m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agenda

Planning and Building

Committee Meeting

18 May 2009, 8:00pm

 


 

Notice of Meeting

 

Dear Councillors

 

Notice is given of the Planning and Building, to be held in the Council Chambers, Lower Ground Floor, 48 Longueville Road, Lane Cove on Monday 18 May 2009 commencing at 8:00pm. The business to be transacted at the meeting is included in this business paper.

 

Yours faithfully



Peter Brown

General Manager

 

Committee Meeting Procedures

 

The Planning and Building Committee meeting is chaired by Councillor Ann Smith. Councillors are entitled to one vote on a matter. If votes are not unanimous the delegations of the Committee require that the matter be referred to Council for determination. Minutes of Council and Committee meetings are published on Council’s website www.lanecove.nsw.gov.au by 5pm of the Thursday following the meeting.

 

The Meeting is conducted in accordance with Council's Code of Meeting Practice. The order of business is listed in the Agenda on the next page. That order will be followed unless the Committee resolves to modify the order at the meeting. This may occur for example where the members of the public in attendance are interested in specific items of the agenda.

 

Members of the public may attend the Meeting and address the Committee on any issue.   Speakers and Councillors will not enter into general debate or ask questions.

 

If you do not understand any part of the information given above; require assistance to participate in the meeting due to a disability; or wish to obtain information in relation to Council, please contact Council’s Manager Governance on 99113525.

 

Please note meetings held in the Council Chambers are recorded on tape for the purposes of verifying the accuracy of minutes and the tapes are not disclosed to any third party under section 12(6) of the Local Government Act, except as allowed under section 18(1) or section 19(1) of the PPIP Act, or where Council is compelled to do so by court order, warrant or subpoena or by any other legislation.

 

 

 

 


DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

APOLOGIES

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

1.      PLANNING AND BUILDING COMMITTEE MEETING - 4 MAY 2009

 

Environmental Services Division Reports

 

2.       Environmental Services Division Report No. 13

SUBJECT: Delegated Authority Report for April 2009

 

3.       Environmental Services Division Report No. 139

SUBJECT: 34A Little Street, Lane Cove  

 

 

 

                     


Reference:    Environmental Services Division Report No. 13

Subject:          Delegated Authority Report for April 2009    

Record No:    SU1863 - 15064/09

Author(s):       Michael Mason 

 

 

Executive Summary

 

During the month of April 2009 a total of 27 Development Applications were determined under delegation by staff with an additional 4 by Council.  In addition 5 Construction Certificates and 9 Privately Certified Construction certificates were issued.  There were 2 Privately Certified Complying Developments determined in April.

 

 

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the report be received and noted.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Applications determined for April 2009

4 Pages

 

 

 


Reference:    Environmental Services Division Report No. 139

Subject:          34A Little Street, Lane Cove    

Record No:    DA08/333-01 - 15166/09

Author(s):       Stan Raymont 

 

 

Property:                                 34A Little Street, Lane Cove

 

DA No:                                     DA333/08

 

Date Lodged:                          15.4.09

 

Cost of Work:                          $38,910

 

Owner             :                                   G.L. & M. Freeman

 

Author:                                     Stan Raymont

 

 

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL TO APPEAR ON DETERMINATION

Replace existing deck and awning at the rear of the dwelling house with a larger timber deck with roof (Section 82A Review of condition of approval)

ZONE

2(a1)

IS THE PROPOSAL PERMISSIBLE WITHIN THE ZONE?

Yes

IS THE PROPERTY A HERITAGE ITEM?

No

IS THE PROPERTY WITHIN A CONSERVATION AREA?

No

DOES DCP 1- BUSHLAND APPLY TO THE PROPERTY?

No

BCA CLASSIFICATION

Class 1a

STOP THE CLOCK USED

No

NOTIFICATION

Neighbours                              32, 32A, 34, 36, 38A Little Street and 5, 7, 9-11 Phoenix Street

Ward Councillors                    East Ward

Progress Association             Osborne Park Progress Association Inc.

Other Interest Groups             -

 

REASON FOR REFERRAL:

 

This application has been referred to the Council’s Planning and Building Committee at the request of the General Manager.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

 

The proposal is for a review under Section 82A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act of condition 2 of the approval given to Development Application No.D338/08 which reads:

 

            2.         The construction of a 1.8m high solid privacy screen along the northeastern side of the proposed deck.  Plans being altered to comply prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

 

The request for a review of condition 2 includes the following reasons:

 

·        Imposed condition is upon the northern end of deck.  The inclusion of a 1.8m high ‘solid’ screen would stop any direct sunlight onto the deck.

 

·        The alleged objection was NOT made in accordance with Council’s own Policy and Guidelines relating to objections.  The alleged objection is stated to have been made by telephone and outside of the stipulated 10 day objection period.  As the alleged objection is not made in writing, then the veracity of this alleged objection must be called into question.

 

·        The Council employee is relying upon conditions set down in Council’s ‘Code and Development Application Checklist for Dwelling Houses, Fences, Private Swimming pools and Outbuildings dated August 2002’.  In particular Section 3.6 subsection 3.  The stated objective of this section is to ensure the construction will not significantly affect the privacy of the occupants of any adjoining site.  The deck is an existing structure and has been for 15 years without any screen or prior objection from the current or prior two owners.  The current owners of the adjacent site in question have been owner/residents of the property since November 2007.

 

The proposed covered deck is larger than the existing deck and is 4.1m wide by 9.984m in length.  The floor level of the covered deck is 1.65m above the existing ground level on the northeastern side and set back 1.2m from the northeastern boundary.  It was considered that the proposed deck was satisfactory subject to a 1.8m high solid privacy screen along the northeastern side.

 

Whilst no written submissions were received a telephone request was submitted within the 14 day notification period requesting the provision of a privacy screen along the northeastern side of the proposed deck.  As set out above this was considered a reasonable request and condition 2 was applied.

 

Submitted for the Planning and Building Committee’s consideration.

 

SITE:

 

The subject site is located on the eastern side of Little Street at the rear of No.34 Little Street.  Access is via a right of carriageway over Nos.32 and 34 Little Street.  The land falls from Little Street.  Existing improvements on the site consist of a two storey brick and tile dwelling.  At the rear and on the northern side of the site is an existing timber deck with a canvas cover over part of it.  Site Plan and Notification Plan attached (AT1 and AT2).

 

PREVIOUS APPROVALS/HISTORY:

 

Via delegated authority to the Manager, Development Assessment consideration was given to Development Application No.D333/08 to demolish the existing timber deck and the canvas cover at the rear of the dwelling and construct a new larger steel frame and timber deck 4.1m wide by 9.984m in length with a cream colorbond steel roof over.  The floor level of the covered deck was shown to vary from a minimum of 250mm on the southwestern side to a maximum of 1.65m on the northeastern side above the existing ground level.

 


Council’s policy re privacy and overlooking is set out in Clause 3.6 of Council’s Code for Dwellings and is as follows:

            “Objective

 

                                    Buildings are to be designed and constructed so as the use will not significantly affect the privacy of the occupants of any adjoining site.

 

            Standards

 

1.   Buildings or additions shall be designed and orientated so that windows, balconies and decks are not situated directly opposite windows of the habitable rooms, balconies and elevated decks of any adjoining dwellings.

 

2.   Buildings or additions shall be designed and orientated to avoid overlooking adjoining dwellings.  Where, due to design or site constraints, overlooking is unavoidable, use should be made of natural or constructed screening.

 

3.   Elevated decks, terraces or balconies greater than 1m above natural ground level are not to exceed a width of 3.0m of useable area.  This clause does not apply where privacy is not an issue.”

 

The proposed deck was 4.1m wide which exceeded the 3m of useable area and was 1.65m above the existing ground level on the northeastern side and set back 1.2m from the northeastern boundary.  In the circumstances and subject to a 1.8m solid privacy screen being erected along the northeastern side of the deck it was considered that the deck as proposed would be satisfactory and would not adversely impact on the amenity of the adjoining dwellings.

 

Whilst no written submissions were received in response to the notification of the development application, a telephone request was submitted requesting the provision of a privacy screen along the northeastern side of the proposed deck.  This telephone request was received within the 14 day notification period.

 

Based on the site inspection, the proposal and the policy the request for a privacy screen was considered reasonable and condition 2 was applied requiring the construction of a 1.8m high solid privacy screen along the northeastern side of the proposed deck.   Environmental Services Report No. 543 of 17 December 2008 attached (AT3).

 

PROPOSAL:

 

The proposal is for a review under Section 82A of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act of the decision to apply condition 2 of the consent given to Development Application No.D338/08 which reads:

 

            2.         The construction of a 1.8m high solid privacy screen along the northeastern side of the proposed deck.  Plans being altered to comply prior to the issue of a construction certificate.

 

The request for a review of condition 2 is for the following reasons:

 

“1.     The deck is an existing structure and has been for over 15 years.  The development application was to renew that existing structure.

 

2.       The imposed condition is upon the northern end of my deck.  The inclusion of a 1.8m high ‘solid’ screen would stop any direct sunlight onto the deck and would probably necessitate the inclusion of artificial lighting, thus unnecessarily adding to green house gas emissions.

 

3.       The alleged objection was NOT made in accordance with Council’s own Policy and Guidelines relating to objections.  The alleged objection is stated to have been made by telephone and outside of the stipulated 10 day objection period.  As the alleged objection is not made in writing, then the veracity of this alleged objection must be called into question.

 

4.       The Council employee is relying upon conditions set down in Council’s ‘Code and Development Application Checklist for Dwelling Houses, Fences, Private Swimming pools and Outbuildings dated August 2002’.  In particular Section 3.6 subsection 3.  The stated objective of this section is to ensure the construction will not significantly affect the privacy of the occupants of any adjoining site.  As stated in the first point, the deck is an existing structure and has been for 15 years without any screen or prior objection from the current or prior two owners.  The current owners of the adjacent site in question have been owner/residents of the property since November 2007.

 

5.       Subsection 3 relates to first floor decks, (as per Council’s diagrams in that document) not ground level decks as is mine.

 

6.       During a recent conference, the Council employee stated that he was relying upon subsection 3 due to the deck being greater than 1m above natural ground level.  Over 78% of my existing deck is at ground level.  The northern end is 1m above natural ground level due to the topography of my block of land as shown in the attached diagrams.  The deck has not been raised but constructed to allow rear of home and rear yard access from the side passage of my home.

 

7.       The section being relied upon came into effect in August 2002, some eight (8) years after the existing deck was constructed.  At the time of construction, the deck complied with all Council conditions.

 

8.       The present owners of the adjacent side are currently undergoing extensive renovations to the rear of that dwelling, including the enclosure of their rear deck with glass.  No conditions were imposed by Council regarding my privacy as their premises are considerably more elevated than mine and allow them greater visual access to my existing deck and rear yard.

 

9.       A concern for Council is, if there is no written record of the alleged objection, clearly in breach of Council’s own Policy and Guidelines for same, it could then be questioned if the objection was made at all.

 

I am not seeking to amend the original Development application.  I am seeking Council’s rejection of the condition imposed by one of its employees for the inclusion of a 1.8m high screen (marked in red on the attached plans) along the northern boundary of my existing deck.”

 

In the amended Statement of Environmental Effects submitted with the Section 82A review it is stated, inter alia:

 

            PRIVACY

The boundary setback for the proposed structure complies with Councils requirements for maintaining the privacy of neighbouring dwellings.  The height of the proposed deck above ground level exceeds 1.6m, but due to the elevated level of the neighbouring dwelling, this height will not interfere with their privacy or amenity.”

 

 

 

RESPONSE TO NOTIFICATION (Section 79C(1)(d))

 

Two submissions were received in response to the notification of the development application.  The issues raised in the submission can be summarised as follows.

 

First letter:

 

Objects to the removal of the screen.

 

Second letter:

 

Does not believe that there are any privacy or other concerns for the neighbour.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

That the matter be submitted for the Planning and Building Committee’s consideration.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Site Location Plans

2 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

Neighbour Notification Plan

1 Page

 

AT‑3 View

ESD Report No. 543 of 17 December 2008

8 Pages