m

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Agenda

Planning and Building

Committee Meeting

7 September 2009, 8:00pm

 

 


Notice of Meeting

 

Dear Councillors

 

Notice is given of the Planning and Building Committee, to be held in the Council Chambers, Lower Ground Floor, 48 Longueville Road, Lane Cove on Monday 7 September 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.

 

 

 

 


Planning and Building Committee 7 September 2009

 

TABLE OF CONTENTS

 

 

 

DECLARATIONS OF INTEREST

 

APOLOGIES

 

CONFIRMATION OF MINUTES

 

1.      PLANNING AND BUILDING COMMITTEE MEETING - 17 AUGUST 2009

 

Environmental Services Division Reports

 

2.       Environmental Services Division Report No. 239

SUBJECT: 22 Gore Street, Greenwich  

 

 

 

                     


Planning and Building Committee Meeting 7 September 2009

 

Environmental Services Division Report No. 239

 

 

 

 

 

Reference:    Environmental Services Division Report No. 239

Subject:          22 Gore Street, Greenwich    

Record No:    DA09/32-01 - 30326/09

Author(s):       Stan Raymont 

 

 

Property:                     22 Gore Street , Greenwich

 

DA No:                         DA32/09

 

Date Lodged:              27/2/2009

 

Cost of Work:              $90,000

 

Owner             :                       P Burrows & J Faulkner

 

Author:                         Stan Raymont

 

 

DESCRIPTION OF PROPOSAL TO APPEAR ON DETERMINATION

Section 96 modification seeking to delete condition 3 from DA09/32 for the demolition of existing rear decks and construction of roofed steel framed decks.

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?

Yes, land adjacent to bushland

BCA CLASSIFICATION

Class 1a

STOP THE CLOCK USED

No

NOTIFICATION

Neighbours                  20, 24, 55 Gore Street

Ward Councillors        East Ward and The Mayor

Progress Association Greenwich Community Association

                                     Inc

Other Interest Groups   Lane Cove Bushland &

                                     Conservation Society

 

REASON FOR REFERRAL:

 

Called by the Mayor, Councillor Longbottom on behalf of the applicants.

 

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

 

·     Under delegated authority, consent was granted for the demolition and erection of decks at the rear of 22 Gore Street on 4 May 2009.  The original application attracted 3 objections. 

 

·     The decks were approved with a depth of 3m (condition 3) and a requirement for privacy screens on their northern edges (condition 2).

 

·     The applicant has submitted a Section 96 Modification seeking to delete condition 3 which restricts the width of the decks and allow the decks to have a maximum width of 4m.

 

·     The applicant contends that privacy is not an issue due to favourable orientation, physical separation and vegetative screening.

 

·     One submission has been received in response to the notification of the Section 96 Modification reiterating their concern at loss of privacy and loss of water views.

 

·     This report recommends that Council refuse the application to delete Condition 3 of Development Consent DA32/09 (4 May 2009) given privacy concerns.

 

SITE:

 

The site is an irregular shaped allotment with an access strip which forms part of a shared Right of Way from the western end of Gore Street.  The land falls steeply to the rear boundary with bushland which forms part of the Gore Creek Reserve. 

 

Existing improvements on the site consist of a part one/ part three storey brick and weatherboard dwelling house with a pitched tiled roof and with an attached carport.  There are 1.8m wide balconies at the rear of the ground floor, lower level 1 and lower level 2.  A copy of the site plan is attached (AT1) and the notification plan (AT2).

 

PROPOSAL:

 

The Section 96 Modification is a request to delete Condition 3 of the development consent given to Development consent 09/32.  Condition 3 reads:-

 

3.       The width of the proposed balconies at ground floor level and lower level 2 not exceeding 3m at any point to comply with the 3m maximum width specified in the Code for Dwellings as privacy is considered to be an issue.  PLANS BEING ALTERED TO COMPLY PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCTION CERTIFICATE.

 

A copy of the applicant’s submission is attached (AT3).

 

In summary the applicant requests the deletion of condition 3 on the basis that Council’s Dwelling House Code allows decks in excess of 3m if privacy is not an issue.  The applicant is of the view that due to favourable orientation, physical separation and vegetative screening that privacy is not an issue.

 

PREVIOUS APPROVALS/HISTORY:

 

4 May 2009  consent granted to DA09/32 to demolish the existing rear timber decks which have deteriorated and construct roofed steel framed decks at the rear as follows:-

 

            Ground Floor Level – 4m wide by 11m long

            Lower Level 1 – 1.8m wide by 6.5m long

            Lower Level 2 – 2.2m minimum and 4m maximum wide by 10.8m long.  Stairs are shown to the lower ground from this level on the south-eastern side.

 

Three submissions were received in respect of this proposal and included the following:-

 

·      The extension of the proposed balcony would have significant visual and noise impact on their property as follows:

a.         Noise and privacy impact onto the Existing Studio which is a stand alone building used as a bedroom;

b.         Direct visual impact into the master bedroom located on the south side;

c.         Direct visual and privacy impact onto the external entertaining area;

d.         Negatively impinge and minimize existing bushland and water view aspects

 

A suggestion is the instalment of solid privacy screens at the end of the proposed balconies that would minimize any potential noise and privacy issues.

 

·      The balconies also exceed the Code width.

 

The application was approved on the 4th May 2009 subject to conditions which included:-

 

2.         The provision of a 1.8m high solid privacy screen along the north western side of the proposed three balconies.  Plans being altered to comply prior to the issue of a Construction Certificate

 

3.         The width of the proposed balconies at ground floor level and lower level 2 not exceeding 3m at any point to comply with the 3m maximum width specified in the Code for Dwellings as privacy is considered to be an issue.  PLANS BEING ALTERED TO COMPLY PRIOR TO THE ISSUE OF A CONSTRUCITON CERTIFICATE.

 

A copy of the Section 96 assessment report (Delegated Authority report 103, dated 6 April 2008 is attached (AT4).

 

RESPONSE TO SECTION 96 NOTIFICATION (Section 79C(1)(d))

 

One submission has been received in response to the notification of the Section 96 Modification.  The issues raised in the submission can be summarised as follows:-

 

·     Refer to their original comments.

·     Increased noise to the studio bedroom.

·     Believe that the proposed 4m balcony impacts on their premises by way of a reducing privacy within the primary entertaining area of the house (balcony facing south and apron facing South West).

·     Profound impact on privacy within the master bedroom.

·     Inhibit directly on the enjoyment of natural bush and water views whilst sitting on the balcony.

·     Reduced property value given the diminished privacy and interference of existing water views

·     Limit opportunity for future development of building at their property for water view enhancement.

 

The objector’s letter is attached separately for Councillors’ consideration.

 

ASSESSMENT

 

Having regard to the provisions of section 96(1A), the proposal is able to be considered on the basis of a Section 96 modification.

 

In the relation to the proposal, the Dwelling House Code states:

 

“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 applicant in their submission has stated  that the proposal is reasonable on the basis of:

 

·     “The orientation and outlook from the decks and their relationship to private open space areas of neighbouring properties is such that overlooking cannot be considered to be an issue of reasonable concern”.

 

The applicant therefore contends that privacy is not an issue in relation to the proposal.

 

·     Orientation –  given the location of the building on the site and its relationship to its neighbours and the view location, the applicant is of the view that the view source is towards the front of the decks towards Gore Creek and not towards the sides or back viewing towards the neighbouring properties which cannot be viewed  “without considerable effort and intent on the part of the viewer”.

 

·     Vegetation and natural Screening – the applicant submits that the existing vegetation between the properties provides natural year round screening.

 

·     The 4m width is requested by the applicant also on the basis of their site’s topography, which falls steeply at the rear and doesn’t reasonably provide usable private open space.  The applicant states

 

“Since the decks require rebuilding due to their age and condition, it makes reasonable sense to provide for slightly more generous living conditions than currently available.  As this can be achieved without detriment to the adjoining properties, it is a reasonable and supportable proposition”.

 

The closest structure on the commenter’s property to the proposed rear decks is the free standing building used as a bedroom.  This structure is around 9m from the proposed rear decks.  The decks are also visible from the objector’s bedroom and outdoor living areas. 

 

The main view from the commenter’s property of Gore Creek and surrounding area is considered to be in a south-westerly direction.  The provision of the privacy screens to the rear decks of 22 Gore Street (as required by condition 2) assists to reduce privacy loss.  The screens are considered not to significantly adversely impact on views from the objector’s property. 

 

Council’s Dwelling House Code provides in clause 3.6 (3)

 

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

 

As privacy has been raised by the objector as an issue it is considered that the width of the decks should be limited to 3m and condition 3 is recommended to remain.

 

CONCLUSION

 

The matters in relation to Section 79C considerations have been considered in the assessment of this application.  As privacy has been raised by the neighbouring property as an issue, it is considered that condition 3 should remain and the Section 96 Modification be refused.

 

 

RECOMMENDATION

 

Pursuant to the provisions of Section 96 of the Environmental Planning and Assessment Act, 1979, as amended, the request to delete Condition 3 of the development consent D32/09 granted on 4 May 2009 for the demolition of existing decks and construction of roofed steel framed decks on Lot 2, DP 230777 and known as 22 Gore Street, Greenwich, is refused for the following reasons:-

 

1.         Privacy is considered to be an issue and the proposed elevated decks should not exceed the 3m Code requirement width.

 

2.         Any increase in the width of the decks over 3m is considered to adversely impact on the amenity of the adjoining dwelling houses and set an undesirable precedent.

 

 

 

 

 

Michael Mason

Executive Manager

Environmental Services Division

 

 

ATTACHMENTS:

AT‑1 View

Site Plan

2 Pages

 

AT‑2 View

Notification plan

1 Page

 

AT‑3 View

Applicant's supporting submission

7 Pages

 

AT‑4 View

Delegated Authority Report No.103

13 Pages