS There are no attachments to this report.

Item 2.3 Page 7 MAYORAL MINUTES & REPORTS Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

ITEM NO : 2.4

SUBJECT : RETIREMENT FROM LOCAL GOVERNMENT - COUNCILLOR PETER C. ASTRIDGE

CSP OUTCOME : THERE IS A BROADER REPRESENTATION OF THE COMMUNITY

DELIVERY PLAN : COUNCIL WILL ENCOURAGE GREATER NUMBERS OF STRATEGY COMMUNITY MEMBERS TO BE INVOLVED

REPORTING OFFICER : CLR RICHARD QUINN

Ref:328089

INTRODUCTION On 8 September 2017, Councillor Peter Astridge will retire after 22 years consecutive service on Hunter’s Hill Council (HHC).

REPORT Peter was first elected to Hunter’s Hill Council in 1995 under the “No Aircraft Noise” banner and was subsequently elected as Deputy Mayor in 2002-2003 and 2005-2006.

During his time on Council, Peter has been actively involved in the drafting and adoption of the HHC Local Environment Plan (LEP 2012) and Development Control Plan (DCP 2013). Most recently, Peter has been a strong advocate of Council’s position regarding the NSW Government’s proposal of the forced merger of Hunter’s Hill Council with the City of Ryde and Lane Cove Councils.

Peter was actively involved in the celebration of the Sesquicentenary of Hunters Hill, the Centenary of Anzac and the restoration of the WWI Howitzer, serving as Chair of the Military Memorabilia Restoration Advisory Committee. He has represented Council on many Council and community committees and organisations through his 22 years of dedicated service as a Councillor, as well as Delegate to the National General Assembly of Local Government in Canberra.

He was awarded the Local Government Service Medal in 2015 for 20 years’ service as a councillor. His contribution over the past two decades includes service on the following Council and community Committees / Panels:

 Conservation Advisory Panel - Chair  Gladesville Village Mainstreet Committee  Hunters Hill Village Precinct Committee  Moocooboola Festival Committee - Chair  No Aircraft Noise Committee  Northern Sydney Regional Organisation of Councils (NSROC)  PACT Community Representative Committee (Crime Prevention Committee)  Parramatta River Catchment Committee  Public Transport & Traffic Advisory Committee – former Chair  Roads & Traffic Authority (now Roads & Maritime Services) Consultative Forum  Seniors Advisory Committee – Alternate Representative  The Centenary of Anzac Committee with the restoration of the WWI Howitzer - Chair

Item 2.4 Page 8 MAYORAL MINUTES & REPORTS Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Peter has a professional background in advertising as owner and Chief Executive Officer on Nationwide Advertising Group. His keen interest in photography have seen him act as photographer at Australia Day celebrations held at Clarkes Point Reserve for many years. He also has a keen interest in sailing and has been an advocate of public access to our beautiful waterways. As a former active service member of the Australian Army’s elite 1st Commando Regiment, he currently serves as Vice President of Gladesville RSL Sub-Branch where he generously organises the annual Anzac Sunday service.

CONCLUSION Councillor Peter Astridge has given 22 years of generous and committed service to Hunter’s Hill Council and the local community, and we wish him every blessing and good health in his retirement from local government

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 Minute addresses strategies identified under Our council and in particular that Council will encourage greater numbers of community members to be involved.

RECOMMENDATION That Council note the retirement from Council of Councillor Peter Christopher Astridge and that a letter of acknowledgement be sent by the Mayor on behalf of Council and the Hunters Hill community acknowledging Councillor Astridge’s very generous service and commitment to this local community.

ATTACHMENTS There are no attachments to this report.

Item 2.4 Page 9 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

ITEM NO : 4.1

SUBJECT : 57 RYDE ROAD, HUNTERS HILL

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

DELIVERY PLAN : ASSESS ALL APPLICATIONS AGAINST THE NEW STRATEGY LEP/DCP

REPORTING OFFICER : SHAHRAM MEHDIZADGAN

DEVELOPMENT DA2017/1002 APPLICATION NO

PROPOSAL DEMOLITION OF EXISTING STRUCTURES AND CONSTRUCTION OF ATTACHED DUAL OCCUPANCY PLUS LANDSCAPING AND STRATA SUBDIVISION

APPLICANT VISIONATA ARCHITECTS

OWNER CHRIS YEE & SHANNON YEE

DATE LODGED 4 JANUARY 2017

Ref:327518

INTRODUCTION

Reasons for Report

The proposal results in a non-compliance with the minimum lot size for dual occupancy under Clause 4.1A of LEP 2012. The proposal having a site area of 694.6sqm would not comply with the 700sqm area requirement in which two (2) new attached dwelling-houses can be erected, under Clause 4.1A Minimum Lot Sizes for Dual Occupancies of LEP No.2012. The proposal is 5.4sqm below the prescribed allotment size of 700sqm.

REPORT

1. SUMMARY

Issues  Non-compliance with the minimum lot size for dual occupancy under Clause 4.1A of LEP 2012.

Submissions

No submissions were received.

Item 4.1 Page 10 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Recommendation

The application is recommended for a deferred commencement 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 development application seeks consent for demolition of existing structures and construction of attached dual occupancy plus landscaping and strata subdivision. The proposal consists of the following:

Demolition

Demolish existing dwelling and all structures.

Attached Dual Occupancy

Dwelling No.1 (Southern dwelling)

 Ground Floor: Single garage, entry, study, powder room, laundry, kitchen, dining and family room.  First Floor: Master bedroom with walk-in robe and ensuite, 3 bedrooms with shared bathroom.  Ancillary: Covered outdoor area and landscaping.

Dwelling No.2 (Northern dwelling)

 Ground Floor: Single garage, entry, powder room, laundry, kitchen, dining and family room.  First Floor: Master bedroom with ensuite, study and two bedrooms with shared bathroom. Ancillary: Covered outdoor area and landscaping.

Site Works

 Strata Subdivision  Tree removal

3. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND LOCALITY

The subject site is known as No.57 Ryde Road, Hunters Hill, located on the northern side of Ryde Road. The property has an area of 694.5sqm with dimensions of 15.24m (front and rear boundaries) and 45.58m (side boundaries). It is a rectangular allotment with access via a single driveway off Ryde Road.

The site accommodates a single storey red brick and tile dwelling, with detached double garage structure at the rear of the site and vehicle access to Ryde Road. The site is generally sloping to the rear of the site.

Item 4.1 Page 11 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

The area is characterised by a variety of low and medium density housing. To the north is a single dwelling (corner of Martin Street and is a detached dual occupancy); further north is a medium density apartment building; to the south is an older style residential flat building containing 12 units; to the rear are a number of single dwellings along Martin Street. Opposite the site is St. Joseph’s College, Hunters Hill.

4. PROPERTY HISTORY

 On 4 January 2017, the subject application was lodged with Council.  On 17 January 2017, Council’s Gateway Preliminary Assessment Team sent the applicant a letter advising of a number of issues.  On 25 January 2017, the subject application was notified to the surrounding neighbours for thirty (30) days, during this period no objection were received.  On 7 February 2017, Council received additional information.  On 15 February 2017, the subject application was referred to Council’s Conservation Advisory Panel (CAP).  On 7 March 2017, Council sent the applicant a letter advising of a number of issues.  On 15 May 2017, Council received amended plans.  On 3 June 2017, Council received amended BASIX Certificate.  On 5 June 2017, Council received amended plans.

5. STATUTORY CONTROLS

Relevant Statutory Instruments

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 Local Environmental Plan 2012 Zone: R2 Conservation Area: Yes River Front Area: No SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment 2005): No Development Control Plan 2013: DCP 2013 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 raised no concern, subject to standard conditions.

Item 4.1 Page 12 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

7.3 Heritage

As stated within the body of the report, the property is within the 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”); Items within the vicinity include St Joseph’s College, 51 Ryde Rd and 5 Martin Street. The stone walls to St Joseph’s College and street boundary of the adjoining RFB to 53-55 Ryde Rd are also listed.

Proposal: demolish existing Interwar cottage and erect new attached dual occupancy.

Statement of Heritage Impact: by Weir Phillips- appears to be in accord with the NSW Heritage Division OEH guidelines.

Comments: the proposal was considered by the Conservation Advisory Panel at its meeting of February 2017, following a site inspection prior to the meeting, the minutes for which are (in part):

In examining the proposal, the Panel was of the view that the car manoeuvring and parking areas dominate the street setback and that appropriate measures to address this impact are to be taken.

It was recommended that the garage doors be finished such that they blend in with the walls in which they are located and are simple in terms of their panelling.

It was also observed that the existing planting to be retained and proposed new planting are not fully detailed and clarification of the intended scheme is required.

In general, the panel is of the view that the proposed dual occupancy is a negative change, compared to the reasonably intact early C20th cottage on the site, within a conservation area that is steadily being eroded and a substantial redesign is needed to reduce the dominance of garage doors occupying two thirds of the ground floor front façade.

While it is claimed that the garages have been reduced in size, comparison of the previous plans with the amending drawings reveal that they have been reduced through internal adjustments to allow for the 500mm setback of the doors. While the actual presented size of the garages has not changed, the setting back of the doors and their simple form should reduce their impact somewhat.

The reduction in driveway area entails use of grass cell to maintain manoeuvring areas. This should, if maintained properly, tend to allow the front garden area to read as such. The one drawback is the provision of car spaces in front of the garage doors.

The tree/ planting issue appears to be resolved in the arborist’s report, but should be checked by Council’s consultants.

Recommendation: Approval, subject to confirmation of the retention of trees.

The heritage issues have been resolved and the application has been reviewed by Council’s Landscape Consult and considered to be satisfactory, subject to conditions.

7.4 Works & Services

The application was referred to Council’s Design and Development Engineer who stated that the amended plans for stormwater management and driveway, submitted on 12 May 2017 are satisfactory.

Item 4.1 Page 13 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

7.5 Parks & Landscape

The application was referred to Council’s Tree Consultant who provided the following comments:

Further to the Referral Response dated the 27th February 2017 the following additional information has been received and reviewed:

 Architectural Plans (prepared by Vision TA, dwg no 1605 DA01- 03 F, 04 D, 05 F, 06-07 D, 08 – 09 F, 10 – 11 D, 12 F, dated 28.03.2017, date stamped 4th April 2017)  Arboricultural Assessment & Development Impact Report (Report) (prepared by Rain Tree Consulting, dated 9th March 2017, date stamped 4th April 2017)  Landscape Plans (prepared by Susan Read, dwg no L 01 B, dated 01.04.2017, date stamped 4th April 2017)

The following documentation/plans were reviewed as part of the previous Referral Response:

 Architectural Plans (prepared by Vision TA, dwg no 1605 DA01 D, dated 14.11.2016, date stamped 4th Jan 2017)  Arboricultural Assessment & Development Impact Report (Report) (prepared by Rain Tree Consulting, dated 17 March 2017, date stamped 4th Jan 2017)

Tree Management

The Report has addressed the impact of the proposed works on a number of trees located onsite and/or neighbouring sites. The trees are discussed in detail below:

Tree 1 Lophostemon confertus (Brush Box) is a Council-managed street tree located in front of the site. The Report outlines that Tree 1 is structurally damaged with an open wound (part decayed) on the north-east side. Tree 1 has been allocated a short SULE.

The amended plans propose the removal of Tree1 as it is located within the footprint of the driveway. Council’s Parks and Landscape Coordinator has reviewed the proposal and provided consent for removal.

Tree 2 Jacaranda mimosifolia (Jacaranda) is a Council-managed street tree located in front of the site. Tree 2 is a 13m specimen, located in a prominent position and considered to have high landscape significance. The Report outlines that the tree has good health and structural condition.

The plans have been amended to enable the retention of Tree 2. Plan DA01 shows that the front fence will be retained and adjusted. Any works within the TPZ of Tree 2 should be supervised by an AQF Level 5 Arborist. If new fence footings are required within the TPZ of Tree 2 any piered footings will need to be located to avoid damage or severance of roots greater than 40mm diameter.

Item 4.1 Page 14 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Tree 2 has a 13m canopy spread with 7m extending within the subject site. Unit 1 is setback 9m from the front (south-western) boundary. To protect the canopy during the demolition and construction phase from mechanical damage, a fenced TPZ shall be setup that aligns with the extremities of the crown of the tree. All works within the TPZ shall be supervised by the Project Arborist (AQF Level 5) to ensure the crown and root system of the tree is not damaged.

Tree 3 and Tree 4 Lagerstoemia indica (Crepe Myrtle) are located in the front of the site along the northern side boundary. Tree 3 and Tree 4 are small specimens (5m & 6m) with good health and structural condition. New works are located outside of the TPZ radius.

Tree 5 Rondeletia amoena (Rondeletia) is located in the rear of the site along the northern side boundary. Tree 5 is a small specimen (5m) with fair to good health and structural condition.

Tree 5 is located within the footprint of the proposed rear courtyard and is proposed for removal. Due to its small size the removal of Tree 5 should have a relatively low visual impact. Replacement planting using healthy, advanced-size specimens could replace the loss of amenity within a short to medium timeframe.

Tree 6 Lagerstroemia indica (Crepe Myrtle) is located in the rear of the site along the northern side boundary. Tree 6 is a medium-sized specimen (9m) with fair to good health and structural condition. The Report outlines that Tree 6 has a Structural Root Zone (SRZ) of 2.7m and a Tree Protection Zone (TPZ) of 6.6m. The proposed patio is located within the tree’s SRZ. The Report outlines tree construction recommendations to reduce the impact of construction to Tree 6, including root mapping. There is additional concern regarding the volume of canopy that will require pruning for construction and building clearance. The Report does not address potential pruning. A Pruning Specification is requested that details individual branches which will need to be pruned to accommodate the proposed works with acceptable levels of vertical clearance. The recommended pruning works should comply with Australian Standard AS4373(2007) Pruning of Amenity Trees not significantly impact the form or amenity value of the tree. Where pruning would result in significant impacts to the trees form and amenity, removal and replacement with an advanced-sized replacement tree will be required.

Tree 7 Lagerstroemia indica (Crepe Myrtle) and Tree 8 Plumeria sp. (Frangipani) are located in the rear of the site (Unit 1). The Unit 1 development footprint is located outside or just within the TPZ radius. Plan DA02 shows SW service lines and pits located within SRZ setbacks. The Report recommends tree sensitive construction methods including hand excavation to tunnel under tree roots greater than 30mm diameter, underboring and directional drilling. All works within the SRZ/ TPZ should be supervised by the Project Arborist (AQF Level 5).

Tree 9 Archontophoenix cunninghamiana (Bangalow Palm) and Tree 10 Castanospermum australe (QLD Black Bean) are located within the neighbouring site at 1 Martin Street. Works proposed within the SRZ/TPZ of Tree 9 and Tree 10 include demolition of a shed. In addition, SW impacts are likely due to inground service lines and the location of a pit adjacent to Tree 10. Root mapping is recommended for Tree 10 to ensure pit excavation does not impact tree anchorage. The Report recommends hand excavation under supervision of the Project Arborist to tunnel under significant tree roots (>30mm diameter).

Recommendations

The following additional information relating to tree management is required to be submitted for assessment:

Item 4.1 Page 15 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Pruning Specification Lagerstroemia indica (Crepe Myrtle)

A Pruning Specification for Tree 6 Lagerstroemia indica (Crepe Myrtle) is requested that details individual branches which will need to be pruned to accommodate the proposed works with acceptable levels of vertical clearance. The recommended pruning works should comply with Australian Standard AS4373(2007) Pruning of Amenity Trees not significantly impact the form or amenity value of the tree. The Pruning Specification shall be prepared by an AQF Level 5 Arborist and submitted to Council for review.

A condition will form part of schedule No.1 of the Deferred Commencement to reflect the above comments.

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

Not applicable.

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.

Compliance with Current Proposed Control Compliance Statutory Controls HEIGHT 8.5 metres 8.5 metres Yes STOREYS 2 storey 2 storeys Yes LANDSCAPED AREA 45% 45% Yes FLOOR SPACE RATIO 0.5:1 0.5:1 Yes MINIMUM LOT SIZE 694.6SQM 700SQM No*

*Clause 4.6 has been submitted for the non-compliance with Minimum Allotment Size for Dual Occupancies

Item 4.1 Page 16 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

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 storey 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 landscaped area of 45% would be equal to the 45% minimum permissible landscaped area for dual occupancy as prescribed by the Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012.

10.7 Subdivision Lot Size

The proposal is for strata subdivision which would not alter the size of the subject allotment.

10.8 Floor Space Ratio

Complies.

10.9 Street Frontage

No change.

10.10 Dual Occupancy

The proposal having a site area of 694.6sqm would not comply with the 700sqm area requirement in which two (2) new attached dwelling-houses can be erected, under Clause 4.1A Minimum Lot Sizes for Dual Occupancies of LEP No.2012. The proposal is 5.4sqm below the prescribed allotment size of 700sqm. The application also seeks consent for a Strata Title Subdivision of the attached dual occupancy.

Accordingly, as the proposal site fails to comply with Clause 4.1A Minimum Lot Sizes for Dual Occupancies of LEP No.2012, a Clause 4.6 objection has been submitted, which attempts to provide justification that strict compliance with the development standard is unnecessary and unreasonable in the circumstances, and that strict compliance would hinder attainment of the objects of the Act.

The applicant’s consultant has provided a Clause 4.6, that strict adherence to the requirement is unreasonable and unnecessary because:-

The site area is 694.5sqm, 5.5sqm or less than 1% below the minimum 700sqm prescribed by HHLEP 2012. In dealing with the circumstances we find that this site is marginally under the control and that the reduced site area allows for the achievement of the objectives of the Act and the local planning controls.

Item 4.1 Page 17 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Flexible application of the control is warranted in this instance due to the fact that the site is located adjacent to a residential flat building and there is a varied building typologies in the area. The design has achieved the required transitional design outcomes so as to temper the bulk and scale of the existing flat building to the east.

Therefore it is demonstrated that the site has the ability to satisfy all other development standards and controls in the HHDCP pertaining to dual occupancies regardless of the minor departure to the minimum lot control. The site is duly located to take advantage of the increased density because it is located on a main road with good access to services and facilities.

Based on the above objective the council can be satisfied that the proposal achieves the desired outcome because it:

 Achieves the FSR density prescribed to the site and the zone  The density mediates the RFB scale and the dual occupancy on the adjoining Sites  No additional services or facilities are required to service the site  The size and scale is equivalent to a dwelling house  The site is located on Ryde Road so achieves transport orientated development objectives which is important for sites which increase density  The proposal has a positive impact in that it disguises the fact that it is a dual occupancy development and presents more as a single dwelling  There are no adverse impacts which flow from the departure given that all controls that affect density like landscaped area and FSR are applied in a pro rata manner against the site area. This means that a smaller site produces a lesser built form.

The overall the proposed development is consistent with the objectives of the particular standard and therefore the variation is supported because:

 the overall height of the development is consistent and compatible with that of surrounding development  the overall bulk of the development is consistent and compatible with that of existing surrounding scale  the proposal mediates the scale between the 1 and 3 storey developments framing the site  the site is located in an area that is well serviced and located to public transport and supports TOD principles  it will be compatible with the current and future character  offers a building that is architecturally designed that will add value to the conservation area  it provides a landscaped setting within the front and side setbacks  it provides reasonable amenity to all surrounding properties  it does not unduly burden any adjoining property  it provides in excess of the landscaped area required for this type of development

Item 4.1 Page 18 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

As detailed above the proposal as one departing from the 700sqm min lot size is acceptable having investigated the potential impacts of the departure and demonstrating that the proposal satisfies zone and specific density objectives under clause 4.1A. The proposal is in the public interest. Council has the power to vary development standards under Clause 4.6 of the HHLEP 2012.

Strict compliance with the development standard is unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case. Strict compliance would not lead to any measurable benefit to the environment, streetscape or surrounding residential amenity.

On this basis we urge Council to support the Clause 4.6 variation to the development standard.

Accordingly, having considered the Clause 4.6 objection to Clause 4.1A, in the Hunters Hill LEP 2012, the strict application of the Minimum size lot sizes for dual occupancies standard is considered to be unreasonable and unnecessary in the circumstances of the case, as the breach of the non-compliance is minor, and the arguments made within the Clause 4.6 specifically relate to the proposal complying with the aims and objectives stipulated under Clause 4..1 of the LEP 2012. The Clause 4.6 is therefore supported.

10.11 Foreshore Building Lines

Not Applicable.

10.12 River Front Area

Not Applicable.

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/ PROPOSED COMPLIANCE PERMISSIBLE HEIGHT Ridge 8.5 metres 8.5metres Yes External walls 7.2 metres 6.2m Yes Storeys 2 2 Yes Landscaped Area 45%minimum 45% Yes BOUNDARY SETBACKS Dwelling house South West (Front) Predom. Building line 9m Yes North East (Rear) 6 metres 11.2m Yes North West (Side) 1.5 metres 2m Yes South (Side) 1.5 metres 2m Yes FSR 0.5:1 0.5:1 Yes

Item 4.1 Page 19 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

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

The proposal complies with the relevant objectives under Part 2 of Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013.

River Front Area

Not Applicable

Height

Refer to section 10.5 of this report ‘Height of Buildings’.

Front, Side & Rear Setbacks

Complies.

Landscaped Area

Refer to section 10.6 of this report ‘Garden Area’.

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 property, being the unit block at No.53-55 Ryde Road. The shadowing would affect less than 33% of the recreational open space of the site.

The shadow diagrams indicate that at 12noon mid winter, the shadows are cast to the south of the subject site and onto the adjoining property, being the unit block at No.53-55 Ryde Road. The shadowing would affect less than 33% of the recreational open space of the site.

The shadow diagrams indicate that at 3pm mid winter, the shadows are cast to the south-east of the subject site and onto the adjoining property, being the unit block at No.53-55 Ryde Road. The shadowing would affect less than 33% of the recreational open space of the site.

On balance, 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.

On balance, 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

The proposed dwellings, due to positioning of window openings and balconies, screen planting, separation from adjoining properties and orientation are considered to provide for the reasonable privacy of the adjoining dwellings and their outdoor spaces, accordingly, satisfying the objective stipulated under Part 3.5.3 of the Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013.

Item 4.1 Page 20 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

The proposed development is not likely to reduce the privacy of the residents of adjoining premises.

Views

Not Applicable.

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 location of the proposed garage for the new residence facing onto Ryde Road is satisfactory as it is not overly visible from the street, and does not adversely impact upon the existing streetscape. It is setback approximately 1m to 2.280m from the front wall of the dwelling with an overhanging balcony above each garage providing shadows. Therefore, it is considered that the proposed garage would satisfy the objectives stipulated under Part 3.6 of the Development Control Plan 2013.

Fences

No detail has been provided for the front fencing of the site. A condition will form part of the deferred commencement that the front fencing of the site is to measure a maximum height of 1.2m from the adjacent footpath and detail of the fencing to be provided to the satisfaction of Council.

12.2 Other DCPs, Codes and Policies

 Hunter’s Hill Council S94A Developer Contributions Plan 2011

14. SUBMISSIONS

The proposed development was notified in accordance with Council’s Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013 for a period of (30) days commencing on the 25 January 2017. Within the specified time period no submissions were received. It should be noted that the amended plans were not required to be renotified to the surrounding neighbours, as the changes provide clarification and lesser of an impact.

CONCLUSION

It should be noted that in 2004, Development Application 2004/1128 was lodged with Council for No.59 Ryde Road, Hunters Hill. This site adjoins the subject site. The Development Application was for alterations and additions to the existing dwelling and new attached dwelling and strata subdivision. This site has an area of 694.5sqm, which is 5.5sqm below the required 700sqm for minimum allotment size for integrated development. The application accompanied a SEPP No.1 objection, which was referred to the Ordinary Council Meeting. This application was recommended for approval at the Council meeting.

Item 4.1 Page 21 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

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 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.

RECOMMENDATION

A. That the Council, as the consent authority, is satisfied that the objection lodged under clause 4.6 of LEP 2012 to vary Clause 4.1A Minimum size lot sizes for dual occupancies under 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 a “Deferred Commencement” consent be granted pursuant to Section 80(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act 1979. The development consent as contained in Schedule 2 shall not operate (or be issued) until such time as the matters contained in Schedule 1 are finalised to the satisfaction of Council.

Schedule No.1

1. The following additional information relating to tree management is required to be submitted for assessment: Pruning Specification Lagerstroemia indica (Crepe Myrtle)

Item 4.1 Page 22 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

A Pruning Specification for Tree 6 Lagerstroemia indica (Crepe Myrtle) is requested that details individual branches which will need to be pruned to accommodate the proposed works with acceptable levels of vertical clearance. The recommended pruning works should comply with Australian Standard AS4373(2007) Pruning of Amenity Trees not significantly impact the form or amenity value of the tree. The Pruning Specification shall be prepared by an AQF Level 5 Arborist and submitted to Council for review.

2. No detail has been provided for the front fencing of the site. The front fencing of the site is to measure a maximum height of 1.2m from the adjacent footpath level and detail of the fencing (colours and materials) are to be provided to the satisfaction of Council.

Schedule No.2

That Development Application No. 2017/1002 for the demolition of the existing dwelling and structures and construction of an attached dual occupancy plus landscaping, and strata subdivision at No.57 Ryde Road, Hunters Hill, be approved, subject to the following conditions:

Council Drawing Number Drawn By Plan Dated Dated Visionata Architects Site Plan, 1605 DA01, Rev F 28.03.17 05.06.17 Visionata Architects Floor Plans, 1605 DA02, rev H 26.04.17 05.0617

Visionata Architects 05.06.17 Elevations, 1605 DA03, Rev H 26.04.17

Materials & Finishes, 1605 Visionata Architects DA09, Rev H 26.04.17 05.06.17

Visionata Architects Sections, 1605 DA10, Rev D 14.11.16 05.06.17

Sweep Diagram, 1605 DA12, Visionata Architects 02.06.17 05.06.17 Rev I Susan Read Landscape Plan, L01, issue B Landscapes 01.04.17 04.04.17

Standard Conditions:

GEN0 GEN1 GEN3 GEN5 GEN6 GEN7 GEN20 PCC0 PCC1 ($3587.50) PCC2 ($3000) PCC3 ($2600) PCC4 ($2750) PCC5 ($10,250) PCC11 PCC13 PCC20 PCC21 PCC40 PCC41 PCW0 PCW1 PCW2 PCW3 PCW4 PCW5 PCW6 CSI0 CSI1 CSI3 DEM0 DEM1 DEM3 DEM4 DEM5 DEM6 DEM7 DEM8 DEM9 DEM10 DEM11 DEM12 DEM15 CON0 CON1 CON2 CON5 CON7 CON8 CON9 CON10 CON11 CON2 CON3 CON5 CON7 CON8 CON9 CON10 CON11 CON13 CON17 CON18 CON19 CON20 CON21 CON23 CON28 CON30 POC0 POC1 POC2 POC3 POC4 POC13 POC14 POC17 POC25 PSC0 PSC1 PSC2 PSC10

ATTACHMENTS 1. Location Map 2. Plans 3. Clause 4.6

Item 4.1 Page 23 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.1 Attachment 1 Page 24 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.1 Attachment 2 Page 25 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.1 Attachment 2 Page 26 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.1 Attachment 2 Page 27 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.1 Attachment 2 Page 28 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.1 Attachment 2 Page 29 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.1 Attachment 2 Page 30 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.1 Attachment 2 Page 31 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.1 Attachment 2 Page 32 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.1 Attachment 2 Page 33 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.1 Attachment 2 Page 34 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.1 Attachment 2 Page 35 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.1 Attachment 2 Page 36 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.1 Attachment 2 Page 37 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.1 Attachment 3 Page 38 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.1 Attachment 3 Page 39 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.1 Attachment 3 Page 40 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.1 Attachment 3 Page 41 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.1 Attachment 3 Page 42 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

ITEM NO : 4.2

SUBJECT : 18 HUNTLEYS POINT ROAD, HUNTLEYS POINT

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

DELIVERY PLAN : ASSESS ALL APPLICATIONS AGAINST THE NEW STRATEGY LEP/DCP

REPORTING OFFICER : KERRY SMITH

DEVELOPMENT 2017-1079 APPLICATION NO

PROPOSAL CONSTRUCTION OF EXTERNAL AND INTERNAL LIFTS AND ASSOCIATED SITE WORKS

APPLICANT MARQUE ARCHITECTS

OWNER NICOLA BUTTARO

DATE LODGED 8 JUNE 2017

Ref:327807

INTRODUCTION

Reasons for Report

The proposal involves the lodgement of a clause 4.6 submission relating to non-compliance with landscaped area and hence is required to be considered by Council.

REPORT

1. SUMMARY

Issues

 Non-compliance with landscaped area

 Building line breach

Submissions

No submissions were received.

Recommendation

The application is recommended for approval for reasons that it is acceptable having regard to:

1. It is reasonable for Council to uphold the clause 4.6 objection to the non-compliance with the landscaped area.

Item 4.2 Page 43 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

2. It is permissible under the zoning

3. It complies with the relevant planning objectives contained in Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012 and Consolidated Development Control Plan 2013

4. It will not have adverse effects on the amenity of adjoining properties.

2. DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL

It is proposed to construct an external lift to the front of the existing dwelling house linking the rear of the garage at street level to the next level up which is the lower ground floor level (servicing the laundry and storage area of the dwelling house). A new internal lift will be constructed linking the ground and first floor levels.

It is also proposed to demolish some structures, and to dig out a walkway to be reinstated, forward of the building line and to construct an open sided awning 2.4 metres wide x 5.2 metres long from the street alignment adjacent to the garage structure.

Accompanying the application were a Statement of Environmental Effects with a clause 4.6 submissions and a Geotechnical site investigation.

3. DESCRIPTION OF SITE AND LOCALITY

The property is known as No.18 Huntleys Point Road, Huntleys Point and is legally described as Lot 161 in DP 752035.

The site is located on the western side, east of Victoria Road. The site has an area of 773sqm with a frontage of 14 metres. It has a slope of 10 metres down to the street.

Existing on the site is a two-storey, part three-storey rendered dwelling house with a detached three car garage at the front of the site and a cabana at the rear.

Adjoining are two storey and part two-storey and part three storey dwelling houses. To the rear is Riverside Girls’ High School and opposite is a public reserve.

4. PROPERTY HISTORY

The development application (DA 2016/1080) for the excavation of a ‘trench’ , the installation of an external three storey lift in front of the front balcony and the construction of a roof over the entry was refused under delegated authority on 16 November 2016 for 8 reasons including the following:

4. The proposal will further reduce the minimum landscaped area of 50% for this site under clause 6.9 of LEP 2012. As no formal submission had been made under clause 4.6 of LEP 2012, Council has no power to approve the application.

5. The proposal for the external lift will breach the building line as required under clause 3.3.3 of DCP 2013.

The applicant subsequently lodged an s.82A application for review of the refusal of the development application. This application could not be proceeded with as the applicant was out of time in its lodgement for a determination by Council within the 6 month period as required by that part of the Act.

Item 4.2 Page 44 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

5. STATUTORY CONTROLS

Relevant Statutory Instruments

Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 Local Environmental Plan 2012 Zone: Low Density Residential R2 Conservation Area: No River Front Area: Yes SREP (Sydney Harbour Catchment 2005): Yes Development Control Plan 2013: 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 application subject to compliance with conditions of consent.

7.3 Heritage

As stated within the body of the report, the property is not a heritage item and is not in a conservation area under Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012. The proposal for those reasons was not 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 conditions to apply to this development.

7.5 Parks & Landscape

The application was not referred to Council’s Tree Consultants as no landscaping around the proposed to be altered.

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.

Item 4.2 Page 45 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

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

(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,

(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.

Item 4.2 Page 46 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

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.

The proposed development would be readily discernible from the nearby river; however, due to the minor nature of the works it would not have a detrimental effect on the skyline as seen from the River and would not have an 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.

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 Proposed Control Compliance Statutory Controls HEIGHT 10.3 metres 8.5 metres No STOREYS 3 storeys 2 storeys No LANDSCAPED AREA 43.4% 50% No FLOOR SPACE RATIO 0.29:1 0.5:1 Yes

Item 4.2 Page 47 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

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 existing building, being 10.3 metres and 3 storeys in height, is acceptable in the circumstances as no part of the subject development proposal is to be carried out above the development standard 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 revised landscaped area of 43.4% would be below the 50% minimum permissible landscaped area as prescribed by the Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012.

As the proposal involves non-compliance with the development standard of landscaped area under clause 6.9 of the Local Environmental Plan 2012, the applicant submitted an ‘exemptions’ submission under the provisions of clause 4.6 of LEP 2012, which is attached.

In support of this part of the proposal relating to the landscaped area non-conformity, the applicant argues that strict compliance with the development standard under clause 6.9 of LEP 2012 is unreasonable and unnecessary and states in part:

The lift has a very small building footprint and therefore results in a very minor (0.46%) reduction of landscaped area. This will have no appreciable effect on the appearance of the dwelling as being surrounded and separated by gardens. The lift is proposed in an area that is currently a raised garden bed planted with small exotic garden species. The size and scale of the dwelling house will remain compatible with the existing character of the locality.

Where there is a landscaped area non-compliance in a development, the Land & Environment Court has ruled the approval for such non-conformity is to be accompanied by a ‘betterment’ of the landscaping of the site by way of removal of paving to provide for ‘soft’ planting area for the premises. The applicant has not provided for any ‘betterment’ in this case and there will be no reduction in the existing landscaped area for the site Therefore, for Council to grant an acceptable approval in these circumstances, a Schedule 1 condition for a ‘deferred commencement’ approval, should require the upgrading of the landscaping of the site. This would have to be effected by way of a landscaping plan showing improvement works around the site by increasing, where possible, the ‘soft’ landscaping around the dwelling.

Such development standard non-conformity must be accompanied by a ‘betterment’ of the landscaping of the site by way of removal of paving or the like to provide for additional ‘soft’ planting area for the premises. There is ample room in the rear yard of the subject premises to achieve this ‘betterment’ by way of:  removal of some paved areas and/or  additional planting and/or  additional turf lawn provision.

Item 4.2 Page 48 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

It is therefore considered that the applicant has reasonably argued that the ‘exceptions’ support letter can be upheld by Council in relation to the non-compliance with the landscaped area standard. This outcome is totally dependent on the subsequent provision of a landscaping plan to provide for a ‘betterment’ of the site. Under those circumstances, strict compliance would therefore be unreasonable or unnecessary in the circumstances of the case. It is based on case law as established under appeal by recent decisions of the Land & Environment Court involving Hunters Hill Council and is therefore provided for in the recommendation for the ‘deferred commencement’.

10.7 Subdivision Lot Size

Not Applicable

10.8 Floor Space Ratio

Complies.

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:

(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.

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

Item 4.2 Page 49 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

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/ PROPOSED COMPLIANCE PERMISSIBLE HEIGHT Ridge 8.5 metres 10.2 metres No External walls 7.2 metres 7.5 metres No Storeys 2 3 No Landscaped Area 50% minimum 43.4% No BOUNDARY SETBACKS Dwelling house East (Front) Predom. Building line 15.2 metres Yes West (Rear) 6 metres 13.0 metres Yes North (Side) 1.5 metres 1.7 metres Yes/No South (Side) 1.5 metres 1.2 metres No Garage East (front) Predom. Building Line 0 metres Yes West (rear) 6 metres 38.0 metres Yes North (side) 1.5 metres 9.1 metres Yes South (side) 1.5 metres 0 metres No

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

Not Applicable

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

No change is proposed in terms of setbacks under DCP 2013 other than the ‘footprint’ of 1.8 metres in depth from Huntleys Point Road and side setbacks of 2.5 metres and 9.5 metres, for the new external lift at the front of the main dwelling. The minor breach in the building line of the dwelling is considered acceptable as there is a large garage in front of the dwelling with a zero setback from the street alignment.

Under the above circumstances, it is considered that the development is reasonable for approval under the terms of DCP 2013.

Item 4.2 Page 50 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Landscaped Area

Refer to section 10.6 of this report ‘Landscaped Area’.

Solar Access

No change proposed.

Privacy

No change proposed.

Views

No change proposed.

Car Parking

Complies.

Garages & Carports

No change proposed.

Fences

No change proposed.

12.2 Other DCPs, Codes and Policies

 Hunter’s Hill Council S94A Developer Contributions Plan 2011

13. THE LIKELY IMPACTS OF THE DEVELOPMENT

Notwithstanding, the existing non-compliance with the landscaped area of clause 6.9 of LEP 2012 (which is to be minimally reduced by 0.46%). brings in minimal change as a result of this development. It is therefore considered that the scale of the development would be acceptable as the landscaped area is to be only slightly reduced. The prime reason for this proposal is to provide effective disabled access to the multi-level dwelling for the long term occupant, who is becoming increasingly disabled.

However, the development as existing does not comply with the development standard for landscaped area based on the requirements of clause 6.9 of LEP 2012 and only a minor reduction change is proposed in relation to the landscaped area of the site. However, ‘betterment’ which has been a feature of similar cases decided by the Land & Environment Court must be brought in as a result of this development.

An objection was submitted by the applicant under the ‘Exceptions’ provisions of clause 4.6 of the LEP for the non-compliance with the landscaped area 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 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 a ‘deferred commencement’ approval subject to conditions, including the subsequent provision of a ‘betterment’ for the site as set out below.

Item 4.2 Page 51 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

To give effective compliance to the provisions of clause 4.6 of LEP 2012, where, in this case, there is a landscaped area non-compliance, the Land & Environment Court has granted approval under appeal for such non-conformity. In these circumstances, the approval must be accompanied by a ‘betterment’ of the landscaping of the site by way of removal of paving or the like to provide for additional ‘soft’ planting area for the premises.

Compared to the previous application that was refused, this design provides for an external lift adjacent to and in front of the lower balcony. The roof of this external lift in this case will only project 360mm above the floor level of the lower balcony. That is, there will be minimal view of this structure when viewed from the street due to the size and location of the large garage constructed in front of the dwelling house.

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 22 June 2017. Within the specified time period no submissions were received.

CONCLUSION Notwithstanding, the existing non-compliance with the landscaped area of clause 6.9 of LEP 2012 (which does not change as a result of this development) it is considered that the scale of the development would be acceptable as the landscaped area does not change.

However, the development as existing does not comply with the development standard for landscaped area based on the requirements of clause 6.9 of LEP 2012 and no change is proposed in relation to the landscaped area of the site by way of ‘betterment’ which has been a feature of similar cases decided by the Land & Environment Court. An objection was submitted by the applicant under the ‘Exceptions’ provisions of clause 4.6 of the LEP for the non- compliance with the landscaped area 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 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 a ‘deferred commencement’ approval subject to conditions, including the subsequent provision of a ‘betterment’ for the site as set out below.

To give effective compliance to the provisions of clause 4.6 of LEP 2012, where in this case there is a landscaped area non-compliance in a development, the Land & Environment Court has ruled the approval for such non-conformity must be accompanied by a ‘betterment’ of the landscaping of the site by way of removal of paving or the like to provide for additional ‘soft’ planting area for the premises. There is ample room in the rear yard of the premises for:

 removal of some paved areas and/or  additional planting and/or  additional turf lawn provision.

This will be able to be addressed in a landscaping plan to be submitted to Council for the issue of an ‘outright’ consent and release of stamped approved architectural and landscaping plans.

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.

Item 4.2 Page 52 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

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.

RECOMMENDATION That Development Application No. 2017/1079 for the construction of external and internal lifts and associated site works at No.18 Huntleys Point Road, Huntleys Point be approved, subject to the following conditions:

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 standards 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 the development application No.DA2017/1079 relating to the development for for the construction of external and internal lifts and associated site works be granted a “Deferred commencement” consent pursuant to Section 80(3) of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979 in respect of No.18 Huntleys Point Road, Huntleys Point

The development consent as contained with standard conditions set out below in Schedule 2 shall not operate (nor be issued) until such time as the matters contained in Schedule 1 are finalised to the satisfaction of Council.

Schedule 1

1. The provision of a ‘betterment’ in relation to the existing landscaping of the site which does not comply with the minimum 50% landscaped area as set out in clause 6.9 of LEP 2012, such as reduction in paving and the provision of additional planting / lawn areas has to be shown in a landscaping plan to be submitted to Council.

SCHEDULE 2 Standard Conditions: GEN0 GEN1 GEN3 GEN5 GEN6 GEN7 GEN20 PCC0 PCC1($297.50) PCC2($1000) PCC3($1300) PCC4($400.00) PCC11 PCC12 PCC13 PCC20 PCC40 PCC41 PCW0 PCW1 PCW2 PCW3 PCW4 PCW5 PCW6 CSI0 CSI3 DEM0 DEM1 DEM6 DEM7 DEM8 DEM9 DEM10 DEM11 CON0 CON1 CON2 CON3 CON5 CON7 CON10 CON12 CON13 CON17 CON18 POC0 POC1 POC2 POC13 POC14

Item 4.2 Page 53 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

GEN3

Drawing Number Drawn By Plan Dated Council Dated Site Plan Marque Architects 4 Apr 2017 8 Jun 2017 A0001 Issue C Street level 4 Apr 2017 8 Jun 2017 A2000 Issue C Lower Ground Plan 4 Apr 2107 8 Jun 2017 A2001 Issue C Ground Floor Plan 4 Apr 2017 8 Jun 2017 A2002 Issue C Level 1 4 Apr 2017 8 Jun 2017 A2003 Issue C Roof Plan 4 Apr 2017 8 Jun 2017 A2004 Issue C South Elevation 4 Apr 2017 8 Jun 2017 A3000 Issue C North Elevation 4 Apr 2017 8 Jun 2017 A3001 Issue C East Elevation 4 Apr 2017 8 Jun 2017 A3002 Issue C South Elevation Coloured 4 Apr 2017 8 Jun 2017 A3003 Issue C North Elevation Coloured 4 Apr 2017 8 Jun 2017 A3004 Issue C East Elevation Coloured 4 Apr 2017 8 Jun 2017 A3005 Issue C Section A-A 4 Apr 2017 8 Jun 2017 A4000 Issue C

Document(s) Dated Council Dated Statement of Environmental Effects May 2017 8 Jun 2017 Mark Shanahan Planning Pty Ltd Geotechnical Site Investigation Apr 2017 8 Jun Crozier

ATTACHMENTS 1. Locality Map 2. Plans 3. Clause 4.6 'exceptions' submission

Item 4.2 Page 54 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.2 Attachment 1 Page 55 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.2 Attachment 2 Page 56 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.2 Attachment 2 Page 57 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.2 Attachment 2 Page 58 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.2 Attachment 3 Page 59 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 4.2 Attachment 3 Page 60 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

ITEM NO : 4.3

SUBJECT : DELEGATED AUTHORITY REPORT

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

DELIVERY PLAN : ASSESS ALL APPLICATIONS AGAINST THE NEW STRATEGY LEP/DCP

REPORTING OFFICER : STEVE KOUREPIS

Ref:297085

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 2017-1033 Zone Res R2 Construction Certificate No. N/A Notification Yes Applicant Suzanne McGirr Value $25,000 Premises 15 Ernest Street, Landscaped Area 51% Hunters Hill Classification (BCA) 1a Date lodged 13 Mar 2017 Assessing Officer Kerry Smith Determination Date 21 Jul 2017 Proposal To carry out alterations and additions to the existing dwelling and repairs to the pergola Determination Approval

Development Application No. DA2016-1096-1 Zone R2 Construction Certificate No. N/A Notification Yes Applicant Innovative Architects Value NA Premises 3 Mayfield Avenue, Landscaped Area 50.05% Woolwich Classification (BCA) 1a, 10a, 10b Date lodged 22 March 2017 Assessing Officer Shahram Zadgan Determination Date 20 July 2017 Proposal Alterations and additions to existing dwelling – s96 Modifications - Determination Refusal

1. The proposal does not satisfy the provisions of Section 79(C) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 in relation to clauses (1)(a)(iii), (b)(c) and (e).

Item 4.3 Page 61 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

2. The proposed development will be visible from the waterway (Parramatta River). The proposed modification seeks consent to introduce new windows along the lower ground floor of the eastern elevation of the building. The windows would cover the majority of the lower ground floor and face onto the waterway, resulting in an appearance of 3 storeys from the waterway. The proposed modification would result in a detrimental impact on the natural aesthetics of the foreshore, as the building would add extra bulk with its appearance of 3 habitable storeys. Currently, the eastern elevation of the ground floor has breaks and doesn’t present as a wall of glass towards the waterway. The proposed treatment to the rear eastern elevation of the building would result in a wall of glass towards the waterway, which fails to comply with the requirements of non-reflectivity from the water way of SREP 2005 Sydney Harbour Catchments.

3. Substantial works have been proposed to the lower ground floor of the building. These works are considered to be outside of the scope of an s96 application, as no works were proposed to the lower ground floor as part of the original application, and neither of these works were considered at the Ordinary Council meeting of 10 October 2016. In this regard, it is considered that the subject amendments may result in a development that is not substantially the same development, which has been previously approved and is considered unacceptable, accordingly the modification sought under s96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act is recommended for refusal.

4. The application was referred to Council’s Environmental Health & Building Surveyor who advised by that: The cinema is required to have natural light and ventilation in accordance with Part 3.8 of the BCA. It would appear that the property is a potential dual occupancy with the addition of laundries and kitchens throughout the house. Also, T2 and the ‘existing hedge’ are located within the Non-Climbable Zone of the swimming pool barrier. Based on the documentation submitted I recommend refusal due to non-compliance.

5. The treatment of the eastern rear façade would further contribute to the appearance of three (3) habitable storeys from the waterway, the modifications would fail to comply with Part 2.2.4 Desired Character under DCP 2013, in particular part a(i).

6. The proposal does not meet the objectives of Hunters Hill Consolidated DCP 2013, has a detrimental impact on the existing and desired future character of Hunter's Hill.

7. The proposal is contrary to the public interest and would create an undesirable precedent undermining Council’s planning objectives.

Item 4.3 Page 62 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Development Application No. DA 2016-1036-1 Zone R2 Construction Certificate No. N/A Notification Yes Applicant Michael Raad Architects Value N/A Pty Ltd Premises 61-63 Huntleys Point Rd, Landscaped Area 78% Huntleys Point Classification (BCA) 1a Date lodged 27 March 2017 Assessing Officer Shahram Zadgan Determination Date 17 July 2017 Proposal Extension of existing first floor balcony – s96 Modifications – amendments to approved balcony and pergola roof Determination Refusal

1. The proposal does not satisfy the provisions of Section 79(C) of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979 in relation to clauses (1)(a)(iii), (b)(c) and (e).

2. The submitted s96 application has not submitted amended corresponding site plan, roof plan, floor plans, western elevation plan, colours and materials plan for a proper assessment of this application.

3. The proposed s96 modification plans are inaccurate, as they indicate that the metal deck roof covering to replace acrylic and batten roof covering. The approved plans do not indicate any roof covering to the proposed pergola. Approved drawing No.DA105 indicates only a ‘Proposed Painted Pergola’, which only covers part of the balcony, not all.

4. It is considered that the subject amendments may result in a development that is not substantially the same development, which has been previously approved and is considered unacceptable, accordingly the modification sought under s96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act is recommended for refusal.

5. The proposal does not meet the objectives of Hunters Hill Consolidated DCP 2013, has a detrimental impact on the existing and desired future character of Hunter's Hill.

6. The proposal is contrary to the public interest and would create an undesirable precedent undermining Council’s planning objectives.

Development Application No. 2017-1090 Zone Construction Certificate No. Notification Yes Applicant Henry Gatt Value N/A Premises 72 Prince Edward St Landscape Area N/A Gladesville Classification (BCA) N/A Date lodged Assessing Officer Tracy Ivin Determination Date 21 July 2017 Proposal Pruning of one (1) tree Determination Approved Pruning of one (1) tree with conditions imposed to limit the pruning works

Item 4.3 Page 63 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Development Application No. DA2001-1048-1 Zone R2 Construction Certificate No. N/A Notification Yes Applicant Ian Richard Markley Value N/A Premises 10C George Street, Landscaped Area 51% Hunters Hill Classification (BCA) 10a Date lodged 13 April 2017 Assessing Officer Shahram Zadgan Determination Date 21 July 2017 Proposal Alterations and additions to dwelling and new carport – s96 Modifications – Relocation of carport Determination Approval

Development Application No. DA2017-1037 Zone R2 Construction Certificate No. N/A Notification Yes Applicant Vigor Master Pty Ltd Value $275,000 Premises 51 Wybalena Road, Landscaped Area 50% Hunters Hill Classification (BCA) 1a Date lodged 17 March 2017 Assessing Officer Shahram Zadgan Determination Date 25 July 2017 Proposal Internal and minor external changes Determination Approval

Development Application No. DA2016-1216 Zone R2 Construction Certificate No. N/A Notification Yes Applicant Direct Build Australia P/L Value $437,903 Premises 141 Pittwater Road, Landscaped Area 61% Hunters Hill Classification (BCA) 1a, 10a, 10b Date lodged 25 Jan 2017 Assessing Officer Shahram Zadgan Determination Date 26 July 2017 Proposal Alterations and additions to existing dwelling Determination Deferred Commencement Approval

Development Application No. DA2017-1045 Zone R2 Construction Certificate No. N/A Notification Yes Applicant Brad Inwood Architects Value $1,100,000 Premises 2 Francis Street, Hunters Landscaped Area 27.6% Hill Classification (BCA) 1a, 10a, 10b Date lodged 10 April 2017 Assessing Officer Shahram Zadgan Determination Date 3 August 2017 Proposal Demolition of existing dwelling and construction of new dwelling with basement car parking and new swimming pool Determination Refusal

1. The proposal does not satisfy the provisions of Section 79C of the Environmental Planning & Assessment Act 1979, particularly in relation to clauses (1)(a)(i), (iii), (b)(c)(d) and (e) for general matters of consideration of development applications.

2. The proposed development is three (3) storeys in height by definition and is contrary to the objectives as set out under clause 4.3 of LEP 2012.

Item 4.3 Page 64 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Determination Refusal

3. The height of the proposal, being 10.4 metres and 3 storeys in height fails to 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. A Clause 4.6 Exception to Development Standards was submitted to Council as part of the application, however, the arguments do not justify the breach of the height control, as the proposed dwelling is all new and compliance can be achieved. Thus, Council does not support the submitted Clause 4.6.

4. The proposed landscaped area of 27.6% fails to comply with the minimum 50% permissible landscaped area as prescribed by the Hunters Hill Local Environmental Plan 2012. A Clause 4.6 Exception to Development Standards was submitted to Council as part of the application, however, the arguments do not justify the breach of the landscaped control, as the proposed dwelling is all new and compliance can be achieved. Thus, Council does not support the submitted Clause 4.6.

5. It is considered that the proposed excavation to the site is excessive. Also, the applicant has not addressed the excavation proposed as required under clause 6.2 of LEP 2012.

6. The proposal does not satisfy the objectives for character of new development in the river front area under clause 6.7 of LEP 2012.

7. The proposed building would be three (3) storeys in height with a flat roof and would result in a detrimental impact on the natural aesthetics of the foreshore. Also, flat roof forms are not a desirable character of the conservation area. The proposed building does not comply with the relevant objectives, design parameters and preferred design elements under Part 2 of Hunters Hill Consolidated DCP 2013, in that the proposed dwelling house fails to adhere to the aims of urban form and characteristics of the Municipality.

8. The proposed appearance of three (3) habitable storeys would fail to comply with Part 2.2.4 Desired Character under DCP 2013, in particular part a(i)

9. The proposed flat roof fails to comply with Part 2.2.4 Desired Character under DCP 2013, in particular part b(iv).

10. The proposal fails to comply with Part 3.3.2 Height DCP 2013, as the proposed building would contain and have the appearance of three (3) habitable storeys.

11. The proposal fails to comply with the required 6 metres rear building setback under Part 3.3.3 of DCP 2013.

Item 4.3 Page 65 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Determination Refusal

12. The proposed development conflicts with clause 3.3.4 (f)(iii) of DCP 2013 in that there will be major excavation of the site in excess of 1 metre below natural ground level.

13. 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 property, being No.18 Wybalena Road. The shadowing would affect more than 33% of the recreational open space of the site. The proposal at 9am fails to comply with the general requirements and objectives stipulated under Part 3.5.2 of the Development Control Plan 2013, as the proposal would not allow for reasonable access to sunlight to adjoining buildings and their recreational open space.

14. The size, height, close proximity and window openings of the proposed building may result in adverse privacy impacts to the adjoining properties, and fails to comply with Part 3.5.3 Visual Privacy of DCP 2013.

15. The height and size of the proposed building may result in loss of shared water or iconic views as a result of this proposal, and fails to comply with Part 3.5.5 View Sharing of DCP 2013.

16. The location of the four (4) car garage fails to comply with Part 3.6.3 of DCP 2013, which requires a garage to be sited at the side of the house and setback at least 1 metre from the front wall of that house. Garages and carports are to be secondary elements, subservient to the main dwelling.

17. The subject application was referred to Council’s Design & Development Engineer who provided the following comments: The stormwater management plan is unsatisfactory, for the following reasons:  Pipe is not allowed underneath building  Boundary pit not on driveway and driveway grate is required  Upstream catchment flow to be assessed

18. The application was forwarded to the Conservation Advisory Panel meeting of 17 May 2017.

The minutes are as follows: In examining the proposal, the Panel observed that the design does not respond to the character of the Conservation Area as set-out in Hunters Hill Development Control Plan 2013.

Item 4.3 Page 66 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Determination Refusal

It was recommended that the design be reviewed to respond to its context and that this be considered in the broader sense of the Conservation Area rather than aberrant nearby houses.

19. The application was referred to Council’s Environmental Health & Building Surveyor who provided the following comments:

Swimming pool barrier does not comply with AS1926.1- 2012 and NCC (NSW) variation.

20. The proposal does not meet the requirements of the Regional Environmental Plan (Sydney Harbour Catchment) 2005.

21. On 21 April 2017, Council’s Gateway Preliminary Assessment Team sent the applicant a letter advising of a number of non-compliances. It should be noted that the no correspondence has been received to date addressing any of the issues. Thus, in the absence of this information, Council is unable to make a proper assessment of this application in its current form, for the reasons outlined in this report it is considered the application in its present form should be refused.

22. The proposal would create an undesirable precedent for Council.

23. The proposal would not be in the public interest.

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 4.3 Page 67 OUR HERITAGE & BUILT ENVIRONMENT Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

RECOMMENDATION That the report be received and noted.

ATTACHMENTS There were no attachments to this report.

Item 4.3 Page 68 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

ITEM NO : 5.1

SUBJECT : DISABILITY INCLUSION ACTION PLAN

CSP OUTCOME : A CARING COMMUNITY WHERE DIFFERENT GROUPS AND INDIVIDUALS FEEL THAT THEY CAN BELONG

DELIVERY PLAN : MAXIMISE PARTICIPATION OF COMMUNITY MEMBERS STRATEGY IN COMMUNITY LIFE

REPORTING OFFICER : MARGARET KELLY

Ref:327359

INTRODUCTION All Councils in NSW are required by the NSW Disability Inclusion Act 2014, to undertake disability inclusion action planning by July 2017. A Disability Inclusion Action Plan (DIAP) provides a whole of Council approach to effectively plan for and deliver on the diverse needs of people with a disability in our community.

It is estimated that approximately 20% of the population have some form of disability and 6% require some sort of assistance with their daily lives.

REPORT Hunter’s Hill Council has worked in partnership with City of Ryde and Lane Cove Council to develop a regional DIAP. The three Councils jointly engaged Elton Consulting to organise the consultation process and the development of the DIAP. Working jointly provided an opportunity to look at specific local issues as well as some of the broader issues and services across the whole region.

The draft Plan has been completed and is attached to this report. It addresses the following four key focus areas. They have been nominated by people with a disability as being of primary importance in creating an inclusive community: 1. Developing positive community attitudes and behaviours; 2. Creating liveable communities; 3. Supporting access to meaningful employment; 4. Improving access to services through better systems and processes.

The draft Plan was developed following a broad consultation process with community members, Council staff and local organisations. Members of the community were asked to provide their input in a number of ways including attending community forums, completing a survey, having one on one discussions or by using a ‘Meeting in a Box Toolkit’.

Altogether 749 people across the region contributed to the development of the DIAP. The information informed the Consultation Report and the development of the three individual Action Plan documents.

The DIAP is consistent with other Council plans and includes timeframes, responsibilities and outcomes. It also includes a Social Justice Charter to further support the significance of the DIAP and reaffirm Council’s commitment to social justice.

Item 5.1 Page 69 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Strategies have been identified for each focus area and an Action Plan to achieve these strategies has been developed. The strategies for each focus area are outlined in the table below.

Focus Area Strategies

Developing positive  Celebrate and value people with disability in the community attitudes and community behaviours  Foster understanding and connections within the community  Facilitate programs that improve social inclusion  Make Council events, facilities and activities welcoming and inclusive  Increase knowledge and understanding about disability in Council.

Creating liveable  Make it safe and easy to get around communities  Ensure Council’s open spaces and leisure and sporting facilities are accessible  Improve accessibility of Council’s buildings and infrastructure assets  Facilitate town centres and commercial areas to be inclusive  Provide more adaptive and affordable housing.

Supporting access to  Ensure Council is a leader in equal employment meaningful employment  Support people with disability in finding local employment  Foster skills, training and social contribution of people with disability

Improving access to services  Improve access and diversity of information through better systems and services processes  Involve people with disability in decision making  Upgrade access to Council services  Be inclusive in how Council operates and services the community

On 30 June 2017 the draft DIAP and Consultation Report were sent to Local Government NSW and the Disability Council NSW as required by the Act. They have requested a copy of the final report once it is adopted by Council.

As a part of the legislation Council must comply with public monitoring and reporting requirements through Local Government Annual Reports, dissemination of reports to the Minister for Disability Services and to the Disability Council NSW and report on the progressive implementation of the Plan. Annual reports by Council will be part of a report tabled by the Minister on the implementation of disability inclusion action planning to Parliament.

As per the legislation a new DIAP is required to be reviewed every 4 years and aligned to the Integrated Planning and Reporting Framework.

The Draft Disability Inclusion Action Plan for Hunter’s Hill Council and the Consultation Outcome Report are attached.

Item 5.1 Page 70 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Following the adoption by Council for public consultation a final version of the DIAP will be submitted to Council in October 2017 for adoption. The adopted plan will be submitted to the Disability Council NSW and work will begin on implementing the actions.

CONCLUSION The draft DIAP is presented for adoption by Council for public consultation.

FINANCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT There is no direct financial impact on Council’s adopted budget as a result of this report. Funds are available from within Councils adopted budget for the preparation of the DIAP.

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 The Disability Inclusion Action Plan will assist Council to deliver CSP strategy 2.1.1 to maximise participation of community members in community life.

RECOMMENDATION 1. That Council approve the Draft Disability Inclusion Action Plan and the Draft Consultation Outcome Report for the purpose of Public Consultation 2. That Council receive a further report following the consultation.

ATTACHMENTS 1. Draft Disability Inclusion Action Plan 2. Consultation Outcome Report

Item 5.1 Page 71 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 72 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 73 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 74 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 75 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 76 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 77 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 78 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 79 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 80 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 81 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 82 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 83 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 84 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 85 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 86 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 87 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 88 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 89 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 90 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 91 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 92 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 93 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 94 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 95 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 96 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 97 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 98 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 99 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 100 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 101 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 102 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 103 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 104 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 105 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 106 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 107 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 108 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 109 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 110 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 1 Page 111 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 112 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 113 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 114 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 115 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 116 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 117 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 118 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 119 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 120 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 121 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 122 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 123 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 124 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 125 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 126 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 127 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 128 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 129 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 130 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 131 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 132 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 133 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 134 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 135 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 136 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 137 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 138 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 139 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 140 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 141 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 142 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 143 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 144 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 145 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 146 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 147 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 148 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 149 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 150 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 151 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 152 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 153 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 154 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 155 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 156 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 157 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 158 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 159 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 160 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 161 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 162 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 163 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 164 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 165 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 166 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 167 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 168 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 169 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 170 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 171 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 172 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 173 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 174 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 175 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 176 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 177 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 178 OUR COMMUNITY & LIFESTYLE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 5.1 Attachment 2 Page 179 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

ITEM NO : 8.1

SUBJECT : SUMMARY OF COUNCIL INVESTMENTS AS AT 30 JUNE 2017

CSP OUTCOME : COUNCIL IS 100% COMPLIANT WITH STATUTORY REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

DELIVERY PLAN : ACCOUNTING MANAGEMENT AND POLICIES THAT STRATEGY COMPLY WITH CURRENT LEGISLATION

REPORTING OFFICER : JOHN JAVILLONAR

Ref:327818

INTRODUCTION A summary of its investments is required to be reported to Council at the end of the month.

REPORT

SUMMARY OF COUNCIL'S INVESTMENTS AS AT 30 JUNE 2017 (330/06)

Institution Reference Principal Lodged Term Matures Rate CBA Term Deposit $ 1,358,213.75 2.6.17 35 6.7.17 1.99 CBA Term Deposit $ 1,027,947.37 5.6.17 92 4.9.17 2.34 CBA Term Deposit $ 1,850,062.85 1.6.17 91 30.8.17 2.35 CBA Term Deposit $ 508,085.78 5.5.17 61 4.7.17 2.29 CBA Term Deposit $ 508,611.22 5.6.17 61 4.8.17 2.23 CBA Term Deposit $ 800,000.00 24.5.17 91 22.8.17 2.30 CBA Term Deposit $ 750,000.00 31.5.17 91 29.8.17 2.35 NAB Term Deposit $ 1,159,463.35 10.4.17 91 10.7.17 2.57 NAB Term Deposit $ 1,168,293.40 8.5.17 92 7.8.17 2.52 NAB Term Deposit $ 1,165,809.16 5.6.17 92 4.9.17 2.45 NAB Term Deposit $ 2,569,443.92 24.4.17 91 24.7.17 2.50 IMB Term Deposit $ 2,463,213.09 24.4.17 95 28.7.17 2.50 IMB Term Deposit $ 2,566,299.51 24.4.17 95 28.7.17 2.50 Bankwest Term Deposit $ 905,658.90 19.4.17 90 18.7.17 2.50 Call 24 HR Call $ 439,653.98 1.25 $ 19,240,756.28

CBA General $ 680,207.88 30.6.2017 Bank Account Balance

Total $ 19,920,964.16

Certification – Responsible Accounting Officer

The investments listed above have been made in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993 , the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and Council’s policy on investments.

The above Investments include the following estimated restrictions

Item 8.1 Page 180 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Internal Restrictions Actual as at 30 June 2017 Office Equipment & Furniture $253,791.04 Town Hall $249,130.00 Replacement of Plant $585,012.85 Elections $120,994.60 Employee Leave Entitlements $676,541.06 Insurance Reserve $58,659.78 Safety & Welfare Expenses OH&S Incentive $31,678.45 Other $20,000.00 Deposits $2,635,857.07 Total Internal Restrictions $4,631,664.85

External Restrictions S94 $967,557.90 Grants $96,781.90 Domestic Waste Management $279,914.73 Special Environmental Levy $192,440.20 Special Community Facilities $1,107,236.90 Other Infrastructure Special Rate $256,330.04 Total External Restrictions $2,900,261.67

Total Restrictions $7,531,926.52

Portfolio 90 Day BB $ % Rate % Rate Total Investment as at: 31.7.16 $ 18,221,026 2.67 1.93 31.8.16 $ 19,045,234 2.52 1.76 30.9.16 $ 20,567,582 2.47 1.73 31.10.16 $ 19,846,945 2.24 1.74 30.11.16 $ 19,968,310 2.43 1.76 31.12.16 $ 19,538,908 2.41 1.78 31.1.17 $ 19,091,068 2.46 1.78 28.2.17 $ 19,108,018 2.46 1.78 31.3.17 $ 19,177,319 2.45 1.79 30.4.17 $ 18,447,239 2.44 1.77 31.5.17 $ 19,209,141 2.43 1.74 30.6.17 $ 19,240,756 2.39 1.72 Average Rate 2.45 1.77

Item 8.1 Page 181 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

CONCLUSION The investments listed above have been made in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993, the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and Council’s policy on investments.

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 is compliant with statutory reporting requirements.

RECOMMENDATION That the report be received and noted.

ATTACHMENTS There are no attachments to this report.

Item 8.1 Page 182 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

ITEM NO : 8.2

SUBJECT : SUMMARY OF COUNCIL INVESTMENTS AS AT 31 JULY 2017

CSP OUTCOME : COUNCIL IS 100% COMPLIANT WITH STATUTORY REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

DELIVERY PLAN : ACCOUNTING MANAGEMENT AND POLICIES THAT STRATEGY COMPLY WITH CURRENT LEGISLATION

REPORTING OFFICER : JOHN JAVILLONAR

Ref:327903

INTRODUCTION A summary of its investments is required to be reported to Council at the end of the month.

REPORT

SUMMARY OF COUNCIL'S INVESTMENTS AS AT 31 JULY 2017 (330/06)

Institution Reference Principal Lodged Term Matures Rate CBA Term Deposit $ 1,360,731.47 6.7.17 96 5.10.17 2.31 CBA Term Deposit $ 1,027,947.37 5.6.17 92 4.9.17 2.34 CBA Term Deposit $ 1,850,062.85 1.6.17 91 30.8.17 2.35 CBA Term Deposit $ 508,611.22 5.6.17 60 4.8.17 2.23 CBA Term Deposit $ 800,000.00 24.5.17 90 22.8.17 2.30 CBA Term Deposit $ 750,000.00 31.5.17 90 29.8.17 2.35 NAB Term Deposit $ 1,166,892.50 10.7.17 91 9.10.17 2.42 NAB Term Deposit $ 1,168,293.40 8.5.17 91 7.8.17 2.52 NAB Term Deposit $ 1,165,809.16 5.6.17 92 4.9.17 2.45 NAB Term Deposit $ 2,085,458.95 24.7.17 91 23.10.17 2.40 IMB Term Deposit $ 2,479,240.85 28.7.17 91 27.10.17 2.45 IMB Term Deposit $ 2,582,998.03 28.7.17 91 27.10.17 2.45 Bankwest Term Deposit $ 910,939.11 18.7.17 90 16.10.17 2.35 Call 24 HR Call $ 41,452.18 1.25 $ 17,898,437.09

CBA General $ 863,080.84 31.7.2017 Bank Account Balance

Total $ 18,761,517.93

Certification – Responsible Accounting Officer

The investments listed above have been made in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993, the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and Council’s policy on investments.

The above Investments include the following estimated restrictions

Item 8.2 Page 183 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Actual as at 31 July Internal Restrictions 2017

Office Equipment & Furniture $253,791.04 Town Hall $249,130.00 Replacement of Plant $585,012.85 Elections $120,994.60 Employee Leave Entitlements $676,541.06 Insurance Reserve $58,659.78 Safety & Welfare Expenses OH&S Incentive $31,045.45 Other $20,000.00 Deposits $2,641,357.07 Total Internal Restrictions $4,636,531.85

External Restrictions S94 $998,611.41 Grants $91,718.90 Domestic Waste Management $279,914.73 Special Environmental Levy $365,650.20 Special Community Facilities $1,097,474.53 Special Roads $367,218.45 Other Infrastructure Special Rate $503,641.89 Total External Restrictions $3,704,230.11

Total Restrictions $8,340,761.96

Portfolio 90 Day BB $ % Rate % Rate Total Investment as at: 31.8.16 $ 19,045,234 2.52 1.76 30.9.16 $ 20,567,582 2.47 1.73 31.10.16 $ 19,846,945 2.24 1.74 30.11.16 $ 19,968,310 2.43 1.76 31.12.16 $ 19,538,908 2.41 1.78 31.1.17 $ 19,091,068 2.46 1.78 28.2.17 $ 19,108,018 2.46 1.78 31.3.17 $ 19,177,319 2.45 1.79 30.4.17 $ 18,447,239 2.44 1.77 31.5.17 $ 19,209,141 2.43 1.74 30.6.17 $ 19,240,756 2.39 1.72 31.7.17 $ 17,898,437 2.39 1.70 Average Rate 2.42 1.75

Item 8.2 Page 184 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

CONCLUSION The investments listed above have been made in accordance with the Local Government Act 1993, the Local Government (General) Regulation 2005 and Council’s policy on investments.

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 is compliant with statutory reporting requirements.

RECOMMENDATION That the report be received and noted.

ATTACHMENTS There are no attachments to this report.

Item 8.2 Page 185 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

ITEM NO : 8.3

SUBJECT : FIT FOR THE FUTURE MERGER PROPOSAL UPDATE

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

DELIVERY PLAN : COUNCILLORS ARE WELL-INFORMED ABOUT STRATEGY ISSUES/PROJECTS

REPORTING OFFICER : BARRY SMITH

Ref:327849

INTRODUCTION The original purpose of this report was to provide Council with a regular update on the expenses incurred on any legal actions associated with the Fit for the Future merger proposal, as required by resolution of Ordinary Council Meeting 4400 held 26 April 2016.

The report was expanded to include updates on any legal processes and to include any other relevant information dealing with mergers and the merger process.

REPORT State Government Announcement On Thursday 27 July 2017 the Premier issued a press release that advised in part that:

“Due to the protracted nature of current legal challenges and the uncertainty this is causing ratepayers, those council amalgamations currently before the courts will not proceed”.

AND

“Local Government elections for all merged councils and the 14 affected by today’s announcement will be held on Saturday, 9 September. The following proposed mergers will not proceed:  Burwood, City of Canada Bay and Strathfield Municipal councils  Hornsby Shire and Ku-ring-gai councils  Hunter’s Hill, Lane Cove and City of Ryde councils  Mosman Municipal, North Sydney and Willoughby City councils  Randwick City, Waverley and Woollahra Municipal councils” (See attachment 1)

Correspondence was also received from the Minister for Local Government advising that the merger proposal would not proceed (See attachment 2).

Appeal Update On Monday 31 July 2017 the Court of Appeal handed down its judgement on Councils appeal.

In the appeal brought by Hunter’s Hill Council the Court to:

Item 8.3 Page 186 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

1. Grant the appellant leave to file and rely upon the amended notice of appeal in fact filed on 19 April 2017.

2. Allow the appeal and set aside the orders made in the Land and Environment Court on 20 September 2016 in matter No 158774 of 2016

3. In place of those orders,

(a) declare that the proposal made by the Minister for Local Government under s 218E(1) of the Local Government Act 1993 for the amalgamation of Hunter’s Hill, Lane Cove and Ryde local government areas is invalid because it did not propose the creation of a new area being a single area of contiguous land, in accordance with s 204(3) of the Act;

(b) set aside the report of the delegate furnished to the Boundaries Commission in March 2016;

(c) set aside the comments of the Boundaries Commission sent to the Minister on 29 April 2016;

(d) order that the Minister pay the Council’s costs of the hearing before the Land and Environment Court.

4. Order that the respondent Minister pay the appellant’s costs in this Court.

Council Poll As a result of the above announcements the State Electoral Commission (SEO) requested urgent advice by 03 August, as to whether Council would be proceeding with its poll question. If Council delayed a decision beyond that date the poll could still be cancelled, however, the full associated costs would be due and payable. Advice was also received that Lane Cove and Mosman Councils would not be proceeding with their proposed polls.

In consultation with the Mayor and given that the Court of Appeal judgement effectively negated the proposed poll question the SEO was advised that Council would not proceed with the poll question.

CONCLUSION It is a relief to be able to advise Council that the merger proposal will now not proceed and Hunters Hill will remain in its present form.

The Court of Appeal judgement awarding all costs to Council also vindicates the Council’s decision to take legal action against the merger proposal and recovery action for those costs has commenced.

Given the substantial distractions caused by the merger proposal and legal actions, the challenge is to now secure long term sustainability during the next term of Council.

FINANCIAL IMPACT ASSESSMENT Council has been able to negotiate a cost sharing arrangement with Lane Cove Council and Strathfield Council. The cost sharing agreement also included North Sydney and Mosman Councils on some matters.

All final accounts for legal fees have not been received at this time, however it is estimated that the total legal costs will exceed $400,000 (inclusive of GST) for both the original Land & Environment Court Case and the proceedings in the Court of Appeal.

Item 8.3 Page 187 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

At this time $375,748.32 has been expended in prior budget years and it was estimated that the total appeal cost would be $100,000, to be expended in the 2017/18 budget year.

As part of the Court of Appeal judgement Council was awarded costs for the original case in the Land & Environment Court and for the Appeal and recovery action for those costs has commenced.

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 report responds to the need to ensure that Councillors are well informed about issues/projects.

RECOMMENDATION 1. That the report is received and noted. 2. That Council endorses the Mayor and General Managers actions in cancelling the proposed Council poll.

ATTACHMENTS 1. Premier's Press Release Cancelling the Proposed Mergers 2. Letter of Advice from Minister for Local Government

Item 8.3 Page 188 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 8.3 Attachment 1 Page 189 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 8.3 Attachment 1 Page 190 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 8.3 Attachment 2 Page 191 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

ITEM NO : 8.4

SUBJECT : HUNTER'S HILL COUNCIL IP&R COMMUNICATION AND ENGAGEMENT STRATEGY

CSP OUTCOME : COUNCIL IS 100% COMPLIANT WITH STATUTORY REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

DELIVERY PLAN : MANAGE THE COMMUNITY STRATEGIC PLAN, STRATEGY DELIVERY PROGRAM AND OPERATIONAL PLAN IN LINE WITH STATUTORY REQUIREMENTS

REPORTING OFFICER : ANNIE GOODMAN

Ref:297221

INTRODUCTION In meeting the requirements of the Local Government Act 1993 and Integrated Planning and Reporting Requirements as advised by the Office of Local Government, Hunter’s Hill Council must endorse a Community Engagement Strategy to deliver the IP&R requirements. This report and attachments is a guide to delivering community expectations in line with reporting requirements.

Hunter’s Hill Council is committed to improving the quality of services to residents by working and liaising with individuals, community groups, commercial operators and associated agencies and service groups.

The IP & R framework puts residents at the core of decision making processes, particularly when associated with Council’s Community Strategic Plan (CSP).

Through the development of participation models Hunter’s Hill Council will ensure a number of long-term beneficial results, including:

 Understanding community issues.  Effective service delivery and improvement.  Improved community resources.  A stronger sense of community.  Identification of any service gaps.  Using information to benchmark and monitor service delivery.  Strengthens the decision-making process.  Providing high quality services shaped around the needs of the community.

REPORT What is Community Engagement? Community engagement is defined as; working with the community to ensure that Hunter’s Hill Council is providing the most appropriate opportunities for residents to be involved and give feedback.

Item 8.4 Page 192 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

The levels of community engagement which Hunter’s Hill Council will undertake depending on the program include:

 Informing the community about local issues and initiatives.  Consulting the community about their views.  Involving the community in the decision-making process.  Acting in cooperation with the local community to ensure decisions are made in partnership.  Empowering and supporting independent community initiatives.

Who is responsible for delivering the strategy? The governance framework for this strategy will be managed by the senior management team at the discretion of the General Manager.

An action plan and community engagement toolkit for each project will be actioned by the Corporate Strategist in liaison with the General Manager.

CONCLUSION It is important for Council to know whether the vision for the Community Engagement Strategy is being achieved. Council will use a variety of methods to gage this, including:

 Using Residents' Survey to measure community satisfaction with Council’s services and programs.  Increasing the percentage of residents who feel that they can influence decisions affecting the local area.  Monitoring, managing and reporting on the performance of this strategy and action plan regularly to Councillors and residents.  Sharing experience and progress through local, regional and state wide networks.  Acting on feedback from our inspections and external assessments of performance.

This strategy will be reviewed annually and a summary of progress and achievements will be published in the Hunter’s Hill Council Newsletter to Residents and on the website.

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.

Item 8.4 Page 193 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

HUNTERS HILL 2030 This report responds to the need to ensure that Councillors and the community are well informed about issues/projects.

RECOMMENDATION That the Community Engagement Strategy and Timeline are adopted.

ATTACHMENTS 1. Community & Engagement Strategy 2. Vision Timeline

Item 8.4 Page 194 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Hunter’s Hill Council IP&R Communication & Engagement Strategy

BACKGROUND/INTRODUCTION

The Community Strategic Plan (CSP) gives both Council and the community a vision for the main priorities and aspirations for the future of the Hunters Hill local government area. The CSP is the highest level plan that Council will prepare. The purpose of the plan is to identify the community’s main priorities and aspirations for the future, and to plan broad strategies for achieving these goals. ‘Building the Community Strategic Plan takes time and must involve a whole-of-community engagement process.’ (OLG NSW, Integrated Planning & Reporting Framework)

To achieve the objectives of the CSP Council has developed this robust Communication and Engagement Strategy to ensure:

 The needs and priorities of the community are driving programs and services.  The community is empowered through community engagement.  Councillors, Individuals and community groups are encouraged to become actively involved in the planning process.  Feedback is given to residents about the outcomes of community engagement.  Groups/individuals whom are not usually represented are targeted to ensure a holistic outcome.

The consultation and engagement developed for the IP&R framework and specifically the Community Strategic Plan will ensure any future projects such as SRVs are based on tested community opinion and not hearsay.

A strategic platform for stakeholder mapping and clear consultative approaches will ensure Council facilitates a clear set of outcomes. Council will be better placed to understand the needs and wants of its community and prioritise these to ensure greater resident confidence in its services.

Other subsidiary purposes to this community awareness campaign include:  Improvement of Council’s communication flow with the community.  Transparency of information regarding Council’s finances.

Item 8.4 Attachment 1 Page 195 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

 Compliance with legislative framework and timelines.  Inclusion of social justice principles; rights, equity, access and participation meaning that all members of the Hunters Hill community have the opportunity to actively participate.

STATE GOVERNMENT FRAMEWORK

The IP&R framework introduced by the State Government recognises that communities do not exist in isolation – they are part of a larger natural, social, economic and political environment that influences and, to a large extent, shapes their future direction.

The framework recognises that most communities share similar aspirations; a safe, healthy and pleasant place to live, a sustainable environment, opportunities for social interaction, opportunities for employment, reliable infrastructure. The difference lies in how each community responds to these needs. This is what shapes the character of individual towns and cities.

The framework opens the way for councils and their communities to have important discussions about funding priorities, service levels, preserving local identity and to plan in partnership for a more sustainable future. This framework allows NSW councils to draw their various plans together, understand how they interact and get the maximum leverage from their efforts by planning holistically and sustainably for the future:

Community Engagement

Community Annual Report Strategic Plan (10 yrs +)

Resourcing Strategy: LTF Plan Workforce Plan Asset Plans

Other Plans, Operational e.g. Cultural Plan (1yr) PLan

Delivery Program (4yrs)

The Community Strategic Plan gives Council and the community a vision for the main priorities and aspirations for the future of the Hunters Hill local government area. The Draft Plan establishes strategic objectives together with strategies to achieve those objectives.

Item 8.4 Attachment 1 Page 196 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

The Delivery Program (4 year plan) is a statement of commitment to the community from each newly elected council. In reviewing the Draft Delivery Program the Council is accounting for its stewardship of the community’s long term goals, outlining what it intends to do towards achieving these goals during its term of office and what its priorities will be. The Delivery Program is designed as the single point of reference for all principal activities undertaken by the Council during its term of office.

Supporting the Delivery Program is the Operational Plan (one year plan). The Operational Plan includes all plans, projects, activities and funding allocations. The Operational Plan spells out the individual projects and activities that will be undertaken each year to achieve the commitments made in the other supporting documents.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this Communication and Engagement Strategy is to:

1. Meet the new Integrated Planning Guidelines as set out by The Department for Local Government. 2. Establish a standard process for community engagement. 3. Review already obtained and relevant information. 4. Allocate timelines to projects and service delivery programs. 5. Make better use of technology such as social media and Council’s website to inform residents about the opportunities to participate in engagement. 6. Ensure that Council consistently listens to the views of residents and service users and that they are central to the decisions that Council makes. By meeting this criteria Council will ensure that the community are given an appropriate opportunity to be involved and are acknowledged for their contribution in shaping the future of the Hunters Hill local government area.

GOALS

The five (5) main goals of the Communication and Engagement Strategy are to ensure that:

Goal 1 Council will engage with its community in meeting the legislative requirements of the IP&R framework.

Goal 2 Council will ensure that the vision of the community is clearly reflected in the Community Strategic Plan.

Goal 3 Council will ensure that the main priorities of the community are captured.

Goal 4 In conjunction with the community Council will develop a clear set of strategies

Item 8.4 Attachment 1 Page 197 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

that support the vision and goals as developed through the engagement process.

Goal 5 Council will develop a clear set of measures to ensure that the goals of the Community Strategic Plan are being reached.

OBJECTIVES

A number of objectives have been developed to ensure that Council is enabling the IP&R process. These objectives are specific, measurable, achievable, and realistic:

1 Council wants the community to understand what IP&R is all about.

2 Council wants to raise awareness about the IP&R process.

3 Council wants feedback from residents about what is important and where Council funding should be allocated.

4 Council wants to know what services the community use.

5 Council wants to understand where financial priorities should be focussed.

6 Council wants feedback about the vision for the future.

7 Council wants to build its reputation amongst the community for being transparent and a conduit for change, built on community need and perception.

STRATEGIES AND KEY PRINCIPLES Council understands that developing strategies to ensure the success of the Communication and Engagement Plan and subsequent development of the IP&R framework includes:

 providing information for the community  enhancing services  promoting opportunities  modifying policies.

These strategies will only be successful if IP&R engagement activities are coordinated or overseen by Council staff or independent consultants such as facilitators, or a combination of both, they need to:

 know enough about the CSP and the purpose of the community engagement  clearly articulate everyone’s role and ensure they understand each role  be suitably skilled (trained and experienced).

Item 8.4 Attachment 1 Page 198 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

If Council looks at the key directions of the project plan (as listed below) the strategies will flow on through each phase and build momentum ensuring that communication and engagement is successful.

Development & Implementation Strategy endorsement

Target groups & Stakeholders individuals

Use tools to; Use tools to; Communication involve, inform and collaborate & & engagement consult empower

Community Validation of Data gathering response & findings feedback

Analysis & CSP Development of Development of vision and goals and development themes objectives

Stakeholder Stakeholders Determine endorsement review outcomes modifications

Action Implementation

Review Evaluate Learn

Using public information, consultation, involvement and collaboration with a clear purpose and strong strategy ensures productive and effective outcomes. The International Association for Public Participation (IAP2) outlines the drivers for a successful engagement framework. IAP2 outline that the key to public participation is the following principles:

 inform (provide information)  consult (obtain feedback)  involve (consider public views)  collaborate (share ideas)  empower (enable the community to make decisions).

Item 8.4 Attachment 1 Page 199 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

These principles together with corresponding methods of engagement as outlined below will provide Council with a clear and successful process/structure:

Goal One way Two way Participatory Working together to To build the capacity communication to communication process designed to develop an of the community to provide balanced process aimed at help identify issues understanding of all lead their own plans and objective obtaining feedback and views to ensure issues and interests for change. information to assist on ideas, that concerns and to work out understanding about alternatives and aspirations are alternatives and something that is proposals to inform understood and identify preferred going to happen or our decision making. considered. collective solutions. has already happened.

Role of community Listen Contribute Participate Partner Lead and/or stakeholders

Examples when this Sharing with the Using social media Asking Council Stakeholders E.g. Building engagement level community what to seek feedback on Committees for their working with Council capacity skills of may be appropriate IP&R/CSP is all community goals feedback regarding to identify preferred small business about what the vision of solutions or employees through Council should be alternatives skills-based training

Methods/tools Website Surveys/market Facilitated Advisory or Facilitation of research workshops reference groups networks Advertisements in local media Attend Deliberative  Practical skills community polling  Committees/ workshops Pirie-odical groups, panels Attend Training events Media releases meetings & functions community Consensus & interviews groups, building Delegated decisions Radio Online surveys meetings & functions Participatory segments Public feedback decision making Letters /Submissions Relevant interest groups Participant led Brochures/fact Public & online workshops

sheets Focus groups Displays Face to face Fairs / events interviews with stakeholders Flyer in rates notices Social media Banners in key locations Social media

Adapted from: Bang the Table (2014). What is community engagement, exactly? Available at: http://bangthetable.com/what-is- community-engagement/,

SITUATION ANALYSIS

Item 8.4 Attachment 1 Page 200 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Typically, factors internal to Council are generally classified as strengths and weaknesses, and external factors are classified as opportunities and threats. This can of course depend upon the project. In regards to the IP&R framework it will be important to consider the following SWOT analysis when undertaking community engagement. Through careful consideration and focussing on any opportunities available Council can tap into an array of new engagement possibilities.

Strengths

Questions Council should ask include what do we do better than any other council, what unique resources can we tap into that others can’t and what is special about us?

Weaknesses

Questions Council should ask include what is it that we should avoid, what do we normally do that doesn’t work and what do the community perceive to be our weaknesses?

Opportunities

Questions Council should ask include what are some really good opportunities that can be seen or used to Council and community benefit, what are some practices that we haven’t used but are being used by our counterparts that are working really well and what changes in demographics are taking place.

Threats

Questions Council should ask include what are some obstacles that Council will face, are there any budgetary constraints that will impact the project, are there standards or services that are changing that may impact?

Strengths Weaknesses  Council has sound knowledge of  Council will be engaging with a IP&R. large resident population.  Council staff are well trained and  The process will take a great deal understand the legislative more time due to the volume of requirements of IP&R. residents to be consulted.  Council is connected to its  Few staff are trained in IP&R community and has a track record legislation. of thorough engagement.  It may be difficult to assess the  Council understands the need for views of the silent majority. community engagement to ensure  Councillors may not be engaged in that better decisions and the process. outcomes are generated.

 Council has an appreciation of the constraints and opportunities

Item 8.4 Attachment 1 Page 201 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

associated with the planned engagement.  Council has set realistic expectations.

Opportunities Threats  IP&R Engagement can be coupled  Local communities may not be with additional feedback needs, targeted and can potentially feel more e.g. vision and branding or Special marginalised. Rate Variation (SRV).  Staff may not feel engaged with a  A more comprehensive approach community driven action plan as to data collection can be opposed to a staff initiated strategy. undertaken due to additional  Residents may be aggressive or self resources. interested.  Council will have an  Residents may have unrealistic unprecedented opportunity to expectations. revitalise services and its strategic direction.  It may be difficult to manage conflicting views or prioritise views.  The community will generate a diversity of viewpoints for Council  Local conflicts may influence to capture. participation and the type of techniques selected.  Strategy will overcome the problem of late stage delays and the need for reactive engagement measures, and sometimes community opposition.

TARGET AUDIENCE

It is important to ensure that the broader the access to community opinion, the better information and understanding will be for stakeholders to make informed decisions.

Council is mindful that there is a need for a greater sense of involvement to achieve a mutual sense of ownership. This can be achieved through identifying target audiences through the following avenues: a) Community members and organisations who have an active interest and have a strong view about, all phases of the discussion/project. b) Community members and organisations who may have particular expertise or an actual role on behalf of those who may be directly affected. c) Community members and organisations who will have a general interest in giving feedback or taking part in Council initiated projects.

Item 8.4 Attachment 1 Page 202 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

d) Groups and individuals who are not directly affected by the issue but have been encouraged to take an active interest by those who are affected. e) People who would normally feel excluded or under represented. f) Communities of interest whose activities might be affected by a proposal.

The Hunter’s Hill Council community is an active and engaged group. Council has developed strong working relationships with many community groups and individuals. Council has also had the opportunity to develop it first CSP with the community back in 2012. This was a positive process and involved using a range of formats and a range of audiences.

Council is looking to strengthen its engagement for the next iteration of the CSP. Following the next local government elections in September 2017 the new CSP will provide a new and invigorated direction for Council for 2017 and beyond.

In order to build a robust and highly integrated CSP Council will also develop and identify any partnerships between groups and individuals and any issues that may link or have past association with target audiences, such as the Gladesville and Hunters Hill Shopping Precincts.

More specifically, Council has already identified the following target audiences:

Council will engage  Councillors with the following individuals/groups  Section 355 Committees/working parties/Council advisory groups  community activists  precinct committees  conservation society/groups  heritage groups  environmental interest groups  leading Indigenous group  leading arts/culture groups  sporting clubs  schools  residents from CALD groups  residents who have access issues  elderly residents  young families  youth  Chamber of Commerce  Businesses

Item 8.4 Attachment 1 Page 203 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

 staff

Audience  language barriers requirements  people with access issues  people who are visually impaired  people with disabilities  people who have not previously engaged with Council

Further considerations if and when holding community forums/face-to-face focus groups are:

 Understanding when the community are most likely to be available to participate.

 Selecting venues across the region to ensure that any community members who may not be in a position to travel can still participate.

 Ensuring that there are a variety of locations selected to engage with the community which ensures a ‘neutral’ approach.

 Ensuring that access is available for people with disabilities at each venue.

 Ensuring the size of the venue suits the audience, i.e. a 400 seat Town Hall may not be appropriate for an expected attendance of only 50 people.

 Ensuring accessibility of parking.

KEY MESSAGES

The key messages that hunter’s hill council will consistently use throughout the engagement process will provide an achievable level of community expectation.

The key messages that Hunter’s Hill Council will use are:

KEY MESSAGES 1 The Community Strategic Plan will be developed by the local community for the local community. 2 The Community Strategic Plan is what will guide this council. 3 Tell us what you want your council to look like in 20 years.

TOOLS

Item 8.4 Attachment 1 Page 204 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

IP&R by its nature requires community engagement events and strategies in some form to encourage the target community members or the entire community to take part. It is vital to check that all publicity needs are satisfied by the ‘information giving techniques’ selected at the planning phase. Important considerations will include the answers to the following questions:

What tools will be used? For example, print, radio, web, socials, video, etc.

What will be the timing of the tools used to engage?

Who will be responsible and which staff are needed to undertake particular strategies?

How much lead time is needed for preparation, translation, distribution, booking, advertising space, etc?

How the style of the publicity might appeal to different groups within the community, such as should the printed material be produced in appropriate community languages or in large text for those with vision impairment?

In developing the engagement tools to be used with the Hunter’s Hill Council community it is important for Council to both consider what ‘normally’ works as well as other avenues for capturing information/data by the use of more non-traditional methods.

The attached table clearly outlines a comprehensive and strategic approach to engaging with the Hunters Hill community.

Item 8.4 Attachment 1 Page 205 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

LEVEL 1 LEVEL 2 LEVEL 3

LARGE . Press release . Information and education campaign . Seminars/conferences . Newsletter . Promotions and campaigns . Deliberative poll . Public Exhibition . Workshop series . Discussion papers . Telephone feedback line . Polling and surveys . Complaint handling and feedback system . E mail information/feedback line . Radio networks . Focus groups . Internet Web site . Independent mediator . Banner . Social media promotion . Pamphlets and explanatory booklets . Advisory Committee . Advertising/public notices . Posters . Shopping centre display . Letterbox drop . Consultant . Focus groups . Signage/banners . Letters to community groups/businesses . Follow-up survey/feedback . surveys

MEDIUM . Press release . Workshops . Focus groups . Fact sheet . Public exhibition . Advisory committee . Letter . Telephone feedback line . Customer Service . Interview . E mail information line . Consultative committee . Publishing details . Polling and surveys . Networking . Newsletter . Internet Web site . Public Exhibition . Radio networks . Signage/banner at site

SMALL . Letter . Letter . Public Meeting or workshop or forum . Publishing details . Interviews . Circulation of meeting notes . Newsletter . Meeting . Complaint resolution . Inquiry and responses

Item 8.4 Attachment 1 Page 206 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Social Media/Outside the box

Whilst Council will be using traditional forms of communication and engagement it will also be important to determine the realms of ‘new’ engagement methods. As social media becomes more of the norm and in many cases the only form of communication used by segments of the community it is important for Council to engage across this platform. Asking the community to contribute their vision for the future of Hunters Hill could involve:

 uploading photos

 posting messages

 working with schools to create artworks/poems

 writing/posting stories

Questions that will be used to start the social media conversation include:

 What do you love about living in Hunters Hill?

 What do you want Hunters Hill to look like in 20 years?

 What ‘new’ things would you like to see happen in Hunters Hill?

TIMELINE

Include a time line detailing the timing and sequence of events. This will give all parties involved in the project a clear understanding of the schedule and length of each phase.

It is important to be realistic with the timetable, as unreasonably tight time frames may compromise the quality of the project.

MEASURING SUCCESS

It is important for Council to measure whether the engagement process was successful. To achieve this Council has developed a series of measures including:

 Were the objectives of the engagement strategy achieved?  Did the process enable everyone to have their say?  Were the views of the community acted upon by Council?  Did participants feel that their opinions mattered?  Which engagement techniques drew the highest response rates and also the highest level of satisfaction from which participants?  Was participation representative of a diversity of views?

Item 8.4 Attachment 1 Page 207 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

 Did people with special needs (e.g. disabled access, child care, tec) feel that their needs were adequately met?

IN SUMMARY

The Policy also seeks to improve Council’s engagement processes and outcomes through encouraging a consistent approach and continual learning through evaluation, and through expanding the range of engagement methods used.

Item 8.4 Attachment 1 Page 208 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 8.4 Attachment 2 Page 209 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 8.4 Attachment 2 Page 210 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

ITEM NO : 8.5

SUBJECT : MONTHLY REPORT ON OUTSTANDING MATTERS

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

DELIVERY PLAN : COUNCILLORS ARE WELL-INFORMED ABOUT STRATEGY ISSUES/PROJECTS

REPORTING OFFICER : WENDY MCGUIRK

Ref: 327813

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

RECOMMENDATION That the report be received and noted.

ATTACHMENTS 1. Outstanding Matters August 2017

Item 8.5 Page 211 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 8.5 Attachment 1 Page 212 OUR COUNCIL Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 8.5 Attachment 1 Page 213 COMMITTEES Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

ITEM NO : 9.1

SUBJECT : MINUTES OF THE CONSERVATION ADVISORY PANEL HELD ON 19 JULY 2017

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

DELIVERY PLAN : TO PROVIDE QUALITY TECHNICAL HERITAGE ADVICE STRATEGY TO THE LOCAL RESIDENTS, DEVELOPERS, DCU, LAND AND ENVIRONMENT COURT AND THE PUBLIC AT LARGE

REPORTING OFFICER : GREG PATCH

Ref:297402

COMMENCEMENT

The meeting commenced at approximately 5:30 pm at the Council Chambers, Hunters Hill. IN ATTENDANCE

Clr Justine McLaughlin Hunter’s Hill Council Clr Zac Miles Hunter’s Hill Council Tony Coote Hunter’s Hill Trust Representative Brian McDonald AIA Representative Helen Temple Berry Community Representative

ALSO PRESENT

Steve Kourepis Group Manager, Development & Regulatory Control Greg Patch Heritage Advisor

APOLOGIES

Bronwyn Doutreband Community Representative Michael Lehany Landscape Advisor

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Tony Coote- 8 Martin Street and 63 Mary Street Hunters Hill

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

RECOMMENDATION That the Minutes of Conservation Advisory Panel of previous Meeting CAP 284 held on 21 June 2017.

Item 9.1 Page 214 COMMITTEES Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

BUSINESS ARISING 2.1 SITE INSPECTIONS

PROCEEDINGS IN BRIEF

22 Vernon Street, Hunters Hill See item 3.1 for discussion. 1 & 3 Ryde Road, Hunters Hill See item 3.2 for discussion.

2.2 DISCUSSIONS AND BRIEFINGS

PROCEEDINGS IN BRIEF

N/A

REPORTS

3.1 6:00 PM - 22 VERNON STREET, HUNTERS HILL

PROCEEDINGS IN BRIEF

The meeting was addressed by the owners, Frank and Victor Placanica, and Timothy Brown of Blainey North Architects, architect.

The property is heritage item 336 (“Sunnyside”), is within Hunters Hill Conservation Area C1 (‘The Peninsula’) and within the vicinity of heritage items at 24 (“Hollingworth”) and 16 (“Mornington”) Vernon Street. It is also located on the waterfront to the Lane Cove River.

It is proposed to make alterations and additions to “Sunnyside”, and to construct a dual occupancy dwelling on the land associated with “Hollingworth”. The proposed development will entail the removal of numerous trees.

The proposal is preliminary consultation item, with the proponents seeking feedback from the Panel.

Panel members (JM, TC, HTB & GP) attended a site inspection prior to the meeting.

In examining the proposal, the Panel advised that:

 “Hollingworth” was built in the “marine villa’ mode, in that it addresses the waterway of the Lane Cove River and the relationship of the house, its curtilage and presentation to the River will be disrupted in a totally unacceptable manner by the proposed dual occupancy development.  The proposed dual occupancy development is of a scale and character that will have severely adverse impacts on the significance and setting of Hunters Hill Conservation Area C1, and the heritage item, “Hollingworth”.  While the 5 levels of the proposed dual occupancy building may not be greater than 2 levels at any one vertical line, the visual impact from the north/ north-east will be that of a 5 storey building due to the effects of foreshortening.

Item 9.1 Page 215 COMMITTEES Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

 The proposed use of glazed balustrades, the excessive scale of the proposed stair/ lift tower, the architectural composition of the building and its overall character is more reminiscent of a residential flat building than a single residence.  The magnitude of the proposed dual occupancy building is such that the heritage item will be dominated to an unacceptable extent, particularly given that its relationship to the River is curtailed by the extension of the proposed dual occupancy building across virtually the full width of its presentation to the foreshore and River.  The proposed works to the heritage item require clarification in terms of the identification of original work/ additions and the historical background to the alterations to it.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Manager, Development & Regulatory Control, be advised of the CAP’s adverse comments in relation to the proposal for consideration in the process of a possible future development application.

3.2 6:20 PM - 1 & 3 RYDE ROAD, HUNTERS HILL

PROCEEDINGS IN BRIEF

The Panel was addressed by the architect, Mark Magill of Zhinar Architects.

The properties are listed as heritage items 146 & 145 and are within Hunters Hill Conservation Area C1 (“The Peninsula”), Hunters Hill Conservation Area C450 and are within the vicinity of heritage items at 62, and 64-68 Gladesville Road.

It is proposed to demolish the cottage at 1 Ryde Road to allow access by trucks in order to construct the approved residential flat building to the rear of the combined sites. It is intended to salvage the front façade, windows, doors fitments etc. in order to reinstate them in the reconstruction of the cottage.

Panel members (JM, HTB, TC) had attended a site inspection prior to the meeting.

There was discussion as to the possibility of relocating the cottage elsewhere while construction is undertaken and reinstating it prior to completion of the works, but the Panel was divided in the appropriateness of this course of action.

In considering the proposal, the Panel concluded that it did not consider the approach to be appropriate and recommended that all efforts should be made to gain access to the site by other means- preferably through the property at the rear (8A-10A Avenue Road).

RECOMMENDATION That the Manager, Development & Regulatory Control, be advised of the CAP’s comments for consideration in the process of the development application.

Item 9.1 Page 216 COMMITTEES Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

3.3 6:40 PM - 7-9 RYDE ROAD, HUNTERS HILL

PROCEEDINGS IN BRIEF

The Panel was addressed by Stephen Davies, director, and Ali Barnier of Urbis Heritage, and Terence ?? of Ghazi Al Ali, Architects.

The property is within Conservation Area C1 (“The Peninsula”), within Conservation Area C450, and within the vicinity of heritage items including those at 1 & 3 Ryde Road, and 12 & 20 Avenue Road.

It is proposed to demolish the existing interwar cottages on the properties and erect a residential flat building containing 9 residential units over 2 levels of basement carpark.

In considering the proposal, the panel advised:

Setbacks: The proposed alignment of the building to the street is closer than the prevailing setback from Ryde Road, and the rear setback to the upper level should be 10 metres in lieu of the 6 metres shown.

Articulation: The separation of the units as presented to the street, and the indents to the sides of the proposal are insufficient in width to adequately articulate the building mass.

External Materials, Finishes and Colours: It was observed that the colours of proposed palette of materials are excessively dark as depicted in the computer model.

It was noted as a general observation, that the proposal seeks an excessive level of development on the site. The bulk and insufficient setbacks will have adverse impacts on the significance and setting of heritage items within the vicinity and the character of the conservation areas in which the site is situated

RECOMMENDATION That the Manager, Development & Regulatory Control, be advised of the fact that the discussions had been terminated due to the secret recording of the meeting.

3.4 7:00 PM - 8 MARTIN STREET, HUNTERS HILL

PROCEEDINGS IN BRIEF

Tony Coote left the meeting.

The Panel was addressed by the owners, Mr & Mrs Bovell, architect David Cant of QOH Architects, and Luisa Alessi, heritage consultant.

The subject property is within Hunters Hill Conservation Area C1 (“The Peninsula”) and within the vicinity of heritage items at 2, 5, and 10Martin St. and 1 James St.

It is proposed to demolish the existing house and erect a new one.

Item 9.1 Page 217 COMMITTEES Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

In considering the proposal, the Panel advised:

Streetscape: the proposed upper-level deck and post-supported gambrel roof over part of this deck, together with the glass balustrading to the front of the house, will present as an uncharacteristic element to the Martin Street/ James Street corner.

Fenestration: the number of window types, actions and proportions is excessive and should be simplified, and division and proportions that better reflect those characteristic of the conservation area adopted.

External Materials, Finishes and Colours: are considered to be excessively dark (lower level bricks and roof/ rainwater goods). It is also recommended that the upper level be clad in weatherboard rather than constructed in face brick.

RECOMMENDATION

That the Manager, Development & Regulatory Control, be advised of the CAP’s comments for consideration in the process of the development application.

3.5 7:20 PM - 62 MARY STREET, HUNTERS HILL

PROCEEDINGS IN BRIEF

The Panel was addressed by the owner, Jason Dooris and Tony Coote Architect.

The subject property is a heritage listed heritage item, is within Hunters Hill Conservation Area C1 (“The Peninsula”) and within the vicinity of heritage items at 23, 58 and 60 Mary St.

It is proposed to make alterations and additions to the existing house, and construct a secondary dwelling in the rear yard.

The Panel was requested to review the formal development application documents in light of comments made in considering the proposal as a preliminary consultation item at its meeting of February 2017.

In response to the discussion of the “skirt” roofs at the previous meeting, Tony Coote Architect explained:

The rear “skirt” roofs have been modified in the DA submission to include and extended eaves over the sliding doors from the Family Room opening out onto the rear Patio. This is achieved by extending the floor framing out 800mm and then pitching the skirt roof off that. This allows the gutter level to continue around the first floor structure.

The Panel agreed that this resolved its concerns.

RECOMMENDATION That the Manager, Development & Regulatory Control, be advised of the CAP’s support for the proposal for consideration in the process of the Development Application.

Item 9.1 Page 218 COMMITTEES Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

OTHER BUSINESS

4.1 10 MILLING STREET, HUNTERS HILL - REVIEW OF DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION

PROCEEDINGS IN BRIEF

The Panel was requested to review the formal Development Application documents in light of its comments made at a preliminary consultation interview at the Meeting of April 2017.

In examining the proposal, the Panel was of the view that the documentation positively responded to previously expressed concerns, and that the proposal is now supportable.

RECOMMENDATION That the Panel advise its comments to the Group Manager Development and Regulatory Control for consideration in relation to the assessment of development application.

The next meeting of the CAP will be held on Wednesday, 9 August 2017 commencing at 5.00pm in the Council Chamber (subject to site inspections that may arise in the interim).

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.

RECOMMENDATION That the Minutes be received and noted.

ATTACHMENTS There are no attachments to this report.

Item 9.1 Page 219 COMMITTEES Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

ITEM NO : 9.2

SUBJECT : MINUTES OF PUBLIC ART COMMITTEE HELD TUESDAY 25 JULY 2017

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

DELIVERY PLAN : COUNCILLORS ARE WELL-INFORMED ABOUT STRATEGY ISSUES/PROJECTS

REPORTING OFFICER : STEVE KOUREPIS

Ref:327906

PRESENT

Clr Justine McLaughlin Virginia Wise Steve Kourepis Hunter's Hill Council

APOLOGIES

Nil

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

Nil

1. BUSINESS ARISING

1.1 Project Process

The Committee agreed that Council should contact the NBN and/or Telstra to determine if there were grant opportunities available in the paint/wrapping of the Nodes.

With regards to the NBN rollout, the paint/wrapping of the Nodes located throughout the local government area has progressed and an in-principle agreement has been reached by both parties regarding art-work selection,. If a funding grant is received then further activity will be contingent upon:

(a) Council being able to paint/wrap the nodes within heritage conservation areas; (b) Council and NBN both agreeing to the selection of art-work for each node; (c) NBN covering all costs associated with the initial, one-time only, node painting/wrapping process; (d) Council covering all costs associated with any subsequent node painting/wrapping, required for any reason; (e) Council and NBN liaising with residents affected by node placement and corresponding artwork;

Item 9.2 Page 220 COMMITTEES Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

and (f) No node construction works taking place until agreement and sign-off is reached to the full satisfaction of both parties.

This approach would allow Council time to move through the process of art-selection and community consultation.

1.2 Painting Style/Theme

Council’s Heritage Advisor has reviewed the placement of proposed node cabinets to nature strips in the locations specified. They are quite spread out, so should not be too intrusive or adversely affect the heritage significance of the existing streetscapes within Hunters Hill LGA. The installation of nodes is a necessary part of the NBN rollout. It is important to mitigate the adverse visual impacts to streetscapes within the LGA by painting/wrapping nodes.

Indicative examples of the “artwork” of the painting/wrapping are shown below:

If NBN boxes are located outside of residential properties it may be necessary to liaise with residents to determine the style of painting/wrapping to be undertaken.

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 Implementation of a range of arts and cultural programs and actively support local cultural organisations and events.

Item 9.2 Page 221 COMMITTEES Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

RECOMMENDATION That the Minutes be received and noted.

ATTACHMENTS There are no attachments to this report.

Item 9.2 Page 222 COMMITTEES Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

ITEM NO : 9.3

SUBJECT : MINUTES OF SENIORS ADVISORY GROUP MEETING HELD 7 AUGUST 2017

CSP OUTCOME : THE NEEDS OF THE MOST DISADVANTAGED AND VULNERABLE IN THE COMMUNITY ARE MET, EG FOR THE YOUNG AND AGED

DELIVERY PLAN : IMPROVED ACCESS TO AGED AND DISABILITY STRATEGY SERVICES

REPORTING OFFICER : KATE KUTTY

Ref:327825

REPORT The meeting opened at 10.05am.

PRESENT

Nan Barbour Betty Benjamin Jacque Alway Anna Buddo Tony Breinl Margarita Grunberg Margaret Treble Mollie Bainton Joan Lloyd Ian Adair Robyn Hogan Kathy Meyer Kate Kutty Hunter’s Hill Council

1. CONFIRMATION OF PREVIOUS MINUTES

The minutes were confirmed as a true and accurate of the meeting held on Monday 3 April 2017.

2. DECLARATION OF INTEREST

Nil

3. BUSINESS ARISING

3.1 Council Amalgamations Update

Hunters Hill Council has been successful in court and the proposed merger with Lane Cove & City of Ryde has been cancelled.

Item 9.3 Page 223 COMMITTEES Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

3.2 Aged Care Information Sessions

 Kate will get in touch with Centrelink and plan a new date to host the next session as soon as it is practicable.  The new date will be advised to the group.  Other ideas for future information sessions suggested include ongoing sessions on how to access MyAgedCare and the Importance of ‘Enduring Power of Attorney’.

3.3 Disability Inclusion Action Plan

 The draft regional Disability Inclusion Action Plan will go into the next Council meeting on 14 August with a recommendation to go on public exhibition.  Kate will advise the display date to the group.

3.4 Road Hazards have been reported

Kate updated the group on hazard reporting and the convention of new Traffic and Access Committees following the upcoming Council elections.

3.5 HHRCS and Lane Cove Northside Community Services Merger

 Anna updated the group on the merger into their new identity as Sydney Community Services  The group continues with ‘business as usual’ for all their local service offerings.

3.6 Seniors Festival Ideas

Kate to review the ideas and contacts discussed to develop a proposal for a Seniors Festival Grant application and report back to the group. The NSW Senior’s Festival runs Wednesday 4 April to Sunday 15 and our local festival dates will be confirmed during this period.

 Living Histories- an intergenerational program with senior residents and local high school students as ‘reporters’.  ‘The Big Sing’ creating a massed choir with local seniors and regional choirs from community groups and schools as an intergenerational event highlight for our Seniors Festival.  Men’s Health Information night  Garden or parks tours with local walking group

4. GENERAL BUSINESS

4.1 Council Elections 9 September

Council committees are established for the term of Council. New committee appointments will be confirmed following the Council elections on 9 September.

4.2 Acknowledgement and Appreciation to SAG members for service

Kate thanked existing SAG members for their service on behalf of the Council and local community.

Item 9.3 Page 224 COMMITTEES Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

4.3 Proposal for new name

The motion to change the name of the group was declined in a general vote. The group expressed their support for retaining their Seniors Advisory group or SAG as the name of Council’s Advisory Committee.

5. OTHER BUSINESS

5.1 NBN

The National Broadband Network is coming to Hunters Hill (planned for 2018). Information regarding the rollout is available on www.nbnco.com.au Closer to the date it may be useful to promote this to older people in the community.

6. NEW INFORMATION

 HHRCS and Lane Cove Northside Community Services have merged with their local bases remaining at Lane Cove and Hunters Hill but co-location of head office, as of 1 July 2017.

 Moocooboola Computer Classes- Kate to talk to Mario at Council for ideas to engage new members.

 Boronia Park Uniting Church is running a Harp Recital on August 13 and a Market day on October 29 and will supply further information for Council promotion.

 Anna discussed supply issues and requirements for community food parcels. Anna will supply food parcel item description for the group.

7. NEXT MEETING

To be advised.

CONCLUSION The meeting concluded at 11.30 am.

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.

Item 9.3 Page 225 COMMITTEES Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

HUNTERS HILL 2030 A key outcome of the Community and Lifestyle section of the Council’s current Community Strategy Plan is 3.2 The needs of the most disadvantaged and vulnerable in the community are met e.g. For the young and the aged.

RECOMMENDATION That the Minutes be received and noted.

ATTACHMENTS There are no attachments to this report.

Item 9.3 Page 226 COMMITTEES Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

ITEM NO : 9.4

SUBJECT : REPORT ON COUNCILLOR BRIEFINGS HELD 24 JULY 2017

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

DELIVERY PLAN : COUNCILLORS ARE WELL-INFORMED ABOUT STRATEGY ISSUES/PROJECTS

REPORTING OFFICER : WENDY MCGUIRK

Ref:327811

PRESENT Clr Richard Quinn Mayor Clr Mark Bennett Deputy Mayor Clr Gary Bird Clr Justine McLaughlin Clr Zac Miles Clr Meredith Sheil

Barry Smith General Manager Dhruba Bhowmik Acting Group Manager Works & Services Steve Kourepis Group Manager Development and Regulatory Control

APOLOGIES Clr Peter Astridge

BRIEFING Information was presented to Councillors on:

 Improving the Commercial Core of Gladesville – Draft Action Plan  Legal Briefing

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.

Item 9.4 Page 227 COMMITTEES Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

HUNTERS HILL 2030 Councillors are well informed of issues and projects.

RECOMMENDATION That the report be received and noted.

ATTACHMENTS There were no attachments to this report.

Item 9.4 Page 228 CORRESPONDENCE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

ITEM NO : 10.1

SUBJECT : CORRESPONDENCE 1. THE HON. GABRIELLE UPTON MP - PROPOSED MERGER DECISION.

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

DELIVERY PLAN : COUNCILLORS ARE WELL-INFORMED ABOUT STRATEGY ISSUES/PROJECTS

REPORTING OFFICER : SHARON MURDOCH

Ref:327442

INTRODUCTION Council receives items of correspondence, requests for donations and representations from business organisations. The following information is for the information of Council.

REPORT 1. The Hon. Gabrielle Upton MP, Minister for Local Government – letter dated 27 July 2017 advising decision not to proceed with proposed merger.

A copy of the letter is attached for your information.

CONCLUSION The correspondence is for the information of Council.

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 The report addresses strategies as identified under ‘Our Council; and in particular 1.3.2 Councillors are well informed about issues and projects.

Item 10.1 Page 229 CORRESPONDENCE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

RECOMMENDATION That the report be received and noted.

ATTACHMENTS 1. Gabrielle Upton MP - Proposed merger decision

Item 10.1 Page 230 CORRESPONDENCE Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 10.1 Attachment 1 Page 231 GENERAL BUSINESS Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

ITEM NO : 12.1

SUBJECT : MEETINGS - VARIOUS COMMITTEES OF COUNCIL

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

DELIVERY PLAN : COUNCILLORS ARE WELL-INFORMED ABOUT STRATEGY ISSUES/PROJECTS

REPORTING OFFICER : SHARON MURDOCH

Ref:327465

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

Bushland Management Working Group 21.08.17 2.30pm Chamber Joint Library Service Advisory Committee 23.08.17 5.30pm Gladesville Library Le Vesinet Friendship Committee 6.09.17 7.00 pm Chamber Access Advisory Committee TBA 12.30pm Chamber Children’s Services Advisory Committee TBA 12.30pm Chamber

Conservation Advisory Panel (CAP) TBA 5.30pm Chamber Art Exhibition Advisory Committee TBA 6.00pm Small Hall Environment Projects & Advisory Group (EPAAG) TBA 6.00pm Small Hall Events Advisory Committee TBA 5.45pm Chamber Gladesville Mainstreet Committee TBA 6.00pm Gladesville Library Gladesville Hunters Hill Mainstreet Committee TBA 5.30pm Community Centre Hunters Hill Local Area Traffic Committee TBA 9.30am Chamber Public Transport & Traffic Advisory Committee (PT&T) TBA 6.00pm Chamber Schools Principals’ Liaison Committee TBA 12.30pm Small Hall Seniors Advisory Group TBA 10.00am The Heritage Young in Art Committee TBA 3.45pm Chamber

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

Item 12.1 Page 232 GENERAL BUSINESS Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

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 That the report be received and noted.

ATTACHMENTS 1. What's On

Item 12.1 Page 233 GENERAL BUSINESS Meeting 4425 - 14 August 2017

Item 12.1 Attachment 1 Page 234