ordinary meeting of council to be held on tuesday, 26 april 2005 at ...

Ordinary Meeting <strong>of</strong> Council - 26 April 2005 19 / 26
2 <strong>to</strong> 4A Finlay Road, Turramurra
Item 19
DA1270/04
6 April 2005
adjacent <strong>to</strong> the site boundary, which would heavily rely on the amenity given by the
neighbouring property <strong>to</strong> establish and grow <strong>to</strong> maturity. This is unsatisfac<strong>to</strong>ry and
does not comply with Council’s DCP55 and goes against the LEP objectives which
encourages the provision <strong>of</strong> sufficient viable deep soil landscaping and tall trees in rear
and front gardens where new development is carried out. In addition, the LEP states
‘the provision <strong>of</strong> viable deep soil landscaping in order <strong>to</strong> maintain and improve the tree
canopy in a sustainable way, so the tree canopy will <strong>be</strong> in scale with the built form. As
the proposed development works will result in a building <strong>be</strong>tween five and six s<strong>to</strong>reys
high, as seen in the south east elevation, the proposed setback <strong>of</strong> 3.6m does not allow
adequate deep soil landscaping for the establishment <strong>of</strong> ‘ canopy’ trees <strong>to</strong> reduce the
scale <strong>of</strong> the development at the rear.
Other comments
Site access/entry
It is noted that the development proposes raised pedestrian entry ramps with railings
directly from the kerb, as there is no pedestrian path. Concern is raised as <strong>to</strong> the
practicality <strong>of</strong> this, particularly as they have minimum width with no landing. As a
result, if a car is parked in front <strong>of</strong> the entry point no access can <strong>be</strong> gained in or out. It
is suggested that a landing approximately 2 or 3 metres long <strong>be</strong> included adjacent <strong>to</strong> the
kerb <strong>to</strong> ensure site access at all times.
The proposed development cannot <strong>be</strong> supported by Landscape Services due <strong>to</strong>
insufficient information and misidentification <strong>of</strong> trees within the Arborist’s Report,
inadequate setbacks, and non-compliance with deep soil landscaping areas.
Engineering
Council’s Engineering Assessment Officer, Kathy Hawken, has commented on the proposal as
follows:
Summary
The following information should <strong>be</strong> requested from the applicant:
- Consent <strong>of</strong> downstream property owners (1456a and 1454 Pacific Highway) <strong>to</strong>
grant an interallotment drainage easement.
- Title certificates for the subject lots <strong>to</strong> confirm the existence or otherwise <strong>of</strong> a
drainage easement along the rear boundary.
- Amended Construction Management Plan addressing:
- Location <strong>of</strong> Works Zone, on site parking for employees and tradesmen,
construction vehicle routes <strong>to</strong> and from the west, correct hours <strong>of</strong> work.
- Amended s<strong>to</strong>rmwater management plan <strong>to</strong> the level <strong>of</strong> detail given in Appendix 13
<strong>of</strong> Council’s DCP 47 Water Management, including:
- Separate s<strong>to</strong>rage <strong>of</strong> rainwater and s<strong>to</strong>rmwater, water quality measures, concept
design for the proposed interallotment drainage through 1456a and 1454 Pacific
N:\050426-OMC-PR-03090-2 TO 4A FINLAY ROAD TURRA.doc/klithgow/26